Atheist Central -- Ray Comfort's Blog: Is God Guilty of Murder?

Thursday, July 16, 2009

Is God Guilty of Murder?

"No one argues that Mein Kampf is a hateful book full of racist lies but for some reason the Bible is immune to this, especially by its readers. Interestingly both books are big on genocide." Andy Duchemin

The "God kills children" argument is a favorite among atheists, and I concede that there is no disagreement. God killed almost all of the human race through the Noahic flood. This included men, women, children, and no doubt puppies, and cute little kittens (another favorite among atheists). Only those animals and people who entered the ark were saved from the Judgment of God. He also told Joshua to kill every Canaanite man, woman and child. All of them. So if you want to make a moral judgment against God, you do have a case.

But it would be wise to gather even more evidence to make your case against God watertight. The Bible says that God also proclaimed the death sentence on the entire human race--every man, woman and child. This death-sentence included all of the animal kingdom as well.

So there you have it. You now have multiple billions of deaths for which you can directly blame God.

So what are you going to do about it? Should you spread the word that you have evidence that God actually kills people? Or should you just keep quiet, because (as a professing atheist) remember, you are supposed to believe that He doesn’t exist.

305 comments:

«Oldest ‹Older 1 – 200 of 305 Newer› Newest»

J said...: Beth, and James B, instead of letting our conversation from earlier in the week get buried, I thought I’d post my responses here.

Beth responded to me in a previous post “Let’s use this premise to ask you to describe God – we know that you say He doesn’t exist, you must first know what He would look like or be like if He DID exist. Otherwise, how would you know Who to even look for in the first place?”

Hi Beth. This is a fine idea. I’m going to assume that the God we’re attempting to find is the Judeo-Christian God of the protestant Bible. There will of course be some difficulty due to the fact that there are multiple conflicting interpretations of that Bible among scholars in various Christian sects, but I’ll try to use the most uncontroversial attributes for our exercise. Keeping in mind the ultimate goal of this activity is to define some attribute or effect that should be observable if this God exists, I’ll leave out the characteristics that are undetectable, at least through current known methods (e.g. God is spirit, God is eternal).

I think we can both agree that the God of the Bible, if he exists, is probably not directly detectable, visibly or tactilely (although certain passages in the Old Testament seem to indicate otherwise, but we’ll ignore this for now). The most obvious observable effect I think we should see is in His responsiveness to his followers’ prayers. Among other similar passages, James 5:14-16 indicates that God will heal the sick if prayed for by a righteous man. Therefore, I believe it would be reasonable to expect to see a statistical positive coloration in the recovery of patients who have received intercessory prayer (from Christians) compared to those who have not.

You are free to disagree with my logic, of course, and I welcome any comments you have on whether or not what I’ve proposed is reasonable. I’d also welcome any proposals you may have on alternative observations we might make if the God of the Bible does exist.

So, I just described what I would expect to find if the God you believe in exists, even though I do not think He does. Would you be willing to do the same for a transitional fossil?

J; July 16, 2009 9:00 AM
J said...: James B responded to me in an earlier post “J - You're correct that I cannot speak for Ray. But you are asking me try to give a description to something I don't believe exists, so as you put it we could have common ground for a discussion. I am responding with facts not "what if". Another reader said I was cherry picking my facts because the report in the Journal of Morphology was not general scientific opionion at this time. Does truth require a concensus for it to be true? It is a new report, but the details show how what was assumed can be proven wrong.”

I don’t understand why it should be so hard to describe a hypothetical object, whether you believe the existence of such an object is even remotely possible or not. Again, I don’t believe leprechauns exist, but I can give you a description of what one would probably look like if it did: small, perhaps only a few feet tall, probably red haired, bearded man with a green hat.

This refusal to give a description of a transitional fossil on your part seems to be nothing more than a massive evasion tactic (I mean this not as an attack, only an honest assessment of how it appears to me). It’s as if you refuse to describe a transitional fossil solely for the purpose of reserving the right to claim that any fossil found is not transitional. It would be similar to me refusing to describe a leprechaun to begin with so that if you managed to snap a polaroid of one I could exclaim “That’s just a midget in a green hat!” It seems to be a method of ensuring that the goal post is always mobile, and you can never get backed into a corner. For the record, note that I haven’t played this game. I set forth a pretty clear method someone could use to begin to persuade me into belief in their God. I am also willing to entertain others.

No, truth does not require consensus. However, wouldn’t you be more inclined to believe five corresponding eyewitness accounts of a crime, and disregard the one contrary account as erroneous? Does this mean that the 1 eyewitness is wrong? Of course not, as might be the case with the recent journal article you cited. The point Steven J. was making however, and I think you would agree were the subject not evolution, is that it is more reasonable to suppose that when many experts who agree, and a few don’t, that the few who don’t are more likely to be the ones in error.

I would also point out that, even if the article you site is correct, you are still wrong. Hillenius and Ruben are proposing that birds probably evolved from an earlier archosaur (of which dinosaurs are classed as), not that they were specially created individually. In an overall view of the theory of evolution, this would be a relatively minor modification. That is, the theory of evolution is in no danger of being discarded even if Hillenius and Ruben are proven correct. Perhaps they are; I’m not, however, convinced just yet.

None of this, mind you, invalidates my original request of you to describe the transitional fossil between dinosaurs and birds. Whether birds did evolve from dinosaurs or not, we could still describe the hypothetical fossils that we would hope to find if they did. This is all I’m asking of you.

You continued, “So let me propose that you first describe what a "missing-link" would look like, to prove that dinosaurs evolved into birds, since you are so convinced that this theory is true.”

As a point of clarification, I am not suggesting (and neither are paleontologists for that matter) that describing a hypothetical transitional and then finding it would prove the theory. No, it would simply be evidence for the theory. It would indicate that the theory warrants consideration and further research. Find enough of them, along with other lines of corroborating evidence, and you can then come to some practical measures of proof.

I’ve enjoyed the discussion thus far with both of you (Beth and James B). I hope we can continue.

J; July 16, 2009 9:01 AM
shunted said...: I liked your post today. I've had a life long struggle with belief in God. At various times in my life I have been convinced there is a God but now I am convinced there isn't a God.

I come here to see what Christians say in response to the tough questions. What you posted on today is perhaps the toughest one in my opinion.

Christians say that God is just. Many of them say that aborted babies go to Heaven because babies are innocent. Well, it's hard to reconcile these two beliefs with the fact that the Bible teaches that God has caused the death of many babies.

It's hard to understand why Christians claim that God is unchanging when He ordered that an adulteress should be stoned to death. He ordered that some rape victims marry their attacker. These actions, along with killing babies, are repugnant. Since God doesn't change and morals are not relative then God must still approve of stoning women to death for adultery.

How is it that God is just? It's not just to let an innocent man to take the place of someone under the penalty of death. That isn't just. Christian theology makes no sense to me. After reading responses on this blog from Christians it makes even less sense than before I came to this website.; July 16, 2009 9:06 AM
Chris B said...: Ray: "So there you have it. You now have multiple billions of deaths for which you can directly blame God."

Wait, God is a murderous, blood-thirsty, child-killing, genocidal maniac???

Why didn't you say so? Sign me up! This is a deity I want to take ALL my moral instruction from!; July 16, 2009 9:08 AM
jonathan said...: I just love you can justify death because God deemed it necessary. What a mockery of human life.; July 16, 2009 9:09 AM
Michael Leal said...: There is nothing remotely inconsistent in highlighting inconsistencies in a worldview I regard as false.

I do not believe that God murdered Canaanites. Rather I draw worrying conclusions about someone who does believe that God murdered Canaanites, and yet still continues to worship him.

This is such an absurdly simple and obvious distinction that it is inconceivable that you weren't already aware of it. I can only attribute your post to an attempt to so enrage atheists with your childishness that they post something vitriolic enabling you to claim that all atheists are angry and embittered.

The above is technically a straw man, I admit, but you have done it so many times in the past that I prefer to think of it as reasonable extrapolation.

On a side note, the logical structure you a claiming to be paradoxical is used frequently by philosophers and mathematicians. It's called proof by contradiction. It is not a difficult concept.; July 16, 2009 9:10 AM
JOSHUA S BLACK said...: Well put, Ray.

It's so funny that atheists take all this time to point out all the flaws of an imaginary character...unless, of course, He is very real, and their consciences are getting stirred up again!; July 16, 2009 9:10 AM
Chris B said...: Too bad Starbuck left. All this talk of murder would've really turned him on.; July 16, 2009 9:11 AM
Michael Leal said...: On the off chance that you grasp the point I, and doubtless many others, made above; how do you reconcile the slaughter of the Canaanites with a loving God.

More importantly (and with apologies for capitals, I think they are merited in this case). CAN WE HAVE YOUR REASSURANCE THAT THE AGE OF GOD ORDERED GENOCIDE IS OVER AND THAT UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCE WOULD YOU PARTICIPATE IN OR CONDONE ONE SHOULD ONE HAPPEN AT ANY POINT IN THE FUTURE. If no, then please section yourself. If yes, then why the inconsistency? What has change between now and then?; July 16, 2009 9:14 AM
Adam Patrick Taylor said...: Ray...

Question: Do you believe the Johnine dictum that "God is love?" (I John 4:8)? If so, how do you personally reconcile God's loving nature with your own belief that:

God...proclaimed the death sentence on the entire human race--every man, woman, and child

the two seem completely incompatible to me.; July 16, 2009 9:16 AM
3in1allinme said...: hahaha (loudly clapping) Good one Ray.

For Him,
S; July 16, 2009 9:19 AM
Airaien said...: Once again Ray Comfort knocks one out of the ballpark. Atheist are left standing scatching their heads with a bullet hole in their foot where they shot themselves (again) On top of that God stands without a scratch.; July 16, 2009 9:20 AM
Amy2 said...: I guess "natural selection" would mean nature chooses for everyone to die! (I would believe that if I were an atheist--but we know it's actually sin that did it...)

All those deaths aren't supposed to mean anything, since we are here by chance anyway, so I never understand the cruel God part; like nature alone (as defined by evolution) isn't cruel?!!; July 16, 2009 9:25 AM
T_ConX said...: You miss the point completely here Ray.

Christians are always telling me that their God is a compassionate and loving one. Fair enough. Cthulhu Believers aside, no one really wants to believe in a God who regularly feels the need to dish out divine punishment on a global scale.

Unfortunately, that's exactly what your God spends most of the Old Testament doing. It seems your already aware of his Wrath-based shenanigans, so I won't point out any examples.

What makes your God even more unbelievable is how he never pulls of this kind of stuff in the modern world. Sodom and Gomorrah get wiped of the map for being filled with Homosexuals, but San Francisco hasn't been touched. God orders Saul to kill "both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass." (Samuel 1:15) but nowadays, the only people who God tells to kill other people are serial killers.

So there. Atheists don't blame God for needless slaughter. We just wonder why he was such an active murderer back then, but not today.; July 16, 2009 9:34 AM
Spector567 said...: It's not a case against God's existence it's a case against something entirely different.

That God is good and moral and that all those who fallow him fit the same catigory. God is not good in moral. He is resentful angry and discriminates. Something that by today's standards is not "good and moral."

He does not provide a good moral framework for life. He does none of these thing. Yet you suggest that we should fallow his example to make the world a better place. huh??

So Ray have you committed a Sin?; July 16, 2009 9:37 AM
Dave B said...: Are you actually trying to say that Christians should be quiet about the Flying Spaghetti Monster because they don’t believe it exists?

It is good to see you acknowledge that your Biblical God is indeed a murderer though and that we have a moral case against Him. Thanks!

By the way, The Flood and Joshua being ordered to kill Canaanites is only two of many times that your God murders babies in the Bible. It’s hard to choose which is my personal favorite, but it's gotta be my Biblical namesake David’s un-named baby boy that God murders to punish his beloved David for having Bathsheba's husband killed in battle. Good stuff!; July 16, 2009 9:38 AM
Iago said...: Hey Ray do you agree with your friend Ken Ham that the Earth is approx. 6000 years old ?

I am not asking about knowing how old it is but about your beliefs.; July 16, 2009 9:43 AM
MVP said...: You have the wrong end of the wrong stick again Ray.

My problem (and I imagine this o be the case for most atheists..they will no doubt tell you this themselves) is never with God because as you rightly say...I do not believe in any God.

My problem is with people that DO believe in such a God as you have described and actually WORSHIP it and consider it to be your moral authority and judge.

My (our?) problem is not with a made up deity but the people who profess to not only slavishly fearfully worship this monster but also has the gall to put us down for not doing so.

This is your best post yet and speaks volumes about the characteristics you consider worship-worthy!

Also...you speak as if it not possible to criticise something thatdoes not exist in reality. I could point out Freddie Kreugers downpoints with no problem. But if a real world someone was to say they worshipped Mr Krueger I would say that they had some serious problems.

Understand now?; July 16, 2009 9:43 AM
Noble said...: It's not much of a dilemma. I know that if I had the power of God, I would not use it in the way that God is alleged to have done. That God is fictional does not mean I cannot judge His alleged actions.; July 16, 2009 9:50 AM
Michael L. Foley said...: No, Ray, there is no 'dilemma.' We just want people to be aware of what they're worshiping so they don't fall for the whole 'love' shtick that Christianity uses to sucker people into conversion with.

Christian doctrine is hate, pure and simple.; July 16, 2009 9:50 AM
Mintz said...: I don't believe in your God because there is no evidence for this entity; the Universe without such an entity would look exactly as we see it; and the supposed qualities of this entity are logically inconsistent.

Because I don't believe in it I have no fear in speaking about the elephant in the room which most Christians seem to ignore, i.e. what a disgracefully nasty character your guide book paints him to be. The character in the Bible is undeserving of worship.

If this God you believed in were actually a alien lifeform posing as a supernatural entity, I wonder whether that would make a difference to you guys? I suspect it would.

So one has to wonder why, if an alien with the qualities of your God doesn't deserve such devotion what's so great about this God of yours that means he does?; July 16, 2009 9:58 AM
Alanrd67 said...: So there it is...now that you know everything never could have come from nothing. (no matter if you say "I never said that.")

You either believe it...or not.

Now it's time to judge God or submit to the One who has the right to do as He desires.

Otherwise, kick against the pricks.; July 16, 2009 10:01 AM
JD said...: Not quite sure what to make of your reasoning here Ray... it seems like you are saying "Atheists say God is guilty of murder ergo they must believe in God (since one can only be guilty of murder if the murder actually happened)"

I think what you are missing is the distinction that Atheists allow for in that, if we momentarily accept your premise that God exists and the bible is true, then you as a believe have additional problems to reconcile, in this case an all-loving God who murders. Atheists don't have to believe in God to be able to point out that particular ethical problem to a christian.

As for the question of God being guilty of murder or not, I'm sure you can rationalize it theologically as it is simply part of the greater 'problem of evil' question. But Atheists don't claim God is a murderer because they actually believe he exists and murdered people, but rather to show christians that uncompromising belief in the bible presents additional problems for the christian. Make sense?; July 16, 2009 10:06 AM
Rabbitpirate said...: Ray Comfort said...

The "God kills children" argument is a favorite among atheists, and I concede that there is no disagreement. God killed almost all of the human race through the Noahic flood. This included men, women, children, and no doubt puppies, and cute little kittens (another favorite among atheists). Only those animals and people who entered the ark were saved from the Judgment of God. He also told Joshua to kill every Canaanite man, woman and child. All of them. So if you want to make a moral judgment against God, you do have a case.

I...well I'm kind of at a loss for words here. So let me get this straight. You agree with us that God has killed directly millions of people and indirectly, by way of orders, killed many more. You also agree that many of those killed were young children and babies and even unborn babies.

And yet you still claim that your God is perfectly moral?

You see if doesn't matter if I believe in your God or not. You do and you think that the mass murder of millions of children is a moral action.

That is what bothers me. It doesn't matter if these things actually happened or not or even if there is a God to carry them out or not. What matters is that you, and many others on this blog, can look at an act of genocide, real or imagined, and think it is perfectly ok and moral.

If you think genocide can EVER be moral then clearly you are not someone that any rational person would every want to gain power.

I will refrain from calling your God immoral. However I will call anyone who thinks genocide can ever be a moral act immoral. You Ray, if you truly believe that God's actions, again real or imagined, are always moral, then you are an immoral person.; July 16, 2009 10:06 AM
Rabbitpirate said...: Ray Comfort said...

"Is God Guilty of Murder?"

