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

[Greatest I am]

Even if we take the Bible at full value, and consider the Great flood as "genocide," God still technically isn't a sinner. To sin, by definition is to disobey God or go against his will (according to the Bible at least). God being himself, can't possibly logically do that.

Another way to perhaps examine this, is that rules on murder apply only to humans, not God, the problem with your analysis is that you are humanizing God. It would be wrong for humans to kill other humans, but for God to kill humans would perhaps be most aptly described as us killing ants. The rules "He" sets for us don't apply to him.

That being said, I personally feel that this line of reasoning is just a huge copout.

Are we not in God's image?
Do as I say and not as I do is poor policy. Try it and see.

Regards
DL

 

[Eddy Daze]

Are we not in God's image?
Do as I say and not as I do is poor policy. Try it and see.

Regards
DL

I know thats a poor policy fellow , but I consider myself hypocritical.

some years ago I spent a number of years travelling and visiting religious places such as temples and churches at one Krsna temple it was run by a very genuinely devoted monk , this got me interested and I followed the rules and regulations for about six months, this had a tremendous effect on me , but then I went back to some of my old ways , so realy I am not fit to preach, but I can tell people of those times and be an example of what it is like not to follow correctly.

think about it like this I make a mistake and am plummeting over the edge of a cliff , I would shout out some safety info to a fellow human who looked as if he was going to make a similar mistake.

 

[ayani]

My issue with the God of the Bible wasn't lack of consistency; my point is that the Bible, especially the Old Testament (though I acknowledge your point about the New), is depicted as doing many horrendous, evil things. The fact that these things continue to a certain extent in the New Testament doesn't improve my opinion of Him.

well, ok. i understand that you view these things He has done as horrendous, evil, and inexusable. but what the Bible does, as a whole, is point to the greater purpose of God in history.

Biblically, God despises sin, and evil. when the sinfulness of a nation really overflows, when its evil and arrogance becoming truly corrupting, perverse, or insolent, God can and does punish or destroy that nation / empire / dynasty. for God, that is not horrendoues or evil, in part because God truly knows the hearts and paths of men far better than we. He Himself abhores evil and corruption (though we see that He will tolerate it for a time) and uses His singular status as the God of heaven and earth to raise up or bring down various peoples.

the Biblical perspective is, simply, He made it, He is above it, He knows it, He guides it to its purpose, He can do as He likes. one theological assumtption the Bible makes is that God's jugement is righteous (Psalm 9:8).

look at Genesis 18:20-40. Abraham makes a very bold and angry cry to God, saying

Will you sweep away both the righteous and the wicked? Suppose you find fifty righteous people living there in the city—will you still sweep it away and not spare it for their sakes? Surely you wouldn’t do such a thing, destroying the righteous along with the wicked. Why, you would be treating the righteous and the wicked exactly the same! Surely you wouldn’t do that! Should not the Judge of all the earth do what is right?”

God promises to spare the cities if only ten righteous people not deserving of death can be found there, and sends Abraham along. ten decent people not dwelling there, the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah are destroyed that evening.

we may not be able to see Gods judgements in full perspective, but the Bible is clear that we are not to hold God to the standards of a finite being, limited in scope, power, insight, righteousness, or ability to judge absolutely. in other words, to the standads of a man. the Bible is clear that while we are made in His image, and were made to know Him, love Him, and walk with Him, that God is not a man, nor are His ways our ways, or always ours to know.

 

[Scuba Pete]

That being said, I personally feel that this line of reasoning is just a huge copout.

Why on earth bring it up then? It's a red herring to this discussion.

 

[Smoke]

It would be wrong for humans to kill other humans, but for God to kill humans would perhaps be most aptly described as us killing ants.

I think, though, that a human who kills ants because they offend his sense of righteousness, or because they haven't offered him the worship he believes to be his due, is bound to be a severely disordered human.

