ken@qantel.UUCP (Ken Nichols@ex6193) (10/12/84)
(+-+-+-+-+-+-+)
LEGEND:
! = me (Ken Nichols)
> = Yoshi Hoshen
-> = Tim Maroney
A few weeks ago I responded to an article on the net with the following.
! Please give specific or semi-specific examples of God's "vengeful, spiteful,
! sadistic, feeble-minded, schizophrenic" behavior. I will be glad to answer
! these claims with other scriptures and experience if examples are given.
A reply by Mr. Hoshen was posted soon after that said the following:
> If we interpret the bible as the "true word of God" then one could
> reach the conclusion that god is "vengeful, spiteful, sadistic, feeble-minded,
> schizophrenic". Early this year, Tim Maroney, who is no longer on the
> net, convincingly articulated this point of view. On the other hand, if the
> bible was written by men then it reflects the perception of God by
> the authors of the bible. These authors would have most likely attribute
> to God the type of Morality that was prevalent 2000-3000 years ago.
> In this case God (if he exists) is vindicated from the above charges.
> Since many of you are new on the net, I am reposting Tim Maroney's
> original article titled: "Even If I DID Believe".
The following is the posting reposted by Mr. Hoshen. I cannot let this go
unanswered even though I wasn't present at the time of the original posting.
This man has a very twisted view of the God that I love and I will not allow
him to curse and swear at my God without returning a fair defense.
Note: When using the word "you" I am refering to the collective you and not
Tim since he's is not on the net anymore.
->I am not a Christian. In my discussions of this fact with Christians, I
->have repeatedly run into one major misunderstanding. The Christians assume
->that if I believed the Bible were true, I would become a Christian; that is,
->they believe that my reason for not being a Christian is that I don't
->believe in their god. This is not the case.
-
You do not, under any circumstances, have to believe that the Bible is all true
to become a child of God. You will, however, in the process of salvation,
believe some of the things found in the Bible. The Bible is not our god, God
is our God. You will never be brought to a saving knowledge of God unless you
are first drawn by the Holy Spirit. You do not have to realize you are being
drawn, and you don't need to know who is drawing you. But you do have to be
drawn. The Spirit will draw you by opening your eyes to the things necessary
for being saved. He will also soften your heart so that when you hear the plan
of salvation, you will be ready to except it. The Spirit of God will not
allways strive with the spirit of man. So beware, the Spirit may decide that
you will never beleive and leave you to die in your sins.
->One disclaimer: The thesis of this essay is that even if a God as described
->in the Bible does exist, he is not fit for worship due to his low moral
->standards. Consequently, I speak sometimes as if I did believe the Bible,
->when in fact I do not.
-
The thesis of my rebutal is to prove the notion above to be false (the notion
that God has low moral standards). I will also attempt to explain how the
lesser understood atributes of God work together.
->If I had undeniable proof of the existence of Yahweh, aka Jehovah, aka
->Adonai, aka El Shaddai, aka Yahweh Elohim, the father of Jesus and the
->ancient leader of the Semitic peoples, I still would not worship the
->bastard. If an angel appeared to me and removed my appendectomy scar so I
->could never deny the reality of divine power, I still would not be a
->Christian. My primary reason for not being a Christian or Jew has nothing
->to do with my lack of belief in their god. My primary reason is that the
->Bible is a disgusting book describing the behavior of a god without the
->morality of an average high school student.
-
You can already see the high moral standards that Tim has in his
reference to God as a b*. I'm glad he at least admits that a supernatural
happening would not convince him to become a Christian. He is absolutely
right. If the supernatural happenings recorded in the Bible do not convince
someone neither would a present day supernatural happening. It would just
be "explained" away in some logical way. And why are there no more
supernatural happenings? Because all the necessary evidence has been given in
the Bible.
I shall discuss the behavior of God farther along in this article.
->That God does what he wants, when he wants, without even an attempt at
->self-justification, and all for what reason? According to Paul, all for his
->own greater glory. Oh, how charming. For his own glory he condemns
->billions to eternal torment, drowns millions of innocent beasts and
->thousands of children, orders the slaughter of entire cities down to the
->last man, woman, and child, creates a race that he knows is flawed and will
->hurt itself (so that in their pain they can worship him better), refuses to
->deal with any other god on a friendly basis, restricts the normal expression
->of the sexual function, rains doom on those who dare to try to be as
->knowledgable as he is, and so on.
-
If God is the creator of the universe, and of you and me, why wouldn't that
give Him the right to desire glorification. Since He is self-sufficient, he
needs no one to glorify Him. He gives us the privelage to add a very small
iota to His glory. Why should He even allow that (I don't know)? It just
gets me sooo irked to hear people condemn God because He doesn't follow what
humans consider moral standards. God makes all the standards, not man.
No human or animal or plant or planet or star or sun or anything in this
universe has the "right" to exist and not be blown to atoms by the breath of
Almighty God. Not only did God create the universe, but He is sustaining it
with His power (it doesn't take much). He can chose to uncreate the universe
with one word if He so desires. We have no "rights" in the sight of a perfect
God. Every person has one right on this earth, the right to go to Hell. All
have sinned Romans 3:23 (not just the original sin of Adam and Eve, more on that
later). All deserve eternal punishment (I'm talking about myself here to).
God did not create the (as Tim says) flawed Israelite race. God created man.
Man's sin as a result of his free will is what flawed him in the garden. The
people of Israel suffered when they weren't worshiping God, but they were
blessed when they were.
There are no other gods besides Him. Actual, physical gods that is. More on
this later, also.
I suppose by "normal expression of the sexual funtion" Tim means what he
considers the normal expression. If God created man, He also created sex, and
can put what bounds He chooses on it. When Tim creates man, then He can do
the same, I guess.
As for reaching the knowledge of God, forget it. More on this later, also.
->Jesus preaching love in no way atones for these many hideous crimes; lest we
->forget, it was at the time of Jesus that he created Hell. This cruellest of
->all concentration camps (certainly far worse than the ones created by the
->Nazis) was at no time mentioned in the Old Testament, and the wrathful and
->threatening god of the Old Testament would hardly have omitted any chance to
->terrify his worshippers.
-
Hell was probably created before the earth was. When Lucifer fell with a
third of heaven Hell (The Lake Of Fire) was created for him and his angels
to be thrown into at the appointed time. It was not designed for man when it
was created, but because of man's sin in his self dependency, God had no
choice but to send man to this awful place of torment and eternal seperation
from God. Why? because God is HOLY. He cannot stand the sight of sin.
Sin is anything against His will (which is perfect since He is perfect).
Romans 14:23b - "...whatsoever is not of faith [in God's will - ken] is sin."
->I have heard some Christians who believe that there is no everburning Hell
->in their religion, that the "lake of fire" is purely destructive, that
->sinners will be annihilated rather than tortured after the Last Judgment.
->Sometimes, they claim that medieval Catholics created that "myth", and that
->they would revile any god who made this concentration camp.
-
The people Tim is refering to are people who cannot face the reality of a holy
God who must judge sin. Justice must be meted out to those who insist on
going there own way.
->Well, get ready to start reviling then. The myth of Hell was not created in
->the Middle Ages. It is explicitly stated in a set of books called the
->Synoptic Gospels, you know, the ones by Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Since some
->people don't seem to be very familiar with these books, usually considered
->the cornerstone of Christianity, I'll fill them in.