I guess according to you the answer is yes. So why do you still worship him?; July 16, 2009 10:07 AM
Elliot said...: This is not an "i don't believe it" issue. This is a contradictory claims issue.

Your claim is that God loves us and wants the best for us. And yet, He made us, by your own account, as miserable pieces of garbage.

You claim that the bible is a source of morality and deeds. Yet, the atrocities and grievous behavior by God is undeniably monstrous. I deny that your claims can both be true.; July 16, 2009 10:08 AM
Vlad Chituc said...: No atheist is suggesting that God actually murdered anyone. Atheists are pointing out the absurdity it takes to worship and claim the divinity of such a God. A point that you so conveniently brushed over.

Cute little cartoons doesn't make something so.; July 16, 2009 10:12 AM
Iago said...: Ray said :

So what are you going to do about it? Should you spread the word that you have evidence that God actually kills people? Or should you just keep quiet, because (as a professing atheist) remember, you are supposed to believe that He doesn’t exist.

endquote

Wow Ray that has to qualify as the lamest argument I have heard from you.
You and people like you want to sprea what you perceive to be the Word of God. Fine and dandy. If it makes you happy, great. Now you go off and start insulting other folks beliefs, well that makes it not fine and dandy. You and others like you start spreading misinformation about science, making it even less fine and dandy. You and yours want to start teaching your version and only you version of the Story How Things Came About, and to teach it out of only your holy text, well that makes it not at all fine and dandy.

See Ray I have no argument about you passing out your tracts or anything else. I could care less. However you want to push your viewpoint on me and insult me, then I have a problem.

Got it ?; July 16, 2009 10:15 AM
Trophy of Grace said...: Why is death bad thing anyways?

If there is no God then death is the ultimate end of everything and everyone. Eventually death wins.

Why are atheists so upset about God killing everyone when they already understand that an impersonal universe is going to do the same thing?

At least if there's a God, there is a Being powerful enough to raise the dead.

He gives life, He can take it away, but He can give it back again.

What do the atheists hope in?

The universe gives life, takes it away, everything was pointless.; July 16, 2009 10:16 AM
Raoul Rheits said...: If your God existed, and did what you claim he did, then yes, killing people is murder.

PS hat-tip to your cartoonist who obviously never heard of a hypothetical argument.

That was one attempt to make atheists look 'foolish' that reay, REALLY backfired! whoops!; July 16, 2009 10:20 AM
stranger.strange.land said...: I have been observing the same thing, Ray. To quote mine myself: "The atheist banishes God to the realm of non-existence, only to occasionally resurrect Him for the purpose of beating Him up a bit."

Craig B; July 16, 2009 10:28 AM
Raoul Rheits said...: I get it now:

1. 'The atheist's nightmare' - aka Ray didn't know that the edible banana was cultivated/hybridized.

The 'atheists dilemma' - aka Ray's cartoonist doesn't know what a hypothetical argument looks like.

Come on guys, you're surely scraping the barrel even when we were convinced the wood had been worn away?

What's next? How about "the atheist's conundrum?"

You could draw a picture of an incredibly angry, smoking, gun-slinging dude with bad hair looking at a stuffed crocoduck. The atheist is thinking (thought bubbles) "If Rayvolution is true, then Evolution must be false? "; July 16, 2009 10:29 AM
vms said...: Ray,

A couple of posts back regarding morality you said:

You have no rock to stand on. We do. The rock upon which the Christian stands is immovable, and it will judge all of humanity (including you) on the Day of Judgment (see Romans 2:12). We have the solid rock of the Law of God.

Now you say:

The "God kills children" argument is a favorite among atheists, and I concede that there is no disagreement.

So killing children is moral as long as God does it?; July 16, 2009 10:34 AM
Froggie said...: As usual, Raymondo, you misrepresent (on purpose I assume) the atheist argument.
There is no dilemma whatsoever, only the false dilemma (strawman) that you have just created.

The argument is that the myths of the bible were written by an authoritarian, brutal culture that justified their killing sprees by invoking their God.

God didn't kill anyone, ever. Even many of the battles of the bible are sheer myths.

I think you will be quite embarrassed when you realize the fractured logic you have used to create this strawman.; July 16, 2009 10:35 AM
Lurker said...: Ray said...
"So if you want to make a moral judgment against God, you do have a case. "

Is this...? Could it be...?

Did Ray just admit that the God of the Bible committed immoral acts? I think he did.

Ray said...
"But it would be wise to gather even more evidence to make your case against God watertight."

Nah, this is good enough, Ray. You've already admitted your God is immoral, and if Al Capone can be put away for tax evasion then no other evidence is needed.

In other words, once you have admitted that your God is immoral, we no longer need to worship Him, because He is no longer worthy of our worship (whether we believe He exists is another story). Actually, I would say is is immoral to worship such a vile creature.; July 16, 2009 10:35 AM
get_education said...: Ray,

you got that a little bit wrong. Atheists do not think there is any God. When they point to those atrocities in the Bible it is more to show the contradictions of your supposed perfect and good God. It is just to show the absurdity of believing, on the one hand, that your believed God is good, while on the other the Bible says otherwise (though it also says God is good other times.

I think a more honest Christianity would not say that God is good, but, rather, that he has the power. That would make a much more coherent belief. You would still have to deal with contradictions in the Bible, but at least you would not be saying that God is good when the picture of God is no such thing in most of the Old Testament. It is more of a "might-makes-right" God than anything else.

But you are mostly right in the sense that it is useless for atheists to complain about how evil your God is, when it is quite easy to just show that it does not exist, if they want to do that.

As of me. I could not care less what you believe. My only problem with you is the misrepresentation of scientific findings. The lying to make your living. Other than that, you are welcome to believe as you wish about there being Gods or not.

G.E.; July 16, 2009 10:38 AM
Its ALL about JESUS !!! said...: It is IRONIC how the atheists proclaim there is no GOD and in the next breath they accuse the Creator of being a genocide 'freak' that is hateful and blood thirsty! lol

You can't have it both way atheists, He either exists as the Bible tells us, or you are wrong about a GOD who has the POWER to give life, and the POWER to take it away at His discretion!

Just like a portrait painter that creates a master piece and dabs out with a paint brush a 'brown stain' in the canvass with red.

Who are we to judge our Creator?
We are NOTHING, remember atheist.

In His Love,
Terry Burton

PULLthePLUGonATHEISM; July 16, 2009 10:40 AM
Jinx McHue said...: I read a book from the local library a while back. It contained all sorts of violence, murder, genocide, rape, torture, etc., committed by people in their name of their god. I did not rail against the book, however. I did not condemn the events contained within. I did not yell at people about this god's and his people's actions. Why? Because the book was from the fiction section. None of the people or events in the book were real. I never believed for one moment that the story was real. I also didn't believe that the book asked readers to commit those acts of violence.

So why then do atheists rail against the Bible? They don't believe the people or events in the Bible are real. They don't believe God is real. They can try to argue that the Bible teaches Christians to commit the acts they are objecting to, but such arguments are based on either ignorance or dishonesty. (Those arguments also fail in the face of the fact that Christians aren't running around committing said acts willy-nilly.)

I just don't get it. Could the atheists here please explain why they rail so much against a book they equate to the fictional book I read?; July 16, 2009 10:45 AM
culberto said...: I know this is going to fall on deaf ears Ray, but I just have to say something.

So, you want to know how I can accuse your God of anything if I don't believe in him?

We atheists are not "accusing the God we don't believe in" of anything. It is merely the fact that the Bible gives an account that is so farcical that it deserves only to be rejected.

If only I were as witty as you Ray, I could think up a killer analogy to explain why this post is complete nonsense.

By the way, I can't stand cats.; July 16, 2009 10:45 AM
Raoul Rheits said...: Disregarding (momentarily) Ray and Richard's (wilful?) incapacity to assess whether something is a hypothetical argument or not...

...May I humbly propose the 'Raytheist's dilemma'? ;

"I'm a Raytheist, and I abhor religion and love honesty, but I can't stop dishonestly quoting Einstein the unbeliever when he says that 'Science Without Religion Is Lame. What am i supposed to do now?"

Answer:

In a 1950 letter to M. Berkowitz, Einstein stated that "My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a vivid consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who works on the basis of reward and punishment."

Now, please cast votes whether or not the answer has solved the Raytheist's dilemma?; July 16, 2009 10:46 AM
Its ALL about JESUS !!! said...: Are these the same atheist who refuse to study ( at length ) the so called 'silly' prophecies in the Old Testament and the New Testament?

I have news for you atheists, these prophecies are coming TRUE, Hundreds of years later, and sometimes Thousands of years later.

As I have stated before, Jesus Christ fulfilled 109 distinct Messiah prophecies. The chances of it NOT being Jesus of Nazareth are IMPOSSIBLE.

This study itself has made many believers in His claim of being the Messiah for mankind.

Then there are the prophecies of Isaiah, who is 12 for 12 in completion, and let us not forget the prophecies in the book of Daniel.

Are you aware that the Bible prophecied the "New World Order" literally thousands of years ago in the book of Daniel chapter 7?

It will a 'loose' confederation of nations with the anti-christ at the helm.

The same World Order that President George Bush (daddy) told us is 'emerging', and is in the NEWS today with the Pope.

One more for the doubters in the Bible, you should look at the 'Mark of the Beast' in Revelation and compare it to micro chip technology of today!

There are videos on YOUTUBE that discuss it, as well as my 'atheist-theory' BLOGSPOT website.

In His Love,
Terry Burton

Are YOU Ready for His Second Coming? NEEDGOD site on the web is a MUST SEE !!!; July 16, 2009 10:59 AM
Templar Ben said...: There is no dilemma for an atheist. We are pointing out that you can't say God is love when clearly he is not. God is not supported by any evidence but even the reason given for belief (the Bible) shows an inconsistent image of God.; July 16, 2009 11:03 AM
Lord Runolfr said...: So there you have it. You now have multiple billions of deaths for which you can directly blame God.

So what are you going to do about it? Should you spread the word that you have evidence that God actually kills people? Or should you just keep quiet, because (as a professing atheist) remember, you are supposed to believe that He doesn’t exist.

Ray, I don't have to actually believe the Biblical stories are true to say that if they were, God would be a genocidal maniac.; July 16, 2009 11:05 AM
metallicafan said...: ray,when us atheists talk about how God has killed people,what you don't realize
is that where saying that IF he was real,then according to your bible,and the things we see in todays world
(natural disasters for instance) then he is evil.thats the point,IF he was real,the bible makes it clear he does bad things. where trying to make a point that if God did exzist,hes evil.where trying to point out how you worship such a immoral God.to tell you the truth if your God was real
i wouldn't be able to worship him,i wouldn't able to live with myself knowing i worship a God who stands by and does nothing when some baby dies of cancer,or gets raped.i mean if a
someone gets raped,(and i know someone who was raped) its not something you would ever get over 100%.you love the God who kills babys,if a man killed babys,wouldn't you agree its immoral to
worship him? is your God allowed to do
whatever he wants.lets say for a momnet i thought he was real. if your God came right up infront of you and killed a bunch of babys,would you just stand by and let him do what he wants? if your answers yes,please stay away from me and my loved ones.you can't be trusted.; July 16, 2009 11:09 AM
Izovaprophet said...: Ray,

As I'm sure many here will point out to you, Andy was merely drawing attention to the book that you base your so-called morals on. But thanks for conceding that the God you propose to worship is a murderer.

One need not believe in a being to deem it undeserving of worship. You show your true colors by holding a genocidal maniac in such high esteem.; July 16, 2009 11:13 AM
Beans In The Pot said...: That was the best response!

You forgot to mention that the atheist also "leeches" Christian morals of right and wrong in order to make a moral judgment about the God who wrote His law on their heart... so they may not want to do that, because now they are giving more evidence to the God they say doesn't exist.

PS-Great cartoon.; July 16, 2009 11:20 AM
Andy Duchemin said...: OK Ray, I'll put it in a way I think you might be able to understand.

Darth Vader.

Anakin Skywalker betrayed his friends, killed children and was ultimately responsible for the death of his wife. He did some truly terrible things and because of this he turned to the dark side. By doing that he became Darth Vader.

Why did Anikin Skywalker do these things? His motives were good but his methods were bad. He wanted to bring peace to the galaxy, which could only be a good thing right? But his impatience lead to his downfall and, in the end, his death.

My point? I love Star Wars, and I'm not going to put some deep meaningful analogy into it. I was upset at the behaaviour of Anikin Skywalker in Revenge of the Sith (though I knew it was going to happen), and I'm talking real emotion.

Because I felt real emotion does that make Anakin Skywalker real? Some people would wish that he was real but luckily I can tell the difference between fantasy and reality.

You on the other hand can't. I know Jehovah/Yahweh/Jesus is a fictional character, but that still doesn't mean the story of the bible affects me any less. The same way Winston Smith betrayed Julia in 1984, or when Romeo took his life in Romeo and Juliet or when Jeptha sacrificed his daughter in Judges, all had an emotional response form me.

This character of God in the bible is a tyrant, just like Sauron in Lord of the Rings. I dislike both equally, and if deluded people thought Sauron was real I'd be just as critical of him as I am of your God.

God doesn't exist, but that still doesn't mean I don't hate the idea.; July 16, 2009 11:32 AM
J said...: I must say I actually sort of agree with Ray in this post. I've never felt the need to condemn the morality of a being in which I don't believe exists. I've also never understood statements like that of Christopher Hitchens regarding his refusal to worship the God of the Bible even if he believed in Him. Personally, if I thought my two choices were an eternity of torment vs. an eternity of bliss, I would grovel at the feet of whoever was needed in order to avoid the former.

Having said all that, I do think there are some legitimate lines of argument against the God of the Bible that are based on His morality. These are usually in the form of demonstrating contradictions between how God is described (particularly in the New Testament) and how He acts (particularly in the Old Testament). These objections, however, are not so much moral judgments on God but rather examples of apparent flaws in that concept of God. In other words, if the morality of the Christian God can be shown to be internally inconsistent, it would expose an inherent weakness in that concept.

Respectfully,
J; July 16, 2009 11:33 AM
Chad Gray said...: Ray,

Do you believe that the Bible's geneologies are correct and thus placing the age of the Earth, according to the Bible, at around 6,000 years young?

Or do you hold with the scientific community which has the age of the Earth some 14 billion years old?; July 16, 2009 11:35 AM
BathTub said...: Ah so because in your theology God is to blame for the death of everyone, how he kills some doesn't matter.

Interesting.

Gunther also left off your moustache again, he's been slack with that lately.

And since when do the non-religious not believe in the past? That doesn't even begin to make sense.

Why do you have to lie about what people to say to make your point? Can't you even be honest for one day?

*sigh* I guess not.

I see that you shut down discussion of your pay despite asking Dave B about his. What are you afraid of there?

Speaking of afraid, when will you be debating Richard Dawkins, Matt D, AronRa, and all the other outstanding debate offers you have? Remember you were the one complaining about how no one will debate you, while ignoring all the offers lined up.

How you doing with that evidence that 100% of scientists thought the earth was flat?

Or that people ever thought Gravity Evolved?

Hmmm?

Or like Carl and Killian are you running away still?; July 16, 2009 11:58 AM
Pvblivs said...: Well, I am in complete agreement that the biblical deity is a strictly fictional character. However, there are real people who claim that this character is worthy of worship. And there is the reason not to be silent. If any significant group of people were trying to say that Sauron was worthy of worship -- even though he is a fictional character -- it would be appropriate to speak up. This is not because I, or anyone else, believe that the actions are real, but because the description is deplorable.; July 16, 2009 12:06 PM
Bob said...: Excellent post Ray!
Thank you for saying what I was trying to but didn't quite know how to word it.

Atheists believe that a God who doesn't exist kills people?

repentanceandfaith; July 16, 2009 12:11 PM
Froggie said...: No atheist I ever saw here ever accused God of anything.
They accuse you of believing these silly myths.

Beat that Strawman, Ray!
Beat him good! LOLOLOLOLOL!!!!!!!!; July 16, 2009 12:45 PM
J.J. Day said...: I was just reading through your posts, Ray, you remind me of Paul.

Keep going, be encouraged.

