The idea that we could be tortured forever for behaving in the way that could have been expected by someone that knew what we was doing when he created us never quite made sense to me. God taking responsibility through his son does make sense, but if I'm going to be tortured forever for misunderstanding the message, then I guess I will be
I've had several atheist and agnostic friends and acquaintances over the years bring this up as a reason or as "evidence" for them that God doesn't exist. However, I noticed something about their lives after they used this argument as to why the existence of God doesn't make sense. When basically put in the same position as God was before he created humans, they did the same thing God did.
This is a great argument. (Clipped and saved.)
I think you are missing something in the argument.
).
I don't think God created nature or Adam and Eve imperfect. They were perfect within the natural realm they were created. They were perfect in their original state. God gave them free will, the capacity to make decisions independently of Him. When you give someone free will, you also give them the capacity to make decisions both good and bad, right and wrong. It's not true free will if there isn't a capacity to make all types of decisions. They were given complete control of their decisions, which in and of itself is a gift, they just decided to use their gift the wrong way and it fractured their nature to it core along with the natural creation around them.
Actually, God doesn't condemn anyone's soul for not living up to His standard. They are condemned for not accepting God's gift, Jesus Christ. Once sin entered human nature, it was impossible to live up to God's standard, it wasn't impossible before the fall. But after the fall, not one person ever born could live up to God's commandments because their nature wouldn't allow it. But all aspects of God's nature is perfect; not one characteristic of God is imperfect. Just as His grace and mercy are perfect, so is his justice. Perfect justice doesn't allow wrongdoing to go unpunished. If God were to allow even one sin to go unpunished, His justice wouldn't be perfect. Jesus satisfied God's justice and paid for humanity's sins through His death and resurrection. At that point, humanity had access back to God and the ability to return to their creator in an eternal, perfect state. When people reject God's free sacrificial gift to not have their sins held against them, they are choosing to have their soul condemned, not God.
I love it when this verse is referenced by unbelievers because most have no idea that all jealousy isn't a bad thing nor is all jealousy a sin. Somewhere down the line of humanity, some relationship/psychologist whack deemed all jealousy as bad. The Bible talks about two types of jealousy, one that is rooted in the sinful nature and the other that is righteous jealousy. Most nonbelievers do not realize this and automatically think the Bible contradicts itself, but it doesn't. If my spouse never got jealous of me, under any circumstances and didn't care one "iota" if other women flirted with me or I flirted with other women. I'd better start worrying. It would mean more than likely she no longer has intimate feelings for me anymore. But if I'm jealous because my neighbor is more successful than I am, has nicer things than I do, etc. Then that jealousy is rooted out of the sinful nature of envy and covetousness. Two completely different types of jealousy.[/QUOTE]
Oh I know, but I like to answer the questions anyway.(Just playing Devil's Advocate here. As a confirmed skeptic, I don't really have a solid opinion among many doubts.
You're looking at it as if God is trapped within the creation (time, matter, and space). He sits outside of creation and isn't subject to the laws of nature (time, matter, and space). The Bible says God is a spirit. It's been debated that at times the original language (in the old testament) uses a greek word that doesn't assert male or female to refer to God. But, as you read the Bible it is obvious that God (as it pertains to humans) wants to be referred to as male within the relationship of Him and humans. Whether that means God actually is a male spirit or not, I guess, can be debated. Granted, you've got people who will debate this, so if you're interested, there is a lot of material on the web about it.
Or maybe it is obvious that the dominant cultural context within which scripture was written used masculine pronouns to refer to God.
I'm going to have to side with the law on this one...abuse of another human being always needs to be reported...cannot imagine why the Catholic Church would want otherwise...Catholic Church to excommunicate priests for following new US state law
The Justice Department is investigating whether the new law violated the First Amendment.www.newsweek.com
Catholic Church To Excommunicate Priests for Following New US State Law
The Catholic Church has issued a warning to its clergy in Washington state: Any priest who complies with a new law requiring the reporting of child abuse confessions to authorities will be excommunicated.
The new law, which will take effect on July 27, eliminates the long-standing confidentiality of the confessional, forcing Catholic leaders and lawmakers into a highly charged standoff over religious liberty and child protection.
The rationale behind it is toward the end of the article. Having said that, it is on the church to demonstrate that there are safeguards in place that make it so that compromising canon law isn't needed. There are still a ton of angry Catholics out there who are watching leadership very carefully. I think it's also noteworthy that this decision came down from the diocese, not the Vatican. And finally, there's no way this law survives SCOTUS anyway. Whether we agree with it or disagree with it, it's still unconstitutional either way. People love them some "separation of church and state" all the way up until they don't.
Yes, I knew that, I got my testaments bassackwards. LOL!
No...I believe the ideas and teachings are inspired, but the actual manuscript bears enculturation. All of us decide at some level how we view the relationship of culture vis a vis truth. Believe what you wish...even very conservative scholars accept this as reality.
Totally agree...I would tell "counselees" that if they disclosed anything to me that involved "harming" another person that they and I together would go to the authorities. You would have been amazed what people told me...getting rid of the guilt -- or sharing it with someone else, is a powerful motivator.
I agree there are things that are cultural vs things that are truth in scripture, and I'm sure there are many things in scripture that we agree on that fall into these categories. But with regard to how God is referred to in the bible (male vs female), we're going to disagree that it was the writers' personal preferences due to the cultural "place" men held compared to women during that time rather than that's what God intended.
Wow, I don't even know what to say.
Much, if not all of the obvious misogyny built into the Roman Catholic church's leadership hierarchy is directly from the early Roman Empire's political and cultural design. It's been roughly 2000 years, and we still haven't fixed the early church's intentional lack of representation for women.
The religious right's compromise with Donald Trump will go down as the ultimate deal with the devil where American Christianity is concerned. It was UNDERSTANDABLE (though in my view a compromise too far) to reason, "well, the Court is 4-4 and an open seat, I can allow Hillary to choose the swing judge or I can take my chance with Trump." But when the adoration of his lewd, crude, and socially unacceptable nonsense was the end result, the depth of compromise was further than was likely intended in the first place.
