God/Jesus sinned. Genocide is a sin of high order.

[Smoke]

My, my it certainly appears you are angry over nothing.

I think you're mistaking disdain for anger.

 

[Scuba Pete]

I think you're mistaking disdain for anger.

Does it matter? I don't show disdain or anger for those who can't see God. I don't even fault the Greeks or Romans for their mythology. Anger or disdain is evidence of some misguided superiority complex derived from ego-centrism. If you want to show disgust, then do so for those who use their theism or atheism as a permit to belittle others. Either is unacceptable to me.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

What would you call killing all but 8 of any species?
DL

In this case judgement.

You cannot change the meaning of words in an attempt to perjure.
Genocide (from Merriam-Webster:
: the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group

In the case of the flood, God's purpose was not to deal with any racial, political or cultural group but rather sin and perhaps the attempt to corrupt the blood line that was to lead to Christ.

 

[BaronVonKaiser]

I haven't read all the posts in this thread but basically what I've seen so far is an example of 'God' ordering genocide and people defending that based on our inability to either understand God's will or the basis that if God gives life he can take it away. Does it not seem painfully obvious that using God as an excuse to murder an entire people, men women and children, is just wrong? But that would be religion for you, it is a device with which to commit unthinkablly evil acts with a clear conscience. I mean seriously, children?? What was it that the newborn infants that were undoubtedly slaughtered do to warrant their demise? It's my opinion that if people were not allowed to make excuses for their actions by saying, "God told me to do it" the world would be a much safer place to live.

 

[Elessar]

Ignoring everything else, I can summarize my argument against the topic title in two statements:

1) A sin is an offense against G-d
2) Therefore, G-d cannot commit a sin.

 

[BaronVonKaiser]

Ignoring everything else, I can summarize my argument against the topic title in two statements:

1) A sin is an offense against G-d
2) Therefore, G-d cannot commit a sin.

Now this would be a perfect example of evil. If this doesn't scare you then your just not understanding the implications. Basically Elessar here is saying that God is beyond reproach, and thus as long as you are doing what God wants you to do (no matter how delusional you may be to think your orders are from God) then you have committed no crime. I don't know anyone involved with the tragedy of 9/11 as an example, but I can assure you, they would have agreed with Elessars statement whole heartedly. What they were doing, murdering so many innocent people, was not a sin, and it was not an act that can be judged by man because they were following God's orders. Where can you find such incredible arrogance except at the heart of religion. Pure evil.

 

[challupa]

Now this would be a perfect example of evil. If this doesn't scare you then your just not understanding the implications. Basically Elessar here is saying that God is beyond reproach, and thus as long as you are doing what God wants you to do (no matter how delusional you may be to think your orders are from God) then you have committed no crime. I don't know anyone involved with the tragedy of 9/11 as an example, but I can assure you, they would have agreed with Elessars statement whole heartedly. What they were doing, murdering so many innocent people, was not a sin, and it was not an act that can be judged by man because they were following God's orders. Where can you find such incredible arrogance except at the heart of religion. Pure evil.

Yes, I would have to agree. This mindset is one of the most dangerous imo. One thing that I did want to comment on was the remarks made about Sodom. Those in defence of it's demise said that the city was full of evil people and that god sent a warning before he destroyed it but they didn't heed the warning. However, no one has commented on the fact that Lot was more than willing to give the crowd outside that wanted the young men to be given to them, his daughters for their enjoyment instead. How was Lot a man worthy of saving? None of it makes any sense and when taken literally is very dangerous.

 

[Elessar]

Now this would be a perfect example of evil. If this doesn't scare you then your just not understanding the implications. Basically Elessar here is saying that God is beyond reproach, and thus as long as you are doing what God wants you to do (no matter how delusional you may be to think your orders are from God) then you have committed no crime. I don't know anyone involved with the tragedy of 9/11 as an example, but I can assure you, they would have agreed with Elessars statement whole heartedly. What they were doing, murdering so many innocent people, was not a sin, and it was not an act that can be judged by man because they were following God's orders. Where can you find such incredible arrogance except at the heart of religion. Pure evil.

I never, ever said that, and you're putting words in my mouth. What I am quibbling with is a definition. The topic title states:

G-d/Jesus sinned. Genocide is a sin of high order.

My dispute is that G-d sinned. G-d cannot sin, because, by definition, a sin is:

Deliberate disobedience to the known will of G-d. (American Heritage Dictionary)

Thus, G-d cannot sin, because it is impossible for him to disobey, deliberately or accidentally, his own will.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Ignoring everything else, I can summarize my argument against the topic title in two statements:

1) A sin is an offense against G-d
2) Therefore, G-d cannot commit a sin.

Don't you ever fall short of your own expectations or ideals?

 

[Elessar]

Don't you ever fall short of your own expectations or ideals?

But G-d, being omnipotent and omniscient, could not fall short of himself.

 

[Scuba Pete]

He wouldn't be saying that about Chuck Norris... now would he?

 

[Greatest I am]

Scuba Pete

As a liberal thinker I tolerate many things. As a moral human being, I judge what should be tolerated and what should not. Don't you?

"You mean the maniac you claim doesn't exist?"

Correct. To me he does not exist but to many he does and they should wonder why they would follow a traitor to humanity.

