How do we know a sinner when we see one?

[Argenta]

A sinner is one who transgresses God’s law. But what is God’s law? Would any two Christians agree on exactly what this law is? Presumably, the Ten Commandments are included but what about the laws set out in Deuteronomy et al? Is wearing a garment made of two fibres a sin? Am I a sinner if I refuse to stone my unruly child? If we could agree what God’s law is we may be able to establish if all humans really are sinners.

Christianity teaches that all humans are sinners as a principle when in fact it is a question that admits of an empirical answer. Does Christianity say this because those who are free of sin do not need Jesus Christ?

If only the Ten Commandments are included it may be that some people are free of sin. The truth is we cannot know until we define god’s laws explicitly. Can we compile a comprehensive list of sins? And if we can, I wonder if anyone would truly wish to be sin-free?

Argenta

[mitty]

IF God exists, both those supernatural events are no big deal for God to do.

The bronze-age god wasn't too flash on knowing what Adam's son or great grandson. Cain/Cainan, had done to his brother though (Genesis 4:9), and similar uncertainties on other other occasions. Perhaps they were his days off after a hard night with the Achaean gods.

[mitty]

[quote="Adstar]

When you can present us with some verifiable evidence for real communication between the bronze-age god and us in the last 100 years, then I will start to take your postings seriously, otherwise Joshua and David just remain as unpunished criminals and the rest is just unverifiable theory.

I don't believe any such verifiable evidence exists. I am sure God would not allow that undeniable evidence to happen. You can take my postings any way you like. Your position is your prerogative.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

If this bronze-age god exists why wouldn't it "allow that undeniable evidence to happen". Afterall isn't that how this entity is described in the OT, as human-like who physically and verbally interacts with the biblical characters just like you and I can. If this god/human interaction actually happened then, it must also happen now for it to be believable. And I thought that's what this god wanted anyway, which is to be recognised as reality and not just something of our imaginations. But what you are saying is that the OT descriptions are wrong and that it's all just in the imagination of the reader of these bronze/iron-age writings, which are very similar to the style of Homer's writings about interactions between the Achaeans and their gods, and we no longer believe in those. If you are a seven year old you believe in the tooth fairy and Santa and that Harry Potter's world is real, that Tolkien's world is real. But as we get older, most of us can differentiate between reality and fantasy and between a theory and the proof of an hypothesis.

It's all just a theory.

[mitty]

Nothing said by the one quoting the bible shook me. I have read it all. God is Just. He is also a God of Wrath upon those who rebel against Him.

I grew up in church; I am no stranger to hell-fire preaching, or condemnation of homosexuality, or the conquests of Joshua, etc.

But for me, realizing the sheer amount of carnage and brutality within the sacred text made me take pause.

It is not a question of "How could a Just God call for the slaughter of children, etc." This is because I understand those histories and stories to be a reflection of the culture at that time. I see those instances of absolute brutality as something that provides insight into the minds which penned them -- specifically how they understood God, justice, and morality.

I do find divine genocides and murder of women and children to be appalling. I have absolutely no need to apologize for, ignore, or brush those passages aside. I have no reason at all to justify such bloodthirsty craven acts as God's will, just because such horrors are recorded within the sacred text.

The fact that such evils exist in the Bible -- and yes they were indeed evil -- solidifies my position that the idea of "a Just, loving God" and "God Breathed, infallible, inerrancy" are totally and completely irreconcilable. To make excuses for such barbaric acts is wrong. I don't do it because I have a the good sense to call evil out when I see it.

I find some of these replies quite perplexing and remind me of a gentleman who's regularly seen here in the Shepparton area, sometimes standing on his little box facing the traffic on the causeway between the two river towns with his bible held high as he preaches similar messages to the passing cars. One hopes that if such a person also protests outside an abortion clinic or at the gay mardi-gras that they're not armed. This type of thinking led to the inquisition, witch burning and supported the Jewish holocaust. Such people should seek appropriate professional counselling.

[JoeyKnothead]

How do we know a sinner when we see one?

They're doin' something I don't 'preciate.