 

[Scuba Pete]

I think, though, that a human who kills ants because they offend his sense of righteousness, or because they haven't offered him the worship he believes to be his due, is bound to be a severely disordered human.

who would in turn use God to justify his demented actions.

 

[ayani]

I think, though, that a human who kills ants because they offend his sense of righteousness, or because they haven't offered him the worship he believes to be his due, is bound to be a severely disordered human.

but see, the human did not create the ants. the human isn't innately familiar with the inner workings of the ant colony, the thoughs and doings of the ants, or the ultimate fate of the ant population, both internally and in relation to the surrounding envirnonemnts. that's the difference. God knows both us, and the ants, with the same scope and insight, a scope which no human can have, even in relation to ants.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

the Biblical perspective is, simply, He made it, He is above it, He knows it, He guides it to its purpose, He can do as He likes. one theological assumtption the Bible makes is that God's jugement is righteous (Psalm 9:8).

I think it's already been pointed out in this thread, but if God has to transgress His own supposedly perfect laws, doesn't that mean He's not a very good lawmaker?

look at Genesis 18:20-40. Abraham makes a very bold and angry cry to God, saying

Will you sweep away both the righteous and the wicked? Suppose you find fifty righteous people living there in the city—will you still sweep it away and not spare it for their sakes? Surely you wouldn’t do such a thing, destroying the righteous along with the wicked. Why, you would be treating the righteous and the wicked exactly the same! Surely you wouldn’t do that! Should not the Judge of all the earth do what is right?”

God promises to spare the cities if only ten righteous people not deserving of death can be found there, and sends Abraham along. ten decent people not dwelling there, the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah are destroyed that evening.

I see problems with this in a practical sense; I don't think it's physically possible for there not to be any good people in a city. I think this passage reads more like propaganda justifying genocide than anything else.

That aside, I think that if you take it at face value, it goes against other messages of the Bible, especially as expressed in the New Testament. I touched on this before, but I think that arguing that some people are beyond saving goes against the other, overarching message of the New Testament that, through Christ, salvation is available to everyone.

Also, I think it speaks against other aspects of the nature of God expressed in the Bible. If God can't turn the hearts of even ten people in an entire city to good, is it right to call Him "Almighty"?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

but see, the human did not create the ants. the human isn't innately familiar with the inner workings of the ant colony, the thoughs and doings of the ants, or the ultimate fate of the ant population, both internally and in relation to the surrounding envirnonemnts. that's the difference. God knows both us, and the ants, with the same scope and insight, a scope which no human can have, even in relation to ants.

Right. The only time it's right for you to wantonly massacre a creature is when you have a deep, meaningful connection with that creature and know it innately... almost, in human terms, like the loving bond between a parent and a child.

Then, and only then, there's nothing wrong with slaughtering away to your heart's content.

 

[ayani]

I think it's already been pointed out in this thread, but if God has to transgress His own supposedly perfect laws, doesn't that mean He's not a very good lawmaker?

God's command to not kill was given to a human / human context. God is not human, and man can not "murder" the Creator. God can, however, kill off, disciple, organize, raise up, and tear down His Creation. He is not bound by the laws He has given to human society, quite simply because He is not human and does not live in a society. He is the Creator of men, the overseer of all human communities, and the ultimate judge. we've basically been saying the same dang thing for pages now... and honestly, i can't find an infnate number of ways to express the same idea.

I see problems with this in a practical sense; I don't think it's physically possible for there not to be any good people in a city. I think this passage reads more like propaganda justifying genocide than anything else.

well, what you can not see or imagine as a reader of the Bible, the God described therein was capable of determining the fact in the case of that particular city. i've been in neighborhoods so corrupted by drugs, sin, abuse, addiction, greed, and aimlessless that it could perhaps be reasonably said that no one in a half-mile radias was living anything close to a good or righteous life. and that's from my human perspective.