-
->Matthew 18:8-9 has Jesus saying, "If your hand or your foot should cause you
->to sin, cut it off and throw it away: it is better for you to enter into
->life crippled or lame, than to have two hands or two feet and be thrown into
->eternal fire."
-
Because this verse is misinterpreted so much, let me explain it. When speaking
of having your foot or hand cut of to stop your sin, Jesus was saying that sin
is SO terrible that it would be better that you cut of a part of your body than
to sin and end up in Hell. He didn't expect people to go around cutting of
limbs in order to stop sinning. He was just trying to point out the serious-
ness of sinning.
->A little while later, in 18:34-35 to be exact, Jesus
->finishes up a parable about an unforgiving debtor with: "And in his anger
->the master handed him over to the torturers till he should pay all his debt.
->And that is how my heavenly Father will deal with you unless you each
->forgive your brother from your heart." Not clean killing -- you will be
->handed over to the torturers.
-
Man deserves even worse for his blatent hatred and rebellion against God.
Look what mankind did to Jesus Christ. Was it justice that had Him murdered
when He had commited no sin?
->In the parable of the wedding feast, Matthew
->22:1-14, Jesus concludes with "Then the king said to the attendants, 'Bind
->him hand and foot and throw him out into the dark, where there will be
->weeping and grinding of teeth.'" The king didn't say, "Execute him", but
->bind him and throw him into a painful place. This is echoed in Mat. 24:51,
->in almost the same words, and again in Mat. 25:30, again with similar words.
-
Just getting our just deserts.
->Finally (for Matthew), we have Mat. 25:41-46, on the Last Judgment. "Next
->he will say to those on his left hand, 'Go away from me, with your curse
->upon you, to the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels... And
->they will go away to eternal punishment, and the virtuous to eternal life.'"
-
->My point is proven, so I won't bore you with the quotes from Mark and Luke;
->however, check out Mark 9:43, Mark 9:48-49, Luke 13:27-28, and Luke
->16:23-26 if you still doubt.
-
You have a choice. You don't have to go to Hell. Although this is what all
mankind deserves, there exists a way of escape. Hell is a terrible place
designed for the devil and anyone who follows in his path by rebelling
against the creator of all.
->You hear a lot from Christians about Yahweh's "infinite compassion and
->mercy". Tell it to the Midianites. Numbers 31 is a classic example of
->wholesale slaughter and rape under the direction of Yahweh. A sample of
->this delightful tale: "They waged the campaign against Midian, as Yahweh had
->ordered Moses, and they put every male to death.... The sons of Israel took
->the Midianite women captive with their young children, and plundered all
->their cattle, all their flocks and all their goods. They set fire to the
->towns where they lived and all their encampments.... Moses was enraged with
->the commanders of the army ... who had come back from this military
->expedition. He said, 'Why have you spared the life of all the women? ...
->So kill all the male children. Kill also all the women who have slept with
->a man. Spare the lives only of the young girls who have not slept with a
->man, and take them for yourselves.'" Yes, friends, this is infinite mercy
->and compassion for you. I particularly like the way that Moses got upset
->with them for sparing women and male children, but allowed the young girls
->to be kept for later raping. If only humans could keep to such lofty
->standards without the necessity of divine revelation.
-
Tim is totally lost here. God does have amazing infinite compassion and mercy.
Why look, he's letting your body live another second! That's more compassion
and mercy than any of us deserve. We all deserve to be damned right now!
Among the other ways He shows His mercy is allowing us to live on the earth,
an earth with enough food to feed all of us if some people weren't selfish and
others didn't worship what they should be eating.
The Israelites were told by God to wipe out all of the races that occupied
the land of Canan. This land was promised to Abraham's decendents way back
in Genesis 12. Should God go back on His word because a bunch of idol
worshiping, sensualistic "heathons" live in this land now? Of course not.
God is perfectly justified in having the Israelites wipe out the other races
in Canan, all mankind deserves anihilation. Anyway, why should God have to
be justified in doing anything, he is all powerfull, are you.
Why does Tim decide that because Moses (through God's direction) had the young
girls spared, that it was 'for future raping'. The Law would have strictly
forbade them to do any such thing. During this time the Israelites were
obeying the Law fairly well. The women were kept as handmaidens and the like,
not for sexual playthings. One of the Laws that the Israelites had to be
constantly reminded of is not to marry people of another race who might lead
then away from Himself. He would not have told them to go out and do the
opposite with these women of Midian. It was a miracle that He chose to spare
any of them.
->I could go on for quite a while in this vein. I don't think the firstborn
->in Egypt during the captivity would have agreed with the verdict of
->compassion and mercy (Ex. 11:5,12:29), particularly since it was due to
->Yahweh's hardening of Pharoah's heart in the first place that made this
->neccessary. Also, with omnipotence, Yahweh could have teleported the Jews
->out of captivity without bloodshed, or put the Egyptians to sleep while they
->left, but no. That wouldn't be gory and exciting enough for him.
-
O.K., imagine this. You have been trying to get this Pharoah guy to see the
light. You've sent 9 plagues already, you would think that would change
anyones mind. But although Pharoah looks as if he's about to give in,
because he's making the people of Egypt suffer and they're not to happy about
it, you can read what he is really thinking. In his heart he still hates you
and the Isrealite nation, and would love to kill both of you of if he could.
Now be honest and tell me you wouldn't say, "Fine, have it your way. I'm not
going to bother trying to persuade you any more, I'm just going to punish you."
Hence, the tenth plague. God was showing the awsomeness of His power to the
Isrealites. He was giving them something they would remember for a long time.
Since God is perfect, He must have done the perfect thing for the situation.
Who cares if Tim or anyone else thinks it could have been done differently.
Does that really change anything?
->Then there are the charming instructions about women taken in war, from
->Deut. 21:10-14. And there is Deuteronomy 28:20-46, a long stream of
->invectives and curses straight from the prophet's mouth, all about the nasty
->things Yahweh will do if you upset him a tad. The entire book of Joshua is
->a long sequence of atrocities. I have not given all these quotes for space
->reasons -- I urge you to look them up for yourself. If you are not shocked,
->then your moral standards must be low indeed.
-
Until Tim understands the hatred of sin by a holy God, he will never understand
these passages. When God looks upon a man, He wants to love him. But He
can't see beyond man's sin because of His holiness. When the sin is taken
care of by the asking of forgivness and the acceptance of Christ as Savior then
God can commune with the man He loves so much.
->Of course, you will sometimes hear rationalizations of this slaughter.
->There are two major forms: the corruption argument and the mercy argument.
->The former says that those slaughtered were evil and deserving of their
->fate; the latter says that since they were religiously incorrect, it was a
->mercy to terminate their existence.
-
->The corruption argument simply does not hold up. The people slaughtered in
->the Old Testament were almost uniformly blameless (with a few exceptions, of
->course -- for instance, the Sodomites violated the conventions of
->hospitality.) Usually, no justification is offered beyond the fact that
->since they were of another tribe, it was OK to kill them.
-
No one on this earth is blameless in any near sense of the word. They are
sinning humans that were given life by God, and can have that life taken away.
