God and evil

[Learner]

...He doesn't fail, ....

That's easy to claim when he keeps destroying the evidence of his experiments gone awry.

I see. How would you get that sort of conclusion? Did you manage to see the gone awry experiments just before the evidence was destroyed?

If he just keeps killing everyone, maybe he'll get it right the next time...

Cheerful takes Camede's proposition in post # 33 which doesn't suggest experiments necessary:

We can take Carnede's proposition and apply to other things. God foresees the future. Thus God can never be surprised.

Perhaps you two can have your own private discussion and make some alterations between you. It would be interesting to hear.

Uh, read the bible. Adam, Eve, Sodom, Gamorrah, the Great Flood....you think killing those people and failing on original sin is an example of success??

Quite intriguing that you would expect such early "examples of success" at the point of Genesis. You should be looking at Revelation. Lots of other things written about, in-between the Beginning and the End.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

...He doesn't fail, ....

That's easy to claim when he keeps destroying the evidence of his experiments gone awry.

I see. How would you get that sort of conclusion? Did you manage to see the gone awry experiments just before the evidence was destroyed?

If he just keeps killing everyone, maybe he'll get it right the next time...

Cheerful takes Camede's proposition in post # 33 which doesn't suggest experiments necessary:

We can take Carnede's proposition and apply to other things. God foresees the future. Thus God can never be surprised.

Perhaps you two can have your own private discussion and make some alterations between you. It would be interesting to hear.

Uh, read the bible. Adam, Eve, Sodom, Gamorrah, the Great Flood....you think killing those people and failing on original sin is an example of success??

Quite intriguing that you would expect such early "examples of success" at the point of Genesis. You should be looking at Revelation. Lots of other things written about, in-between the Beginning and the End.

Why? Your claim was something about never failing. You expect people to have a lot of failures in the beginning and then get better and more refined with time as they get more experience anyway. So you might want to target the beginning initially.

If you want to look at the whole chronology, here it is:
"Aw shit, I left them there with the snake."
"Oops. Bad people, get out!"
"Aw shit. Cities of people engage in sin. That's it. I'm going to kill everyone. Except Noah and his clan. Oh yeah and two of each kind of animal where by kind I don't mean species. Everyone else, gets murdered!"
"Now I am going to name a special group of people. I will make them promises of land they can take from others."
Then later on, "Welp, that didn't work out. Here's my son that I made with a 15 year old virgin. Crucify him and then you can all be saved."
After that, "Oh shit. It's still not working. Well, it's just free will. That's the ticket! It works well with some people but not others."
And later on. "I'll be back motherfuckers. Revelation."

To call these things successful is to stretch the meaning of the word beyond recognition.

 

[DBT]

It's all a part of a Grand Plan, we are told.

 

[Rhea]

My question is if God is not himself subject to a standard that is objective and apart from himself how do you know you have not been deceived by a devil or demon and tricked into following a false standard?

My view as Christian may be a short and simple explanation (while my guest is making tea). I take from examples like the verse below, Matthew 7 : 15 -16 which in relation to the teaching of the gospels which is to be taught and spread through the prophets, preachers and teachers throughout the world etc.:

15 “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. 16 You will know them by their fruits.


What I find interesting is that not only do Christians point out false preaching done by other Christians who contradict the bible but also... I have seen atheists and Muslim's point them out too. There is a universal understanding to some extent at least when regarding Jesus, comparing many behavioral attributes of Christians that don't measure decently enough to the Christ-like image attributes. You will know them by their fruit.

Coinciding with the above verses not Christ-like - its through the false prophets who are to be watched :

1 John 4:1
4 Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world.

1 Timothy 4:1
Some Will Depart from the Faith
1 Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons,

1 Timothy 6: 3-5
3 If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; 4 He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, 5 Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.

