Is God always justified in his actions?

[nobspeople]

Of course this is based on personal opinion (some of you may not like that), but is all of God's more 'negative' decisions made in the bible justified? I'm sure all Christians would say YES, while non-Christians may be mixed in their responses.

For those that say YES, God's more 'negative' actions (drowning most of the life on the planet, drowning Pharoah and his army when they crossed after Moses (God likes to drown, it seems - weird), killing of Egypt's first born, allowing Job to be tortured to prove a point when he already knew how faithful he was, etc), are you saying YES because he is God and can do no wrong (in other words, you question his motives based on your understanding but stand behind him nonetheless) or do you believe, 100%, he was right in his actions?
Can you provide reference as to why and how he was 100% justified?

[JehovahsWitness]

I already did.

No you did not. That is untrue; if you insist simply provide the link "again". Why do you not do so?

Of course I did. A simple review will reveal the fact that this is true. Where do we turn to to answer the question you continually ignore? Is the bible holy or is it not?


Tcg

That is untrue . A simple review will reveal the fact that this is untrue. Your continued refusal to simply provide a link where I made the claim that the bible is holy indicates that you cannot support this assertion.

I simply used the term to identify the book - as a TITLE - not as a description of its contents

I have stated this on MULTIPLE occasions and not ONCE in this exchange have you even yet acknowledge my claim to have used the term holy as a title, would you please do so now? why not?

Will you acknowledge in writing that I made the claim above? I ask because you have consistently ignored my statement that I used the term as a title (commonly attributed coloquialsm).

If there was ever any confusion I have catagorically clarified with this statement what I meant. Unless you are suggesting I am lying (in saying used the term holy as a title), the matter would be settled by acknowledgjng my statement.

Why have you at no point during this exchange acknowledged my statement that I used the term as a title?



JW

[Tcg]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #72]

So, is the bible holy or is it not? It's not a complex question. There are in fact only two answers to the question:

Yes, the bible is holy.

No, the bible isn't holy.

If one can't address this simple question, why should this ancient book be considered the standard by which modern humans should adopt their morality?


Tcg

[brunumb]

Much better to get a read on standards from decent fellow human beings ..

Much better to get a read on standards from the holy bible.
JW

Shouldn't that be Holy Bible if you are referring to the title of the book?

[JehovahsWitness]

So, is the bible holy or is it not?

Avoidance. That is not what under discussion. The issue was in what way did I use the expression "holy bible". You said ...

....you can't support your claim that the bible is holy.


Tcg

This doesn't support your claim that the bible is holy. ....


Tcg

I responded "I made no such claim" and clarified as follows...

I simply used the term to identify the book - as a TITLE - not as a description of its contents

At no time have you even acknowledge the post above. You avoid the simple statement accompanied by there links as proof of what was said. Why is it you have at no point even acknowledged that I did indeed say the above?

[nobspeople]

[Replying to Purple Knight in post #7]

The most moral people are moral by definition, and anything they do will be right and justified, while evil people are evil and will never be able to overcome their innate malicious motives.

True. But this 'definition' can change over time, change by culture and by knowledge. Not to mention that morality can change from person to person. But I agree - those who think they're good can justify anything they do. Just like God. Which seems, to me at least, one piece of evidence that the Christian god is a human invention and not an actual thing.

He is trying to selfishly make himself good for the benefit of himself, because he wants to be good.

Pretty much. Just like Christians are trying to do what God tells them because they 'want to make it to heaven' even without understanding what heaven truly is (how many people can grasp eternity? None).

[nobspeople]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #10]

Knowing how faithful someone is does not mean necessarily mean we know how faithful that person will be in the future.

Of course. But God does. Or it's not all knowing.

God expressed his confidence in Job but there is nothing in the text that confirms God knew for certain of Job's continued integrity under test.

Is there any biblical text in the entire bible describing God as all knowing? If so, that's enough to invalidate your point. If there's nothing showing God is all knowing, well, he's pretty much worthless as a deity IMO.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #10]

Knowing how faithful someone is does not mean necessarily mean we know how faithful that person will be in the future.

Of course. But God does. Or it's not all knowing.

God expressed his confidence in Job but there is nothing in the text that confirms God knew for certain of Job's continued integrity under test.

Is there any biblical text in the entire bible describing God as all knowing? If so, that's enough to invalidate your point.

No it would not.



JW

[nobspeople]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #10]

Knowing how faithful someone is does not mean necessarily mean we know how faithful that person will be in the future.

Of course. But God does. Or it's not all knowing.

God expressed his confidence in Job but there is nothing in the text that confirms God knew for certain of Job's continued integrity under test.

Is there any biblical text in the entire bible describing God as all knowing? If so, that's enough to invalidate your point.

No it would not.



JW

Is that an opinion of biblically provided fact?

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #10]

Knowing how faithful someone is does not mean necessarily mean we know how faithful that person will be in the future.

Of course. But God does. Or it's not all knowing.

God expressed his confidence in Job but there is nothing in the text that confirms God knew for certain of Job's continued integrity under test.

Is there any biblical text in the entire bible describing God as all knowing? If so, that's enough to invalidate your point.

No it would not.



JW

Is that an opinion of biblically provided fact?

What is "biblically provided fact"?





JW

[nobspeople]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #10]

Knowing how faithful someone is does not mean necessarily mean we know how faithful that person will be in the future.

Of course. But God does. Or it's not all knowing.

God expressed his confidence in Job but there is nothing in the text that confirms God knew for certain of Job's continued integrity under test.

Is there any biblical text in the entire bible describing God as all knowing? If so, that's enough to invalidate your point.

No it would not.



JW

Is that an opinion of biblically provided fact?

What is "biblically provided fact"?





JW

You're good at providing scriptures to prove your point, as we all know. That, to me, is a biblically provided fact. Can you provide scriptures showing God is 'all knowing' or not? Which means more than 'No it is not'

1 John 3:20, for example