->As to the mercy argument: They shoot horses, don't they? However, people
->are not animals to be destroyed against their will in the name of mercy. If
->I don't claim to be suffering, and don't ask to die, neither you nor any god
->has the right to decide that you know better. If you tried to do this to
->me, I would shoot you; if a god tried, well, the only weapon I would have
->would be withholding my worship.
-
I'll bet God laughs at statements such as these. Is man mightier than God?
Man doesn't have one single right in the presence of Almighty God. Just who
does Tim think he's talking to, a mere man? God will function fine without
your worship that He so richly deserves here on earth. There will come a day
when all mankind will worship (I can't wait!) God the way He deserves, on our
knees. Like I said God will do fine without your worship, but you won't do to
fine in eternity without excepting His gift in the form of Jesus Christ.
->Most of us, given omnipotence, would be able to do a far better job than
->Yahweh. What would you do if given omnipotence? If your answer is anything
->other than "abolish world hunger", there's something more than a little
->skewed in your perception of mankind. There is no question that this is the
->greatest evil in the world today. The second thing would be to abolish
->disease, right? This doesn't take "infinite mercy", just normal compassion
->and a bit of common sense. God's supposedly infinite mercy is apparently
->the same thing as no mercy at all.
-
The greatest evil in the world today is man's twisted perception of the way
God should act. Man has brought his current condition upon himself with the
help of Satan and his demons. Why should God feed and heal a planet of
selfish, rebelious, backbitting humans. BTW, God does take care of the
physical needs of those who love Him, and honor Him for who He is.
God's mercy is not blind mercy, just as His love is not blind love. Do
you give a child everything he wants because you love him? No, of course
not. You must love in wisdom, thinking of what's best for the child. Well,
God's love and mercy are the same as that. You may think you know what's best
for the world, just like the child who thinks he knows what's best for him.
I think in both cases the higher authority is most likely right.
Things such as hunger, disease, etc. will be abolished at the proper time
(I don't have the date), when Christ comes back to reign upon the earth.
Until then, the earth is under Satan's authority, and he can do with it as he
pleases (with God's permission).
->What makes this particularly unforgivable is that even Jesus's own standards
->demand feeding of the poor. See Matthew 26:35, in which it is stated that
->the blessed feed the hungry, and that the damned do not. Does the old saw
->about "practicing what you preach" not apply to Yahweh? Is his hypocrisy
->not a sin?
-
What do people think God is, a divine Santa Claus? Is he supposed to give us
our every hearts desire because we WANT it. Why should God bail us out of the
mess we have got ourselves in? Of course, it would be much simpler if He took
care of everybody like a big Italian mother in the sky, wouldn't it? We
wouldn't want to have to do anything in this life for ourselves, and for others
would we? Good grief.
GOD CANNOT SIN, IT IS CONTRARY TO HIS NATURE, WHICH IS PERFECTION!!!!
->One popular rationalization of this is that for Yahweh to feed all the
->hungry would somehow (and it is never explained how) make it more difficult
->for people to get into Heaven. Sure, and another reason is that it would
->make the quality of newspapers worse, right? You can't just say that two
->things are connected when there is no apparent or explained link between them!
-
I don't understand their argument either. But I will say that God, in His
perfection, has chosen that Christians take care of the underpriveledged in the
world. It's supposed to be something we do for the Lord and an honor, not a
pain in the neck.
->The charge against Yahweh of infecting us with disease is particularly
->strong. God made these micro-organisms, and made us subject to them. If I
->made a bunch of plague germs and set them loose, you would rightly hold me
->accountable. Since (according to Genesis) all disease comes from Yahweh, I
->hold him similarly accountable.
-
I beleive that diseases were created when the earth was cursed because of man's
sin. Amazing how every evil thing comes back around to man's sin, isn't it?
Disease will be destroyed when Christ comes to rule the earth.
->Suppose you were a god and there were other gods. What would you do? What
->I would try to do is the same thing I do as a person among other people --
->try to make friends or at least truce with as many of them as possible. The
->jealous Judeo-Christian god does the opposite.
-
There are no other Gods, see below.
->Some people feel that Yahweh is the only god, and therefore cannot be
->faulted for not having friendly relations with other gods. This idea is a
->fairly modern invention: that not only is he the best god, but the only one.
->Yahweh is repeatedly referred to as "our God" in the Pentateuch, and there
->is no implication that he is the only real one. Also, try Deut. 5:7-9. It
->is psychotic to be jealous of nonexistent beings. The statement "You shall
->have no gods except me" clearly implies that the contrary is possible.
-
"God", as in something to be worshiped, not a literal God. "You shall have
nothing more important to you in this life except me" could be another way
of stating the same idea. "Our God", the one we trust in to deliver us, etc.,
etc. Not an idol, not a person, but GOD.
->Suppose you were an omnipotent god and there were no other gods. What would
->you do? Perform a continual sequence of verifiable miracles; after all,
->this doesn't require any effort, and keeps people from delusion. No such
->luck in the case of Jehovah. He demands absolute fidelity without any
->demonstration of his existence, beyond some visionary manifestations of the
->sort that you can get from any religion.
-
Wouldn't it be nice if God did everything we want Him to. Sorry, He didn't
choose to do things that way. I think that's His choice, NOT OURS! There are
demonstrations of His existance, but people just choose not to see them for
what they are (ie. creation is a good one). He doesn't have to do anymore
than He already has. He has given enough evidence to bring millions to
himself. Looks like plenty of evidence to me.
->Christians commonly rationalize this in one of two ways. First, they claim
->that there is a virtue in believing something without proof; that is, faith
->in itself is held to be a virtue, and Yahweh doesn't want to remove our
->opportunity to indulge in it. All I can say to this is that I do not
->consider faith to be a virtue -- I consider it to be a sign of intellectual
->weakness, and a significant barrier to scientific and other intellectual
->progress. (I consider scientific progress desirable because it is so
->efficacious in improving the quality of people's lives.) I see no virtue in
->accepting a thing on faith, since it may well be false, and it is clearly
->not a virtue to believe the false.
-
Faith is not a virtue, it is a gift of God (Ephesians 2:8-9). You will not
have any faith unless the Holy Spirit gives it to you. If you choose to
beleive in "scientific and other intellectual progress" as Tim does, and not
by faith, that is fine with God. He has given the evidence, the rest is up to
you to make the choice. That is why God designed the plan of salvation with
free choice.
Our faith is not earthly, everyday common faith. It is "...the EVIDENCE of
things hoped for, the ASSURANCE of things not seen."(Heb. 11:1) Our God
given, God directed faith is ASSURANCE not "Well, I sure hope that's right"
->Given the willingness to have faith, how
->does one decide whether to put it in Christianity instead of Hinduism?
->There is no way; you just have to cross your fingers and take the plunge.
->Whichever choice you take, you will hear voices in your head, see divine
->manifestations, and so on, so even once the plunge is taken there is no way
->to know you are correct.
-
You don't "just cross your fingers and take the plunge" You don't dive into
God, you meet Him as a friend. Unless you know that what your doing is right,
don't do it. Christ said we should count the cost before coming to Him.
(Luke 14:25-35) God will give the assurance, althought I can't explain how.
This is one of the mysteries of Christianity. I will not pretend to know how
He assures me, but I am sure I am going to heaven, and that I am on the right
track.
->Second, there is the rationalization that scientific discovery would become
->impossible if a continual stream of verifiable miracles were performed.