God Bless :); July 16, 2009 12:50 PM
Mr Pants said...: I think my response would be the same as it would be if I were responding to Hannibal Lecter's murders. I don't have to believe that he actually exists to say that the stories about him display a character that is an evil murderer. The same goes for Yahweh. I don't actually believe the myths about him in the OT, but if they were real, that would make him evil and I could never worship an evil God.; July 16, 2009 12:56 PM
moab said...: Well said!; July 16, 2009 1:03 PM
moab said...: The truth can be a hard thing!; July 16, 2009 1:05 PM
RKM said...: Well put! Thanks to God for His undeserved forebearance and stay of execution on those who call out to Him. Everyone else, I would say write down your accusations against God for judgement day, but every idle word you say and do and think is already being recorded for the trial you will have your part in. Oh, and I doubt there will be representation for you on that day so be prepared!; July 16, 2009 1:10 PM
Matt said...: Ray said:

"The Bible says that God also proclaimed the death sentence on the entire human race--every man, woman and child. This death-sentence included all of the animal kingdom as well."

Aaahhhh...I get it now - God is an equal opportunity murderer.

Nice!; July 16, 2009 1:29 PM
BathTub said...: Basically this is a variant on Ray's 'by what right do you have to judge me as a liar?' schtick. What he always deliberately has to ignore is that it's by his own standards he judge him so. So when we say 'wow the God of your bible is a beast' it's judging him by his own apparent standards or lack of them. It's not that we believe in him.; July 16, 2009 1:32 PM
Rando said...: You totally don't get it, do you?

Ever heard the term, "for the sake or argument?"

We don't think he exists. So we don't actually think God killed anyone. We don't think we have "evidence" that God actually killed anyone. That's silly.

You think he exists. Therefore all of the God-condoned killings that are pointed out in the Bible, you actually think occurred. We are pointing them out to you, because we can't understand why you see nothing wrong with God flooding the entire world for disobeying orders that he knew were going to be disobeyed from the moment he created everything. That's illogically stupid.; July 16, 2009 1:38 PM
Lurker said...: Today's comic makes no sense at all!

"I hereby accuse the God I do not believe in...
Of doing things I do not believe He did...
At a time I do not believe ever existed!"

Okay, I’m going to igore the fact that it is possible to accuse fictional characters of crimes they committed within a fictional setting (Ever watched a detective show? Are the viewers not allowed to say “I think Mr. X the murderer” because Mr. X does not actually exist?!). I’ll dive into Gunther’s world view for a moment and accept, for argument, that I as an atheist accuse a God I do not believe in of things I do not believe ever actually happened.

HOWEVER, what does “at a time I do not believe ever existed!” mean?? What atheist does not believe in the time periods never occurred that are brought up in the Bible? What does that even mean?

I guess that's why the file is called "No one argues.jpg" ... because no one argues that!; July 16, 2009 2:01 PM
carl said...: God DID NOT KILL Feathered Dinosaurs (because there is no such thing):

Theagarten Lingham-Soliar,1* Alan Feduccia,2 and Xiaolin Wang3
1Biological and Conservation Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Private Bag X54001, Durban 4000, Republic of South Africa

"Alleged primitive feathers or protofeathers in the theropod dinosaur Sinosauropteryx have potentially profound implications concerning feather morphogenesis, evolution of flight, dinosaur physiology and perhaps even the origin of birds, yet their existence has never been adequately documented. We report on a new specimen of Sinosauropteryx which shows that the integumental structures proposed as protofeathers are the remains of structural fibres that provide toughness. The preservation in the proximal tail area reveals an architecture of closely associated bands of fibres parallel to the tail's long axis, which originate from the skin. In adjacent more exposed areas, the fibres are short, fragmented and disorganized. Fibres preserved dorsal to the neck and back and in the distal part of the tail are the remains of a stiffening system of a frill, peripheral to the body and extending from the head to the tip of the tail. These findings are confirmed in the holotype Sinosauropteryx and NIGP 127587. The fibres show a striking similarity to the structure and levels of organization of dermal collagen. The proposal that these fibres are protofeathers IS DISMISSED."

Another MYTH in a loooong line of myths (ape-men, ERVs, isochron dating, etc. etc. etc.) Well, on to the next evolutionary rabbit trail...

Romans 1:
"They (INTENTIONALLY) exchanged the truth of God for a (TWO-BIT) lie..."; July 16, 2009 2:24 PM
Mintz said...: Where's my post? What rule was broken?; July 16, 2009 2:25 PM
Froggie said...: There is no dilemma, Ray.
You have created an absurd strawman argument.
Yet I see your minons think you made some kind of valid argument.
So, now Ray's minions think that atheists suddenly believe God exists?

Very Funny.

Atheists point out the biblical God's murderous side merely to show the absurdity of your claim of his "Love."

This is the most preposterous post yet.; July 16, 2009 2:26 PM
Froggie said...: Amy2
You said,
"All those deaths aren't supposed to mean anything, since we are here by chance anyway, so I never understand the cruel God part; like nature alone (as defined by evolution) isn't cruel?!!"

As usual, you make no sense at all.
That paragraph is unintelligable as to it's meaning.

The more you write the more silly you look.; July 16, 2009 2:32 PM
Chris B said...: JOSHUA S BLACK: "It's so funny that atheists take all this time to point out all the flaws of an imaginary character...unless, of course, He is very real, and their consciences are getting stirred up again!"

Correct. I only deny God because it allows me to indulge in my favorite sins: not committing genocide and not worshiping Gods who commit genocide.

Oh, and bacon. I love bacon.; July 16, 2009 2:34 PM
Michael Leal said...: Airaien said:
"Once again Ray Comfort knocks one out of the ballpark. Atheist are left standing scatching their heads with a bullet hole in their foot where they shot themselves (again) On top of that God stands without a scratch."

Did Ray's post actually seem convincing to you? He accepted that the God described in the Bible committed genocide, and then didn't even provide any defense of this, and instead made the utterly nonsensical claim that one cannot talk about hypothetically, and find contradictions in, an entity in which one does not believe. I cannot ascribe your praise of Ray's argument to anything other than an automatic agreement with any attack on atheism, no matter how incoherent.

Joshua S Black said:
"It's so funny that atheists take all this time to point out all the flaws of an imaginary character...unless, of course, He is very real, and their consciences are getting stirred up again!"

We are not concerned directly with God's flaws, as you point out, this would be inconsistent with not believing him to exist. We are concerned about the system of ethics that arises from the belief that Genocide can be morally justified ever. Nor is this purely academic; there are a great many fundamentalist Christians (you yourself not necessarily among them, although I would be interested in your views on the subject) who strongly oppose any attempts for a peaceful solution to the Israel / Palestine conflict on the basis of Biblical prophesy*. This is easily sufficient ground to be bovverd.

*Caveat, I am not attributing the Israeli / Palestinian conflict primarily to religion, it is a political conflict like any other. I merely note the extreme nastiness of views that a religious outlook can produce.; July 16, 2009 2:36 PM
Froggie said...: Bob said...
Excellent post Ray!
Thank you for saying what I was trying to but didn't quite know how to word it.
--------------------------

You were trying to say that suddenly all the atheists actually believe in God?; July 16, 2009 2:36 PM
Chris B said...: Jinx McHue: "I just don't get it. Could the atheists here please explain why they rail so much against a book they equate to the fictional book I read?"

Because people take the Bible seriously.

Nobody is running around trying to pass laws based on the book you picked up at the library.

The mythology is not the problem, the people who believe it and worship it are.

Is that clearer now?; July 16, 2009 2:40 PM
DaveTea said...: shunted said...
"I liked your post today. I've had a life long struggle with belief in God. At various times in my life I have been convinced there is a God but now I am convinced there isn't a God.

I come here to see what Christians say in response to the tough questions. What you posted on today is perhaps the toughest one in my opinion.

Christians say that God is just. Many of them say that aborted babies go to Heaven because babies are innocent. Well, it's hard to reconcile these two beliefs with the fact that the Bible teaches that God has caused the death of many babies.

It's hard to understand why Christians claim that God is unchanging when He ordered that an adulteress should be stoned to death. He ordered that some rape victims marry their attacker. These actions, along with killing babies, are repugnant. Since God doesn't change and morals are not relative then God must still approve of stoning women to death for adultery.

How is it that God is just? It's not just to let an innocent man to take the place of someone under the penalty of death. That isn't just. Christian theology makes no sense to me. After reading responses on this blog from Christians it makes even less sense than before I came to this website."

Hi Shunted, thanks for your post and your honesty. It's good to see you questioning but, as you say, you are convinced there isn't a God so what does it matter if this God you know doesn't exist is just or not?; July 16, 2009 2:40 PM
Henkka said...: So if you accept that your God did indeed do all those things, how do you justify saying that he's loving and just? I suppose you could say " He sent his only son to die so we could live!", but he didn't. Not for those who got killed in the flood. He just massacred them...

You oppose abortion right? The flood must've killed thousands of unborn children, too.; July 16, 2009 2:43 PM
Templar Ben said...: Chris B said...

Too bad Starbuck left. All this talk of murder would've really turned him on.

He is a Christian. There is a good chance he simply lied about that and is lurking around reading. He will pop up when he thinks it has been long enough.

Don't worry he will have a good justification.

Airaien said...

Once again Ray Comfort knocks one out of the ballpark. Atheist are left standing scatching their heads with a bullet hole in their foot where they shot themselves (again) On top of that God stands without a scratch.

Explain what he knocked out of the ballpark. He admits that it is not logically consistent to view God as just or loving. The fact that we point out that your God it not internally consistent doesn't mean we agree that it would exist. I can point out to a different deluded person that if the CIA were after them to take their brain waves for use as a weapon and wanted to kill them that killing them would stop their brain waves. That doesn't mean I actually think the CIA is after them.

Amy2 said...

I guess "natural selection" would mean nature chooses for everyone to die! (I would believe that if I were an atheist--but we know it's actually sin that did it...)

I could go into copy errors and explain why things die but since you reject science you would get lost more than likely.

All those deaths aren't supposed to mean anything, since we are here by chance anyway, so I never understand the cruel God part; like nature alone (as defined by evolution) isn't cruel?!!

Nature is cruel. The phrase red in tooth and claw is a description of that. If it makes you feel better, we don't worship nature either. Those are pagans. ^_^; July 16, 2009 2:43 PM
Iago said...: Ray do you agree with your friend Ken Ham that the Earth is approx. 6000 years old ?; July 16, 2009 2:45 PM
Froggie said...: Jinx,
"I did not yell at people about this god's and his people's actions. Why? Because the book was from the fiction section. None of the people or events in the book were real. I never believed for one moment that the story was real. I also didn't believe that the book asked readers to commit those acts of violence.

So why then do atheists rail against the Bible?"

Because unlike the book from the library, many people use the bible as some kind of authority on morality.

If I used the book from the library to justify wanting to teach it in public schools as science, you would definitely be pointing out that the book is fictitious and has no merit.

It's just that simple.
You have got a real problem lil buddy. You are a twisted individual.; July 16, 2009 2:51 PM
BathTub said...: Wow it's hilarious to see all the Christians jump up and down and say what a great post you just made,... where you admitted that there is a good case for God being a murderer...

Amazing.; July 16, 2009 2:54 PM
BathTub said...: carl still has reading comprehension problems, when will you telling us what the Law of Gravity is? Why is it taking you so long. Quote mining doesn't take that long.

Or are you sorting out with Killian who is going to run away first?

Come on Killian, show us how science has radically changed the age of the earth over the last 20 years.

You weren't lying where you?; July 16, 2009 2:56 PM
Amy2 said...: You guys are a hoot. You spend half your day posting against this "ultimate strawman".

At least one side tries to get you think about eternity out of concern for you (even though you may not like the delivery).

The other side has what? A concern for humanity's understanding of fossils? Or maybe just to reaffirm that you possess a higher intellect? Such worthy causes.; July 16, 2009 2:58 PM
Matt said...: Terry Burton said:

"Are these the same atheist who refuse to study ( at length ) the so called 'silly' prophecies in the Old Testament and the New Testament?"

Retrofitting data is not prophecy, Terry.; July 16, 2009 3:00 PM
Homer the Heretic said...: Well I actually agree with you on this subject. That is why I don't argue about the attributes of your supposed God. I personally don't care what the Bible has to say about this subject because I don't even believe in in the concept of ANY God. However I think the only reason atheists or agnostics point out the negative attributes of the biblical God is to show how silly it is for people to believe in such a being.; July 16, 2009 3:02 PM
erikloza said...: Froggie,
Methinks thou dost protest too much.; July 16, 2009 3:07 PM
Homer the Heretic said...: p.s. I would just like to add, in case it doesn't come up that creating an anthropomorphic God wasn't original to the Israelites. Many other religions have done it also. It just adds to the absurdity of religion.; July 16, 2009 3:10 PM
shunted said...: Joshua S Black wrote:

It's so funny that atheists take all this time to point out all the flaws of an imaginary character...unless, of course, He is very real, and their consciences are getting stirred up again!

This is a strange statement. There are Christians who think people will go to Hell and they want to do what they can to prevent that. I believe Ray is such a Christian. Furthermore some of these Christians believe the Bible is correct and infallible. These ideas are stated to nonbelievers.

It is perfectly reasonable for nonbelievers to look into matters to determine their veracity. I find that these claims of Christians make no sense. Even more damning I find the beliefs of Christians to be contradictory.

Why is it funny to you that some people have actually taken the time to look into the claims of Christianity to determine if they are correct? Isn't that what you want people to do? It's to understand, given this, that a lot of the atheists on the site are deemed to be closed minded.; July 16, 2009 3:10 PM
Lurker said...: Amy2 said...

"I guess "natural selection" would mean nature chooses for everyone to die!

Actually, yes. Once you have mated and passed your genes onto the next generation, your genes are no longer selected for.

Plus, a society of creatures that continued to give birth but never die would exhaust its resources, killing them all. Obviously, death has very real benefits for the gene pool.; July 16, 2009 3:17 PM
Airaien said...: How can God be a genocidal maniac, killer, evil, and all of the above, but at the same time not exist?

silly atheist....your reason is futile.

If you don't believe in God, then so be it. Don't get hell bent on telling everyone he doesn't exist. You don't hear me screaming from the rooftops about how much I hate cottage cheese do you? Then why do atheist do it?

What is more silly? Christians believing in a God they can't visibly see, or Atheist offended by a God they don't believe in?

Great cartoon Ray. It demonstrates the failed reason of the Atheist dead on.; July 16, 2009 3:19 PM
shunted said...: Bob wrote:

Atheists believe that a God who doesn't exist kills people?

No. Atheists on this site have pointed out that according to the Bible the God that Ray believes in kills innocent people. See Christians state that God is just and that this is why we need a Savior. This is an essential component of Christian theology.

Christianity collapses if God isn't just. What atheists on this site have shown is that if the Bible is true then one can reasonably conclude that God is not just. Therefore there is no reason to believe the Bible is true. The document isn't consistent. It says that God is just but His actions are clearly unjust.

1. He kills little children.
2. He institutes the punishment of stoning to death for adultery.
3. He forces some rape victims to marry their attacker.
4. He accepts the death of an innocent man as a substitute for meting out eternal punishment.; July 16, 2009 3:19 PM
ramses said...: The entire point is that you as a believer, are asking me as an athiest to believe in your god. So if you can prove that your god is real why would i choose to follow someone who is so horrid?; July 16, 2009 3:20 PM
Trophy of Grace said...: Froggie said...
Atheists point out the biblical God's murderous side merely to show the absurdity of your claim of his "Love."

That’s easy to do without context. If you ignore His holy standard and His mercy and longsuffering you can easily invent a “god” you don’t like in a heartbeat.; July 16, 2009 3:24 PM
Nathan said...: Thank you Ray for finally being honest in what the Bible says about your imaginary friend that you call God. Now that you realize your moral standards are based off the concept of an insane murderer perhaps you are getting closer to realizing the errors of your ways. As for me I will continue to have a higher moral standard than your pretend friend who you so desperately hold to in order to not be held responsible for your own insane beliefs. We're all hoping for you and your followers.; July 16, 2009 3:30 PM
Trophy of Grace said...: Rando said...
We are pointing them out to you, because we can't understand why you see nothing wrong with God flooding the entire world for disobeying orders that he knew were going to be disobeyed from the moment he created everything. That's illogically stupid.

Is it better to be logically stupid?

Like thinking, “Because I don’t understand God fully, can’t see him with my own limited eyes, and the Creation nor my conscience are enough to show that God is obvious, I’d rather just die and really really hope there isn’t a judgment or hell.”; July 16, 2009 3:30 PM
Trophy of Grace said...: Matt said...
Aaahhhh...I get it now - God is an equal opportunity murderer.

Nice!

Why is murder bad or wrong?

Almost every other “evolved” creature does it, why can’t we or other entities (like God) do it?

