God's motives to torture

[metis]

...and some people still believe the earth is flat.

It's not?

Maybe I misinterpreted "fat" for "flat"? or is it "fart"?

I'm so confused.

 

[PuerAzaelis]

... questioning God and his authority ...[Romans 9:19-20]

The idol of power has such a hold on some human minds that they prefer a God who is a mixture of good and evil, provided that he is powerful, to a God of love who governs only by the intrinsic authority of the Divine — by truth, beauty and goodness — i.e. they prefer a God who is actually almighty to the crucified God.

 

[Skwim]

But certainly it is worth thinking about. "What if?" is a good question to ask oneself.

Have you sinned?

According to Christian theology, most certainly, but then you and I have no doubt also crossed some of the taboos of other religions as well, which you and I would dismiss as irrelevant. I have simply failed to see any credibility in the concept of sin, so I dismiss it as meaningless.

.

.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

However, I must say that God is also a just God, and worshiping another God is the biggest sin.

The problem is that it's a sin for what reason? It bruised God's ego. That's it. There are far worse things to be guilty of than having more than one contact in your phone.

Vishnu, particularly in his Krishna avatar.

And a superior one than Yahweh, if I'm being frank.

And God didn't make Hell for people... He made it as Satan's ultimate abode.

How is that punishment for someone who wanted to move out anyway?

In this case, Krishna or Jesus?

Krishna is more of a joy to read, to be honest. Sure, he manipulated a war and got his kingdom destroyed as karma or whatever, but he was a doer, whereas Jesus just talked a few times. Plus, the bible never made me cry (in a good way). The Mahabharata, even though I was reading a prose version, made me cry.

But the biblical perspective and my view is that God is transcendent—He is above all that He created and I think life in this world demonstrates that reality.

But the thing is, there is no "above all" because there is only "all."

So which is it? If one or the other is true it does matter and would make a difference in one's choices and eternal destiny.

How does Jesus' or Krishna's biology make any difference to your salvation?

While you may see Krishna as all loving, I see the opposite. I see the relentless requirement and burden of endless effort and work.

It's not like Jesus told you to sit on your butt. Work IS required. You give what you have, no more, no less. The woman who could only afford a couple pennies was valued as much as the people making it rain.

I cannot understand how anyone can see lifetime after lifetime as a good thing.

You're bound to get it right at some point, unlike "one strike and you're done".

Isn't one in this world, with all the pain and suffering enough?

You're supposed to be learning how to make things better. In the parable of the talents, the guy who just sits on his coin is punished because he never invested it. It was his ONE job to do his duty. Everyone else did, with varying success. However, they weren't punished if they didn't make as much as the other. The guy is only punished for doing NOTHING.

The devotion required by Krishna is so hopeless compared to the merciful, loving compassion freely offered by the God revealed in the Bible who ...so loved the world that He gave His only Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have eternal life (John 3:16) and ...So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed (John 8:36)

That's kinda why Krishna showed up, though. He was born to slay demons, some villainous kings, save the innocent, etc. Jesus says faith can move mountains but Krishna did it before puberty.

Jesus is good for talking. Krishna actually DID stuff and put his money where his mouth was.

Jesus spoke about the torment of being separated from God for eternity because of our sin

But, again, if God is omnipresent, you CAN'T be separated. That's the mind-blowing thing: separation is all in your head.

What happens if you don't follow the Bible or accept its teachings? You fall away from God. What happens if you don't follow the Bhagavad Gita or accept its teachings? Nothing bad, that's for sure.

Used to watch a show called Fraggle Rock, by Jim Henson. The protagonist asks a wise character what will happen if he fails. "Nothing," was the reply. No punishment, just no reward. It's like you aren't punished for not turning on the light switch. There will simply just be no light until you do.

Who are we to question him?

If something's not working, I should be able to call Customer Service.

Is not praying a tacit admission that you think God isn't doing what you think He should be doing?

People like the ones in this thread who are questioning God and his authority are the EXACT reason why the world is in the condition that it is in today.

People who just swallow things without digesting it is why we can't have nice things.

Jesus....

... made sure.

How? His own followers sin up to and during and after his death, so what really happened?

 

[InChrist]

Krishna is more of a joy to read, to be honest. Sure, he manipulated a war and got his kingdom destroyed as karma or whatever, but he was a doer, whereas Jesus just talked a few times. Plus, the bible never made me cry (in a good way). The Mahabharata, even though I was reading a prose version, made me cry

It's not like Jesus told you to sit on your butt. Work IS required. You give what you have, no more, no less. The woman who could only afford a couple pennies was valued as much as the people making it rain.