I have yet to see a verifiable argument presented to support any one of, or two buses full of the proposed multitudes of gods having an opinion in the affairs of humankind.

I recommend thoroughly and with healthy skepticism should one approach the arguments of those who propose otherwise.

[Slopeshoulder]

How do we know a sinner when we see one?

They're doin' something I don't 'preciate.

I have yet to see a verifiable argument presented to support any one of, or two buses full of the proposed multitudes of gods having an opinion in the affairs of humankind.

I recommend thoroughly and with healthy skepticism should one approach the arguments of those who propose otherwise.

Fair enough.
Rather than to claim to know all about what a supposedly existing, personal and knowable god wants, demand, or finds pleasing, I suggest we look to the best of what our religions, philosophy, law, history, reason, and conscience suggests, and live accordingly. They seem to suggest that we ain't perfect, and would like to better much of the time. OK, check, move on.

It's weird, I saw the movie Luther, with Joe Feinnes, which was prety good. He's rolling around freaking out with guilt, and getting nearly epileptic about how he as a sinner can be justified before God (this is before he was relieved bu paul's letter to the romans). Whereas I could be enjoying something like the private horizontal comforts of a lass I met an hour or so ago and not feel an ounce of guilt, just joy and appreciation, before the same god. Different stroks, so to speak. My god is nice and seems to like me. Warts and all.

[Adstar]

Nothing said by the one quoting the bible shook me. I have read it all. God is Just. He is also a God of Wrath upon those who rebel against Him.

I grew up in church; I am no stranger to hell-fire preaching, or condemnation of homosexuality, or the conquests of Joshua, etc.

But for me, realizing the sheer amount of carnage and brutality within the sacred text made me take pause.

It is not a question of "How could a Just God call for the slaughter of children, etc." This is because I understand those histories and stories to be a reflection of the culture at that time. I see those instances of absolute brutality as something that provides insight into the minds which penned them -- specifically how they understood God, justice, and morality.

I do find divine genocides and murder of women and children to be appalling. I have absolutely no need to apologize for, ignore, or brush those passages aside. I have no reason at all to justify such bloodthirsty craven acts as God's will, just because such horrors are recorded within the sacred text.

The fact that such evils exist in the Bible -- and yes they were indeed evil -- solidifies my position that the idea of "a Just, loving God" and "God Breathed, infallible, inerrancy" are totally and completely irreconcilable. To make excuses for such barbaric acts is wrong. I don't do it because I have a the good sense to call evil out when I see it.

Yes you have used your own measure to judge God. As i said a smorgasboard christian. You disagree with Gods right to judge.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

[Adstar]

[quote="Adstar]

When you can present us with some verifiable evidence for real communication between the bronze-age god and us in the last 100 years, then I will start to take your postings seriously, otherwise Joshua and David just remain as unpunished criminals and the rest is just unverifiable theory.

I don't believe any such verifiable evidence exists. I am sure God would not allow that undeniable evidence to happen. You can take my postings any way you like. Your position is your prerogative.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

If this bronze-age god exists why wouldn't it "allow that undeniable evidence to happen". After all isn't that how this entity is described in the OT, as human-like who physically and verbally interacts with the biblical characters just like you and I can.

Of course He made himself known in an irrefutable way to them. But He was in the process of establishing His Message. Showing the world through the Jewish people His will. But once the Message is established, then the need for God to do miracles and give great signs ends.

There have been cases of God giving signs for His messengers when they first entered into a new territory or met new peoples for the very first time. But that was only to make the new people take notice of the Messengers Message.

If this god/human interaction actually happened then, it must also happen now for it to be believable.

I have had signs given to me but they are personal things that are unverifiable to the most part. And God does interact with His people through the Holy Spirit. But again anything other people may see can be put down to some other explanation.

And I thought that's what this god wanted anyway, which is to be recognised as reality and not just something of our imaginations.

I recognise Him as reality and many people are like me. It's got nothing to do with my imagination either. God is the ultimate reality for me.