Do you judge spiders, lion, snakes, viruses… as being murderous?; July 16, 2009 3:34 PM
Trophy of Grace said...: J said...
I do think there are some legitimate lines of argument against the God of the Bible that are based on His morality. These are usually in the form of demonstrating contradictions between how God is described (particularly in the New Testament) and how He acts (particularly in the Old Testament). These objections, however, are not so much moral judgments on God but rather examples of apparent flaws in that concept of God. In other words, if the morality of the Christian God can be shown to be internally inconsistent, it would expose an inherent weakness in that concept.

Have you read Revelation???

God is the same and consistent throughout the Bible.

He is Just, righteous, angry against sin, merciful, longsuffering, full of grace in both OT and NT.

Read your Bible. If you are alive while reading this you are still in an age of grace. Don’t dismiss God’s patients with you.; July 16, 2009 3:40 PM
MVP said...: OK...so just for the record. At the time of this post several theists have posted reponses, namely:
JOSHUA S BLACK
3in1allinme
Airaien
Amy2
Alanrd67(weird post!)
Trophy of Grace
Its ALL about JESUS!!!
Beans In The Pot
Bob
J.J. Day
moab
RKM
carl
Jinx McHue

Not a single one has mentioned any disagreement with your post which states that:

"The "God kills children" argument is a favorite among atheists, and I concede that there is no disagreement. God killed almost all of the human race through the Noahic flood. This included men, women, children, and no doubt puppies, and cute little kittens (another favorite among atheists). Only those animals and people who entered the ark were saved from the Judgment of God. He also told Joshua to kill every Canaanite man, woman and child. All of them. So if you want to make a moral judgment against God, you do have a case."

I honestly thought that you may have a few theists on your case after this blogpost but they have all applauded you on your 'Atheists hate something which does not exist' angle and have seemingly accepted all your claims of God being an immoral ('you do have a case') killer.

And you all worship this made up monster. I dont know if you fully realise what a position you have put yourselves in. You are all lunatics, i dont know how else to describe you. This is the best post ever and the fact that no theist has disagreed makes it even more special.

You worship an immoral monster.
(make it known in case you miss it that I am judging YOU and not your made up monster..you dont seem to understand the concept of 'lets pretend').
Seek help immediately.; July 16, 2009 3:40 PM
Trophy of Grace said...: Andy Duchemin said...
Because I felt real emotion does that make Anakin Skywalker real? Some people would wish that he was real but luckily I can tell the difference between fantasy and reality.

You on the other hand can't. I know Jehovah/Yahweh/Jesus is a fictional character,…
Some might think George Washington was a fictional character but just saying that doesn’t make it true. You can’t prove that he actually existed. But I’m sure you’d think that those who would deny his existence are a little mentally off.

You can’t even “know” that God doesn’t exist since you don’t have all knowledge. Again, not an intelligent thing to say.

I wonder how many “fictional” characters you spend time making comments about and debate about? Do you go out of you way to debate someone who “really” thinks Anakin Skywalker is real? Is there a blog you visit where the host claims to personally know Sauron? Would you spend much time there? Maybe you would. I would think there’s something unhealthy about that. I don’t spend time with those who I think aren’t aware of reality. But yet here you are regularly debating people who know God (which you think is impossible).

Why is that?

Personally, I think atheists like you have a problem with God, because deep down your conscience is screaming at you that after your death you are accountable for all your actions in life. You’re at war with your Creator and something inside you knows it. I really believe that, because I was once on the wrong side of that war. There no peace when you’re an enemy of God.; July 16, 2009 3:56 PM
Tom said...: Michael L. Foley said:

"Christian doctrine is hate, pure and simple."

Michael, I know that it is the popular mantra currently to state that fundamentalist Christians are the Western equivalent of the Taliban. However, this is a misconception, and an easily demonstable one. Please note Michael, if one has a grain of intellectual integrity, they will not equate individuals (and their actions) with a belief system. There are sadly, too numerous examples of those who label themselves "Christians" who engage in deplorable actions. But to address your point directly, Christian doctrine boiled down to its base can be summed up as follows:

We are all unworthy. No one can claim moral superiority to another. As such, God in His loving kindness has demonstrated this love by making the ultimate sacrifice for us all. We needn't do anything to merit this love. It is free, and a gift. All we have to do is love Him back, in eternal gratitude. Not too much to ask considering the alternative.
What is hateful about that?

Do not judge Christianity by some who call themselves Christians.

Your friend,
Tom

word ver: anghtsk; July 16, 2009 4:07 PM
KiwiInOz said...: No. You maintain that your God is moral and say that the bible is the inerrant word of your God. We just point out the hypocrisy.; July 16, 2009 4:17 PM
Tom said...: Froggie said:

"Atheists point out the biblical God's murderous side merely to show the absurdity of your claim of his 'Love.'"

Froggie: While I recognize that you do not believe in God, or that the universe, and all therein, is a creation of Him, it is intellectually disingenuous to claim that God has murdered anyone. If God is real, then the claims of Christianity are real, to wit, all are accountable to a holy God and are individually unjust to enter His presence. Therefore, in order to constitute murder, the person killed would necessarily have to be innocent. This is not the claim of Christianity.
Alternatively, if God is fiction, then your argument is academic and not worth further debate.

Your friend,
Tom; July 16, 2009 4:26 PM
Rebecca said...: I do not believe that there is a God who ordered/committed these murders. However, you apparently do.

Please explain why you choose to base your morality on such a cruel thing.... because I think that's what this "atheist argument" is truly getting at - the question of why any rational being would profess undying commitment to something they believe is such a jerk.; July 16, 2009 4:36 PM
Trophy of Grace said...: Lurker said...
So killing children is moral as long as God does it?

Yes. He gave them life, doesn't He have the right to take it back. Doesn't He also have the power to return it again?

According to your own subjective opinion is it better that a child grows up in an environment full of violence taught nothing but evil and most certainly will suffer and bring suffering to others, or to bring them to a better place.

Does God have the power to bring children into his own presence? Since the Bible is silent on where children go have you considered that possibility?; July 16, 2009 4:45 PM
Mike and Lizette said...: So what are you going to do about it? Should you spread the word that you have evidence that God actually kills people? Or should you just keep quiet, because (as a professing atheist) remember, you are supposed to believe that He doesn’t exist.

If God does not exist as the atheist professes, then they can't blame Him for killing anyone.

I find that sadly ironic.; July 16, 2009 4:53 PM
Trophy of Grace said...: Izovaprophet said...
But thanks for conceding that the God you propose to worship is a murderer.
One need not believe in a being to deem it undeserving of worship. You show your true colors by holding a genocidal maniac in such high esteem.

Can you explain why murder is wrong?

Everyone and everything is going to die anyways – why does it matter whether it’s by God, man, or nature?

Where does your moral sense that murder is wrong come from?

Maybe you don’t like it. Maybe you don’t like carrots, does that mean carrots are wrong or eating carrots is immoral? Someone else thinks carrots are fine… who are you to judge?

So you don’t like murder. Is it maybe because you stand condemned awaiting your own death sentence?

Maybe, you just do like the authority that God has over your own life and like a criminal who doesn’t think too fondly of his executioner you have a problem with the justice of God, because that justice is over your own head.

You might not like the justice of God (because you don’t understand it) but that doesn’t make it go away.; July 16, 2009 4:57 PM
The False Convert said...: You forgot to mention that the atheist also "leeches" Christian morals of right and wrong in order to make a moral judgment about the God who wrote His law on their heart... so they may not want to do that, because now they are giving more evidence to the God they say doesn't exist.

When you say "leeches," is that like the way the entire Christian "faith" has been leeched from earlier myths, including the whole virgin birth/crucifixion/resurrection thing? The only original bits Christian's added were the completely unbelievable mess about your God sending himself down to be sacrificed to himself in order to save us all from himself.

And you wonder why Christianity is in such steep decline.

Word Verification = fluct; July 16, 2009 4:59 PM
The False Convert said...: Jinx...

I can't speak for anyone else, but I just do it for a laugh. To me it's like discussing whether Star Wars or Lord of The Rings is the better movie. Some people just get upset about the silliest things.

When someone like starbuck show's up and starts ranting like a baboon with the pox, I can't resist tweaking them a bit. This is an entertainment site? Am I wrong about that?; July 16, 2009 5:03 PM
Trophy of Grace said...: A man was murdered and now his children have no income, no one to support them, no one to raise them. Is that fair to the children? Isn't this mans death completely unjust. The person who did this must be immoral.

They way most atheists here think, they would say "Yes" without thought.

But only if they paused to think about how limited their knowledge of the situation really is.

What if the man was violent to the family, a criminal, a danger to them and to others? Suppose he was guilty of horrible crimes and it was the state that justly executed him. The children are better off. There's no injustice with that scenario, and in fact the story becomes a demonstration of justice. You just needed to know the full picture.

Most of the atheists here have no idea what the full picture of a holy God would look like even if it was written for them in a Book... oh wait, it has been.

I wish they would read it (all of it and not just the cut-n-paste on atheist sites) and use the brains God gave them.; July 16, 2009 5:07 PM
Iago said...: Jinx you seem like soemone that would have enjoye being an Aztec. You got to witness the power of your god on a daily basis, the Sun rose every day. And you knew why the Sun rose everyday, it is because the high priest ripped the living heart out of a captive and sacrificed it to your god.
See what a mistaken belief can bring about ?
On the other hand I am writing to you so I do kinda doubt that.; July 16, 2009 5:12 PM
James B. said...: Hi J,

I appreciate that you are interested in continued discussions, however this is really off topic of this current blog. Perhaps there is a better forum, if you know one please let me know.

In regard to our discussion of transitional fossils to support dinosaur to bird evolution, I stated I would not know how to describe a hypothetical missing-link, because I was speaking the truth to you. I then asked if you would begin the discussion by describing one since it seems you believe this theory.

Your answer in part was "As a point of clarification, I am not suggesting (and neither are paleontologists for that matter) that describing a hypothetical transitional and then finding it would prove the theory. No, it would simply be evidence for the theory. It would indicate that the theory warrants consideration and further research. Find enough of them, along with other lines of corroborating evidence, and you can then come to some practical measures of proof."

You also said "This refusal to give a description of a transitional fossil on your part seems to be nothing more than a massive evasion tactic (I mean this not as an attack, only an honest assessment of how it appears to me). It’s as if you refuse to describe a transitional fossil solely for the purpose of reserving the right to claim that any fossil found is not transitional."

Respectfully, I never claimed I could describe one, yet you seem to insist that this is paramount to our discussion that I do so. I referred to quotes from scientists to show there are fallicies in the theories proposed and there are challenges to the theories and some of these challenges exist within the scientific community itself. Those that challenge the conventional teachings are often ridiculed or dismissed. When the question was turned back to you, you did not provide any description of a transitional fossil yourself.

I'm sorry J - if you want to dicusss the current claims and examples of so called "transitional fossils" we can do that. You used an "evasion tactic' when you did not respond with a description yourself. You seem to have more time to blog that I do, yet you missed the opportunity in your reply to accept my counter-proposal.

On a separate issue, in a reply to Beth you said "I believe it would be reasonable to expect to see a statistical positive coloration in the recovery of patients who have received intercessory prayer (from Christians) compared to those who have not."

Now I can't give you numbers and I will try to see if any were published, but I believe if you speak to physicans, a majority of them will confirm to you that people with faith, have a better chance of recovery and have a better outlook on treatment then those who don't. Paul had an affliction that God did not remove yet he praised God continually and preached the Gospel to many. Paul even thanked God for his affliction. I think you are asking why does God allow pain and suffering even unto those who believe in Him? The answer is in the Bible, I hope that God can use Ray, I or others to help you become a believer.

Blessings,; July 16, 2009 5:34 PM
Honeybee said...: Good post Ray,

I hope some of the "atheists" here will seriously think about why they are disturbed by a Diety (that they say doesn't exist) taking back life that He gives.

It made me consider Passover and how our Lord Jesus Christ is the ultimate Passover.; July 16, 2009 5:44 PM
ltlgeorge said...: From some of the comments that I read, it looks like the creature can judge the Creator. Seems a bit grandiose.; July 16, 2009 5:44 PM
Dywindel said...: Ray said:

"Biblical Christianity is not a religion."

You're right Ray, it's a cult.; July 16, 2009 5:57 PM
ltlgeorge said...: If I understand Ray's post, he does not say God is a murderer. He asks the question, is God a murderer? The answer is no.; July 16, 2009 6:06 PM
hope to see you in heave really said...: NO NO NO ....
A criminal was sentance to prision for the wickedness he have done . It is not the judge fault .
Ray They do not have a case against God at all !!!!!

He sent destruction because of sin . Not becasue he want to . If he really want to . he would have kill all the atheist in this blog !! .

In noah time . Imagine this ! everyone is wicked . thinking of hurting any one they saw .
Should not God destroy them for their wickedness ?

As for the Canaanite . Man . you should read their wickdness they have done in LEV 18 . You know what they did ????? They sleep with beast !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The whole land could be infected with disease !!!!!

imagine if they mate with other tribe ??? they will be no human race now !!!!

man having sex with man .
whole land is a huge orgy !!!; July 16, 2009 6:20 PM
jsk said...: Now that we've had about twenty people explain very, very slowly and clearly to Ray why moral criticism of the Christian God doesn't imply any belief in his existence, how long will it be before Ray makes exactly the same "argument," in almost exactly the same words, without any acknowledgment of these previous responses? A day? a week?; July 16, 2009 6:24 PM
Kaitlyn said...: Wow, I was not expecting to read this... It's seems very un-Ray-Comfort-like.

Oh well, thanks for keeping me on my toes, Ray. :); July 16, 2009 6:25 PM
get_education said...: Jinx,

See what you do? Now I know better than when I posted what I said.

I just don't get it. Could the atheists here please explain why they rail so much against a book they equate to the fictional book I read?

Because you believe in that God and you are a real person. Because you rail against atheists for not "having an absolute moral standard" when you do not have such thing at all. Because if that fictional thing is your moral standard, then we are in danger.

Bob,

Atheists believe that a God who doesn't exist kills people?

Nope, atheists believe that the clear contradictory nature of your God, however fictitious, takes away a lot of the claims you try and do against atheism.

Amy2,

I guess "natural selection" would mean nature chooses for everyone to die! (I would believe that if I were an atheist--but we know it's actually sin that did it...)

Ha! Now this is funny. Nature is impersonal. There is no feelings, no promises, no choosing, nothing. Nature is what it is. So, nobody can blame nature for anything. Your God is supposed to be something with feelings, intelligent, omni-everything, and goodness all over the place ...

I do not worship nature, nor natural selection. There is no reason to worship any of that. Your "attack" means nothing. It would be like blaming gravitational forces for not stopping its work while I fall off a cliff. Useless. Gravitational forces are impersonal. No promises, no goodness, no badness, no omni-anything, no nothing. Do you get it by now?

G.E.; July 16, 2009 6:44 PM
hope to see you in heave really said...: One More time !!!!
God DID NOT ASK A RAPE VICTIM TO MARRY THE RAPIST .

Read KJV . All other vision are being corrupted by wicked man that have turn into the minister of God to corrupt the word of God !!!!; July 16, 2009 7:06 PM
Ryk said...: Actually Ray no dillema at all. Your God is a fictional character who is described as horrible, genocidal, murderer. No difficulty for an atheist at all. After all Hannibal Lector is not real but I describe that character as evil also.; July 16, 2009 7:13 PM
Nature'sOwnBrew said...: Atheists tell people all the time that God is murderer.

Believers don't care.; July 16, 2009 7:22 PM
Kevin4u2 said...: If a judge in Texas send a man to the electric chair, is the judge guilty of murder?

I think we need to make a distiction between who the criminal is and who the judge is.

If you love your life you'd better make things right with the judge.; July 16, 2009 7:40 PM
Iago said...: Airaien said...

If you don't believe in God, then so be it. Don't get hell bent on telling everyone he doesn't exist. You don't hear me screaming from the rooftops about how much I hate cottage cheese do you? Then why do atheist do it?

endquote

There is no one to my knowledge trying to force the belief that cottage cheese made everything and that if you do not believe in it you are going to burn for alt ime.; July 16, 2009 7:48 PM
No Doubt said...: After all these years, it still amazes me when atheists have their own words turned back upon them, they actually appear to be appalled. Now that's a dilemna.