->This argument denies the omnipotence of Yahweh. If he can do anything, he
->can perform a sequence of miracles in such a way as to convince everyone of
->his existence and not interfere with scientific discovery at all. The only
->things he can't do are logical absurdities such as making 2+2=5.
-
What would anyone out there consider a "verifiable miracle"? I don't think
there can be such a thing. BTW, logic doesn't put any restraints on God's
power. If God proclaims that 2+2=5, then it does.
->The point to remember here is that if we don't believe in him, we go to
->Hell, and this is a greater evil than a lack of the "virtue" of faith or a
->stunting of science, or anything else conceivable. If Yahweh is concerned
->about the good, he will do what he can to keep us from Hell, and keeping
->vital information from us is the exact opposite of this.
-
God is good. God is just. Man is sinfull. God is holy. Man deserves
death and punishment forever. God must give that punishment no matter how
good He is. See the balance?
He has done alot to keep you out of Hell.
He gave His only son, Jesus Christ, to pay your debt of punishment to God,
and save you from Hell. All you have to do is accept that gift for what it
is, and acknowledge the person of God. That's all He asks.
->I have heard the claim that Yahweh does not restrict us from learning, that
->he encourages us to learn all we can. Tell it to the workers at the Tower
->of Babel. In case your memory fails you here, Gen. 11:6-7 says, "'So they
->are all a single people with a single language!' said Yahweh. 'This is but
->the start of their undertakings! There will be nothing too hard for them to
->do. [ Horrors! -- tim ] Come, let us go down and confuse their language on
->the spot so that they can no longer understand one another.'" Yahweh
->deliberately acts to restrict man's capability for understanding.
-
The people building the Tower of Babel were attempting to reach God, so as to
be like Him. He was crushing the pride they had in themselves and their
'human acheivment'. This same pride exists today (the Olympics comes to mind).
God will not allow man to accend to His glory. He won't even let an angel try
to be like Him (Lucifer was cast down because of pride in himself Ezek.
28:11-19). Any such attempt would prove impossible anyhow.
There cannot exist two standards of perfection can there? No. Neither can
there exist two Gods, each having different attributes and standards of
perfection.
->One thing in particular would keep me from worshipping this god. That is
->the fact that he desires worship. The only reason why this would be is that
->he gets something out of worship, perhaps power, perhaps just pleasure. In
->the former case, it would be totally unjustifiable for me to increase the
->power of this hugely arrogant and malefic being. In the latter, well, I
->don't LIKE this deity, and I don't think it deserves such a reward for its
->heinous career.
-
You cannot increase God's power by worshiping Him. He already posseses
unlimited power. Tim is the arrogant one, for thinking He is at a higher
plane of thinking than God. Even King Nebuchadnezzer of Babylon recognized
the full authority of God on the earth. He wrote "...And none can ward off his
hand, or say to Him, "What hast thou done?". Neb had to be made to eat grass
like a beast to recognize this, but he at least he got the point. Danial 4:35
Maybe Tim needs something equally devestating to happen to hime to break down
this pride he has in himself. I hope the Lord is exceedingly merciful for
Tim's sake.
The privelage of giving God pleasure by worshiping Him is one of the nicest
things about being a Christian. It's to bad Tim does not want to experience
this.
->Some of the responses I have heard to this sort of argument in the past are
->shown below, with my answers.
-
My answers to his answers follow.
->"You can't judge God by the same standards as man." In that case, why is it
->that I keep getting told that God is good? Are there two meanings of the
->word "good", one of which forbids murder, deliberate starvation, infecting
->people with disease, and so on, and another which allows these things? I
->suggest that there is already a word for the second meaning. That word is
->"evil". If you think that it's OK to worship an evil god, that's your
->business, but you can't expect me to do the same.
-
I have already spoken of wisdom in love and mercy, the same principle applies
here. The goodness in God's plan is not allways apparent, but it's there.
Just wait till it's completion for the shock of your life. Just because He
may seem to be evil in one man's limited wisdom means absolutly nothing.
The foolishness of God is wiser than the wisest man (I Cor. 1:18-20).
->One particularly curious rationalization here is that "starvation and
->disease and all the other evils of the world come from breaking God's laws."
->Starvation comes from not having enough food. Disease comes from exposure
->to various nasty micro-organisms, and from genetic infirmities. If you can
->show me how these two things come from breaking god's laws, I will be
->greatly surprised. Perhaps at the root they are caused by Adam and Eve
->falling from grace, but you can't hold some starving infant in Namibia
->responsible for the actions of two long-dead people, any more than you can
->hold me responsible for the acts of Jack the Ripper. There just isn't
->sufficient connection to establish guilt.
-
No, I can't. But God can and does, whether you choose to admit it or not!!!
Hunger and diseases come from man's sin nature, which started in the garden.
God does not condemn you for Adam and Eve's sin, but because of your own
sin nature (your tendency to pull away from God and do your own thing) that
you were born with. With this nature, you were born in a state of war with
God (Eph. 2:1-7). You do the things that you want to, with no regard for your
creator. This is sin, the act of not acknowledging God as your master and
Lord. In the eyes of God Adam, Eve, Tim, Jack the Ripper, the infant in
Namibia, you, and me are all guilty of sin, and deserving of Hell for the same
reason, the sin nature.
->"Everything God does is really good, even though we can't always see that it
->is." There is no possible amount of good that can counterbalance the
->deliberate, perpetual starvation of the human race. Maybe we Americans have
->it so good that we can't see this, but most of the people in the world are
->starving. Children are dying by the truckload, not for any sin, but just
->because there isn't enough food for them. If you could see these children,
->and you had food, you would give food to them. (Either that, or you are an
->unfeeling monster.) Not so with the omniscient god you worship. He sees
->their bellies bloat, sees them run out of nutrients and rot alive, sees
->their brains dying, and doesn't do a damn thing, despite the fact that he
->has an unlimited supply of food to give. Another example of his mercy.
-
YES, HUNGER IS BECAUSE OF SIN. How many times do I have to say it???????
Sin has tainted this world that God created in perfection, and it will not
be restored until Christ comes back to reign. Yes, I would give these
children food, but that doesn't mean I blame God because He doesn't
magically produce food for them like a genie. It is the job of the
church to care for the hungry of the world (I know were not doing a very
good job). What God has is an unlimited supply of LOVE and GRACE
(unmerited favor) to give. But nobody wants that, they just want the goodies!
->Christians have been claiming that there will be wonderful events, that will
->more than make up for the abominable pain and suffering on Earth, for about
->two thousand years now. It is clear from the gospels that Jesus thought
->that it was about to happen shortly after his death. Before the Christians,
->the Zoroastrians were saying it. Yet the world still turns as it has, and
->there is still no reason to think of these claims as other than pipe-dreams
->to mollify the masses.
-
This sounds just like the Bible in II Peter 3:3-4:
"Know this first of all, that in the last days mockers will come with their
mocking, following after their own lusts, and saying, "Where is the sign of
His coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all continues just as
it was from the beginning of creation."
For the answer to this read II Peter 3:5-12.
->"Don't ask such questions." People who say this are cowering slaves,
->beneath my notice. They would as soon serve the devil as god in their
->blindness and faith. No amount of evidence could convince them that the
->devil was bad once they had decided to worship him; their basic assumption
->is that they are correct, so they are untouchable by any rationality.