In Christianity, an entity would have to prove who they're from, like fulfilling the promises made, consistently, having no influences causing conflictions with actions that goes against Jesus - maintaining or confessing Jesus is (their) Lord by the entity. There are various things Christians look out for, who also make videos to highlight them, like for example of profiteering etc .. basically you'll be able to notice, who actually benefits or gains (by their fruit) depending on the teaching of his or her particular doctrines.

If I were Satan, and my goal was to keep people from Yahweh, I would write a bible, and bring it to earth, and fill it with all sorts of contradictory stuff. I’s make prophesies that I would then act to get fulfilled to lend credence to my book. I would make the book vague and convoluted so that earnest people trying to think they are following god would have confusing instructions causing them to violate what god actually wants (I know god, remember, and the people don’t). Like love your neighbor, but half of them are abominations. And don’t kill, but drink the bitter water. And love thy father and mother, but hate them and leave them to follow the Jesus that I created to convince people that abusive atonement is necessary for sins they never committed.


And I’d set out various books at various times, like an old testament and later a new testament. And I’d write the book so that it would be nearly effortless for charletans and other minions of mine to decieve and get people to commit murders and inquisitions and genocide, because in my book, I wrote that *god did* and he liked his genocide - drowning babies and pregnant women because they were “bad”. I’d make you believe that about god.

And every time god tried to talk to someone, I’d point to a line in my bible that I wrote to deceive them. So that they’d run around trying to convert people to my us/them eternal war.

And I’d write in my book “look to their fruits,” but I’d make the fruits easy to misuse and easy to mistake. I’d write, “say your prayers in private” and also “go preach the word!”

I’d tell people that they should quote the book I wrote, and draw truths from it and try to make other people follow it - convoluted, contradictory, and against what Yahweh really wanted. Instead of just loving the earth and each other because that’s actually the only life Yahweh had to give you. And that’s how I win, as Satan, but taking from you the only life you have, in vapid pursuit of some “eternity”.


And you.
Would never.
Be able.
To tell for sure.
who.
wrote.
the bible.

And I would win. Because you’d believe it anyay, and do all the nasty things I told you to do that the real god actually hates. Like trying to get people to squander their life on earth thinking there’s a hell, and a heaven.

when there never
was one.

And then you die.

and I’d win.

 

[Rhea]

Because how can you actually tell that the bible is not the false prophet?

You can’t.

 

[Learner]

I meant in terms of those who ignore God's standards, even if God was present. For some, it would make no difference.

That's possible, but those "some" would constitute a minuscule number of complete idiots.

If God were to actually punish people for breaking His rules (as He is alleged to have done in the Biblical era), then His existence would be obvious, and His wrath unquestionable.

It was obvious and Gods wrath was unquestionable. Parts of scripture were warnings about this. That's the reason why they wrote about it for future followers.

Without a doubt, there are some people in even the most effective of surveillance regimes who will try to subvert the system; And some who will break even the most obviously sensible and reasonable rules.

But an all-knowing and all-powerful God could (without even touching my precious free will) remind me of His rules and the consequences of breaking them in real time, if He cared one iota about my actions.

It's a two way thing - you would have to meet Him part way etc. I mean... what does Jesus mean to you? If you heard of the Gospels, are you rejecting them because of your moral stance regarding the violent wars described in the Old Testament? Could you be looking for reasons not to believe or be opened to it, because Jesus conflicts with your way of life?

If I were about to (for example) risk my immortal soul by committing adultery, it would be pretty compelling to me if the clouds were to part, and a giant finger of admonishment emerge to wag in my face while a booming voice said "This is against my commandment; Think long and hard before you make this mistake!"

And yet, this kind of thing just stopped happening a couple of thousand years ago, because... er... when Jesus died for our sins that made everything different somehow. So does Jesus's bad weekend mean that God no longer cares if I commit adultery? Or does He no longer care if I burn in hell eternally for having done so? Or does He not understand that I am skeptical of the claims made by His followers and their books? Or is He happy with both the adultery and the subsequent punishment? What, indeed, is the benefit of an infinitely excessive punishment that occurs long after the crime, and is unknown (other than as unconvincing rumours) to anyone else who might be contemplating a similar crime?