Do you honestly think you can judge G-d as a unjust murderer, then get away with it by proclaiming he is a fictional character and appear to be rational and logical? I sorry it don't work that way.; July 16, 2009 7:56 PM
Steven J. said...: Jinx McHue said:

I read a book from the local library a while back. It contained all sorts of violence, murder, genocide, rape, torture, etc., committed by people in their name of their god. I did not rail against the book, however. I did not condemn the events contained within. I did not yell at people about this god's and his people's actions. Why? Because the book was from the fiction section. None of the people or events in the book were real. I never believed for one moment that the story was real. I also didn't believe that the book asked readers to commit those acts of violence.

Unless Richard Dawkins has decided to supplement his income as a librarian in your town, I'll assume the book you found in the "fiction" section was not the Bible.

I'll further assume that almost no one else who read the book thought that the events and characters it described were real, or that the book was an inerrant guide to whatever period of history it covered (or, if it concerned the future, that it was an infallible prophecy of what would be). It's very dubious that anyone was insisting that everyone should be compelled to act in certain ways, or constrained from acting in other ways, on the ground that this particular novel told them to. If this novel contradicted something in your local high school's history or biology texts, hardly anyone would insist that the school books must be wrong and the novel right.

So why then do atheists rail against the Bible? They don't believe the people or events in the Bible are real. They don't believe God is real. They can try to argue that the Bible teaches Christians to commit the acts they are objecting to, but such arguments are based on either ignorance or dishonesty. (Those arguments also fail in the face of the fact that Christians aren't running around committing said acts willy-nilly.)

Yes, Christians aren't running around committing indiscriminate genocide. Is that because you are modelling your lives on the Bible's precepts, or because you are not?

"Railing against the Bible" is prompted by several different things.

First, many Christians here argue that the Bible is the source of morality: without the Bible, they implicitly argue, we wouldn't know what was moral. It is relevant to this claim to point out that in various respects the morality Christians actually enjoin on us is contradicted by biblical passages (e.g. killing little boys because you disapprove of their choice of ancestors), or simply not addressed clearly (if you're against slavery, or for that matter abortion, you're probably reading your views into the Bible, not out of it).

Second, many Christians here argue for particular policies, ranging from calling atheists "fools" to the teaching of creationism in public schools, on no real grounds except that the (supposedly infallible and unchanging) Bible supports their ideas on these matters. By showing that they must either interprett some parts of the Bible in a very nonliteral or cultural- and time-bound sense (i.e. not applicable today), or else must accept that the Bible contains ideas that they find abhorrent, their arguments are undercut. Perhaps the creation accounts, like references to God changing His mind or to the sky having "windows" in it, are merely figurative. Perhaps various injunctions relative to sexual morality are as temporary as the commandments for animal sacrifice.; July 16, 2009 8:09 PM
Matt said...: Trophy of Grace said:

"Almost every other “evolved” creature does it, why can’t we or other entities (like God) do it?

Do you judge spiders, lion, snakes, viruses… as being murderous?"

---------------

Oh, no, I wouldn't dare judge a spider. I don't know what's in a spider's heart.; July 16, 2009 8:21 PM
Bob said...: jonathan said...
I just love you can justify death because God deemed it necessary. What a mockery of human life.
-------------------------------
Hey jonathan, without death what would the world population be about now?

repentanceandfaith; July 16, 2009 8:24 PM
Lord Runolfr said...: Personally, if I thought my two choices were an eternity of torment vs. an eternity of bliss, I would grovel at the feet of whoever was needed in order to avoid the former.

J, are we agreed that the character, God, described in the Bible is a mass murderer? Then how can you be sure that what such a being considers "an eternity of bliss" will be blissful to YOU?

Besides, you're obviously not basing your actions on morality; you're basing them on pure self-interest. You're hoping for the carrot and terrified of the stick, regardless of the morality of the person supposedly holding them.; July 16, 2009 8:25 PM
Templar Ben said...: If I say that Santa can't exist and the reasons he can't exist are the following.

It is not possible to travel at the speed he would have to travel in the atmosphere without it turning to plasma.

It is not possible for all toys to fit into a single bag.

It is not possible for their to be a secret workshop at the North Pole that we haven't seen as the US Navy has subs punch through the ice frequently.

Stating that does not mean I believe in Santa. I am saying that if you do, you should not and here is why.

If I say don't believe in God because he is not possible given there is no evidence. Don't believe in God as it is possible given the text that states he exists (just and loving God that commits mass murder for sins of others).

That does not mean I believe in God.

I know you are Christian and that Christianity precludes the use of logic and reason but even grade school children would understand the difference.; July 16, 2009 8:29 PM
Steven J. said...: Carl said:

God DID NOT KILL Feathered Dinosaurs (because there is no such thing):

First, Carl, Alan Feduccia and his pals are not the only paleontologists who studied Sinosauropteryx (indeed, Feduccia is not a paleontologist at all; he's an ornithologist; he knows a lot about birds, not so much about fossils). There are reputable scholars who disagree with him about the fibers sticking out from Sinosauropteryx.

Second, there are a number of putative feathered dinosaurs that have indisputable pennaceous (like the typical feather of modern birds) feathers: Caudipteryx, Microraptor, etc. Caudipteryx is, if one ignores the feathers, a typical oviraptorid, a member of what has always been thought of as a group of theropod dinosaurs. Microraptor is, as its name implies, a typical dromeosaurid (a "raptor," as Jurassic Park taught us to call them) if one looks only at its bones. Even Archaeopteryx fossils have, on two separate occasions, been classified as the typical small theropod Compsognathus before the feather impressions were spotted. Discard Sinosauropteryx, and you still have to deal with these.

Now, you can take the position of Alan Feduccia and insist that all these species were actually birds (flightless, in some cases). But what that means is that it is impossible, judging only from skeletal features (which is all that is available in most fossils) to tell whether something is a theropod or a bird ... which is, for all practical purposes, admitting that birds are theropod dinosaurs. This is even more true in your case; Feduccia can say that birds evolved from non-dinosaurian archosaurs and just resemble theropods convergently (an incredible coincidence, but not absolutely unthinkable), but since you don't think that dinosaurs are all related by common descent or that they can be defined by shared ancestry, but only through common design, you have no grounds for denying that birds are, in fact, dinosaurs.

Another MYTH in a loooong line of myths (ape-men, ERVs, isochron dating, etc. etc. etc.) Well, on to the next evolutionary rabbit trail...

Why? You're wrong on feathered dinosaurs, wrong on ERvs, wrong on ape-men, wrong on isochron dating, etc; why must you seek out yet more points on which to be wrong?

Romans 1:
"They (INTENTIONALLY) exchanged the truth of God for a (TWO-BIT) lie..."

So the next time someone accuses evolutionists of wasting huge amounts of taxpayer money on a "lie," will you, weigh in and point out that at least it's a cheap lie?; July 16, 2009 8:35 PM
askegg said...: Wait, I am confused. Are we suppose to condemn God for his actions using the morality he gave us, or not?; July 16, 2009 8:53 PM
Sh'ma Y'srael Goyim said...: When all your arguments are over, we all will stand before Hashem. He alone is the righteous judge over life and death.

What you call murder, he calls righteous judgement. When dealing with a Holy G-d, we have no right to judge him, especially when his viewpoint is absolute.

For 55 years, since I have accepted Yeshua, I have waited for Meshiach to return. I long to bow before his throne. Believe it or not, all atheists will be on their knees with me proclaiming him to as El Shaddai. None of your logic or self proclaimed righteousness will help you at that time. You will not call him murderer at that time, I guarantee.; July 16, 2009 8:56 PM
Rene said...: Re: Is God guilty of murder?

Ray, either you're being wilfully obtuse or you've finally admitted that the game is up.

As I wrote in a recent post, you have my grudging respect for allowing dissent on your threads. As you no doubt know, most religious sites disallow any comments questioning the basis of the beliefs they expound. This stance can only mean one thing: That the apologists running these sites have little faith in their faith to begin with.

Be that as it may, your latest post is a bombshell. While you pretend to be jocular & offhand, your humour doesn't quite ring true. Could it be--like Joshua S Black, Amy2 & 3in1allinme et al.--that you're forced & feigned mockery of atheists is the last refuge of a spent force?? I mean, surely questions of such overwhelming importance merit serious consideration & should not be dismissed lightly? But of course, in my eyes at least, that is what all religions do.

I'm surprised, & in a perverse way delighted, with your last post. I completely fail to see the point, if any, you're trying to make!! The fact you believe--or at least profess to believe--in a text which you are certain is the inviolable, inerrant, literal word of God, despite shovelfuls of evidence to the contrary, is one thing.

But to think that you've somehow trumped your atheist 'enemies' by denouncing them for not ackowledging a Supreme Being who, by your admission, is not the loving God you proclaim he is, is a reverse double bluff.

Instead of telling the 'truth', in the hope that you will catch out the 'naive' atheist who thinks you are lying, you introduce a 'strawman' argument in the hope that you won't be rumbled.

Doesn't work that way, I'm afraid. At least not in the world I live in.

In trying to 'set up' the atheist, you set yourself up for a pasting. Why in the world you'd do that beats me?!; July 16, 2009 8:59 PM
shunted said...: David Tea wrote:

Hi Shunted, thanks for your post and your honesty. It's good to see you questioning but, as you say, you are convinced there isn't a God so what does it matter if this God you know doesn't exist is just or not?

If God doesn't exist then none of it matters. If there is a God then it does matter as a means of helping determine which perception of God is correct. Ultimately, though, I think your real question is why do I discuss these topics.

There are a variety of reasons that I do so. Ray would call me a false convert. In some sense I wish there is a God who is loving, active, and interested in humanity. So I keep my eyes open and I come here looking to see if there are valid reasons for believing in the God of the Bible.

If there is a God I think the true theology with regard to God and our existence would have to be consistent. If I find a religion with consistent beliefs about God and His nature then that would be cause for further inquiry. It would make me stop and think.

I think a necessary aspect of human created religions would be inconsistencies. Humans are inconsistent and contradictory. When I see inconsistencies in a religion my default belief about that religion is that it is man made.

I also come here to see the effects of cognitive dissonance. Amy2, Beth, Terry Burton, and others are fine examples of this. It fascinates me. I try to understand what it is that allows them to hold contradictory beliefs and not recognize the contradictions even when the contradictions are pointed out to them.

I come here also to see the differences in thought between the nonbelievers and the Christians. There is strong evidence, for instance, that liberals and conservatives think differently from a neurological point of view. I begin to the think the same thing applies to religious people versus nonbelievers.

Lastly, I come here for the same reason that I will read articles from string theorists. I don't consider string theory a science. I think it is a religion but I listen to string theorists because I'm not arrogant enough to presume that I must necessarily be right. It's OK to see what others think and why.

It's OK to try to understand why Christians think God is just even though He instituted the punishment of stoning to death adulteresses. I don't know any Christians who aren't horrified by this form of punishment. Even Ray was horrified by this form of punishment. Yet Christians claim God is just. I don't know anyone who thinks it is just for an innocent man to be killed instead of the guilty person. We supposedly deserve eternal punishment and Christians think it is just that an innocent man was killed and was dead for only 3 days that this has the potential to make up for the punishment that we richly deserve.

Why do you think God is just? What reasons do you have to believe this other than the Bible says so? What do you say to the points raised?; July 16, 2009 9:25 PM
Matt said...: Hope to see you in...ok...seriously-you-really-need-a-new-username, said:

"God DID NOT ASK A RAPE VICTIM TO MARRY THE RAPIST .

Read KJV . All other vision are being corrupted by wicked man that have turn into the minister of God to corrupt the word of God !!!!

You're right - God didn't ask a rape victim to marry the rapist, he commanded her to. Let's go ahead and read the KJV.

"If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days." Deut. 22:28-29

To clear up the confusion, let's take a look at the term "lay hold on". The Hebrew word used in verse 28 is "taphas" which means any of the following according to Strong's Concordance:

"to catch, handle, lay hold, take hold of, seize, wield, to lay hold of, seize, arrest, catch, to grasp in order to wield, wield, use skilfully, to be seized, be arrested, be caught, be taken, captured, to catch, grasp (with the hands)."

Not one these references mean anything even closely resembling consent. Instead, they mean to take by force. The term "lie with" is pretty self explanatory. In other words, this is rape.

Start calling rape what it is - evil. The idea that your Jehovah would force the victim to marry her rapist because it's his "law" is vile and reprehensive. How can you serve such a person?; July 16, 2009 9:31 PM
gmc4jesus said...: Is God Guilty of Murder?

Regardless of any other argument you press, is God guilty of the murder of His Son, Jesus Christ?

When Jesus died on the cross to pay for your sins and make it possible for your life to have significance by living for Him, did He committ suicide?

No matter how you chose to spin it, I thank God that He sent Jesus to die for my sins. I praise Jesus that He was obedient to His Father, even to the point of not doing anything to prevent His death, but even helped His enemies find reason to persuade Pilate to crucify Him.

I'm glad that Jesus not only died for me, but also lived as a role model. I'm grateful that God gave me the ministry of writing the Getting To Know Jesus Bible Study Series.

Jesus will change your life. Getting To Know Jesus is a complete non-denominational Bible study tool that will help you learn about every event in His life and apply it to your life today.

www.gettingtoknowjesus.org
Glen Copple; July 16, 2009 10:02 PM
MOJO said...: See Ray, this is evidence that your Imaginary Friend is not benevolent.

Puppies and kittens are not cursed with this "original sin" idea that they spruik in your Book of Myths. They have done nothing wrong at all, a kitten or puppy cannot blaspheme, they are innocent creatures.

Yet if your Imaginary Friend was real, He is in the sky, willingly and knowingly committing harm upon these defenceless creatures, and He seemingly does not bat an eyelash, He merely watches with folded arms, complete indifference and apathy.

Yet your Imaginary Friend claims omniscience, so He is completely, clearly and utterly aware of every moment of untold suffering some poor defenceless creature has to endure in the painful moments leading up to its death, even THEN, your Imaginary Friend does not bat an eyelash.

To sum this up:

(a) If your Imaginary Friend exists (Yahweh), then He is accountable for all the suffering in the world, i.e. all suffering can ultimately be attributed to your Sky Daddy, whether it be passively (watches with folded arms as suffering occurs), or actively (intervenes to cause suffering).

(b) There is no logical reason for this suffering to occur. If we infer your Imaginary Friend is existent, then He has the omnipotence and omniscience to intervene in whatever way he sees fit to prevent suffering. Suffering does not better the human race in any way. We have been intrinsically programmed to seek pleasure and avoid suffering.

(c) If we infer that your imaginary friend from the Bible exists, then he has the omniscience to vicariously experience the suffering Himself of every living creature that has ever experienced it. Yet even though this occurs, your Imaginary Friend still does not intervene, even though intervention is by definition effortless for an omnipotent being.

(d) Omnibenevolence is a key quality that the God of Abraham is described as possessing.

(e) In a world where the Xtian God existed, we would expect to observe a reality that is indicative of being intelligently created and maintained by an omnibenevolent entity.

(f) This is not what we observe, nor what is mentioned in the Scriptures.

Therefore:

1: The scriptures are inconsistent and fallible.

2: Yahweh does not exist.

The sad thing is, you will never come to know reason Ray. It is truly depressing to think that there are still people in this day and age who have shyed away from the force of reality and buried themselves nose deep in a childish collection of stories designed to cognitively manipulate an archaically primitive civilisation.

Your bizarre form of wishful thinking and your own perverted and incompetent sense of moral judgement result in nothing but you subjectivelly villifying anyone who tries to pull your head out of the clouds and back into the real world.

Theres no hope for you Ray, it truly is a tragedy to see the effects of religious self-brainwashing in action.; July 16, 2009 10:26 PM
Michael L. Foley said...: @All

"As I have stated before, Jesus Christ fulfilled 109 distinct Messiah prophecies. The chances of it NOT being Jesus of Nazareth are IMPOSSIBLE."

My Orthodox Jewish would beg to differ. So would the Reform, the Conservative, Chasidm, etc. They know Jesus failed the prophecies.; July 16, 2009 10:39 PM
Michael L. Foley said...: Tom:

I have to go to bed shortly, so I will just post you a brief quote from Dan Barker:

"I do understand what love is, and that is one of the reasons I can never again be a Christian. Love is not self denial. Love is not blood and suffering. Love is not murdering your son to appease your own vanity. Love is not hatred or wrath, consigning billions of people to eternal torture because they have offended your ego or disobeyed your rules. Love is not obedience, conformity, or submission. It is a counterfeit love that is contingent upon authority, punishment or reward. True love is respect and admiration, compassion and kindness, freely given by a healthy, unafraid human being."

