The Character of God

[PaxRomana]

My question is for Christians, and has 3 parts:

#1-I consider myself a rational and compassionate person. How could I, in good conscience, follow a God who orders his people to do the following?:

“Thus says Yahweh of hosts: 'I have observed what Amalek did to Israel, how he opposed him when he went up from Egypt. So then, go and attack Amalek and utterly destroy all that is his! You must not spare him, but kill both man and woman, both child and nursing infant, both ox and sheep, both camel and donkey.'�
(1 Samuel 15:2-3 LEB)

(Similar episodes of divine genocide can be found in Gen: 6, Deut: 2, 3, 7, 13, 20 & Josh: 6, 10)


#2-If God commanded you to commit an atrocity, such as murdering 'nursing infants', as he commands the ancient Hebrews in the last passage, would you obey him, and would it change your perception of his character?


3-Finally, how do you reconcile this image of a wrathful & jealous God with the impression of God one might get from reading the following verses?:

“Dear friends, let us love one another, because love is from God, and everyone who loves has been fathered by God and knows God. The one who does not love does not know God, because God is love.
(1 John 4:7-8 LEB)

“Love is patient, love is kind, love is not jealous, it does not boast, it does not become conceited, it does not behave dishonorably, it is not selfish, it does not become angry, it does not keep a record of wrongs, it does not rejoice at unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth, bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.
(1 Corinthians 13:4-7 LEB)

[ttruscott]

Quoting ttruscott, post 20:

"Are you a denier of the doctrine that all are born in sin?"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

EJ responds: Yes, I deny the doctrine of original sin, which I call "inherited guilt". We are not "born in sin".
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Good, me too.

So are you calling anyone who disagrees with this doctrine of pre-existence determining suffering, idolaters?

Of course not. Only if they are sinning. All sinners are idolaters for that which they rebelled against GOD over.

I got a real problem with doctrines of reincarnation or pre-existence when those doctrines lead to the conclusion that everyone who suffers deserves their own suffering.

It can lead to indifference to suffering as supposedly being part of "God's will", and thus the by-stander is obliged to do nothing about it. Such indifference is contrary to everything Jesus taught.

...

Your problem seems to be with people who misuse the doctrine to deny Christ and HIS commands so as to stay in their sin...

May I remind you that every doctrine is perverted to satan's uses by Cain-ish pew warmers and tares in the church, not just PCE? Will you put your beliefs to public scrutiny as I have for the past 2 years and let us in on how satan perverts it?

Peace, Ted

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 31 by ttruscott]

Hey Ted, thanks for the clarification. Still not sure I understand your beliefs, but please pardon me if and to the degree I may have misunderstood.
-------------------------------------
"All sinners are idolaters for that which they rebelled against GOD over."
------------------------------
Elijah John responds:

One of my pet peeves is when folks call sins by the wrong name, like calling greed or gluttony "idolatry" Paul does this too. Religious educators do this when teaching the commandments, they generalize the concept of "idolatry" because very few people actually make idols nowadays and bow down before them. "Idolatry" is not a catch-all phrase to define all types of sin.
---------------------------------------

"May I remind you that every doctrine is perverted to satan's uses by Cain-ish pew warmers and tares in the church, not just PCE? Will you put your beliefs to public scrutiny as I have for the past 2 years and let us in on how satan perverts it?

Peace, Ted"
------------------------------------

EJ responds,

First, what is PCE?
Second, I HAVE put my beliefs out there, ever since I joined the forums back in October. Not sure what your point is in that regard.

[Choir Loft]

[Replying to post 24 by DanieltheDragon]

DanielTheDragon wrote:

"I got a real problem with doctrines of reincarnation or pre-existence when those doctrines lead to the conclusion that everyone who suffers deserves their own suffering.

Just an interesting note. This is the exact inverse of what I was talking about earlier. That all good is done through the will of god. Hopefully you can use this to gain your own insight.

I think this also falls in line with Karma as well. That if something bad happens in your life it is Karma for your behavior in a past life. Likewise you can also understand this by using the Golden rule. If something bad happens to you it is likely your fault for causing harm to another."

Consequence and behavior

The above quoted post reads vaguely like a five year old's excuse for doing something naughty - with a new coat of paint added to suggest an adult's excuse for the same thing.
At issue is responsibility vs. avoidance of guilt. In the real adult world you take your licks for what you do wrong.

The kid would say he stole from the cookie jar because 'everybody else was doing it'.
The adult attempts to avoid criminal prosecution because 'the devil made me do it' or because he was 40% wrong (the other 60% being society's fault).
It's the same rationale with a more elaborate excuse.
In both cases the underlying motive is to escape guilt and punishment.

In truth, however, consequence is a direct result of behavior and justice is the measure by which punishment is assigned.

When a guilty man stands before a judge he pays for his crime. That's a fact.
Disagree? Break the law and find out. I recommend against it, however.

Nobody goes free because of karma, the devil or because they were persuaded by the TV.
The devil never goes to jail because some two bit criminal breaks the law. (How would you arrest satan anyway?)
God doesn't get a gold star when you help an old lady cross the street. (He has stars of his own.)

The good a man does is its own reward.

