Does God have unrealistic expectations?

[Justin108]

Christians often claim that we all deserve death / hell because we are sinners. It is because of our being sinners that we need to accept Jesus and ask for his forgiveness.

Christians also often claim that we are all indeed sinners. If this is the case, if literally every single one of us is a sinner, does it mean that to be sin-free is virtually impossible? If it is impossible for our species to not sin, why does God punish us with death / hell if we give in to what is apparently impossible to resist?

Furthermore, if we all sin, doesn't that suggest that sinning is part of our very nature? If it is part of our nature, does this not in turn suggest that God (having made us and all) created this nature, thereby designing us to be sinners? If so, it's even more unrealistic to expect us to behave in contrast to our nature, and then punishing us with death / hell

[Hawkins]

There was no such person as Adam and Eve!

You mean that there's time machine in your dispatch for you to go back to history to verify to draw this conclusion.

If not, don't throw out nonsense.

[beeswax]

Just take a few minutes to study human evolution by a multitude of world experts. If then, you say its nonsense, then its your choice. None of them agree with Genesis though. There is a time machine and they will show you how it works.

[ttruscott]

Christians often claim that we all deserve death / hell because we are sinners. It is because of our being sinners that we need to accept Jesus and ask for his forgiveness.

Christians also often claim that we are all indeed sinners. If this is the case, if literally every single one of us is a sinner, does it mean that to be sin-free is virtually impossible? If it is impossible for our species to not sin, why does God punish us with death / hell if we give in to what is apparently impossible to resist?

Furthermore, if we all sin, doesn't that suggest that sinning is part of our very nature? If it is part of our nature, does this not in turn suggest that God (having made us and all) created this nature, thereby designing us to be sinners? If so, it's even more unrealistic to expect us to behave in contrast to our nature, and then punishing us with death / hell

I find most of this to be an agreeable summation of Christian reality...but not all. Yes, being sin free is actually impossible for humans without the grace of GOD. Yes, sin is part of our human nature.

NO HE DID NOT CREATE us this way with this nature because such a doctrine flies in the face of HIM creating us to join HIM in a true free will marriage. Free will is destroyed by sin so all our sin is self chosen, not a part of our creation. Only those who have chosen by their free will before the foundation of the world to be sinful in HIS sight are sent to live on the earth, that is, only sinners are born on earth so that is why all humans have a sinful nature and are born sinful, and not because of any blasphemy about HIM creating us this way in Adam.

Why would HE create HIS future bride as evil, the most sickening creatures in all of created reality? It is impossible to think that HE needed for some reason to make us evil so HE could later save everyone from the suffering we have been causing everyone. The angels are elect and have a free will but they are never born here to suffer a human life...why not if that is the way to get to heaven? Why are they already there?

HE did NOT give us the law so we could be perfected by it but to prove to us we were sinners by our inability to keep it no matter how much we wanted to. Then when we become convinced we are sinners in need of redemption, HE can turn us toward repentance and Christ.

No one who can be saved is not saved.
Only those guilty of eternal sin will not be saved.

[ttruscott]

...

If thoughtfully examined, the god of the Bible is one contradictory and inscrutable entity who defies logic. Taken as a whole, neither he nor the theology surrounding him are rational.

I have taught the logic of YHWH's work here for years GIVEN THE CHRISTIAN PREMISES - have you missed it or rejected it? Nothing is logical if you dismiss the premises of the reality under discussion. In other words, it is not rational nor logical to dismiss the other part of reality, the spiritual things of reality, from the point of view that there are two realities, the physical and the spiritual.

Taken as a whole this blanket statement needs to be taken apart and explained...where is the irrationality GIVEN THE CHRISTIAN PREMISES? What is the proof that non-belief in spiritual things is based on a superior rationality and not an inferior perception of reality? Are you one who claims that premises are not proofs so their rationality cannot be accepted, sinking themselves with their own ideology?

[ttruscott]

...

If we humans are God's creations, and he knew us in the womb, then he in his omniscience knew he was gestating a sinner who would 'choose' Hell rather than be with him. Why even create such a doomed human?

...

YES!!!

Even though I reject our conception as human as the time of our creation but insist we were created looooong before the creation of the physical universe in the spiritual world, this question still carries much weight with me.

In contrast to the two mainstream Protestant sects and the Roman Church who all accept that GOD created everyone to be sinners in Adam from which they need to be saved but some end in hell, I reject this doctrine as a false interpretation of the Bible just for the logic you express here!!! The GOD who is Love would never create a sinner knowing HE would end in hell...the thought is almost as ludicrous as accepting that creating sinners knowing their end in hell is the loving way HE does things - double-think at its best. The bible say HE wants everyone to be saved and the best way to do that is to not create those HE knows will never accept HIM or HIS Son. Since people do end in hell, this reason for people ending in hell by their creation is foolish.