Or, as Bill Hicks noted:

"According to Christianity eternal suffering awaits anyone who questions God’s infinite love. That’s the message we’re brought up with: believe or die. “Thank you, forgiving Lord, for all those options.”"; July 16, 2009 10:49 PM
Michael L. Foley said...: Here's another one from Robert Anton Wilson:

"An idea, which has terrified millions, claims that some of us will go to a place called Hell, where we will suffer eternal torture. This does not scare me because, when I try to imagine a Mind behind this universe, I cannot conceive that Mind, usually called “God,” as totally mad. I mean, guys, compare that “God” with the worst monsters you can think of - Adolph Hitler, Joe Stalin, that sort of guy. None of them ever inflicted more than finite pain on their victims. Even de Sade, in his sado-masochistic fantasy novels, never devised an unlimited torture. The idea that the Mind of Creation (if such exists) wants to torture some of its critters for endless infinities of infinities seems too absurd to take seriously. Such a deranged Mind could not create a mud hut, much less the exquisitely mathematical universe around us.

If such a monster-God did exist, the sane attitude would consist of
practicing the Buddhist virtue of compassion. Don’t give way to hatred: try to understand and forgive him. Maybe He will recover his wits some day."

And I do truly feel for those of you who are in thrall to this non-existent sadist.; July 16, 2009 10:53 PM
Mintz said...: What's with the redacted blog post?; July 16, 2009 11:12 PM
MVP said...: TROPHY OF GRACE...Thank you for your example of how morals are not objective.
In your first paragraph the murder of the man seems immoral.
Then when you reveal details about the man and how he beats his wife and is a violent criminal his murder is not immoral according to you:

"There's no injustice with that scenario, and in fact the story becomes a demonstration of justice. You just needed to know the full picture."

So you agree then that morals are based on CONTEXT and therefore a commandment like 'Thou shalt not murder' is far too black and white to be adhered. Every action can be deemed moral or immoral based on the context.

Morals are NOT objective as they do not exist outside the mind and they cannot be absolute based on the story you have given.; July 17, 2009 12:08 AM
Raoul Rheits said...: ltlgeorge states:

"From some of the comments that I read, it looks like the creature can judge the Creator. Seems a bit grandiose."

You just put me in mind of a skit with Frankenstein's monster...looking up pitifully at a Dr Frankenstein who is fresh home from murdering every other creature on earth.

"I know I can't judge you Doctor, because you made me....and you are so awesome, and I, I am so wretched...anyone that says otherwise must be grandiose, dear Doctor..."

Source:

Hypothetical argument (for all Ray's fans who can't figure out why I don't believe in Frankenstein yet mention him anyway); July 17, 2009 12:20 AM
Raoul Rheits said...: This post has been removed by the author.; July 17, 2009 12:26 AM
MVP said...: I have never seen such ridiculous sociopathic self rightous insanity as that that comes from the keyboard of 'Trophy of Jesus'. In this blog alone:

"Why is murder bad or wrong?"

"Almost every other “evolved” creature does it, why can’t we or other entities (like God) do it?"

"He is Just, righteous, angry against sin, merciful, longsuffering, full of grace in both OT and NT."

"Can you explain why murder is wrong?"

"Everyone and everything is going to die anyways – why does it matter whether it’s by God, man, or nature?"

"So you don’t like murder. Is it maybe because you stand condemned awaiting your own death sentence?"

"Where does your moral sense that murder is wrong come from?"

"So killing children is moral as long as God does it?

Yes. He gave them life, doesn't He have the right to take it back. Doesn't He also have the power to return it again?"

I think you may have missed a major step in your child development. A crucial part of you is missing and renders you unable to see your own hypocrisy, complete unempathy and downright psychotic self delusion. I REALLY hope you do not have children because it appears you are a very disturbed human being. I am quite surprised Ray allows you to indulge your psychosis (see: enabler) by allowing your posts on this blog. Barely a post os written by you that is not either covertly or overtly insane.; July 17, 2009 12:32 AM
Raoul Rheits said...: Ryk said:

"Actually Ray no dillema (sic) at all. Your God is a fictional character who is described as horrible, genocidal, murderer. No difficulty for an atheist at all. After all Hannibal Lector (sic) is not real but I describe that character as evil also."

Well stated Ryk.

Of course Ray's fans will be scratching their heads at that. And when they penny seems to be dropping, they will then say something like "Then why don't atheist's hate Hannibal Lecter all day long like they hate God? Could it be because they know in their hearts that God exists?"

And on it goes forever.

I do agree it is futile to attempt to show Christians or Muslims that their objects of worship are not only mythical but horribly illogical and bloodthirsty.

Ray, Amy, etc here's an example for y'all:

Malaysia’s Ministry of Home Affairs has (this year) ordered the Catholic weekly Herald to cease publishing its Malay-language section pending the outcome of a court case over the newspaper’s right to use the Arabic word “Allah” for God.

In response to this, a Jewish commenter wrote:

"I've got no problem with Catholic publications not using the word 'Allah' -- this desert idol has nothing to do with the God of Abraham. Allah is a monster, demanding endless human sacrifice."

Now, do you believe that this Jew really believes in Allah? If he doesn't, then why would he talk about Allah as if he was real? Is Allah 'written on his heart'?

Ray, Amy?; July 17, 2009 12:34 AM
MVP said...: Hope to see you in heave really garbled:

"NO NO NO ....
A criminal was sentance to prision for the wickedness he have done . It is not the judge fault .
Ray They do not have a case against God at all !!!!! "

Well well well, a theist who disagrees with Ray! Will wonders never cease.
However...it is pathetic to try and analogise a real world criminal case with your ridiculous doctrine of sin=hell. For one thing in your mind your God IS judge, jury and executioner. Secondly your God only has one available punishment regardless of the size of the 'sin' - eternal torture in hell. Thirdly it was the judge himself who set up this system and although seemingly all-powerful is not willing to change it. Forthly the judge is guilt of exactly the same 'sins' for which He is doling out the punishment.
It is pathetic to compare real world to your fantasy and even more pathetic that you believe it and deem it worthy of worship.

"He sent destruction because of sin..." That HE created if you are a biblical literalist - Adam & Eve were HIS CREATIONS and he already knew what they would do and created them with the ability and will to do it - why does this get constantly over looked as if God didnt know what would happen. If you are not a creationist then explain the fallen world doctrine to me because it makes even less sense than your Adam & Eve scenario. Its all ridiculous.

"...Not becasue he want to. If he really want to he would have kill all the atheist in this blog !!"

So you are saying that 'sin' controls your God?? That he has no power to erase it or control it...this is all riddles and ramblings.

"In noah time..." Whcih never existed but continue "... Imagine this ! everyone is wicked . thinking of hurting any one they saw ." But you christians think that everyone including yourselves are wicked NOW!! Your definition of 'wicked' covers everything from rape to lying so you leave no room for anyone not to fit in your category. So God fails again. And were the children, babies and foetises in your fantasy flood time 'thinking of hurting any one they saw'?? Of course not...your reasoning is skewed out of all recognition - this is NOT a moral story in any way.

"Should not God destroy them for their wickedness ?" BUT YOU BELIEVE HE CREATED THEM ALREADY KNOWING THEY WOULD BE 'WICKED'. WHY BOTHER IF HE ALREADY KNEW THEY WOULD END UP IN HELL...AND THEY CANNOT ALL HAVE BEEN WICKED...crikey you are a monster for believing this stuff.

"As for the Canaanite . Man . you should read their wickdness they have done in LEV 18 . You know what they did ????? They sleep with beast !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

Another exclamation mark would have done it. And who were the Canaanites in your little fantasy story? They were cursed ancestors of a cursed Canaan. Cursed by the 'righteous' Noah because his father Ham saw Noah drunk and naked...what a wonderful story. The pathetic nature of this 'holy book' knows no bounds.

"The whole land could be infected with disease !!!!!"
Wow, more exclamation marks for dramatic effect! Its almost as if your mythical omni-everything God would have seen it coming and done something to avoid the cursed Canaanites suffering! He must have been doing a crossword or something.

"imagine if they mate with other tribe ??? they will be no human race now !!!!"

You really do love your exclamations dont you.

"man having sex with man .
whole land is a huge orgy !!!"
That you immediately equate men having sex with men as being a 'huge orgy' tells me more about your own hidden desires than it does about anything else. I imagine Ted Haggard was also really appauled by this thought until he realised it was denial.

!!!!!!exclamation mark!!!!!!!; July 17, 2009 1:59 AM
Andy Duchemin said...: Trophy of Grace said:

"Personally, I think atheists like you have a problem with God, because deep down your conscience is screaming at you that after your death you are accountable for all your actions in life. You’re at war with your Creator and something inside you knows it. I really believe that, because I was once on the wrong side of that war. There no peace when you’re an enemy of God."

Ah yes, the old Fruedian repression argument. I'm repressing my natural instinct to believe in God in order to give myself free licence to sin. All makes sence now!

I used the phrase "I know there is no God" as hyperbole. Of course I don't know 100%, but I also don't know 100% that JRR Tolkien wasn't under inspiration from the Arda to write Lord of the Rings.

Let's say for argument's sake that you're right and I am repressing my natural instinct to aknowlege God. Which God am I repressing? Your God, the Mormon God, Allah, Ahuru Mazda? I see the same ammount of compelling evidence for Allah as I do for Jesus, so I reject both.; July 17, 2009 2:50 AM
Rabbitpirate said...: Airaien said...
Once again Ray Comfort knocks one out of the ballpark. Atheist are left standing scatching their heads with a bullet hole in their foot where they shot themselves (again) On top of that God stands without a scratch.

Yes, because Ray agreeing with us that your God is an evil murderer really hurts our side of the argument.; July 17, 2009 4:10 AM
Rabbitpirate said...: stranger.strange.land said...
I have been observing the same thing, Ray. To quote mine myself: "The atheist banishes God to the realm of non-existence, only to occasionally resurrect Him for the purpose of beating Him up a bit."

Craig B

Ok this is a bit of an aside from the main topic but it does relate to something I have noticed a lot of Christians do.

Craig I am sorry to say that you clearly don't know what there term "quote mine" means. You have not quote mined yourself, you have "quoted" yourself and that is completely different.

When you quote someone you take a comment that someone said and present it in a way that puts forward the actually argument and point of view that the person was making.

When you quote mine someone you take something they said and twist it so that it appears they are supporting a position that in fact they do not support. This is a very dishonest tactic.

Hopefully you can understand the difference. One is a perfectly legitimate way of explaning someones point of view, the other is a very dishonest method of making it look like someone agrees with you when they don't.; July 17, 2009 4:49 AM
Rabbitpirate said...: Jinx McHue said...
I read a book from the local library a while back. It contained all sorts of violence, murder, genocide, rape, torture, etc., committed by people in their name of their god. I did not rail against the book, however. I did not condemn the events contained within. I did not yell at people about this god's and his people's actions. Why? Because the book was from the fiction section. None of the people or events in the book were real. I never believed for one moment that the story was real. I also didn't believe that the book asked readers to commit those acts of violence.

So why then do atheists rail against the Bible? They don't believe the people or events in the Bible are real. They don't believe God is real. They can try to argue that the Bible teaches Christians to commit the acts they are objecting to, but such arguments are based on either ignorance or dishonesty. (Those arguments also fail in the face of the fact that Christians aren't running around committing said acts willy-nilly.)

I just don't get it. Could the atheists here please explain why they rail so much against a book they equate to the fictional book I read?

Because YOU do believe it. Because YOU do follow a God that, Ray agrees, is described as a mass murderer. You think this God is a perfectly moral being. You think that a being that commits mass murder is moral.

We have a problem with the things YOU, someone we do believe exists, believes.

As Ray has confirmed that what atheists say about your God is true. He is a murderer.

YOU think this is ok.

YOU also make descisions based upon the belief that your God, a confirmed mass murderer, is good and moral.

YOU, and I mean Christians, try to change the law based on the belief that an agreed mass murderer is good and moral.

That is why we have a problem, not because we believe in your God, but because YOU DO.; July 17, 2009 5:11 AM
jonathan said...: @Bob

I know about population control and I know death is a mechanism of it. Taking a life before their expiration date is called murder. So God took all life during the flood right, I would like to state that the population back then would be no where near close to what it is now, so what was the need?. He murdered the individuals to satisfy his need (a need is human by the way), not for population control. Something that has really made me curious is if Noah and his family only survived the flood, how would we have the population that we do now, and why are we all not completely disfigured brothers and sisters?; July 17, 2009 5:42 AM
Amy2 said...: Rauol,

I believe the Bible when it says that all other idols are "demons". (1Cor. 10) Is there a demon out there specifically named "Allah"? I couldn't say, but since they have fooled so many people, the IDEA of Allah has to be acknowledged.

Now if you want to take that one step back to God, go right ahead. The Bible already has the Alpha and the Omega. Mohammed was a false prophet at the get go (not to mention depressed and probably mentally disturbed). Yes, I have read the Koran. He wasn't even a good plagarist (plus he violated God's command of not adding anything to His word).

Now if he had come back from the dead (although if I believed in reincarnation, I would have said that he already came back kinder and gentler as L. Ron Hubbard...) and a bunch of people came out of their graves at the same time, and 500 witnesses saw him, and the Scriptures had told me ahead of time he was coming, then I might give him a second look.; July 17, 2009 5:55 AM
Amy2 said...: MVP,

God did not create people wicked. He created them with a conscience to know right from wrong and to be able to choose right.

If Adam and Eve had obeyed God, we would be living in paradise today, because we would still have God's presence as they did. You are saying that God made them sin, and that is not true. He doesn't make you sin either, but you have.

God has ALWAYS provided man with a sinless path (His presence, then His law which the lead to Christ) and the FREE WILL to choose it.

Why is the topic never, "why don't we choose to do good?"; July 17, 2009 6:03 AM
Tom said...: To Michael L. Foley:

I am sure that you hold the sources of your reply quotes to me in great esteem. However, the suffer from the same misconceptions as you. God does not send people to Hell...

(Note to atheists seething to reply to the above statement. As you rail against Ray for stating evolution is everything created by nothing, despite your constant admonitions otherwise, your statements about God's sending people to Hell, despite Christians constantly telling you otherwise, is equally problematic.)

...people send themselves there. God has given you a way out, and you curse Him as evil.

Your friend,
Tom; July 17, 2009 6:18 AM
The False Convert said...: After all these years, it still amazes me when atheists have their own words turned back upon them, they actually appear to be appalled. Now that's a dilemna.

I'm sorry. What words have been turned back on whom? And who is appalled? That's a Christian state isn't it. I'm appalled by all these heathens... I don't know what a dilemna is, but a dilemma is something that most Christians live with 24 hours a day, unless they are graced with auditory hallucinations...

Do you honestly think you can judge G-d as a unjust murderer, then get away with it by proclaiming he is a fictional character and appear to be rational and logical? I sorry it don't work that way.

So. Why are you afraid of that little "o?" Are you terrified of that evil monkey that lives in your closet? This is no different.

I can get away with anything I can get away with. But that's beside the point. I see your fiction for what it is. BAD fiction and a big reason is because the characters are so freakishly unbelievable.

Then there's also the written history that shows that the morality you claim for your religion was their long before the alleged events in your myth took place.

BTW... You made me choke with joy when I heard you discussing something being logical or rational. How would you know if something was rational. You believe in zombies and magical beasts.

Yes it does work that way. Shame on you for being so horrid in your grammar.; July 17, 2009 6:34 AM
Alanrd67 said...: Iago said...
"Ray do you agree with your friend Ken Ham that the Earth is approx. 6000 years old ?"

Iago...do you believe that mutations via spider bites produce quickly or over long periods of time: Spider people (i.e. Spiderman) like your friends {of evolution}.

Seriously...Walt Disney and Marvel Comics have done lightning bolts and radioactive goo cause new traits or life...(who knows maybe Herbie can one day be real...without intelligent design.); July 17, 2009 6:41 AM
shunted said...: Lord Runolfr wrote:

J, are we agreed that the character, God, described in the Bible is a mass murderer? Then how can you be sure that what such a being considers "an eternity of bliss" will be blissful to YOU?

Besides, you're obviously not basing your actions on morality; you're basing them on pure self-interest. You're hoping for the carrot and terrified of the stick, regardless of the morality of the person supposedly holding them.