-
I am sad to hear that Christians told Tim to not ask such questions. If they
didn't know the answers they should have said so (and then found them out).
We are to be always ready to give an account of the hope that lies within
us (I Peter 3:15).
->In closing, let's see how Yahweh/Jesus stands up to his own standards. In
->Matthew 26:41-46, we hear the King, "Next he will say to those on his left
->hand, 'Go away from me, with your curse upon you, to the eternal fire
->prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you never gave
->me food; I was thirsty and you never gave me anything to drink; I was a
->stranger and you never made me welcome, naked and you never clothed me, sick
->and in prison and you never visited me.' ... And they will go away to
->eternal punishment, and the virtuous to eternal life."
->In the light of this, your god himself is the worst of sinners; if there is
->no double standard, he will be at the head of that line into eternal
->punishment. He is guilty of every crime of which he accuses the damned.
-
Tim missed the point of the verse he quoted. When a Christian does one of the
above things to another human, and we do it for His glory not our own, God says
it's just as if we did it to Him and that it is counted is worthy of praise.
However, when a non-Christian does own of the above things to another human, it
is either for their own glory, or maybe because they think it's the 'right'
thing to do. In either case, it means nothing to God, and you might as well
not have even done it. Doing 'right' things will NEVER SAVE YOU FROM THE WRATH
OF GOD.
WHY DO YOU EXPECT ALMIGHTY GOD TO LIVE UP TO YOUR PUNY STANDARDS OF MORALITY??
DID YOU MAKE THE STANDARDS??? I don't think so!
->I do not believe in the reality of Jehovah, except as a psychological
->phenomenon, but if I did believe I would not worship that horror. It could
->send me to the Hell it's made for those it dislikes, and I would walk in
->proudly, knowing that I was no slave to be broken down by force.
---
->Tim Maroney, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
-
God does not dislike anybody. God loves everybody. God hates the sin which
resides in every person. Here is the beginning of all sin, pride. Your pride
will condemn you, not God. All men will be broken down to their knees, and
no amount of pride will be able to stand up to the strength, wisdom, and
knowledge of God when He returns to the earth in the form of His son.
Please except God's offer of Jesus Christ as Savior while He still offers it
to you. Don't wait until you become bitter, and your heart is hardened like
Tim's. God loves you, and desires to commune with you. But he can only do
so if you confess your sin and relinquish your pride in yourself for the joy
of the Christian life.
"...holding forth the Ken Nichols
Word of life..." Phil. 2:16 ...!ucbvax!dual!qantel!ken
P.S. Any and all responses welcome. Flame me if you like, but don't you dare
revile the God I love.
-----------jtc78@ihuxm.UUCP (Mike Cherepov) (10/16/84)
Ken Nichols said an awful lot of things, some of them catching weaknesses in "EVEN IF I DID BELIEVE..." article that I saw myself. Some of the better points remained unopposed: "I can not explain how I know, but I do". That means that you don't. One sentence above all characterizes the value of Ken's arguments about God's perfection: > God loves you, and desires to commune with you. But he can only do > so if you confess your sin and relinquish your pride in yourself for the joy > of the Christian life. He just can not fulfill his desire to commune, you know. Not unless you give him a hand. There probably will be a 600-line clarification. We'll see. Tim Maroney did such a good job that it is hard to dispose of him in a hurry. Mike Cherepov
ken@qantel.UUCP (Ken Nichols@ex6193) (10/18/84)
(+-+-+-+-+) Mike writes: > Ken Nichols said an awful lot of things, some of them > catching weaknesses in "EVEN IF I DID BELIEVE..." article that > I saw myself. Some of the better points remained unopposed: > "I can not explain how I know, but I do". > That means that you don't. No, I meant exactly as I said. I know I'm on the write path, but I can't show you why. Why would you take my word for it (if I had factual evidence) if you won't take God's word for it? ('it' = christianity) Certainly God is much greater than I. > One sentence above all characterizes the value of Ken's arguments about > God's perfection: > >> God loves you, and desires to commune with you. But he can only do >> so if you confess your sin and relinquish your pride in yourself for the joy >> of the Christian life. > > He just can not fulfill his desire to commune, you know. Not unless > you give him a hand. No, not unless you take the hand He's is extending toward you. You just except the provisions He's already made. Confessing your sin would do nothing unless God forgave that sin because of Christ's sacrifice. Nothing we do will help us to reach God, because He's already done it all. > There probably will be a 600-line clarification. I don't think I can write that much any more. That was alot of work, you know. > We'll see. Tim Maroney did such a good job that it is hard to > dispose of him in a hurry. > Mike Cherepov Tim Maroney did a good job at proving how wise man thinks he is, when he is really a fool. I know someone who will (literaly) dispose of him at the proper time, that's not my job. "...holding forth the Ken Nichols word of life..." Phil. 2:16 ...!ucbvax!dual!qantel!ken ----------
jho@ihuxn.UUCP (Yosi Hoshen) (10/18/84)
I would like to make some comments concerning Tim Maroney's reposted article: "Even If I DID Believe", and Ken Nichols's response to this article. Tim's article presents a very thoughtful analysis of the negative sides of the character of the Jewish-Christian god as described in the bible. I have studied the bible (OT) for about 11 years, and have not paid attention to the darker side of the god of the bible. I found Tim's presentation to be enlightening on this matter. Although I complement Tim for his article, I have some minor reservations. I think that occasionally the tone of Tim's article is unnecessarily harsh. (This criticism does not only apply to Tim, but also to others. I think using more polite presentations will improve the level of the discussion in net.religion). I also think that focusing on the negative side of the character of Jehovah, as described in the bible, gives an incomplete description of the character. Another approach would be to compare the character of Jehovah to other mythological gods. Since we do not have absolute standards, a comparison may help understand the characters in question. Now to Ken Nichols's rebuttal. Though Ken's response is very detailed and eloquent, I suggest that Ken misses the point. Ken assumes axiomatically that Jehovah is good, and, therefore, his actions can not be construed as bad. Such an approach is satisfactory if you take that axiomatic stand as a starting point. Unfortunately, that approach is unacceptable to the skeptics. Since, I assume, Ken you are trying to address the skeptics among us (you don't have to convince the believers), you may have to drop, for the sake of this discussion, the a priori assumption on the goodness of god. An example may illustrate the problem we have with the character of god. Let us assume that Tim's article does not address the character of Jehovah, but rather the character of the north mythology god Odin (AKA Wotan), and the book that he is quoting from is not the bible, but rather the book of Odin. I think that all of us, the skeptics as well as the believers, would have to conclude, based on the information from the book of Odin, that Odin's morality is far from perfect. (Tim Maroney, where art thou?) -- Yosi Hoshen Bell Laboratories Naperville, Illinois (312)-979-7321 Mail: ihnp4!ihuxn!jho
barry@ames.UUCP (Kenn Barry) (10/23/84)