But what you are saying is that the OT descriptions are wrong and that it's all just in the imagination of the reader of these bronze/iron-age writings, which are very similar to the style of Homer's writings about interactions between the Achaeans and their gods, and we no longer believe in those.

I think i have clarified this at the beginning of this reply.

If you are a seven year old you believe in the tooth fairy and Santa and that Harry Potter's world is real, that Tolkien's world is real. But as we get older, most of us can differentiate between reality and fantasy and between a theory and the proof of an hypothesis.

I think it is a shame that little kids believe in such things as santa, the tooth fairy and harry potter. I get the feeling that the forces that moved to make such beliefs happen in children are the same forces that seek to undermine belief in God.

It's all just a theory.

A theory that, like all theories should be tested. His message is there for people to test.



All Praise The Ancient Of Days

[Darias]

Yes you have used your own measure to judge God. [...] You disagree with Gods right to judge.

I don't disagree with God's right to judge. I just don't think God is involved in the genocide, rape, infanticide, and slaughter of children that the Old Testament attributes to Him. I don't think he actually ordered those murders.

It makes no sense to say that He did. If God is the epitome of love; if God is just, and God is unchanging -- how can He also be a coldblooded, bloodthirsty, child murderer, as depicted in the scriptures? That makes no sense.

Obviously, man attributed their conquests and their evil deeds to God, much like the Papacy claimed that the crusades were "God's will" during the Middle Ages.

To say that yes Indeed God ordered the murder and slaughter of children, rape of women, and the stoning of both -- is to say that they deserved it somehow. That's pretty cruel and there's no denying it. Children... being eaten alive by lions which God sent to devour them. How - how is that loving?

This is why my position is that of reason: Biblical inerrancy is a fantasy, a false doctrine which makes God out to be a bloodthirsty monster, instead of a God of love. God cannot be both.

This...

Let the little children come to me and do not hinder them, for to such belongs the kingdom of heaven.

... is incompatible with this:

This is what the LORD Almighty says: 'I will punish the Amalekites for what they did to Israel when they waylaid them as they came up from Egypt. Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.

Those children and infants defying our Lord God! They had it coming!

[mitty]

[quote="Adstar]

I think it is a shame that little kids believe in such things as santa, the tooth fairy and harry potter. I get the feeling that the forces that moved to make such beliefs happen in children are the same forces that seek to undermine belief in God.

Why not, they grow out of it and it's no more or less of a fantasy than a bronze-age god who apparently for a few thousand years communicated personally with the human population, but lo and behold, he doesn't now. Hmmm!!!!! Contrary to you, I'm quite happy to have little kids have their chidhood fantasies but I don't think they should be exposed to the theory of the bronze-age god until they are at least 12 years old, as we did with our chidren, and they are doing with theirs.

I recognise Him as reality and many people are like me. It's got nothing to do with my imagination either. God is the ultimate reality for me.

A theory that, like all theories should be tested. His message is there for people to test.

That's very much a small minority view, with fewer and fewer in the developed world genuinely accepting this unproved theory. The "message" is so full of contradictions and inconsistencies that it's no wonder you see almost empty churches often only attended by elderly women out of weekly habit. I'm sure we don't want to see the equivalent of Sharia Law though.

Unless one can physically sense this god, then it is just in one's imagination. If this god actually appears real, then it's perhaps time for the individual to seriously seek professional therapy.

[mitty]

[quote="Adstar]

All Praise The Ancient Of Days

If this bronze-age god exists why wouldn't it "allow that undeniable evidence to happen". After all isn't that how this entity is described in the OT, as human-like who physically and verbally interacts with the biblical characters just like you and I can.

Of course He made himself known in an irrefutable way to them. But He was in the process of establishing His Message. Showing the world through the Jewish people His will. But once the Message is established, then the need for God to do miracles and give great signs ends.

That sounds like a excellent bit it omniscient pontificatioin. Well done!!!! Perhaps it's time for him to resume that dialogue, with all those churches continuing to empty and empty and empty, or maybe he should go on a business course to see how to impress the punters and sell the message. Afterall, it's all about the dollars isn't it.