Well stated. What I hear from some of the Christians on this site is that without the fear of God they would be murdering, raping, thieving people. Their belief in God is to avoid the pain of Hell and, hopefully, to prevent themselves from becoming criminals. If there is a God can He be fooled by such transparent motives?; July 17, 2009 6:53 AM
Rabbitpirate said...: Tom said...

Therefore, in order to constitute murder, the person killed would necessarily have to be innocent.

Seriously? Do you seriously think it is impossible to murder someone if they are guilty of a crime? So if I snuck into the house of a killer who managed to escape imprisonment on a technicality and beat them about the head until they died that wouldn't be murder in your eyes because the person was guilty of a crime. You honestly think this would be fine because I killed a guilty person rather than an innocent person?

If you really believe that then I find that very disturbing.; July 17, 2009 6:56 AM
Rabbitpirate said...: Trophy of Grace said...
Lurker said...
So killing children is moral as long as God does it?

Yes. He gave them life, doesn't He have the right to take it back.

Ok let's just assume that God does exist and he did give us life. Does he have the right to take it back?

NO!

Sorry but I find the very idea that you would think it ok for someone to kill something just because that someone gave that something life sick.

Do you think parents should be able to kill their children because they gave them life? I bet you don't and yet you make an exception when it comes to the God you believe in.

Anyone who can justify murder and call it moral is sick and immoral as far as I am concerned.

It is people like you that I have a problem with, not the God that you believe in as I do not believe he exists.; July 17, 2009 7:04 AM
The False Convert said...: Is God Guilty of Murder?

God's not real, but in that horrid work of fiction you call the Bible, he is.

Regardless of any other argument you press, is God guilty of the murder of His Son, Jesus Christ?

I guess it would be more of a S/M suicide type thing. Since he sacrificed himself to himself to save the world from himself. Pretty sick fiction if you ask me.

When Jesus died on the cross to pay for your sins and make it possible for your life to have significance by living for Him, did He committ suicide?

Regardless of his validity, I never asked anyone to die for anything and I don't believe in sins. So regardless of what the story says he allegedly did, it was a monumental waste. A stupid story and a completely unbelievable premise.

Your comment about having significance by living for this mythical man is kind of twisted.

No matter how you chose to spin it, I thank God that He sent Jesus to die for my sins. I praise Jesus that He was obedient to His Father, even to the point of not doing anything to prevent His death, but even helped His enemies find reason to persuade Pilate to crucify Him.

This type of wasteful extravagance is one of the big turnoffs of the Christian fairy tale. And one of the best proofs that it is a man made fairy tale. A horribly written, inconsistent and highly immoral work of bad fiction.

I'm glad that Jesus not only died for me, but also lived as a role model. I'm grateful that God gave me the ministry of writing the Getting To Know Jesus Bible Study Series.

Ahhhhhh... Now we come down to the real reason you're here. Times are hard and you want to jumpstart your Jesus business. You are a seedy little charlatan, itching to expand your market. What a punk. At least the majority of crazies who come here think they believe. You are just a bottom feeder.

Jesus will change your life. Getting To Know Jesus is a complete non-denominational Bible study tool that will help you learn about every event in His life and apply it to your life today.

More proof that this is all man made. A perfect God would not need so many study guides to get through his so called inerrant word. It's always been about power over the stupid and money. Money is your God. What a punk.; July 17, 2009 7:10 AM
Rabbitpirate said...: hope to see you in heave really said...
One More time !!!!
God DID NOT ASK A RAPE VICTIM TO MARRY THE RAPIST .

Read KJV . All other vision are being corrupted by wicked man that have turn into the minister of God to corrupt the word of God !!!!

You keep saying this and every single time I ask you why you think the KJV is the most accurate version you tell me you don't know and will have to do more research.

Until you can prove that the KJV is the most accurate translation of the Bible then the fact that this version doesn't use the word rape and other versions do really doesn't do anything to support your argument.

The vast majority of the other versions of the Bible say rape. You have failed to show why we should not believe what they say but should believe the version that you claim supports your argument.

Tell me why I should trust the KJV over all other translations and then, and only then, will you have a leg to stand on in this argument.; July 17, 2009 7:15 AM
Patrick said...: Raoul Rhetis said... Now, do you believe that this Jew really believes in Allah? If he doesn't, then why would he talk about Allah as if he was real? Is Allah 'written on his heart'?

I can't speak for people of the Jewish faith, but as a Christian I certainly accept the existence of false deities. 2 Corinthians 11:14 states that Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light.

I reject Allah not because I am "atheistic" towards Islam but because I believe it to be a counterfeit of the real thing.

The "atheists just go one God further than theists" claim is a fallacy. We don't reject idols for the same reasons. Our rejection of other beliefs is grounded in Jesus' claim of exclusivity as per John 14:6.; July 17, 2009 7:32 AM
LivingAsOneFreed said...: I came into this thread late and with little time to read all the posts, so please forgive me if this has been asked before....

Besides making accusations against a God they don't believe in, aren't atheists (that make these accusations) also using, as evidence, a book that they claim is full of error, misleading eyewitness accounts and 'fairy tales'?

Wouldn't that be similar to accusing the woodsman in the story of 'Little Red Riding Hood' of animal cruelty, because he killed the 'Big Bad Wolf'?; July 17, 2009 7:49 AM
born a second time said...: Haha! I love it Ray!

The athiest knows that there is a God, otherwise why would they be so concerned about what He does?

It just takes one step from there to full repentence, can you put your pride aside and admit you're a sinner?

I hope so

NBH; July 17, 2009 7:49 AM
Tom said...: Context Rabbit. I was not talking in the abstract. If a person is rightly convicted of a Capital crime, and is sentenced to death (qualms about Capital punishment aside), the criminal is not murdered, he is killed.

Your friend,
Tom; July 17, 2009 8:02 AM
Raoul Rheits said...: Patrick:

"We don't reject idols for the same reasons."

So you actually believe in all any mythical creature as long as people put a name to it and worship it?; July 17, 2009 8:05 AM
Iago said...: Alanrd67 said...
Iago said...
"Ray do you agree with your friend Ken Ham that the Earth is approx. 6000 years old ?"

Iago...do you believe that mutations via spider bites produce quickly or over long periods of time: Spider people (i.e. Spiderman) like your friends {of evolution}.

Seriously...Walt Disney and Marvel Comics have done lightning bolts and radioactive goo cause new traits or life...(who knows maybe Herbie can one day be real...without intelligent design.)

endquote

Please show me one credible scientist that has stated that spider bites cause evolutionary changes.
You have given perhaps the most ridiculous response I have come across. Keep them coming, they are getting more and more amusing and I feel onfident that with time and a bit of effort you may actually be able to string together a coherent response.; July 17, 2009 8:07 AM
Raoul Rheits said...: Amy2 said:

"Is there a demon out there specifically named "Allah"? I couldn't say, but since they have fooled so many people, the IDEA of Allah has to be acknowledged."

Thanks for responding Amy. I don;t believe in 'demons', but I when you say the 'idea' of Allah has to be acknowledged, then you and I are coming from the same angle. Maybe now, with that example you will understand how it is that Ray's 'atheist's dilemma' is simply another strawman.

You see Amy, atheists acknowledge the 'idea' of your 'God' just as that Jew acknowledges the idea of a 'monster' called 'Allah'.

Interestingly enough, an Arabic Christian calls the God of the Bible 'Allah'.

Worth remembering when you guys are arguing about which is the 'real' one.; July 17, 2009 8:10 AM
Rabbitpirate said...: Amy2 said...
MVP,

God did not create people wicked. He created them with a conscience to know right from wrong and to be able to choose right.

If Adam and Eve had obeyed God, we would be living in paradise today, because we would still have God's presence as they did.

Er not to be picky but if God created Adam and Eve with "a conscience to know right from wrong" how come they had to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil before they realised they had done something wrong?; July 17, 2009 8:14 AM
felix said...: Iago said...
"Ray do you agree with your friend Ken Ham that the Earth is approx. 6000 years old ?"

Alanrd67 wrote:
Iago said...
"Ray do you agree with your friend Ken Ham that the Earth is approx. 6000 years old ?"

Iago...do you believe that mutations via spider bites produce quickly or over long periods of time: Spider people (i.e. Spiderman) like your friends {of evolution}.

Seriously...Walt Disney and Marvel Comics have done lightning bolts and radioactive goo cause new traits or life...(who knows maybe Herbie can one day be real...without intelligent design.)

Alan, thanks for putting the Biblical myths in proper context.; July 17, 2009 8:19 AM
Trophy of Grace said...: Rabbitpirate said...
Ok let's just assume that God does exist and he did give us life. Does he have the right to take it back?

NO!

Wrong!

He’s the Creator. He can do what ever he wants with His creations.
You have the right to destroy a picture you drew. You have a right to delete your comments. You made them, you can erase them.

Here’s why you got it wrong.
Do you think parents should be able to kill their children because they gave them life?

Parents are not the creator of children. God is their creator, and parents are the means for that creation. All human life originates with God. Think of it like a picture you draw. You’re pencil doesn’t have the right to destroy your pictures, nor the paper – only you have that right.
Parents are entrusted with the care and training of children but each human soul belongs to God. God is our owner. That’s why parents do not have the right to murder children at any stage of life.

Anyone who can justify murder and call it moral is sick and immoral as far as I am concerned.

But this brings me back to the question why? Why is murder immoral to you? Is it universally and absolutely immoral? It can’t be without God. All you have is an opinion that’s no more grounded than your favorite flavor of ice cream.; July 17, 2009 8:20 AM
Raoul Rheits said...: Bob asked:

"Hey jonathan, without death what would the world population be about now?"

Mindful that the question is asked of Jonathan, I hope he doesn't mind me responding on the same subject.

Bob, if there was no death, then we would be probably scrabbling underneath meters of insects and all manner of life forms.

I guess you thank 'the devil' or 'Adam and Eve' that this isn't the case...?

Or would a benevolent supernatural being magically cease living thing's ability to reproduce after a certain population level has been reached? I'm second guessing your response, it's hard not to..; July 17, 2009 8:27 AM
FoundSoul said...: I have come to terms with it this way:
God is not human. We are not God. We do not understand why He does what He does sometimes because we are looking at things from a perspective of the time, a concept that we have basically invented. He is looking at it from a perspective of Eternity, which is a concept that we will never as humans wrap our minds around. I think of it as the "big picture" and humans are naturally narrow minded, no matter how open minded we try to be. We have limitations, He does not. So as much as I do not like that babies have died as a result of His will, I do not feel that I am in a position to question why it was done as he is the good Father and knows what is best for us. I am looking forward to better understanding when my body dies and I get to see the "big picture" too.; July 17, 2009 8:28 AM
Trophy of Grace said...: Andy Duchemin said...
Let's say for argument's sake that you're right and I am repressing my natural instinct to aknowlege God. Which God am I repressing? Your God, the Mormon God, Allah, Ahuru Mazda? I see the same ammount of compelling evidence for Allah as I do for Jesus, so I reject both.

There is only One Creator. Just because you can give a lot of names that humans have made up to refer to something like God, and are invented to suit their own sin, doesn’t make the truth about God any less true. Allow me to show you why your argument doesn’t work. You’re at a drive thru and your coffee costs $3. You give the man a fake 3 dollar bill, he rejects it. You give him 3 dollars in monopoly money. Again rejected. You give him a piece of paper where you write down, “This is 3 dollars.” Sorry, no coffee for you. You would leave thinking, “There no such thing as $3.”; July 17, 2009 8:31 AM
Trophy of Grace said...: MVP went on a Ad hominem diatribe because he cannot answer any of my question.

This is how he argues.

I have never seen such ridiculous sociopathic self rightous insanity as that that comes from the keyboard of 'Trophy of Jesus'.

I think you may have missed a major step in your child development. A crucial part of you is missing and renders you unable to see your own hypocrisy, complete unempathy and downright psychotic self delusion. I REALLY hope you do not have children because it appears you are a very disturbed human being. I am quite surprised Ray allows you to indulge your psychosis (see: enabler) by allowing your posts on this blog. Barely a post os written by you that is not either covertly or overtly insane.

MVP did not make one argument or point about any of the questions I ask.

My guess is that he can’t make any arguments because he has none.; July 17, 2009 8:36 AM
shunted said...: Amy2 wrote:

If Adam and Eve had obeyed God, we would be living in paradise today, because we would still have God's presence as they did. You are saying that God made them sin, and that is not true. He doesn't make you sin either, but you have.

According to Christian theology there has been precisely one man who ever lived who did not sin. That one man was the incarnation of God in human form and thus was a bit different from the rest of us.

So here's the situation. Consider each adult person's life an experiment. There have been billions of experiments. In each experiment no person who wasn't also God has been able to live sin free. According to Christian theology no future adult person will live their life sin free.

In what reasonable way can living sin free be called a choice? Who don't have that ability to live sin free. If no one has ever demonstrated this ability and no ever will demonstrate this ability then what is the non-Biblical basis of saying that we do possess this ability? We can't choose to live sin free. It's not a choice.

we would be living in paradise today

It's a bit foolish to punish me for the sins of someone who lived thousands of years ago. It would make a lot more sense for each human to be born in their own private Garden of Eden and have their own private manufactured companion from their rib and then see who fails or doesn't fail the test of whether or not to eat a particular piece of fruit.

Me paying for Adam's sin is grotesquely evil. God is not just. Besides if eating that particular piece of fruit was so grievous to God then why did He put it there in the first place? If it was to test Adam and Eve then He it kind of implies He isn't omniscient. Unless He knew the outcome beforehand in which case He knew millions of His creation would be eternally punished in which case He is evil.; July 17, 2009 8:37 AM
Michael L. Foley said...: "...people send themselves there. God has given you a way out, and you curse Him as evil."

Scriptural evidence for this claim, please.

Are you saying that God's hand, love and salvation can be easily forced by us puny humans?; July 17, 2009 9:09 AM
Kevin4u2 said...: If a judge in Texas send a man to the electric chair, is the judge guilty of murder?; July 17, 2009 9:18 AM
BeamStalk said...: Trophy of Grace said,

Yes. He gave them life, doesn't He have the right to take it back. Doesn't He also have the power to return it again?

So you have no problem with a parent killing their child then, since they brought the child into the world they can take them out.

Might makes right. Woooo!!!; July 17, 2009 9:32 AM
Rabbitpirate said...: Tom said...
Context Rabbit. I was not talking in the abstract. If a person is rightly convicted of a Capital crime, and is sentenced to death (qualms about Capital punishment aside), the criminal is not murdered, he is killed.

Your friend,
Tom

Fair point, I must have misunderstood the point you were making. I think all the comments seem to blur together after a while. Thanks for correcting my misunderstanding.; July 17, 2009 10:12 AM
Rabbitpirate said...: Trophy of Grace said...

Anyone who can justify murder and call it moral is sick and immoral as far as I am concerned.

But this brings me back to the question why? Why is murder immoral to you? Is it universally and absolutely immoral? It can’t be without God. All you have is an opinion that’s no more grounded than your favorite flavor of ice cream.

Can you please answer a question for me. In your eyes is murder wrong because God says so OR does God say so because murder is wrong.

Those are two different things.

If murder is only wrong because God says it is wrong then your morality is just as subjective as you say mine is. If God decided that murder was no longer wrong then your morality would change.

However if God says it because murder is intrinsically wrong in of itself then that is a conclusion that mankind could come to on its own without God.

So which is it. Is murder intrinsically wrong or is it just wrong because God says so?; July 17, 2009 10:18 AM
Trophy of Grace said...: BeamStalk said...
Trophy of Grace said,

Yes. He gave them life, doesn't He have the right to take it back. Doesn't He also have the power to return it again?

So you have no problem with a parent killing their child then, since they brought the child into the world they can take them out.

Might makes right. Woooo!!!

I responded to this with someone else, here’s what I wrote.
Parents are not the creator of children. God is their creator, and parents are the means for that creation. All human life originates with God. Think of it like a picture you draw. You’re pencil doesn’t have the right to destroy your pictures, nor the paper – only you have that right.
Parents are entrusted with the care and training of children but each human soul belongs to God. God is our owner. That’s why parents do not have the right to murder children at any stage of life.
But here’s the question that I haven’t heard an atheist answer yet, If there’s no God then why is murder bad?; July 17, 2009 10:23 AM
Trophy of Grace said...: BeamStalk said...
Trophy of Grace said,

Yes. He gave them life, doesn't He have the right to take it back. Doesn't He also have the power to return it again?

So you have no problem with a parent killing their child then, since they brought the child into the world they can take them out.

Might makes right. Woooo!!!

I responded to this with someone else, here’s what I wrote.

