God's 'track record'

[nobspeople]

In another thread, a poster said the following:

Does that good track record, overall include eliminating war, hunger, corruption, injustice and suffering?

It made me wonder, how would god's track record rate?

Let's look at biblically supplied highlights (not in chronical order necessarily):
God created everything
Then it made man
Then mad was tempted by satan
This would mean god made satan and allowed satan to tempt man, knowing (if god's all knowing) that man would sin
Then god got mad and pouted like a spoiled child (editorializing a bit there but you get the jest) and made man to suffer through sin and ultimately die
God asks a guy to sacrifice his son, which he tries but then god sends an angel to stop it
God gets upset with a city and obliterates it from the planet
God gets upset with humanity and drowns all terrestrial life (including babies, women in the middle of child birth, animals (which have NOTHING to do with man's sin) and plants)
God THEN offers a sacrifice to sin as himself/son/self/son/self (the debate still lingers as to the specifics of this person)
This person lives a life to his early 30s
God allows a guy to betray himself/son/self/etc and allows history to see this guy as a traitor when, in all actuality, SOME guy had to do this in order to complete god's 'plan'
Then this god/man/god/man dies and raises from the dead
God allows mankind's history to be told in 'the bible', even though there are Es and Os which cause confusion for the remainder of humanity

Being that humanity is IMPERFECT and god (is said to be) PERFECT, we can't legitimately judge the two with the same measurement.
So let's judge god's 'track record':
or
or

How would YOU judge god's work?
How should god's work be judged?

[Veridican]

[Replying to nobspeople in post #1]

I encounter this all the time with atheists--or did when I used to debate atheists. The problem is not God's; the problem is your understanding of God. Because, if you knew who God was, you wouldn't be an atheist. You're only able to be an atheist because you conveniently leave out any real definition of God.

If you will allow yourself to imagine what God really is, then you won't have a problem. I think you have a problem with the classic Christian notion of God, and so do I.

God, being the monistic entity, is the only thing that really exists. Everything else is His dream--His lucid dream if you will. If He wants to crumple up the piece of sketch paper He's drawing on and start again, He can do that. If He wants to destroy an innocent human being or animal, He can do that. He's not under any moral law--He writes our moral law. He's not even under the truth or existence. He is existence for its own sake, and He is the author of truth.

The only appropriate response to God is to fear Him, worship Him, and bask in whatever grace and mercy He will show you. That fear, at some point, turns to love and adoration, and that is the religious experience of man.

Now, you will bristle at that. You will raise your fist with indignity and claim: I will never worship a god like that!

But what you don't get is that you really don't have any choice. It is that same God (you will not worship) that allows you to claim you will not worship Him. If He was not holding you in existence within His mind, you would just disappear as if you never were in the first place.

[1213]

...
God THEN offers a sacrifice to sin as himself/son/self/son/self ...

I think everything God does, is good, but that is not what God did. At least Bible doesn't say that God offered sacrifice. Because Jesus lived for us and died because of us, it can be said he sacrificed his life for us, similarly as we could say soldier sacrifice his life for his country by defending it. But Jesus was not sacrifice in the sense as animal sacrifices. If he would be, it was the Romans that killed him, but I don't think they killed him as a sacrifice for something.

[Difflugia]

animals (which have NOTHING to do with man's sin)

Are you sure about that? Have you read Exodus 20:15-16? If anyone gets seduced by a sexy, sexy cow or something and gets caught, the Israelites were supposed to kill the cow. I assume it's because nothing's worse than a homewrecking cow and you know that if they did it once, they'll do it again. All we know about the Flood is that people were only thinking evil thoughts, but God didn't inspire Moses to tell us exactly what form that evil took. Maybe the evil thoughts were how they'd all like to get with that fine-looking donkey and her camel friend over there.

[Veridican]

animals (which have NOTHING to do with man's sin)

Are you sure about that? Have you read Exodus 20:15-16? If anyone gets seduced by a sexy, sexy cow or something and gets caught, the Israelites were supposed to kill the cow. I assume it's because nothing's worse than a homewrecking cow and you know that if they did it once, they'll do it again. All we know about the Flood is that people were only thinking evil thoughts, but God didn't inspire Moses to tell us exactly what form that evil took. Maybe the evil thoughts were how they'd all like to get with that fine-looking donkey and her camel friend over there.

There's a cow on every corner when you're trying to get home.

[Difflugia]

You're only able to be an atheist because you conveniently leave out any real definition of God.

...

Now, you will bristle at that. You will raise your fist with indignity and claim: I will never worship a god like that!

I'm starting to think that you might be projecting a bit. When I was a Christian, theodicy was never one of my problems. If it's meaningful to say that God and we are (or even can be) eternal and God is omnipotent, then perhaps suffering in this life is somehow important to living eternally. Since we are not eternal, it's beyond our ken to know that mortal suffering is evil in the overall scheme.