If his actions are especially noteworthy his boss at work might reward him with a promotion or raise.
Society might reward him with ceremonial kudos. He might even garner a fortune because of his good judgment.
But God doesn't get the raise, God doesn't get the promotion and God doesn't cash the reward check.
Most of the time God doesn't even get passing credit for inspiring the deed in the first place (nobody ever named a street after Jesus Christ).

I think you're right about the Golden Rule, though. The rule is all about how people treat one another.
It has nothing at all to do with karma, tea leaves, or the alignment of the stars.

And sometimes bad things simply happen all by themselves.

But is all good done through the will of God? (How would you define Godly good anyway?)
The Bible says there's no such thing, therefore God has nothing to do with it.

and that's just me, hollering from the choir loft...

[Choir Loft]

[Replying to post 26 by Elijah John]

Well yes ones view would be different, However what offence you took to his theological point is what equal offence I took to yours and his for that matter. In other words, try this If all good that is done in the world is done through god that naturally leaves us as sinful in nature. Now Truescott includes a past life to this paradigm but none the less it is this that all evil done in the world is done through man. It is the Yang to your Yin. Both function on the same principle, that God is the source of all good. His carries out a portion of that theological stand point to show where suffering comes from if god is the source of all good.

I am merely being an objective 3rd party here. Both of your position are 2 sides of the same coin.

The views expressed stating that Yang and Yin are objective points are totally erroneous from a linguistic as well as philosophical point of view.

They are matters of opinion. There is no verifiable fact to support any of it. If there is, none is provided.

The statement might have been more correctly worded as 'subjective 3rd party'.

and that's just me, hollering from the choir loft...

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 34 by Choir Loft]

I was not talking to you and yes it is a matter of opinion. This is addressed to Elijha John as part of a prior conversation. It was something I noticed and I used other analogies to put perspective on a particular philosophy. Not to represent an analogous position.

And that's just me getting annoyed by some random dude hollering from a choir loft.

[otseng]

The above quoted post reads vaguely like a five year old's excuse for doing something naughty - with a new coat of paint added to suggest an adult's excuse for the same thing.

Moderator Warning


This would be considered an uncivil remark and would in violation of the rules.

Please review our Rules.

______________

Moderator warnings count as a strike against users. Additional violations in the future may warrant a final warning. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 34 by Choir Loft]

I was not talking to you and yes it is a matter of opinion. This is addressed to Elijha John as part of a prior conversation. It was something I noticed and I used other analogies to put perspective on a particular philosophy. Not to represent an analogous position.

And that's just me getting annoyed by some random dude hollering from a choir loft.

Well Dan, I would ask that you please do not confuse me with any who believe in "original sin" or "inherited guilt" or "fallen humankind" or anyone who thinks that human reason is "depraved," or "fallen". I am no Calvinist. I am no real fan of the apostle Paul,, either.

All I am saying is that ULTIMATELY I believe that all good comes from God. I have never once implied that you are "lost" because you do not share that belief with me. And my position of believing in the goodness of God and that of His goodness infusing His Creation is not the same as saying that mankind must be sinful by nature or even by comparison. I hope you see the difference.

(just for the record, I do acknowledge there is evil in the world too)

Also, I reject your suggestion that I am the other side of the coin from someone who believes in pre-existence, karma or reincarnation. I reject all that too, as I think it all too often may lead to indifference to human suffering, or the erroroneous belief that the innocent are not really innocent and deserve to suffer. I don't believe that and I don't think Jesus taught or believed that either.

[ttruscott]

[Replying to post 32 by Elijah John]

PCE refers to Pre-Conception Existence theology. My list of user groups sums my take on doctrine pretty well.

Peace, Ted

[Yahu]

[Replying to post 29 by DanieltheDragon]

You make a claim, I do not think it is very valid. Care to support your claim with scripture? After all the genocides in the bible occur AFTER the flood. The Nephilim were wiped out during the flood. So I don't buy it.

Yes, the first round of nephilim were wiped out by the flood BUT there are also four more angels that were bound at the Euphrates that are let out during the tribulation. Those four were bound at a separate event which is most likely at the tower of Babel event. They are the source of the post-flood nephilim, giants and mighty men, as well as the source of the pagan religions that spread from Babel.

The OT is riddled to references to those pagan religions if you know what to look for. That ancient paganism has been an area of study of mine for over 20 years. The high priestess of Ashtoreth I knew over 20 years ago openly admitted her 'goddess' was a daughter of one of those four angels and she was born after the flood. Both Nimrod and Sidon were her sons.

There are clues all over scripture if you actually study it. For example the 'field of Zophim' on Mt Pisgah where Balaam offered sacrifices on the high places of the Baalim is a good example. It is a reference to the goddess Asherah as the 'womb of the Watchers' as the mother of the post flood gods. She is the field were the tares were planted by the enemy.

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 37 by Elijah John

No I would not confuse you as a calvinist etc., I implore that I was merely suggesting that the inverse of all good comes from god is that all evil comes from man. I guess I did not articulate clearly enough that I understand you don't believe in the secondary statement but that the other position is the inverse of your own. So the same reservations you have with ttruscott's position's were the same I had with yours.

It was only for perspectives sake I didn't intend to get this so drawn out for that I apologize.

The Karma stuff was just an analogy not a statement of belief.