Parents are not the creator of children. God is their creator, and parents are the means for that creation. All human life originates with God. Think of it like a picture you draw. You’re pencil doesn’t have the right to destroy your pictures, nor the paper – only you have that right.
Parents are entrusted with the care and training of children but each human soul belongs to God. God is our owner. That’s why parents do not have the right to murder children at any stage of life.
But here’s the question that I haven’t heard an atheist answer yet, If there’s no God then why is murder bad?; July 17, 2009 10:24 AM
Rabbitpirate said...: Trophy of Grace said...

He’s the Creator. He can do what ever he wants with His creations.
You have the right to destroy a picture you drew. You have a right to delete your comments. You made them, you can erase them.

Ok let's go with this for a moment. Let's say I create a wonderful amazing painting. I give this amazing painting to a young couple and they instantly fall in love with it. It becomes their most treasured posession.

Every day this couple looks at this painting and it fills them with joy. The simple fact they have this painting strengthens their relationship, gives them hope for the future and some how makes their world a better place.

After five years of them loving this painting and it having a tangible effect on every single action they take, I turn up at their house and destroy the painting completely.

After all I created the painting so, by your argument, I have the right to destroy it. No matter how this makes the couple feel, I created it, I can destroy it.

Do you agree with my right to do that?

Ok now think about God creating a new born child, by way of its parents, and gifting it to a young couple.

The couple love this child, it changes their lives, things are never the same again. It brings joy, hope and a new out look on the future.

And after five years God kills the child. After all he created it so he can destroy it.

And you think this is ok?

So there are my two questions. first is it ok for me to destroy the painting I created and secondly is it ok for God to destroy the life he created? If your answers differ then please explain why.; July 17, 2009 10:28 AM
Chris B said...: Topher of Grace: "Parents are not the creator of children. God is their creator, and parents are the means for that creation."

Soooo...God makes children himself...but he chooses to do it via the parents having sex?

That's kinda weird. And creepy.; July 17, 2009 10:28 AM
Chris B said...: Topher of Grace: "He’s the Creator. He can do what ever he wants with His creations.
You have the right to destroy a picture you drew. You have a right to delete your comments. You made them, you can erase them."

Have you ever played any of The Sims computer games? I bet you'd enjoy them.; July 17, 2009 10:30 AM
shunted said...: Trophy of Grace said:

He’s the Creator. He can do what ever he wants with His creations.
You have the right to destroy a picture you drew. You have a right to delete your comments. You made them, you can erase them.

Surely God is real He can do pretty much whatever He wants to. You are right in this. However, it's hard to further argue that God is just. That is what this whole post is about. The essence of this post can be stated as follows.

If God as described in the Bible is real then is He just?

The answer is definitely not by most people's standards. I know some will say we can't use human standards to judge God but saying that God is just is a judgement on God and so people who say this shouldn't claim that God is just. At most they should claim that He is consistent and logical.

I know you have previously said that you wish it were true that men who rape virgins had to marry their victims but most of us think this is horrifying. Ray thinks stoning a woman to death for adultery is horrifying and these are things that have been instituted by God according to the Bible. God is not just.; July 17, 2009 10:46 AM
Amy2 said...: Shunted,

Just like the stoning thing, you refuse to accept what you were told. You are not being punished for Adam's sins. (already said)

What was passed to the world through Adam's sin was PHYSICAL DEATH, not his sin. (See the book of Romans). Each person sins on their own after the law. (Please insert Steven commenting on the Sabbath HERE)

Ezekiel says, "The soul that sinneth it shall die." You are punished because you, YOU, broke God's law, unless of course you put your trust in the payment that was already made. When Christ's body (flesh) was crucified, our body (of sin) was crucified with Him. True Christians walk after the spirit after that, and not the flesh.

You CAN be free of sin, you just don't like the solution.

God is evil in YOUR eyes. You will never see anything else until you see the evil in yourself. (might want to start with blasphemy); July 17, 2009 10:48 AM
Michael L. Foley said...: "If a judge in Texas send a man to the electric chair, is the judge guilty of murder?"

That depends on a variety of factors, such as the crime in question, the Judge's biases, the Judge's own connection to the man, if any, etc.; July 17, 2009 10:49 AM
Alanrd67 said...: felix said... inresponse to this response.
{[Iago said...
"Ray do you agree with your friend Ken Ham that the Earth is approx. 6000 years old ?"

Alanrd67 wrote:
Iago said...
"Ray do you agree with your friend Ken Ham that the Earth is approx. 6000 years old ?"

Iago...do you believe that mutations via spider bites produce quickly or over long periods of time: Spider people (i.e. Spiderman) like your friends {of evolution}.

Seriously...Walt Disney and Marvel Comics have done lightning bolts and radioactive goo cause new traits or life...(who knows maybe Herbie can one day be real...without intelligent design.)}]

"Alan, thanks for putting the Biblical myths in proper context."

felix...RIF

reading is fundamental

Lightning...The Big Bang...Spontaneous Generation of all life as we know it...The Computer Wore Tennis Shoes.=Evolutionary Claims of increasing information.; July 17, 2009 10:59 AM
Rando said...: Kevin4u2 says;

If a judge in Texas send a man to the electric chair, is the judge guilty of murder?

Did the judge create the man knowing he would eventually send him to the electric chair?

You guys really need to stop trying to compare God to the US legal system. The analogies fail miserably.; July 17, 2009 11:06 AM
Tom said...: Michael L. Foley responded to Tom:

"'...people send themselves there. God has given you a way out, and you curse Him as evil.'

Scriptural evidence for this claim, please.

Are you saying that God's hand, love and salvation can be easily forced by us puny humans?"

Michael, as for scriptural evidence, I would suggest the entire Bible. However, if you are short on time, read Romans, it is the entire theme.

God's hand is never forced. He offered salvation to us. "God demonstrated His love for us in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." Romans 5:8.

"That whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved." Romans 10:13.

Your friend,
Tom; July 17, 2009 11:12 AM
Rando said...: Trophy of Grace said:

Rando said...
We are pointing them out to you, because we can't understand why you see nothing wrong with God flooding the entire world for disobeying orders that he knew were going to be disobeyed from the moment he created everything. That's illogically stupid.

Is it better to be logically stupid?

I notice you didn't try to defend the absurdity behind the position that God created everything with the foreknowledge that he was just going to destroy it all because people were not going to obey him. Really, why bother?

Like thinking, “Because I don’t understand God fully, can’t see him with my own limited eyes, and the Creation nor my conscience are enough to show that God is obvious, I’d rather just die and really really hope there isn’t a judgment or hell?"

That's not how I think. I don't believe in your God because I find the evidence for his existence incredibly uncompelling. I don't think he is there for you to understand in the first place, which is why there are so many disparate interpretations of him.

It has not been demonstrated that what we see around is in fact a "Creation" and my apparently God-given conscience finds problems with God's behavior in the Bible. So it is hardly as obvious as you would like to think it is.; July 17, 2009 11:17 AM
Patrick said...: Raoul Rhetis said... So you actually believe in all any mythical creature as long as people put a name to it and worship it?

Why not? Idols are just satanic sockpuppetry.; July 17, 2009 11:42 AM
Templar Ben said...: Trophy of Grace said,

some nonsense.

If I give my neighbor a dollar and then later steal a dollar from my neighbor, I committed a crime. It is still stealing. It doesn't matter that I gave it to him to begin with. That is why your analogy is flawed.

Combine that with your attitude that murder doesn't matter when God does it shows that you have an inability to empathize with the victim of that murder. That is a textbook definition of a psychopath.

I agree that in many ways it was an ad hominem to address your obvious danger to society instead of simply picking apart your poorly constructed analogy. I don't blame him though as in previous posts directed to me you have proven yourself to be a liar. You are a liar. It is as simple as that.

Since you are a proven liar people tend to discount anything you say. I trust you can understand why.; July 17, 2009 11:42 AM
Iago said...: Kevin4u2 said...
If a judge in Texas send a man to the electric chair, is the judge guilty of murder?
endquote

Here is the general procedure for Texas death penalty sentencing...

In Texas, the district courts have original jurisdiction for all criminal felony cases. If an individual is convicted of a capital felony, he or she may be subject to punishment by death, if the State sought such punishment. A capital felony is one in which an individual "intentionally or knowingly causes the death of an individual," under special circumstances. In particular, the:

murder of a public safety officer or firefighter in the line of duty
murder during the commission of specified felonies (kidnapping, burglary, robbery, aggravated rape, arson)
murder for remuneration
multiple murders
murder during prison escape
murder of a correctional officer
murder of a judge
murder by a state prison inmate who is serving a life sentence for any of five offenses; [or]
murder of an individual under six years of age1.
In Texas, a person must be of at least 18 years of age at the time of the crime to have the death penalty imposed upon him or her2.

After the verdict is rendered, if the defendant is found guilty, the case is automatically appealed to the Court of Criminal Appeals3.

If the prisoner loses in the Court of Criminal Appeals, he/she may then appeal the case to the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, and then finally to the United States Supreme Court.

As quoted from the Tarleton Law Library. It is not just one judge that sentences a person to death but multiple people and juries.

Simple answer is No a judge is not comitting murder. Nor a person on the jury who convicted the person that committed the crimes. Nor is the policeman the arrested him. Nor is the prosecutor who prosecuted the case and found the person guilty. Nor is the person that flips the switch that turns on the chair. Nor is the person(s) that assembled the chair. The person responsible for the person being up for the death penalty is the person that committed the crimes. And all of these people are real and can be seen. As opposed to some other magic sky daddy judge who is the figment of an over fevered imagination while it baked in the deserts of Judea.

And no I do not hate God. In order to hate something it has to actually exist. I hate the 'Real Christian' idea of God and the hateful philosophy it embodies.; July 17, 2009 12:17 PM
shunted said...: Amy2 wrote:

Just like the stoning thing, you refuse to accept what you were told. You are not being punished for Adam's sins. (already said)

I think you don't understand the story behind the fall of man. From Genesis 3:17-19

Because you have listened to the voice of your wife,
and have eaten of the tree about which I commanded you, You shall not eat of it",
cursed is the ground because of you;
in toil you shall eat of it all the days of your life; thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you;
and you shall eat the plants of the field.
By the sweat of your face you shall eat bread until you return to the ground,
for out of it you were taken; you are dust,
and to dust you shall return.

We are being punished because of what Adam and Eve did. Well, according to the Bible. There are lots of doctrines in the various sects of Christianity regarding the sinful nature of man.

From the Augsburg Confession:

It is also taught among us that since the fall of Adam all men who are born according to the course of nature are conceived and born in sin. That is, all men are full of evil lust and inclinations from their mothers’ wombs and are unable by nature to have true fear of God and true faith in God. Moreover, this inborn sickness and hereditary sin is truly sin and condemns to the eternal wrath of God all those who are not born again through Baptism and the Holy Spirit. Rejected in this connection are the Pelagians and others who deny that original sin is sin, for they hold that natural man is made righteous by his own powers, thus disparaging the sufferings and merit of Christ.

[Source Wikipedia]

We have a sinful nature according to most doctrines of Christianity. We are incapable of living a sin free life. There is no one who can live their entire life sin free according to most doctrines of Christianity. The fact that the Bible teaches that have fallen short of the glory of God ought to tell you that we are incapable of choosing to live our entire lives totally sin free.

Our sinful nature is a consequence of the Fall. We are suffering the consequences of the sins of Adam and Eve. This is evil. It is entirely foolish to give humans a sinful nature and then punish humans for following their nature.

I have no idea what you are talking about with regard to your statement about stoning. Ray was horrified by the stoning of a woman for adultery. This form of punishment for adultery is evil. It comes from God. Therefore God is not just.; July 17, 2009 12:34 PM
Michael L. Foley said...: Tom,

I've read the Bible. I used to be a Christian (yeah, I know, cue Ray's silly rant about how no-one ever "used" to be a Christian), including Romans.

The fact is, if God doesn't want to send people to Hell, then the fact that people are going to Hell means God's will is being thwarted.

His hand is being forced.

Either he wants to send us to your mythical torture chamber or he doesn't - and if he doesn't, and is still doing so, his hand is being forced. It is very simple.; July 17, 2009 12:36 PM
Kerri Love said...: This is just one reason I believe in God but not the bible... I don't believe he did anything that your bible says he does, I think men did those things and used God as a scapegoat so they could make him take all the blame.; July 17, 2009 12:43 PM
MVP said...: Trophy of Grace.

My point is that the fact that you have to ask why murder is bad makes you a psychopath.
Make a list of reasons why murder is bad. If your list only contains "because God says so" then you are a pyschopath and I am thankful you are a believer.
If your list contains more than that just cross "because God says so" off the list and you may be using the same list as us normal unpsychopathic folk.

WOuld you like to be murdered? If the answer is NO then I think you would call that a negative. Do you think other people want to be murdered? If the answer is NO then I think you could call that a negative. IE: Bad.

So...what reasons are in your list?
Please tell...here are some of my reasons that require no deity:

A) I have empathy for another human life (cos I am one)
B) Because the guilt of doing so would drive me insane
C) Because I wouldnt like it to be done to me
D) Because I am not a socio/psychopath
E) Because I (as much as is possible) control my emotions, they do not control me.
F) For ACTUAL REASONS, not because it is an arbitrary commandment authored by a character of which kills viciously, capriciously and constantly.

there are probably more reasons both selfish and selfless.

and your answer is...?; July 17, 2009 1:05 PM
Tom said...: Michael L. Foley responded to me:

"The fact is, if God doesn't want to send people to Hell, then the fact that people are going to Hell means God's will is being thwarted."

Michael, I can see the logic in that statement, but some facts are being omitted that need to be considered. As you note in your premise, Second Peter states that it is God's wish(not will)that none shall perish. However, the Bible, as you know, clearly states that God is just, holy, and cannot have sin in His presence. Therefore, God has given Himself as a perfect sacrifice in order that none shall perish. Being omniscient, God has foreknowledge as to who will accept the sacrifice of Jesus. As such, Jesus stated in John 6:37, "all that the Father gives to me will come to me, and all who come to me I will never drive away." God's will is not being thwarted. It is being fulfilled.

Your friend,
Tom; July 17, 2009 1:20 PM
Tom said...: Iago said:

"I hate the 'Real Christian' idea of God and the hateful philosophy it embodies."

Iago, I fail to see how the idea of unmerited love and the ability to dwell eternally in paradise with the creator of the universe, that is not performance based is hateful. I fail to see how a teaching that espouses that no man is more deserving than any other is hateful. Most importantly, I fail to see how a faith, based entirely on free choice, without coercion is hateful.
I suspect you'll answer with the judgment and Hell response. However, Christianity and Christians have not concocted Hell for those with whom they disagree. Regardless of your belief, Christians are merely stating what they believe to be a fact in order that you may avoid it. Hardly hateful. Every major religion except Biblical Christianity makes one earn their way to heaven. One can never know for sure if they were good enough. Fear will always follow.
Christians can have the assurance of knowing that salvation is theirs. They try and communicate this with you. Hardly hateful.
Tom; July 17, 2009 1:35 PM
felix said...: Alanrd67,
reading is good. Understanding what one reads is even better. :)
Iago accurately put down what Ken Ham believes. Not what Ken Ham's favorite comic book tells him this month, but what he thinks his Holy Scripture tells him. Ray said several times that he does not know what this age is.

Ken Ham also writes that not clearly stating this conclusion is detrimental to teaching Christianity.

That is why Iago's question is very legitimate.

Of course Ray has every right not to answer a fundamental question about his worldview. But then he also should not expect to be listened to when he claims that his worldview is a pointer to Cosmic Truth and essential to every human's life. Allegedly, the Christian worldview teaches that as many people as possible should learn about it and adopt it, for the sake of their immortal souls. So, Ray either doesn't care about this part, demonstrated by the fact he seemingly does not try to form an opinion, or he does not agree with Ken Ham that teaching the Biblical view of the age of Earth is Christian.; July 17, 2009 1:40 PM

«Oldest ‹Older 1 – 200 of 305 Newer› Newest»

"Atheism is so senseless." Sir Isaac Newton

Thursday, July 16, 2009

Is God Guilty of Murder?

305 comments:

WHEN IS YOUR APPOINTMENT?

Previous Posts

Were you once a Christian? Listen to this to see your problem...

Recent Videos

Receive Ray's Blog by Email

Receive Ray's Blog by Reader

Add Ray's Blog to Your Website

Great Links

Put a Banner for Ray's "Comfort Food" Blog on Your Website