Jesus is good for talking. Krishna actually DID stuff and put his money where his mouth was.

Jesus came from heaven, stepped into human history, paid for the sins of the world and rose again conquering death for all who trust Him as their Savior. Krishna is a mythological god.

But the thing is, there is no "above all" because there is only "all."

But, again, if God is omnipresent, you CAN'T be separated. That's the mind-blowing thing: separation is all in your head.

How do you know this idea that "you can't be separated from God" is accurate?

You're bound to get it right at some point, unlike "one strike and you're done".

According to the scriptures we need a Savior because we can't get it right. A thousand lifetimes wouldn't make a difference...
Just as people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him.Hebrews 9:27-28

 

[Shia Islam]

The problem is that it's a sin for what reason? It bruised God's ego. That's it. There are far worse things to be guilty of than having more than one contact in your phone.

Man is more than slave to the One who created him..There is no bigger sin than the minute slave ignores the all powerful God..
Besides, this action means that you rebel against all the laws God has put for humans..How can this poor man wage a war against his holy God?!!

 

[Jainarayan]

Jesus came from heaven, stepped into human history, paid for the sins of the world and rose again conquering death for all who trust Him as their Savior.

What sins? Why is man sinful? Why do we need salvation? What is sin? If sin is disobedience to God, what does he want obedience to? Was man not made in the "image of God"? Why would an omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent, (but evidently not omnibenevolent) God give man free will knowing man would "sin" and that man would reject God? That's like a parent putting the cookies in full view and reach of a child, knowing full well the child will take the cookies, even after being told not to take the cookies, then punishing the child for taking the cookies. E-n-t-r-a-p-m-e-n-t. S-a-d-i-s-t-i-c.

So we have two choices to resolve this illogic as I see it:

1. Man, made in the image of God, is holy and sinless. There is no need for "salvation", and Jesus came only as a teacher.
2. Because man is sinful sin, and man is made in the image of God, God is sinful.

Which is it?

Krishna is a mythological god.

You forgot to add "I believe" to "Krishna is a mythological god". Because it is only your belief, and an insult to Hindus everywhere to state it as fact. Not to mention not being in compliance with RF rules.

 

[Kenny]

According to Christian theology, most certainly, but then you and I have no doubt also crossed some of the taboos of other religions as well, which you and I would dismiss as irrelevant. I have simply failed to see any credibility in the concept of sin, so I dismiss it as meaningless.

.

.

It isn't that hard since "sin" is missing the mark. Tell a wife that she is not worth the house she is living in and then "dismiss it as meaningless".

I think the concept is quite easy to understand.... if one wants to understand.

 

[Kenny]

How? His own followers sin up to and during and after his death, so what really happened?

What really happened is that the followers sin up to and during and after his death is covered because of the Cross. Love covers a multitude of sin

 

[Jainarayan]

Man is more than slave to the One who created him..There is no bigger sin than the minute slave ignores the all powerful God..
Besides, this action means that you rebel against all the laws God has put for humans..How can this poor man wage a war against his holy God?!!

What are those laws, and why did he create them?

Not steal? Before people knew of this God, they had human laws against stealing.
Not murder? Before people knew of this God, they had human laws against murder.
Not harm others? Before people knew of this God, they had human laws against harming others.

What did this God give that man didn't already have?

The further I get away from the Abrahamic religions, the less sense it all makes to me. Maybe I just have a problem being controlled and an authority issue.

 

[Skwim]

It isn't that hard since "sin" is missing the mark. Tell a wife that she is not worth the house she is living in and then "dismiss it as meaningless".

I think the concept is quite easy to understand.... if one wants to understand.

Oh, I understand the concept alright, but like the concept of psychokinesisis, which I also understand, I don't believe in its reality.

.

 

[Kenny]

Oh, I understand the concept alright, but like the concept of psychokinesisis, which I also understand, I don't believe in its reality.

.

LOL. I think even a child can understand it as more than a concept. Correction, which sometimes comes with consequences, is proof enough. Or, at the least, people in jail can confirm a transgression.

 

[Jainarayan]

It isn't that hard since "sin" is missing the mark.

What's the mark? ELI5 me as someone who understands sin only as not 'doing the right thing', harming someone or something, being selfish; and as someone who does not understand sin as disobedience to God, as someone whose God doesn't give commandments or expect obedience. Even if we don't love him, and I daresay even hate him, as long as he's in our minds, we'll be given grace.