[] A while back, Tim Maroney wrote an essay giving his opinion that the morality of the god portrayed in the Bible was very low, and showed him to be unworthy of worship. Ken Nichols responded with a rebuttal of 650 lines. Since I suspect few on the net had the patience for such a long posting, I have collected a few of the more pungent quotes from this offended Christian's essay. These should help reassure us all that Yahveh's not the nasty sort that Tim portrayed Him to be. I have added just a few comments of my own; the quotes speak for themselves. [re the necessity of worshipping God] >If God is the creator of the universe, and of you and me, why wouldn't that >give Him the right to desire glorification. Since He is self-sufficient, he >needs no one to glorify Him. He gives us the privelage to add a very small >iota to His glory. Why should He even allow that (I don't know)? [me] I'd feel better about this God-given "privilege" if God didn't send us to the flamey place for declining it. >No human or animal or plant or planet or star or sun or anything in this >universe has the "right" to exist and not be blown to atoms by the breath of >Almighty God. ... >We have no "rights" in the sight of a perfect >God. Every person has one right on this earth, the right to go to Hell. ... >Man deserves even worse for his blatent hatred and rebellion against God. >Look what mankind did to Jesus Christ. Was it justice that had Him murdered >when He had commited no sin? [me] Doesn't the Bible show Jesus' execution was planned by God to save mankind from sin? Seems to me those who slew Jesus were acting in accordance with God's will. >Tim is totally lost here. God does have amazing infinite compassion and mercy. >Why look, he's letting your body live another second! That's more compassion >and mercy than any of us deserve. We all deserve to be damned right now! ... >God is perfectly justified in having the Israelites wipe out the other races >in Canan, all mankind deserves anihilation. [me] I see Meir Kahane has at least one non-Jewish supporter. >Anyway, why should God have to >be justified in doing anything, he is all powerfull, are you. [me] Ahhh, might makes right. >No one on this earth is blameless in any near sense of the word. They are >sinning humans that were given life by God, and can have that life taken away. ... >Things such as hunger, disease, etc. will be abolished at the proper time >(I don't have the date), when Christ comes back to reign upon the earth. >Until then, the earth is under Satan's authority, and he can do with it as he >pleases (with God's permission). [me] I see; God is good because he contracts out all evil deeds to Satan. >God is good. God is just. Man is sinfull. God is holy. Man deserves >death and punishment forever. God must give that punishment no matter how >good He is. See the balance? ... >YES, HUNGER IS BECAUSE OF SIN. How many times do I have to say it??????? [me] This would be easier to believe if the greatest sinners suffered the greatest hunger. [speaking of good deeds] >However, when a non-Christian does own of the above things to another human, it >is either for their own glory, or maybe because they think it's the 'right' >thing to do. In either case, it means nothing to God, and you might as well >not have even done it. Doing 'right' things will NEVER SAVE YOU FROM THE WRATH >OF GOD. ... >WHY DO YOU EXPECT ALMIGHTY GOD TO LIVE UP TO YOUR PUNY STANDARDS OF MORALITY?? >DID YOU MAKE THE STANDARDS??? I don't think so! I hope the above has helped to reassure any doubters that Jonathan Edwards' (oops, I mean Ken Nichols') God is the most loving and merciful deity that could possibly be imagined. Since no rebuttals to Nichols' posting has been made by any of the vocal Christians on net.religion, can I safely assume the God described is the same one you all worship? Just asking. - From the Crow's Nest - Kenn Barry NASA-Ames Research Center Moffett Field, CA ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Electric Avenue: {dual,hao,menlo70,hplabs}!ames!barry
ken@qantel.UUCP (Ken Nichols@ex6193) (10/24/84)
Kenn Barry writes: > A while back, Tim Maroney wrote an essay giving his opinion that > the morality of the god portrayed in the Bible was very low, and showed > him to be unworthy of worship. Ken Nichols responded with a rebuttal > of 650 lines. Since I suspect few on the net had the patience > for such a long posting, I have collected a few of the more pungent quotes > from this offended Christian's essay. These should help reassure us all > that Yahveh's not the nasty sort that Tim portrayed Him to be. I have > added just a few comments of my own; the quotes speak for themselves. > > [re the necessity of worshipping God] >>If God is the creator of the universe, and of you and me, why wouldn't that >>give Him the right to desire glorification. Since He is self-sufficient, he >>needs no one to glorify Him. He gives us the privelage to add a very small >>iota to His glory. Why should He even allow that (I don't know)? > > [me] I'd feel better about this God-given "privilege" if God didn't > send us to the flamey place for declining it. Well, I suppose to you it might not seem a privilege, but it is to me. It is also a fact that in the end every man will give God glory whether or not he wishes to. >>No human or animal or plant or planet or star or sun or anything in this >>universe has the "right" to exist and not be blown to atoms by the breath of >>Almighty God. > ... >>We have no "rights" in the sight of a perfect >>God. Every person has one right on this earth, the right to go to Hell. > ... >>Man deserves even worse for his blatent hatred and rebellion against God. >>Look what mankind did to Jesus Christ. Was it justice that had Him murdered >>when He had commited no sin? > > [me] Doesn't the Bible show Jesus' execution was planned by God > to save mankind from sin? Seems to me those who slew Jesus were acting > in accordance with God's will. Sin (especially the sin of killing God's son) is never 'in accordance with God's will'. God may have known in his omniscience that rebellious men would kill Jesus as a result of there own sin, therefore He used there sin to complete a greater work of righteousness and power in raising Jesus from the dead. >>Tim is totally lost here. God does have amazing infinite compassion and mercy. >>Why look, he's letting your body live another second! That's more compassion >>and mercy than any of us deserve. We all deserve to be damned right now! > ... >>God is perfectly justified in having the Israelites wipe out the other races >>in Canan, all mankind deserves anihilation. > > [me] I see Meir Kahane has at least one non-Jewish supporter. I didn't say the Jews as a nation had the right. I said that God had the right and exercised that right through the Isrealite nation. >>Anyway, why should God have to >>be justified in doing anything, he is all powerfull, are you. > > [me] Ahhh, might makes right. No, perfection makes God right. God is also perfect, are you? >>No one on this earth is blameless in any near sense of the word. They are >>sinning humans that were given life by God, and can have that life taken away. > ... >>Things such as hunger, disease, etc. will be abolished at the proper time >>(I don't have the date), when Christ comes back to reign upon the earth. >>Until then, the earth is under Satan's authority, and he can do with it as he >>pleases (with God's permission). > > [me] I see; God is good because he contracts out all evil deeds > to Satan. God allows Satan to have dominion over the earth for this short time (Human history is a short time compared to eternity). Man, however, has enough rebeliousness in his own self that he doesn't require much help from Satan to make this world more and more like Satan would like to see it become. >>God is good. God is just. Man is sinfull. God is holy. Man deserves >>death and punishment forever. God must give that punishment no matter how >>good He is. See the balance? > ... >>YES, HUNGER IS BECAUSE OF SIN. How many times do I have to say it??????? > > [me] This would be easier to believe if the greatest sinners > suffered the greatest hunger. The whole of creation groans with the weight of sin. The whole earth is affected because of man's sin. Hunger is a result of creation being thrown out of wack as a result of man's sin upon the earth. > [speaking of good deeds] >>However, when a non-Christian does own of the above things to another human, it >>is either for their own glory, or maybe because they think it's the 'right' >>thing to do. In either case, it means nothing to God, and you might as well >>not have even done it. Doing 'right' things will NEVER SAVE YOU FROM THE WRATH >>OF GOD. > ... >>WHY DO YOU EXPECT ALMIGHTY GOD TO LIVE UP TO YOUR PUNY STANDARDS OF MORALITY?? >>DID YOU MAKE THE STANDARDS??? I don't think so! > > I hope the above has helped to reassure any doubters that Jonathan > Edwards' (oops, I mean Ken Nichols') God is the most loving and merciful > deity that could possibly be imagined. Since no rebuttals to Nichols' > posting has been made by any of the vocal Christians on net.religion, > can I safely assume the God described is the same one you all worship? > Just asking. > > - From the Crow's Nest - Kenn Barry > NASA-Ames Research Center > Moffett Field, CA Most christians have become afraid that they will offend some people with the truth of sin and God's anger against it. However, the bible says that the gospel will offend some people. There is nothing wrong with preaching against the evil of sin and the holiness of God. If you are offended by my writting, you are offended by the holiness of God. (I'm not saying I am God's perfect spokesman or anything like that here. All christians are to be the spokepersons of the truth about God.) I will continue to defend that which I have written to anyone who asks. "...holding forth the Ken Nichols word of life..." Phil. 2:16 ...!ucbvax!dual!qantel!ken -----------