The very reason Jesus gave his life up is because of those very things you say about sin in the above. It would simply be automatically, 'straight to jail' punishment, otherwise - no second chance ( forgiveness).

We know that if you want people to not commit crimes, the best option is to stop them before they act; And that a less effective option is to impose small and well publicised punishments immediately after their crimes; and that even less effective is to impose larger punishments but with longer times between the crime and its consequences. Massive punishments, long after the event, are now known and demonstrated to be by far the least effective way to reduce criminal activity.

Sounds quite civil. I can imagine God saying "I knew you'd have it in you, to understand this importance; how one should treat people" according to the crime. Jesus says we should be civil to each other, even... love our eneimies and pray for those who try to harm you.. Very civil even for the ancients don't you think?.

But God seems to have missed all the developments in criminology and psychology since the medieval era, and to have settled on the punishment model we know to be least effective - extreme and excessive punishment for even the most minor transgressions, imposed long after the offence, and in secret (with only easily dismissed rumours of the punishments ever reaching those who might also choose to commit the crime in future).

It seems to be you (and those who think that way) that's missed something. The differences between people of the ancient times.. who were born into a harsher environment than today - who were psychologically conditioned to those times of violence - whereas those born in the modern age environment - who are in comparison to the ancients living by biblical laws - being persecuted by the not so harsh "traffic laws" etc.. The laws of today would be quite feeble and petty to the ancients to ever consider them, being somewhat more of a nuisance, especially when the modern "gentler" aproach won't ever enforce them with very dangerous blood warring tribes.

Never mind "free will"; Whatever that is, the current legal system clearly doesn't prevent it from operating just the same way it would and did in an entirely anarchistic environment. And yet the supposedly all-powerful God can't even achieve something as limited in its effectiveness as our secular and human systems of law, crime, and punishment.

You can't act on empathy or compassion without 'free will' I'm afraid. To be judging without either, is an absurd proposition when it regards humanity!

Again with your analogeous comparison: "the secular and human systems of law etc. " By that logic you've demonstrated here - Do you think those warring, human/baby sacrificing nations/tribes of ancient times, would willingly take the seriousness the threat of consequences meted out by rebelling against these modern "gentler" rules, as people of today would willingly abide by?

If you park in a 'No Standing' zone, and block up peak hour traffic, then if it's a very brief transgression, not much will happen to you apart from some invective from passing motorists. If the offence is more prolonged, a local laws officer will turn up, and instruct you to move the vehicle. If he cannot find you, or you refuse, he might impose a financial penalty, proportional to the severity of the offence and its impact on other citizens. In the most severe cases, your car will likely be towed (the authorities will act to mitigate the damage you're doing, once they have tried and failed to persuade you to do so); And you will, within a specified fairly short time period, pay a fine to have it returned to you, or it will be permanently confiscated. This system is a sufficient deterrent that most people don't commit the offence, and the few who do are unlikely to commit it in its most severe form twice.

Traffic laws would be no threat, let alone being useful to people of biblical times. You'd need to be a tad tough to enforce them I would think. Oh yes God did - making laws for those tough minds in harsh times.

The punishments are public; Everyone knows what they are. And they are swift; Nobody is allowed to continue, unpunished and unmolested, with their offensive behaviour indefinitely, or even for very long. And they are proportionate; Nobody gets incarcerated for life with hard labour, for a mere traffic violation*.

Traffic violations via horses would be the norm in biblical times, if you know what I mean.