 

[Kenny]

What's the mark? ELI5 me as someone who understands sin only as not 'doing the right thing', harming someone or something, being selfish; and as someone who does not understand sin as disobedience to God, as someone whose God doesn't give commandments or expect obedience. Even if we don't love him, and I daresay even hate him, as long as he's in our minds, we'll be given grace.

I would agree that there is a grace that is being extended even to the murderer.

 

[Tazarah]

The idol of power has such a hold on some human minds that they prefer a God who is a mixture of good and evil, provided that he is powerful, to a God of love who governs only by the intrinsic authority of the Divine — by truth, beauty and goodness — i.e. they prefer a God who is actually almighty to the crucified God.

Who is your God?

You know that evolution is just a theory... right?

I forgot to mention that — for all of you agnostic/atheist scoffers in here — evolution is nothing more than a theory, and that is all it ever has been and will be.

Why everything you've been told about evolution is wrong

“The story, still sometimes repeated in creationist circles, goes like this: it is the 1960s, at Nasa's Goddard Space Flight Centre in Maryland, and a team of astronomers is using cutting-edge computers to recreate the orbits of the planets, thousands of years in the past. Suddenly, an error message flashes up. There's a problem: way back in history, one whole day appears to be missing.

The scientists are baffled, until a Christian member of the team dimly recalls something and rushes to fetch a Bible. He thumbs through it until he reaches the Book of Joshua, chapter 10, in which Joshua asks God to stop the world for . . . "about a full day!" Uproar in the computer lab. The astronomers have happened upon proof that God controls the universe on a day-to-day basis, that the Bible is literally true, and that by extension the "myth" of creation is, in fact, a reality. Darwin was wrong – according to another creationist rumour, he'd recanted on his deathbed, anyway – and here, at last, is scientific evidence!”

 

[InChrist]

What sins? Why is man sinful? Why do we need salvation? What is sin? If sin is disobedience to God, what does he want obedience to? Was man not made in the "image of God"? Why would an omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent, (but evidently not omnibenevolent) God give man free will knowing man would "sin" and that man would reject God? That's like a parent putting the cookies in full view and reach of a child, knowing full well the child will take the cookies, even after being told not to take the cookies, then punishing the child for taking the cookies. E-n-t-r-a-p-m-e-n-t. S-a-d-i-s-t-i-c.

So we have two choices to resolve this illogic as I see it:

1. Man, made in the image of God, is holy and sinless. There is no need for "salvation", and Jesus came only as a teacher.
2. Because man is sinful sin, and man is made in the image of God, God is sinful.

Which is it?



You forgot to add "I believe" to "Krishna is a mythological god". Because it is only your belief, and an insult to Hindus everywhere to state it as fact. Not to mention not being in compliance with RF rules.

I apologize, you are right, I should have said "I believe" Krishna to be a mythological god. Yet, I do believe this because the tone of the Bhagavad Gite and the characters in it appear to have mythological quality, rather than historic or factual.

I don't see the illogic you refer to and the two choices you present are not the only options. Although the biblical scriptures state that humans are made in God's image, this does not mean that humans are Gods or completely the same as the only Creator God. From the biblical view, humans are created beings with a beginning while God is eternal with no beginning. God has a God-nature, while humans have human nature which does not include the omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence, holiness, and sinlessness which only God possesses Because humans are not God we therefore fall short of God's perfect and sin, so the need of a God to save us. Sure God knew created being would fall short and sin. That is why He lovingly provides the way of salvation and freedom by His own hand and free gift offered to all.

 

[Jainarayan]

I apologize, you are right, I should have said "I believe" Krishna to be a mythological god. Yet, I do believe this because the tone of the Bhagavad Gite and the characters in it appear to have mythological quality, rather than historic or factual.

So how is turning water into wine, raising the dead, giving sight to blind men with clay made of spit and dirt, feeding 5,000 people with a few fish and loaves of bread, filling the empty nets of fishermen in an instant, not to mention rising from the dead, achieving escape velocity of his own power to leave Earth any less mythological and more historical that the stories in the Srimad Bhagavata Purana, Mahabharata and Bhagavad Gita?

I don't see the illogic you refer to and the two choices you present are not the only options.

Enlighten me.

Although the biblical scriptures state that humans are made in God's image, this does not mean that humans are Gods or completely the same as the only Creator God. From the biblical view, humans are created beings with a beginning while God is eternal with no beginning. God has a God-nature, while humans have human nature which does not include the omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence, holiness, and sinlessness which only God possesses Because humans are not God we therefore fall short of God's perfect and sin, so the need of a God to save us. Sure God knew created being would fall short and sin. That is why He lovingly provides the way of salvation and freedom by His own hand and free gift offered to all.