Regards
DL

 

[herushura]

Actually Treason is the Most Highest Sin people can do, yes god/jesus (Alien Beings) sinned by taking advantage over the human race by feeding on there bodys

 

[Greatest I am]

In this case judgement.

You cannot change the meaning of words in an attempt to perjure.
Genocide (from Merriam-Webster:
: the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group

In the case of the flood, God's purpose was not to deal with any racial, political or cultural group but rather sin and perhaps the attempt to corrupt the blood line that was to lead to Christ.

Sounds exactly like what Hitler was doing. Death to all non Arians.

I take it you do not believe this.


Deuteronomy 32:4
He is the Rock, his work is perfect:

Did God mess up?

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

Ignoring everything else, I can summarize my argument against the topic title in two statements:

1) A sin is an offense against G-d
2) Therefore, G-d cannot commit a sin.

So to you it is good policy to say do as I say and not as I do.
Right?

It is OK for a law maker to break his own laws. Strange.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

Now this would be a perfect example of evil. If this doesn't scare you then your just not understanding the implications. Basically Elessar here is saying that God is beyond reproach, and thus as long as you are doing what God wants you to do (no matter how delusional you may be to think your orders are from God) then you have committed no crime. I don't know anyone involved with the tragedy of 9/11 as an example, but I can assure you, they would have agreed with Elessars statement whole heartedly. What they were doing, murdering so many innocent people, was not a sin, and it was not an act that can be judged by man because they were following God's orders. Where can you find such incredible arrogance except at the heart of religion. Pure evil.

Agreed.
Being a traitor to humanity is good if God does it. Good grief, how stupid some Christians are.

Regards
DL

 

[Scuba Pete]

As a liberal thinker I tolerate many things. As a moral human being, I judge what should be tolerated and what should not. Don't you?

Yeah, and I abhor bias based on stereotypes of religion. Perhaps I am far more liberal and tolerant than you are.

"You mean the maniac you claim doesn't exist?"

Correct. To me he does not exist but to many he does and they should wonder why they would follow a traitor to humanity.

How can a non entity be a traitor?

Again, you base your continued harangue on hearsay and the quaint but fallacious notion that it's cool to dis God and people who believe in God. You love to put words in our mouths and paint us with a brush that is as wide as Alaska. In your hate, you make the mistake that all haters make and stereotype us, even to the point of declaring what we MUST believe and how sad we are for believing it. It appears to me that you are not so much a liberal thinker as you are a pseudo-intellectual. You have arrived at a passionate conclusion derived from flawed research. Unfortunately, most pseudo-intellectuals are intellectually lazy. They want to state their premise without equivocation, but they are simply not ready to put in the time and scholarship needed to do the research to do that. After all, you don't need to bash other religions to give yours validity. Or do you?

 

[Greatest I am]

Yeah, and I abhor bias based on stereotypes of religion. Perhaps I am far more liberal and tolerant than you are. How can a non entity be a traitor?

Again, you base your continued harangue on hearsay and the quaint but fallacious notion that it's cool to dis God and people who believe in God. You love to put words in our mouths and paint us with a brush that is as wide as Alaska. In your hate, you make the mistake that all haters make and stereotype us, even to the point of declaring what we MUST believe and how sad we are for believing it. It appears to me that you are not so much a liberal thinker as you are a pseudo-intellectual. You have arrived at a passionate conclusion derived from flawed research. Unfortunately, most pseudo-intellectuals are intellectually lazy. They want to state their premise without equivocation, but they are simply not ready to put in the time and scholarship needed to do the research to do that. After all, you don't need to bash other religions to give yours validity. Or do you?

I will bash any religion that says that it is OK to use genocide against man.
It is called loyalty to humanity over an alien aggressor.

If you would be able to sit and watch your God kill humans by the millions, with ought thinking it wrong, then you should question your indoctrination and the incompetence of your God that has to kill his perfect works.

Regards
DL

 

[Scuba Pete]

You can justify your bigotry any way you see fit. Your hate and acrimony towards Jews and Christians have blinded you to all reason. I don't see how you can call yourself a liberal with such a narrow minded outlook.

My God has killed no one. Not even those who hate him as you do.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

My God has killed no one. Not even those who hate him as you do.

Pete, what do you say to Christians who do believe in the literal, historical truth of Bible stories like the Flood, the ten plagues of Egypt, and the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, and do attribute all of these to God? I think there are a sizable number of Christians who take that position; there are several here on RF.

So far, you've pointed out that the objections and problems raised in this thread don't apply to your beliefs; don't you think there are other Christians (or, potentially, Jews, Muslims or perhaps Baha'i) who they do apply to?

I recognize that there's a wide spectrum beliefs in Christianity, but I'd say that Biblical inerrancy ranks right up there with infant baptism in terms of commonly-held Christian beliefs. And even though neither one is universally held by all Christians, they're still Christian beliefs.

Obviously, if the arguments here are based on premises that just don't work for you, then the conclusions reached don't apply to you either. However, I think that the arguments here do apply to the claims made by a significant segment of Christianity. Even if the arguments don't work for you, I think they do work for the Biblical literalists/inerrantists.

Edit: I should probably also add that I think Greatest_I_am is incorrect in trying to apply arguments against Biblical inerrancy to all of Christianity and Judaism.