If God were sitting on the traffic laws committee for the city council, His solution would be very different. He would have the city authorities do absolutely nothing for an average of thirty or forty years, and then secretly and mysteriously kidnap the offender and subject them to eternal misery, while having a bunch of (frankly unconvincing) people spread rumours that this had probably occurred, and hint darkly at the possibility that it could happen to anyone. Meanwhile, every highway in the city would be choked with traffic, while preachers sermonised about the problem being due to homosexuality, and to a constitutional ban on posting the parking regulations in schools. Any call to introduce tow trucks to at least clear up the worst affected streets, would be dismissed as an unacceptable violation of the free will of the offenders.

Which of these do you think would be the most effective solution to traffic congestion in the city?

God would expect you to run your city accordingly, as per nation in the times they're living in. Its that simple.

Why, if you apparently feel God to be worthy of your respect (or even worship), do you make Him out to be so massively and completely incompetent that even a city council can develop a more effective way to influence people to do the right thing?

A city council of today couldn't protect you against the enemies of the Israelite. Totally two different scenarios.

*May not be applicable in North Korea, or for black people in some states of the USA.

*Not even applicable to the bible.

 

[Learner]

...He doesn't fail, ....

That's easy to claim when he keeps destroying the evidence of his experiments gone awry.

I see. How would you get that sort of conclusion? Did you manage to see the gone awry experiments just before the evidence was destroyed?

If he just keeps killing everyone, maybe he'll get it right the next time...

Cheerful takes Camede's proposition in post # 33 which doesn't suggest experiments necessary:

We can take Carnede's proposition and apply to other things. God foresees the future. Thus God can never be surprised.

Perhaps you two can have your own private discussion and make some alterations between you. It would be interesting to hear.

Uh, read the bible. Adam, Eve, Sodom, Gamorrah, the Great Flood....you think killing those people and failing on original sin is an example of success??

Quite intriguing that you would expect such early "examples of success" at the point of Genesis. You should be looking at Revelation. Lots of other things written about, in-between the Beginning and the End.

Why? Your claim was something about never failing. You expect people to have a lot of failures in the beginning and then get better and more refined with time as they get more experience anyway. So you might want to target the beginning initially.

Failings? Certainly not Gods. On the whole where man is concerned, these are baby steps in the realm of things. As I said. Revelation is the example of a success story.

If you want to look at the whole chronology, here it is:
"Aw shit, I left them there with the snake."
"Oops. Bad people, get out!"
"Aw shit. Cities of people engage in sin. That's it. I'm going to kill everyone. Except Noah and his clan. Oh yeah and two of each kind of animal where by kind I don't mean species. Everyone else, gets murdered!"
"Now I am going to name a special group of people. I will make them promises of land they can take from others."
Then later on, "Welp, that didn't work out. Here's my son that I made with a 15 year old virgin. Crucify him and then you can all be saved."
After that, "Oh shit. It's still not working. Well, it's just free will. That's the ticket! It works well with some people but not others."
And later on. "I'll be back motherfuckers. Revelation."

To call these things successful is to stretch the meaning of the word beyond recognition.

In your eyes only (and other atheists). You must know I don't ascribe to your anti-biblical view point because of course, I have my own viewpoint on the matter.

 

[Rhea]

If you heard of the Gospels, are you rejecting them because of your moral stance regarding the violent wars described in the Old Testament?

No. Rejecting them because they are relentlessly human and not divine and they seem, honestly, to be ridiculous, exaggerated, and kinda dumb.

Talking asses?
Zombies?
Angels and demons?
Pillars of salt?
Sun standing still?
A god of the whole universe talking to only one small subgroup of humanity?
The freaking ARK STORY? Seriously?
Atonement sacrifice?
Walking on water?
Turning water into wine?
Eating my body and drinking my blood?
The ever-freaking Revelations story?


It’s just too hard to swallow. It does not smack of divinity. It’s clearly not the work of a being that can write the DNA of the Tardigrade.

 

[Learner]

My question is if God is not himself subject to a standard that is objective and apart from himself how do you know you have not been deceived by a devil or demon and tricked into following a false standard?