jnelson@trwrba.UUCP (John T. Nelson) (10/25/84)
Tim Maroney did a good job at proving how wise man thinks he is, when he is really a fool. "He who calls another fool shall be liable to the hellfire"... Tim's article dealt with God. The claim that it was only to show "how wise man really thinks he is" is an expression of your need to deride the opponents of your God... not an expression of the truth. Above all, God represents the truth.... and how many falsehoods have been perpetrated in his name.... I know someone who will (literaly) dispose of him at the proper time, that's not my job. But you seem to derive enormous satisfaction from the thought of your intellectual enemies burned to a crisp. That's blood-thirsty revenge.... not forgiveness or an attitude of understanding. No its not your job.... but what would you say if God said, "Tim's article was well put together and done in the spirit of honest questioning... while YOU (you slime you vermin) cared only to suck up to me.... damned art thou!" - John
dubois@uwmacc.UUCP (Paul DuBois) (10/26/84)
> I hope the above has helped to reassure any doubters that Jonathan > Edwards' (oops, I mean Ken Nichols') God is the most loving and merciful > deity that could possibly be imagined. Since no rebuttals to Nichols' > posting has been made by any of the vocal Christians on net.religion, > can I safely assume the God described is the same one you all worship? > Just asking. I suppose I don't speak for all, but, yes, Ken's posting would be a rough approximation to what I believe. God's holiness is poorly understood by all. But most poorly by those who have a low view of holiness. God sets the standards; man does not. God defines what is right; man does not. God also lets man know what the standards are and what is right, so that we may act in accordance with Him - and if we refuse to so act, then we deserve what we get. Ken stated it better than I, but the point is that rebellion against God is not grounds for God's favor. Nor will it be received. -- Paul DuBois {allegra,ihnp4,seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!dubois "Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ loved the church, and gave himself for it." Ephesians 5:25 Would you die for your wife?
ken@qantel.UUCP (Ken Nichols@ex6193) (10/29/84)
John writes, >> Tim Maroney did a good job at proving how wise man thinks he is, >> when he is really a fool. > "He who calls another fool shall be liable to the hellfire"... Tim's > article dealt with God. The claim that it was only to show "how > wise man really thinks he is" is an expression of your need to deride > the opponents of your God... not an expression of the truth. God calls men fools in their wisdom. Look to II Cor. 1-2 for the 'wisdom' of man compared to the 'foolishness' of God. >> I know someone who will (literaly) dispose of him at the >> proper time, that's not my job. > > But you seem to derive enormous satisfaction from the thought of your > intellectual enemies burned to a crisp. That's blood-thirsty > revenge.... not forgiveness or an attitude of understanding. True, that line was maybe a bit harsh. I should have said that someone would dispose of his sin at the proper time. Christians are to hate sin as God hates it, but to love the sinner. I apologize for my outburst at Tim in a personal way. > No its not your job.... but what would you say if God said, "Tim's > article was well put together and done in the spirit of honest > questioning... while YOU (you slime you vermin) cared only to > suck up to me.... damned art thou!" Tim article was 40% scripture and 60% blasemphemy of that scripture. He didn't ask any questions that he hadn't already answered for himself. I was defending the faith in responding to such blasemphemy. -- "...holding forth the Ken Nichols word of life..." Phil. 2:16 ...!ucbvax!dual!qantel!ken ------------
jnelson@trwrba.UUCP (John T. Nelson) (10/30/84)
[Ken Nicholls on Hell] Well, I suppose to you it might not seem a privilege, but it is to me. It is also a fact that in the end every man will give God glory whether or not he wishes to. I see. God will use us like puppets to praise him, whether we consciously want to or not. The reason that every knee shall bend before your god is because everyone else will be burning alive for sins they never knew they committed. I don't really care to worship a god that practices blackmail. Not because of "sinfull rebellious pride", your three favorite words Mr. Nicholls, but rather because only a God that practices justice and the truth is worthy of worship. Your God is a monster who threatens potential worshipers through blackmail. A truly just and holy god understands and respects his creations. Understanding them, he would judge them according to their own beliefs, experiences and performance on earth... and reward them accordingly. Not like a master rewards an obedient dog, but like an artist is rewarded with what he desires through his work, a thing of beauty and truth. These deserve heaven for what they have sought (but could never attain) on earth. Those that opted for the easy path; spouting psuedo-religious nonsense in defense of a God they didn't understand and had no right to defend, will not accept the truth because their preconceived beliefs are now too deeply ingrained. They worshipped a satanic God with little respect for life and ready to anhialate man upon man's first transgretion. It is said, he who thirsts justice will find justice. He who seeks the truth will find truth. Those that are righteous for its own sake will find righteousness. And those that seek the deaths and eternal torture of millions upon millions of people in the name of an imagined God... will find precisley what they have been looking for all along. No, perfection makes God right. God is also perfect, are you? Is your God? God has committed murder... have you? God allows Satan to have dominion over the earth for this short time (Human history is a short time compared to eternity). Man, however, has enough rebeliousness in his own self that he doesn't require much help from Satan to make this world more and more like Satan would like to see it become. God allows Satan to continue to deceive man on earth and God allows his son to be killed without mercy or justice on earth. Who did you say was calling the shots? If man was innocent and without sin (as God created him in God's own image) then why did man rebel? If man was duped into disobeying God then why was God so incredibly harsh in his judgment and punishment? Why have generations of humans been totally condemned for this one seemingly so trivial act, which I would like to add was not conceived of by man or even performed with "rebelliousness" in mind. Oh I get it, get out of line JUST ONCE and the entire human race burns, is that it? Well I have more faith in God than that Mr. Nicholls. If you are offended by my writting, you are offended by the holiness of God. I am offended by the arrogance of man. How dare you claim to be the spokesperson of God? Have you consulted with God on every word you have uttered while on the net? Are the two of you one in the same? Should we now refer to God as "The Holy Four-In-One?" (I'm not saying I am God's perfect spokesman or anything like that here. All christians are to be the spokepersons of the truth about God.) You're not his spokesperson but you are his spokesperson. "...holding forth the Ken Nichols word of life..." Phil. 2:16 ...!ucbvax!dual!qantel!ken This is begininng to grate... like a McDonnald's commercial... No claim to fame - John
ken@qantel.UUCP (Ken Nichols@ex6193) (10/31/84)