That aside, I think that if you take it at face value, it goes against other messages of the Bible, especially as expressed in the New Testament. I touched on this before, but I think that arguing that some people are beyond saving goes against the other, overarching message of the New Testament that, through Christ, salvation is available to everyone.

some people just do not get it. and not everyone will. some human hearts are hard, and some peoples are simply poisonous. could God do it? yes. didn't He send warners to that city? yes, He did. but we have free will. Bilically, in how He interacts with us, it could be said that He'd rather have us come to understand what He is saying on our own rather than His instantly (without our consent) re-programming our hearts to avert the punishment we deserve.

 

[Paroxys]

Are we not in God's image?
Do as I say and not as I do is poor policy. Try it and see.

Regards
DL

In God's image is not an equivalence sign. God =/= humans. Our reflection is in the image of us, does it mean that its equivalent? We apply rules to other animals that we ourselves don't follow. A dog attacks a human, the dog gets put down, a human attacks another human, we go to jail.

Again, you're lowering God's status. And you're also not considering how it's logically impossible for God to sin, if we assume the Bible's definition.

 

[Heneni]

When somebody gets killed there spirit is not hidden from god, or destroyed. So if people during the flood were killed their spirits were not destroyed, so they were not spiritually 'no more', though they did not have a body any longer. And since god is a spirit and all of us have spirits it matters not whether we are in a body or not, god is able to see all spirits be they within a body or not. Naturally dead or not.

 

[ayani]

Right. The only time it's right for you to wantonly massacre a creature is when you have a deep, meaningful connection with that creature and know it innately... almost, in human terms, like the loving bond between a parent and a child.

Then, and only then, there's nothing wrong with slaughtering away to your heart's content.

while many people are cut down and lives ended, God's acts in the Bible can not be called wanton (from a Biblical perspective).

wanton can mean immoral, unrestrainedly excessive, and undisiplined. God's righteous judgement is none of those.

here is what God sees when He views mankind before the flood is sent :

the LORD saw how great man's wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time... now the earth was corrupt in God's sight and was full of violence. God saw how corrupt the earth had become, for all the people on earth had corrupted their ways. (Genesis 6)

the hearts of men are descibed as being "evil all the time", and it is stated that "all the people on earth had corrupted their ways". this was not a case of mild or tolerable or redeemable sin.

should corruption, sin, and evil simply be allowed to go on forever, as though nothing were wrong? Biblically, God would say no. God makes a clear differnce between right and wrong, righteous and sinful. God gives societies and individuals chances for repentance, grace, and comprehension of His ways. and He gives us a choice as to how we are to live in light of what He has given us.

 

[Alla Prima]

while many people are cut down and lives ended, God's acts in the Bible can not be called wanton (from a Biblical perspective).

wanton can mean immoral, unrestrainedly excessive, and undisiplined. God's righteous judgement is none of those.

here is what God sees when He views mankind before the flood is sent :

the LORD saw how great man's wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time... now the earth was corrupt in God's sight and was full of violence. God saw how corrupt the earth had become, for all the people on earth had corrupted their ways. (Genesis 6)

the hearts of men are descibed as being "evil all the time", and it is stated that "all the people on earth had corrupted their ways". this was not a case of mild or tolerable or redeemable sin.

should corruption, sin, and evil simply be allowed to go on forever, as though nothing were wrong? Biblically, God would say no. God makes a clear differnce between right and wrong, righteous and sinful. God gives societies and individuals chances for repentance, grace, and comprehension of His ways. and He gives us a choice as to how we are to live in light of what He has given us.

So let's see what we have here.

1. God makes imperfect creations.

2. Imperfect creations behave imperfectly.

3. God destroys imperfect creations for behaving imperfectly.

Now who screwed up here?