My view as Christian may be a short and simple explanation (while my guest is making tea). I take from examples like the verse below, Matthew 7 : 15 -16 which in relation to the teaching of the gospels which is to be taught and spread through the prophets, preachers and teachers throughout the world etc.:

15 “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. 16 You will know them by their fruits.


What I find interesting is that not only do Christians point out false preaching done by other Christians who contradict the bible but also... I have seen atheists and Muslim's point them out too. There is a universal understanding to some extent at least when regarding Jesus, comparing many behavioral attributes of Christians that don't measure decently enough to the Christ-like image attributes. You will know them by their fruit.

Coinciding with the above verses not Christ-like - its through the false prophets who are to be watched :

1 John 4:1
4 Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world.

1 Timothy 4:1
Some Will Depart from the Faith
1 Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons,

1 Timothy 6: 3-5
3 If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; 4 He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, 5 Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.

In Christianity, an entity would have to prove who they're from, like fulfilling the promises made, consistently, having no influences causing conflictions with actions that goes against Jesus - maintaining or confessing Jesus is (their) Lord by the entity. There are various things Christians look out for, who also make videos to highlight them, like for example of profiteering etc .. basically you'll be able to notice, who actually benefits or gains (by their fruit) depending on the teaching of his or her particular doctrines.

If I were Satan, and my goal was to keep people from Yahweh, I would write a bible, and bring it to earth, and fill it with all sorts of contradictory stuff. I’s make prophesies that I would then act to get fulfilled to lend credence to my book. I would make the book vague and convoluted so that earnest people trying to think they are following god would have confusing instructions causing them to violate what god actually wants (I know god, remember, and the people don’t). Like love your neighbor, but half of them are abominations. And don’t kill, but drink the bitter water. And love thy father and mother, but hate them and leave them to follow the Jesus that I created to convince people that abusive atonement is necessary for sins they never committed.

That is an interesting idea (perhaps there's a movie in the works for this script). This would require the god in this story to be "non-omniscient" in order for satan to be that successful. Would that concept go down well? Hmm, 'go down' I think it will.

And I’d set out various books at various times, like an old testament and later a new testament. And I’d write the book so that it would be nearly effortless for charletans and other minions of mine to decieve and get people to commit murders and inquisitions and genocide, because in my book, I wrote that *god did* and he liked his genocide - drowning babies and pregnant women because they were “bad”. I’d make you believe that about god.

And every time god tried to talk to someone, I’d point to a line in my bible that I wrote to deceive them. So that they’d run around trying to convert people to my us/them eternal war.

And I’d write in my book “look to their fruits,” but I’d make the fruits easy to misuse and easy to mistake. I’d write, “say your prayers in private” and also “go preach the word!”

I’d tell people that they should quote the book I wrote, and draw truths from it and try to make other people follow it - convoluted, contradictory, and against what Yahweh really wanted. Instead of just loving the earth and each other because that’s actually the only life Yahweh had to give you. And that’s how I win, as Satan, but taking from you the only life you have, in vapid pursuit of some “eternity”.

The god in your fantasy doesn't sound like the "main creator" at all, and he seems quite oblivious to satans guile.

And you.
Would never.
Be able.
To tell for sure.
who.
wrote.
the bible.

And I would win. Because you’d believe it anyay, and do all the nasty things I told you to do that the real god actually hates. Like trying to get people to squander their life on earth thinking there’s a hell, and a heaven.

when there never
was one.

And then you die.

and I’d win.

So this would be your ideal concept for God and satan, ok. It could be almost as convincing as the gnostics distorted view of God and satan, with a bit of work.

 

[Learner]

Because how can you actually tell that the bible is not the false prophet?

You can’t.

There has to be others to counter the bible. So which alternatives do you consider as contenders?

 

[bilby]

I meant in terms of those who ignore God's standards, even if God was present. For some, it would make no difference.

That's possible, but those "some" would constitute a minuscule number of complete idiots.