> [Ken Nicholls on Hell] > Well, I suppose to you it might not seem a privilege, but it is > to me. It is also a fact that in the end every man will give > God glory whether or not he wishes to. > > I see. God will use us like puppets to praise him, whether we > consciously want to or not. The reason that every knee shall bend > before your god is because everyone else will be burning alive for > sins they never knew they committed. No. At the Great White Throne Judgement all men will give God the worship He deserves. They will finally realize that He exists, and was there all the time, waiting for them to come to Him in humility. But since they refused, they have to be punished. > I don't really care to worship a god that practices blackmail. Not > because of "sinfull rebellious pride", your three favorite words Mr. > Nicholls, but rather because only a God that practices justice and the > truth is worthy of worship. Your God is a monster who threatens > potential worshipers through blackmail. God is the essence of Truth and Justice. He is the standard. Man is merely TRYING to imitate this standard (and not doing very well). Why can't you see it is because of God's perfect Holiness and Justice that He must condemn man for sin? Why do you (everyone on the net) refuse to look at man's sin for what it is? God cannot allow sin into His presence. He has no choice in this matter. His perfect attributes demand His judgment of sin. > A truly just and holy god understands and respects his creations. > Understanding them, he would judge them according to their own beliefs, > experiences and performance on earth... and reward them accordingly. > Not like a master rewards an obedient dog, but like an artist is > rewarded with what he desires through his work, a thing of beauty > and truth. These deserve heaven for what they have sought (but could > never attain) on earth. You must not know the definition of God's holiness, or you would not say this. Holiness is opposed to sin. They cannot co-habitate. Your talking as if God is human. What is this mutual respect stuff?? God is not your buddy down the street, He's the creator of the universe. God judges for sin, nothing else. All else is irrelevant until the sin is taken care of. For some reason you don't want God to be you Master, Lord, etc. You still want to retain some of your earthly pride. Sounds like you want to be equal with God, instead of under Him. Well, Lucifer tried that, look were it got him. > Those that opted for the easy path; spouting psuedo-religious nonsense > in defense of a God they didn't understand and had no right to defend, > will not accept the truth because their preconceived beliefs are now > too deeply ingrained. They worshipped a satanic God with little respect > for life and ready to anhialate man upon man's first transgretion. True christianity is far from easy. Look at Paul's life. Look at all He suffered for the sake of the gospel. The only truth that man can know is revealed in the Bible. Where is your source of truth? > It is said, he who thirsts justice will find justice. He who seeks the > truth will find truth. Those that are righteous for its own sake will > find righteousness. And those that seek the deaths and eternal torture > of millions upon millions of people in the name of an imagined God... > will find precisley what they have been looking for all along. Where is this said, not in the Bible. God's word is my only source of truth. Being righteous for its own sake will get you NOTHING. Titus 3:5 says, "He saved us, not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration, and the renewing of the Holy Ghost." Only Jesus death on the cross makes a man righteous. I do not SEEK the deaths of millions. I will, however, warn of the wrath of God to come. You cannot keep me from doing that. > No, perfection makes God right. God is also perfect, are you? > > Is your God? God has committed murder... have you? God chose that some men would be killed as a proof of His power to the Isrealites, who in turn, glorified Him. The men were used to glorify God. That's the purpose of creation, to glorify Him. Although some men chose not to glorify Him at this time, they all will. > God allows Satan to have dominion over the earth for this short > time (Human history is a short time compared to eternity). > Man, however, has enough rebeliousness in his own self that he > doesn't require much help from Satan to make this world more > and more like Satan would like to see it become. > > God allows Satan to continue to deceive man on earth and God allows > his son to be killed without mercy or justice on earth. Who did you > say was calling the shots? God allowed His son to be killed to redeem man. It is obvious you do not know the purpose of Jesus Christ's stay on this earth. Jesus Christ could have wiped out all the men that were crusifying Him with a single word. He chose to let them kill Him in order to bring men into a relationship with God. But you must chose to enter this relationship, just as He chose to die for you. God is calling all the shots. In the end all things will be under subjection to His beloved son. > If man was innocent and without sin (as God created him in God's own > image) then why did man rebel? If man was duped into disobeying God > then why was God so incredibly harsh in his judgment and punishment? > Why have generations of humans been totally condemned for this one > seemingly so trivial act, which I would like to add was not conceived > of by man or even performed with "rebelliousness" in mind. Man rebelled because of pride. The tree of the knowledge of good and evil was able to make one wise. They wanted to be wise like God. Pride. Now, all men think they can run there own lives without the help of any God. Pride. Man was not duped into disobeying God. Both Adam and Eve knew what they were doing when the took of the fruit of the tree. They wished to be like God. God had to punish their pride, and now also the pride of all other men. > Oh I get it, get out of line JUST ONCE and the entire human race burns, > is that it? Well I have more faith in God than that Mr. Nicholls. JUST ONCE is all it takes, I'm afraid. "He who is guilty on one point is guilty of the whole Law." > If you are offended by my writting, you are offended by the > holiness of God. > > I am offended by the arrogance of man. How dare you claim to be the > spokesperson of God? Have you consulted with God on every word you > have uttered while on the net? Are the two of you one in the same? > Should we now refer to God as "The Holy Four-In-One?" The arrogance of men is their failure to take into account all of God's attributes (as stated clearly in creation and the Bible) and instead to pick out only the ones that will fit well into their theology! I only speak what I have read in the Bible (which can only be understood with the Holy Spirit living inside after salvation). I do not take parts of God and parts of His Word to make my theology. > (I'm not saying I am God's perfect spokesman or anything like > that here. All christians are to be the spokepersons of the > truth about God.) > > You're not his spokesperson but you are his spokesperson. I said I wasn't a PERFECT spokesperson, but I am a spokesperson. I must be. > "...holding forth the Ken Nichols > word of life..." Phil. 2:16 ...!ucbvax!dual!qantel!ken > > This is begininng to grate... like a McDonnald's commercial... > > - John I'm sorry. I use it because it is the key verse of my church. Maybe I'll come up with some new ones. -- "...holding forth the Ken Nichols word of life..." Phil. 2:16 ...!ucbvax!dual!qantelken -----------------
dubois@uwmacc.UUCP (Paul DuBois) (11/05/84)
> Tim Maroney did a good job at proving how wise man thinks he is, > when he is really a fool. > > "He who calls another fool shall be liable to the hellfire"... Tim's > article dealt with God. The claim that it was only to show "how > wise man really thinks he is" is an expression of your need to deride > the opponents of your God... not an expression of the truth. Yeah. Ken expresses what he believes. Ken's enemies say he's hate- filled and derisory. Sounds like net.motss. > I know someone who will (literaly) dispose of him at the > proper time, that's not my job. > > But you seem to derive enormous satisfaction from the thought of your > intellectual enemies burned to a crisp. That's blood-thirsty > revenge.... not forgiveness or an attitude of understanding. This is silly. If Ken really wanted to see his "intellectual enemies" burned to a crisp, he'd shut up and refuse to say what he knows. > No its not your job.... but what would you say if God said, "Tim's > article was well put together and done in the spirit of honest > questioning... while YOU (you slime you vermin) cared only to > suck up to me.... damned art thou!" Honest rebellion, you mean. -- Paul DuBois {allegra,ihnp4,seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!dubois