jho@ihuxn.UUCP (Yosi Hoshen) (10/25/84)
I have been reading recent posting of Ken Nichols's responses to Tim Maroney's article: "Even if I DID Believe" as well as his other posting on similar topics. I have also been reading other net people evaluation of Ken's responses. Some of these evaluations conclude that Ken's posting are not a rebuttal to Tim's article, but rather reinforce Tim's views on the character of God. Regretfully, I have to concur with these evaluations. To illustrate my point, let me draw upon a biblical analogy: The king of Mo'ab, Ba'lak, fearing the approaching Israelites, asked Ba'laam (a prophet) to direct a curse against the Israelites. Instead of cursing the Israelites, Ba'laam blessed them. Numbers 23:13 sums this situation in the following passage: 'And Ba'lak said to Ba'laam, "What have you done to me? I took you to curse my enemies, and behold, you have done nothing but bless them"' It is quite obvious that Ken Nichols, just as in the biblical story, has accomplished the opposite of what he intended to do. Instead of rebutting Tim Maroney, he reinforced Tim's thesis. The only way I could consider Ken's posting as a rebuttal to Tim's article is by assuming a double standard - one standard for god and another standard for the rest of the universe. Does it imply that what we recognize as a low moral standard (e.g. killing innocent people) is reversed when it is applied to god? When God bears the responsibility for the death of the innocent, is he to be judged as having high moral standards? -- Yosi Hoshen Bell Laboratories Naperville, Illinois (312)-979-7321 Mail: ihnp4!ihuxn!jho
ken@qantel.UUCP (Ken Nichols@ex6193) (10/26/84)
> The only way I could consider Ken's posting as a rebuttal to > Tim's article is by assuming a double standard - one standard for > god and another standard for the rest of the universe. Does it > imply that what we recognize as a low moral standard (e.g. killing > innocent people) is reversed when it is applied to god? When God > bears the responsibility for the death of the innocent, is he > to be judged as having high moral standards? > -- > > Yosi Hoshen Noone is innocent in the sight of a Holy God. There is no such thing. All men deserve death and punishment forever in Hell. -- "...holding forth the Ken Nichols word of life..." Phil. 2:16 ...!ucbvax!dual!qantel!ken ------------
lab@qubix.UUCP (Q-Bick) (10/29/84)
> Yosi Hoshen: > The only way I could consider Ken's posting as a rebuttal to > Tim's article is by assuming a double standard - one standard for > god and another standard for the rest of the universe. Does it > imply that what we recognize as a low moral standard (e.g. killing > innocent people) is reversed when it is applied to god? When God > bears the responsibility for the death of the innocent, is he > to be judged as having high moral standards? Not a double standard...God IS the standard, and man doesn't even come close. Someone may be innocent when only humans and human standards are considered, but when God and His standards are brought into the picture, everything changes. Man's accountability to man has its basis in man's accountability to God. This was one of Tim's major fallacies - trying to put God on a human level. However, Isaiah 55:6-9 clearly puts God on a distinct level above us. -- The Ice Floe of Larry Bickford {amd,decwrl,sun,idi,ittvax}!qubix!lab You can't settle the issue until you've settled how to settle the issue.
features@ihuxf.UUCP (M.A. Zeszutko) (10/31/84)
>>Noone is innocent in the sight of a Holy God. There is no such thing. All >>men deserve death and punishment forever in Hell. >>-- >> >> >>"...holding forth the Ken Nichols >> word of life..." Phil. 2:16 ...!ucbvax!dual!qantel!ken As long as Ken keeps emphasizing that all *men* are doomed, the women are assured of salvation. If he starts using non-sexist language, however, that may change my perceptions of this argument. Mary Ann Zeszutko ihnp4!ihuxf!features "There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." Gal. 3:28
jnelson@trwrba.UUCP (John T. Nelson) (11/06/84)
[Someone] The only way I could consider Ken's posting as a rebuttal to Tim's article is by assuming a double standard - one standard for god and another standard for the rest of the universe. Does it imply that what we recognize as a low moral standard (e.g. killing innocent people) is reversed when it is applied to god? When God bears the responsibility for the death of the innocent, is he to be judged as having high moral standards? [Larry Bickford] Not a double standard...God IS the standard, and man doesn't even come close. Someone may be innocent when only humans and human standards are considered, but when God and His standards are brought into the picture, [John T. Nelson] In other words, it IS a double standard. I see NO change when "God and His standards are brought into the picture"... only a deeper chasm between the truth and what Ken Nicholls and Larry Bickford prescribe. God does as he pleases. Why shouldn't he? He is accountable to no one. As a result he can condemn millions to eternities of punishment for the most trivial of crimes and yet turn around and wash his hands of the blood, claiming to be a Holy and righteous God. If God cannot manage to adhere to the laws that he has set up for his creations, then he is by no means better than us... only different from us. You might argue that these laws were created for man here on earth, but no that doesn't wash because the things that we learn here on earth will also be applied in heaven. That's why this hypocritical theology that Larry Bickford and Ken Nicholls percribe as the panacea to all our ills seems so patently false! Any God that wishes us to be perfect so that he can commune with us had better clean up his own act. Sin is sin no matter WHAT lame hand-wave you use. This was one of Tim's major fallacies - trying to put God on a human level. However, Isaiah 55:6-9 clearly puts God on a distinct level above us. God fails the test by human standards... how can God's actions possibly be condoned by his OWN standards? Notice how the evidence Mr. Bickford and Co. always show us is (for the zillionth time) chapter and verse from the Bible. But if the Bible is inspired or written by God (as many believe) then can we be expected anything BUT justification of God's actions? What totaly cyclical logic! - John