The problem is with the definition that you mentioned. It's not that I "leave out any real definition of God," but that none of those definitions make any sense or comport in any way with our experience of reality. It doesn't matter where one starts with the definition. The Bible paints an absurd picture of God and nothing about reality independently points to the existence of any god. Trying to define gods is what makes clear their absurdity. The only ones that aren't outright contradictory are tautologies of some sort, too vague to be meaningful, or both ("He is existence for its own sake...").

"God is love" is meaningless. "God created everything 6000 years ago" is wrong. I've yet to see a definition of God outside that continuum.

[TRANSPONDER]

Indeed. This is why I am willing to go pretty near a positive claim of denial 'If there is a god - it can't be that one'.
I know all the excuses from 'That's all man's fault' to 'Ok, it's all God - so He can do as he likes'.
Both disgusting and reprehensible and not credible for a god that cares a damn for man, let alone any of the religions they invent. More likely we simply have a god made in Man's image, whether the violent atrocities of the people when they win to their whining 'How have we sinned?' when they get beaten, or the snivelling 'we are good moral people of Greek Pauline Christianity with the muttered snarls of 'you deniers will all burn in hell!' when their back in turned.

Religions can bring out the best in people but also the worst. And they can't all be true and for my money none are, including the Abrahamic religions and their spin -offs. I know - arguments are made for an over-arching Cosmic intelligent creator, and there are at least Gaps for God, so that That's a possibility, though I can't buy any argument for an intervening god. The excuses about it being Hamstrung by free will won't wash, and the logic is on the side of a world that looks like it works naturally probably does, and none of the ID apologetics or delusionary dot -joining of 'God works in my life' are good evidence, as I can find coincidences that I could have told myself were a god doing me favours. No - that is coincidences and believers seeing evidence that isn't really there, and of course that isn't a Cosmic Mind by a personal god, just maybe not religion but still (it seems) doing favours for those who Believe in it. Residual Christianity where belief in the religion has all but gone.

But back to active belief in the religion, whether fundamentalist including Genesis - literalism or a cafeteria - selection of the nice stuff and leaving The OT and Eternal torture on the side of your plate (1). No, despite the apparently reliable event recording of the Bible, neither records nor the God they supposedly tell us about look at all credible to me and Threats or warnings of God turning up and confounding me bother me no more than threats of Allah coming down and scowling at all the infidel Christian infidels bothers them.

Succinctly 'What if you're wrong' doesn't work and never really did.

(1) and it's hilarious that the Cafeteria - Christians day 'what's wrong in selecting the good stuff and dismissing the bad or at least unbelievable?' Nothing - unless one is doing it to cling to as much Faith as they can in a belief that does not deserve it.

[nobspeople]

animals (which have NOTHING to do with man's sin)

Are you sure about that? Have you read Exodus 20:15-16? If anyone gets seduced by a sexy, sexy cow or something and gets caught, the Israelites were supposed to kill the cow. I assume it's because nothing's worse than a homewrecking cow and you know that if they did it once, they'll do it again. All we know about the Flood is that people were only thinking evil thoughts, but God didn't inspire Moses to tell us exactly what form that evil took. Maybe the evil thoughts were how they'd all like to get with that fine-looking donkey and her camel friend over there.

It's not the cow's fault if some guys eye them for impure thoughts.
Then again, it wasn't the babies fault but god drowned them too, so maybe god's more consistent that it's getting credit for...?!?!

[nobspeople]

[Replying to nobspeople in post #1]

I encounter this all the time with atheists--or did when I used to debate atheists. The problem is not God's; the problem is your understanding of God. Because, if you knew who God was, you wouldn't be an atheist. You're only able to be an atheist because you conveniently leave out any real definition of God.

If you will allow yourself to imagine what God really is, then you won't have a problem. I think you have a problem with the classic Christian notion of God, and so do I.

God, being the monistic entity, is the only thing that really exists. Everything else is His dream--His lucid dream if you will. If He wants to crumple up the piece of sketch paper He's drawing on and start again, He can do that. If He wants to destroy an innocent human being or animal, He can do that. He's not under any moral law--He writes our moral law. He's not even under the truth or existence. He is existence for its own sake, and He is the author of truth.

The only appropriate response to God is to fear Him, worship Him, and bask in whatever grace and mercy He will show you. That fear, at some point, turns to love and adoration, and that is the religious experience of man.

Now, you will bristle at that. You will raise your fist with indignity and claim: I will never worship a god like that!

But what you don't get is that you really don't have any choice. It is that same God (you will not worship) that allows you to claim you will not worship Him. If He was not holding you in existence within His mind, you would just disappear as if you never were in the first place.

Ah the old 'it's not god's fault it's ours' even when people are imperfect and can't understand a perfect being in total. Sorry I don't buy it and many don't. It's not OUR fault WE can't understand something that created US, it's the creator's fault.
But you're right in thinking NO ONE can truly understand god. But that's not what this is about. It's about what you think of god's track record.

[Difflugia]

It's not the cow's fault if some guys eye them for impure thoughts.

I'm sure they dressed provocatively.