My denial of this doctrine is one of the pillars of logic that have brought me to my understanding that we became sinners earlier and elsewhere than on earth and are sent here already sinners to work out our choices from our past.

[1213]

...Furthermore, if we all sin, doesn't that suggest that sinning is part of our very nature? ...

When Jesus heard it, he said to them, "Those who are healthy have no need for a physician, but those who are sick do. But you go and learn what this means: 'I desire mercy, and not sacrifice,' for I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance."
Matt. 9:12-13

On basis of that, maybe all are not sinners.

[ttruscott]

...

He has never spoken to any human being no matter what others say. Ditto Jesus.

...

Such a dogmatic assertion surely needs to be supported by proof, eh? Provide or rescind as they say...

[OnceConvinced]

I will also note that it seems that Gods expectations are entirely realistic. He tells us what is good and right but has false expectation that we, in our current condition, can always do what is good. So he has provided a means of salvation that is not based on our ability do good but instead is based on His grace.

'
It seems to me that God has created us with disabilities and then expects us to function as though we don't have those disabilities and if not, then he's going to punish us for it. That doesn't seem very reasonable or realistic to me. Then supposedly, according to some humans he has come up with a system to help us, one that can't be shown to be real and that's supposed to solve the problem?

I'm surprised the people can't see how flawed this supposed system is.

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 3 by bjs]

Think of it this way: According to most non-theistic worldviews people have no soul. We are entirely physical creatures. As such our personalities and actions come from our biology and our upbringing. We cannot change these things. Our actions are mostly (entirely?) determined and there is nothing we can do about that.

Who really knows?

The debate rages. I think that free will might not exist, but that doesn't mean that I believe that I can't choose certain things or that I am completely predetermined to act just the way that I do. Free will is as hard to prove as determinism. I think I prefer some kind of compatibalism. It seems to make more sense than the other two extreme cases. In any case, we can't prove any of these hypotheses. Angels on the head of a pin, to me.

So expecting a person whose biology and upbringing have determined him to be a rapists to then not commit rape is asking the impossible.

Possibly. IF hard determinism is true. I seriously doubt that it is. People can change.

Should we therefore no longer punish rape with prison or other penalties? I would say not. Certain actions are either good or evil. Human capacity does not change right or wrong.

Stopping violent crime in some way doesn't have anything to do with free will. I think that in most cases, punishment is counter productive. But a society sure has the duty to protect itself from violence.

I will also note that it seems that Gods expectations are entirely realistic.

You note your opinion. It seems that God's expectations are entirely realistic, to you. I have an other, entirely different kind of an opinion, that I might want people to note. it seems that God's expectations might NOT be so entirely realistic. That's what I note.

So he has provided a means of salvation that is not based on our ability do good but instead is based on His grace.

So, I really don't get this. It doesn't MATTER if the Christian rapes or not. As long as God gives him grace, it's fine. Raping for Jesus or something. I have NO idea what that might imply.

IF I were a god, I'd say that if you rape, you are not going to my penthouse in the sky after you are dead. It spoils the partay.

If I were a god, I'd probably insist that the party goers were COOL dudes and dudettes, and not people who did bad things. That's the way that I roll. Oh and the angels don't play harp music, if you were wondering.

[Miles]

...

If thoughtfully examined, the god of the Bible is one contradictory and inscrutable entity who defies logic. Taken as a whole, neither he nor the theology surrounding him are rational.

I have taught the logic of YHWH's work here for years GIVEN THE CHRISTIAN PREMISES - have you missed it or rejected it?

I have indeed missed it.

Nothing is logical if you dismiss the premises of the reality under discussion. In other words, it is not rational nor logical to dismiss the other part of reality, the spiritual things of reality, from the point of view that there are two realities, the physical and the spiritual.

Okay. I'm assuming then that you believe Christian theology works on two levels, one spiritual and the other non-spiritual, and that while the two do commingle now and then, most often an issue of one doesn't translate well as an issue of the other. That about right? In any case, an example, and a pretty obvious one.

The god of Abraham is typically taken to be a god of love, goodness, justice, mercy, wisdom, and grace. And because of these characteristics and some other things, he's considered to be worthy of adoration, praise, worship, thanks, and love. YET, he is also a wrathful god, jealous, hateful, cruel, vengeful, intolerant, and inhumane. A god who has no compunctions about wiping out millions of innocent people because doesn't care to opt for more humane ways of resolving a problem.

While Christians will commonly admit god does have these less than admirable qualities, they are quickly forgotten in favor of his good qualities---hardly surprising, but hardly honest either. They acknowledge this contradictory nature of their god; a truly two-faced sort of fella, and it doesn't bother them. The inscrutable part is this Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde character. It simply isn't rational. It's like very bad fiction.

Taken as a whole this blanket statement needs to be taken apart and explained...where is the irrationality GIVEN THE CHRISTIAN PREMISES?

See the above.