If God were to actually punish people for breaking His rules (as He is alleged to have done in the Biblical era), then His existence would be obvious, and His wrath unquestionable.

It was obvious and Gods wrath was unquestionable.

Past tense. Not helpful today.

Parts of scripture were warnings about this. That's the reason why they wrote about it for future followers.

But for some reason, God didn't realise that people would be skeptical of the implausible stories of his wrath in a book full of implausible stories.

Without a doubt, there are some people in even the most effective of surveillance regimes who will try to subvert the system; And some who will break even the most obviously sensible and reasonable rules.

But an all-knowing and all-powerful God could (without even touching my precious free will) remind me of His rules and the consequences of breaking them in real time, if He cared one iota about my actions.

It's a two way thing - you would have to meet Him part way etc. I mean... what does Jesus mean to you?

He's a fictional character, like Sherlock Holmes or Albus Dumbledore or Superman.

If you heard of the Gospels, are you rejecting them because of your moral stance regarding the violent wars described in the Old Testament?

No, that would be bizarre and crazy.

I'm rejecting them because they're fiction.

Could you be looking for reasons not to believe or be opened to it, because Jesus conflicts with your way of life?

Again, no. Sherlock Holmes strikes me as a very intelligent and well intentioned individual, who I should have liked to meet. His approach to problem solving is highly effective (despite its apparent flaws), and certainly in no way conflicts with my own interest in evidence and logic based reasoning.

I don't, despite their absence of conflict with my way of life, believe the Sherlock Holmes stories though, because they're fiction.

If I were about to (for example) risk my immortal soul by committing adultery, it would be pretty compelling to me if the clouds were to part, and a giant finger of admonishment emerge to wag in my face while a booming voice said "This is against my commandment; Think long and hard before you make this mistake!"

And yet, this kind of thing just stopped happening a couple of thousand years ago, because... er... when Jesus died for our sins that made everything different somehow. So does Jesus's bad weekend mean that God no longer cares if I commit adultery? Or does He no longer care if I burn in hell eternally for having done so? Or does He not understand that I am skeptical of the claims made by His followers and their books? Or is He happy with both the adultery and the subsequent punishment? What, indeed, is the benefit of an infinitely excessive punishment that occurs long after the crime, and is unknown (other than as unconvincing rumours) to anyone else who might be contemplating a similar crime?

The very reason Jesus gave his life up is because of those very things you say about sin in the above.

How does Jesus giving up his life two thousand years ago have the slightest influence on anything that anyone does today? How does that work? It's nonsensical.

It would simply be automatically, 'straight to jail' punishment, otherwise - no second chance ( forgiveness).

That might have been a fully formed thought in your head, but what you've typed is an incoherent fragment, so I have no idea what you're trying to convey here.

We know that if you want people to not commit crimes, the best option is to stop them before they act; And that a less effective option is to impose small and well publicised punishments immediately after their crimes; and that even less effective is to impose larger punishments but with longer times between the crime and its consequences. Massive punishments, long after the event, are now known and demonstrated to be by far the least effective way to reduce criminal activity.

Sounds quite civil. I can imagine God saying "I knew you'd have it in you, to understand this importance; how one should treat people" according to the crime. Jesus says we should be civil to each other, even... love our eneimies and pray for those who try to harm you.. Very civil even for the ancients don't you think?.

Yes.

And?

But God seems to have missed all the developments in criminology and psychology since the medieval era, and to have settled on the punishment model we know to be least effective - extreme and excessive punishment for even the most minor transgressions, imposed long after the offence, and in secret (with only easily dismissed rumours of the punishments ever reaching those who might also choose to commit the crime in future).

It seems to be you (and those who think that way) that's missed something. The differences between people of the ancient times.. who were born into a harsher environment than today - who were psychologically conditioned to those times of violence - whereas those born in the modern age environment - who are in comparison to the ancients living by biblical laws - being persecuted by the not so harsh "traffic laws" etc.. The laws of today would be quite feeble and petty to the ancients to ever consider them, being somewhat more of a nuisance, especially when the modern "gentler" aproach won't ever enforce them with very dangerous blood warring tribes.