 

[ayani]

that's pretty funny, and i see your point.

what God has given His imperfect creatures is a conscience. an internal unerstanding of what is right and wrong, a kind of built-in comprehension of the golden rule. we can either use it, or ignore it, and act with selfishness, cruelty, and uappreciative waste.

what the Bible also says is that the peoples whom God has punished or destroyed were not without warning. they were not without the resources, internal or external, to comprehend wickedness vs. righteousness, and to seek God's ways.

God knows what we seek, and where our priorities lie. He knows exactly how aware *we* are of what is right and wrong, and He knows how we are responding internally to those evidences.

So let's see what we have here.

1. God makes imperfect creations.

2. Imperfect creations behave imperfectly.

3. God destroys imperfect creations for behaving imperfectly.

Now who screwed up here?

 

[Alla Prima]

that's pretty funny, and i see your point.

Thank you... I try.

what God has given His imperfect creatures is a conscience. an internal unerstanding of what is right and wrong, a kind of built-in comprehension of the golden rule. we can either use it, or ignore it, and act with selfishness, cruelty, and uappreciative waste.

what the Bible also says is that the peoples whom God has punished or destroyed were not without warning. they were not without the resources, internal or external, to comprehend wickedness vs. righteousness, and to seek God's ways.

God knows what we seek, and where our priorities lie. He knows exactly how aware *we* are of what is right and wrong, and He knows how we are responding internally to those evidences.

Why didn't he just create us all happy?

 

[Paroxys]

that's pretty funny, and i see your point.

what God has given His imperfect creatures is a conscience. an internal unerstanding of what is right and wrong, a kind of built-in comprehension of the golden rule. we can either use it, or ignore it, and act with selfishness, cruelty, and uappreciative waste.

what the Bible also says is that the peoples whom God has punished or destroyed were not without warning. they were not without the resources, internal or external, to comprehend wickedness vs. righteousness, and to seek God's ways.

God knows what we seek, and where our priorities lie. He knows exactly how aware *we* are of what is right and wrong, and He knows how we are responding internally to those evidences.

WELL TECHNICALLY. He didn't GIVE it to, we took it. Well that's if take Genesis literally.

 

[Smoke]

but see, the human did not create the ants. the human isn't innately familiar with the inner workings of the ant colony, the thoughs and doings of the ants, or the ultimate fate of the ant population, both internally and in relation to the surrounding envirnonemnts. that's the difference. God knows both us, and the ants, with the same scope and insight, a scope which no human can have, even in relation to ants.

The reason it's insane for humans to judge the morality of ants isn't that we don't have perfect knowledge of ants; humans don't have perfect knowledge of each other, either, but they feel perfectly qualified to judge each others' morality, as you will notice whenever Christians or Muslims discuss homosexuality.

The reason it's insane for humans to judge the morality of ants is that ants cannot even begin to understand human morality. The idea that ants could possibly know or care about human morality is ludicrous. To punish them for their lack of knowledge and concern would just be nuts.

If God is so infinitely far above us all -- so much so that humans are more nearly comparable to ants than to God -- then it's infinitely more insane for God to judge humans for violating divine morality.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

God's command to not kill was given to a human / human context. God is not human, and man can not "murder" the Creator.

Ah... so, hypothetically, if humans had the ability, it would be moral, or at least not immoral, for a human to kill God?

God can, however, kill off, disciple, organize, raise up, and tear down His Creation. He is not bound by the laws He has given to human society, quite simply because He is not human and does not live in a society. He is the Creator of men, the overseer of all human communities, and the ultimate judge. we've basically been saying the same dang thing for pages now... and honestly, i can't find an infnate number of ways to express the same idea.

I understand what you're saying, I just don't accept your argument. I see it as an exercise in special pleading: you say that God isn't subject to morality because He's God. Well, why? What is it about God that exempts Him from being subject to good and evil?

well, what you can not see or imagine as a reader of the Bible, the God described therein was capable of determining the fact in the case of that particular city. i've been in neighborhoods so corrupted by drugs, sin, abuse, addiction, greed, and aimlessless that it could perhaps be reasonably said that no one in a half-mile radias was living anything close to a good or righteous life. and that's from my human perspective.