26 Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, after Our likeness, to rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, and over all the earth itself and every creature that crawls upon it.” 27 So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. Gen. 1:26 - 27

I've read further and I find no qualifications on that statement, nothing to support what you're saying. Where is that spelled out? I don't believe it is anywhere. Why would God (the God of the Bible, that is), in his alleged perfection, create imperfect beings, knowing they're going to falter and need to be rescued? Why would he then pull a stunt as I described in the cookies analogy? That says God is not perfect; that he has flaws, he's not omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent, and certainly not omni-benevolent. There's no way, time or place any of that can make sense.

What I believe is that the God of the Bible is not the supreme omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent creator, ruler and judge of the universe, but rather just another deity in a long list of deities in a long list of pantheons who have personalities like the rest of us... some benevolent and caring, some malevolent and malicious and downright evil, some indifferent, some childish and throwing childish temper tantrums and scaring their followers, some even socio- and psychopathic..

 

[Jainarayan]

Who is your God?

You know that evolution is just a theory... right?

I forgot to mention that — for all of you agnostic/atheist scoffers in here — evolution is nothing more than a theory, and that is all it ever has been and will be.

Why everything you've been told about evolution is wrong

“The story, still sometimes repeated in creationist circles, goes like this: it is the 1960s, at Nasa's Goddard Space Flight Centre in Maryland, and a team of astronomers is using cutting-edge computers to recreate the orbits of the planets, thousands of years in the past. Suddenly, an error message flashes up. There's a problem: way back in history, one whole day appears to be missing.

The scientists are baffled, until a Christian member of the team dimly recalls something and rushes to fetch a Bible. He thumbs through it until he reaches the Book of Joshua, chapter 10, in which Joshua asks God to stop the world for . . . "about a full day!" Uproar in the computer lab. The astronomers have happened upon proof that God controls the universe on a day-to-day basis, that the Bible is literally true, and that by extension the "myth" of creation is, in fact, a reality. Darwin was wrong – according to another creationist rumour, he'd recanted on his deathbed, anyway – and here, at last, is scientific evidence!”

Yeah, uh no... It's a meme going around since 1936... a meme full of holes.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/the-lost-day/

 

[InChrist]

So how is turning water into wine, raising the dead, giving sight to blind men with clay made of spit and dirt, feeding 5,000 people with a few fish and loaves of bread, filling the empty nets of fishermen in an instant, not to mention rising from the dead, achieving escape velocity of his own power to leave Earth any less mythological and more historical that the stories in the Srimad Bhagavata Purana, Mahabharata and Bhagavad Gita?

The events of the Bible are set within actual historical time periods on earth, mentioning real people and places and often supported with archeological evidence giving credibility to the accounts. It seems reasonable to me that God as Creator of heaven and earth who controls the universe and rules over nature would have the ability to do the things you listed above.

26 Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, after Our likeness, to rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, and over all the earth itself and every creature that crawls upon it.” 27 So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. Gen. 1:26 - 27

I've read further and I find no qualifications on that statement, nothing to support what you're saying. Where is that spelled out? I don't believe it is anywhere. Why would God (the God of the Bible, that is), in his alleged perfection, create imperfect beings, knowing they're going to falter and need to be rescued? Why would he then pull a stunt as I described in the cookies analogy? That says God is not perfect; that he has flaws, he's not omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent, and certainly not omni-benevolent. There's no way, time or place any of that can make sense.

According to the biblical scriptures there is only One eternal God, One Creator. It stands to reason that an beings this God creates, while they may be good as the scriptures stated God said they were, they could not be perfect as God is perfect because the eternal Creator is one of a kind, unique. No created being could be as God or with the abilities of God, all created beings would fall short of God's perfection. The cookie analogy, stunt, as you call it, is no stunt at all, but a very real opportunity for each person to see their own sinful choices with resulting damage and choose (or refuse) to be transformed into Christ likeness. That's how I see it.

What I believe is that the God of the Bible is not the supreme omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent creator, ruler and judge of the universe, but rather just another deity in a long list of deities in a long list of pantheons who have personalities like the rest of us... some benevolent and caring, some malevolent and malicious and downright evil, some indifferent, some childish and throwing childish temper tantrums and scaring their followers, some even socio- and psychopathic..

That's not my perspective, but thanks for sharing your thoughts.

 

[PuerAzaelis]

Who is your God?

The one who says that his strength is "made perfect in weakness".

The reed is compatible with any old breeze that blows through it. It does not need the presence or absence of a particular theory to prove or disprove anything.