If you say so, I'm not going to dispute you, but I bet that if you had perfect knowledge and infinite power, you'd be able to figure out how to turn that neighborhood around without killing every single person in it.

some people just do not get it. and not everyone will. some human hearts are hard, and some peoples are simply poisonous. could God do it? yes. didn't He send warners to that city? yes, He did.

Knowing that they would be ineffective. Or is God not all-knowing? If you're hanging onto a cliff and I throw you a rope that I know won't hold your weight, have I acted charitably?

but we have free will.

Do we have free will in death?

Does being convinced with overwhelming rationale for one side over another negate free will? I don't think it does.

Bilically, in how He interacts with us, it could be said that He'd rather have us come to understand what He is saying on our own rather than His instantly (without our consent) re-programming our hearts to avert the punishment we deserve.

Yet in many cases, He chooses not to do so. If an all-knowing, all-powerful God tries to do something, it gets done. This isn't one of those examples of semantic trickery like "can God make a square circle" or "can God make a rock so heavy he can't lift it", this is fundamental to the idea of an omnipotent God. If the answer to the question "can God always do what He sets out to do" isn't "yes", then the God in question isn't omnipotent.

while many people are cut down and lives ended, God's acts in the Bible can not be called wanton (from a Biblical perspective).

wanton can mean immoral, unrestrainedly excessive, and undisiplined. God's righteous judgement is none of those.

I disagree. If you believe the Bible, God can take something as simple as a bush and make it a mechanism by which to turn a person toward His will. God always has means other than murder at His disposal to accomplish His aims.

Or do you not believe in an almighty God?

here is what God sees when He views mankind before the flood is sent :

the LORD saw how great man's wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time... now the earth was corrupt in God's sight and was full of violence. God saw how corrupt the earth had become, for all the people on earth had corrupted their ways. (Genesis 6)

the hearts of men are descibed as being "evil all the time", and it is stated that "all the people on earth had corrupted their ways". this was not a case of mild or tolerable or redeemable sin.

If you believe the Gospels, how can you call any sin "not redeemable"?

should corruption, sin, and evil simply be allowed to go on forever, as though nothing were wrong? Biblically, God would say no.

Also biblically, God is capable of a whole spectrum of ways of turning a person's heart from evil other than killing them.

God makes a clear differnce between right and wrong, righteous and sinful. God gives societies and individuals chances for repentance, grace, and comprehension of His ways. and He gives us a choice as to how we are to live in light of what He has given us.

It is my innate sense of right and wrong that allows me to identify many of the actions of God described in the Bible as evil. I think that if it was placed there by God, this creates two possibilities:

- my "moral compass" is correct, and these acts of God described in the Bible are evil.

- my "moral compass" is faulty, along with that of other people who condemn the God of the Bible. It is insufficient to allow us to tell good from evil. By itself, this doesn't really create any logical problems, but I've also heard Christians use the fact that we have this innate moral sense to justify why it's right for God to judge non-believers guilty and send them to Hell. If this innate sense has gone haywire, can it really be used as the basis for a just punishment this way?

 

[Greatest I am]

I know thats a poor policy fellow , but I consider myself hypocritical.

some years ago I spent a number of years travelling and visiting religious places such as temples and churches at one Krsna temple it was run by a very genuinely devoted monk , this got me interested and I followed the rules and regulations for about six months, this had a tremendous effect on me , but then I went back to some of my old ways , so realy I am not fit to preach, but I can tell people of those times and be an example of what it is like not to follow correctly.

think about it like this I make a mistake and am plummeting over the edge of a cliff , I would shout out some safety info to a fellow human who looked as if he was going to make a similar mistake.

If the message reaches thinking people then they will get it. If it reaches sheeple, they will not.

Regards
DL