I think you're missing my point here. Harsh punishment was common in the past, because people expected (incorrectly) that it would reduce crime. We learned that it didn't, so we've largely stopped doing it. Life was harder in the past, but people were not really different at all.

Never mind "free will"; Whatever that is, the current legal system clearly doesn't prevent it from operating just the same way it would and did in an entirely anarchistic environment. And yet the supposedly all-powerful God can't even achieve something as limited in its effectiveness as our secular and human systems of law, crime, and punishment.

You can't act on empathy or compassion without 'free will' I'm afraid.

Sure you can. But that's completely irrelevant to the current discussion.

To be judging without either, is an absurd proposition when it regards humanity!

Your finding something "absurd" is not a demonstration that it's untrue.

Again with your analogeous comparison: "the secular and human systems of law etc. " By that logic you've demonstrated here - Do you think those warring, human/baby sacrificing nations/tribes of ancient times, would willingly take the seriousness the threat of consequences meted out by rebelling against these modern "gentler" rules, as people of today would willingly abide by?

Yes. Do you think they weren't humans just like us?

If you park in a 'No Standing' zone, and block up peak hour traffic, then if it's a very brief transgression, not much will happen to you apart from some invective from passing motorists. If the offence is more prolonged, a local laws officer will turn up, and instruct you to move the vehicle. If he cannot find you, or you refuse, he might impose a financial penalty, proportional to the severity of the offence and its impact on other citizens. In the most severe cases, your car will likely be towed (the authorities will act to mitigate the damage you're doing, once they have tried and failed to persuade you to do so); And you will, within a specified fairly short time period, pay a fine to have it returned to you, or it will be permanently confiscated. This system is a sufficient deterrent that most people don't commit the offence, and the few who do are unlikely to commit it in its most severe form twice.

Traffic laws would be no threat, let alone being useful to people of biblical times. You'd need to be a tad tough to enforce them I would think. Oh yes God did - making laws for those tough minds in harsh times.

It's an analogy.

The punishments are public; Everyone knows what they are. And they are swift; Nobody is allowed to continue, unpunished and unmolested, with their offensive behaviour indefinitely, or even for very long. And they are proportionate; Nobody gets incarcerated for life with hard labour, for a mere traffic violation*.

Traffic violations via horses would be the norm in biblical times, if you know what I mean.

You appear to mean "Learner has zero clue what an analogy is".

If God were sitting on the traffic laws committee for the city council, His solution would be very different. He would have the city authorities do absolutely nothing for an average of thirty or forty years, and then secretly and mysteriously kidnap the offender and subject them to eternal misery, while having a bunch of (frankly unconvincing) people spread rumours that this had probably occurred, and hint darkly at the possibility that it could happen to anyone. Meanwhile, every highway in the city would be choked with traffic, while preachers sermonised about the problem being due to homosexuality, and to a constitutional ban on posting the parking regulations in schools. Any call to introduce tow trucks to at least clear up the worst affected streets, would be dismissed as an unacceptable violation of the free will of the offenders.

Which of these do you think would be the most effective solution to traffic congestion in the city?

God would expect you to run your city accordingly, as per nation in the times they're living in. Its that simple.

So God is valueless and indistinguishable from non-existent, as far as law making is concerned. Got it.

Why, if you apparently feel God to be worthy of your respect (or even worship), do you make Him out to be so massively and completely incompetent that even a city council can develop a more effective way to influence people to do the right thing?

A city council of today couldn't protect you against the enemies of the Israelite. Totally two different scenarios.

FFS. You really don't know what an analogy is, do you?

 

[bilby]

Because how can you actually tell that the bible is not the false prophet?

You can’t.

There has to be others to counter the bible. So which alternatives do you consider as contenders?

Nobody needs care about any alternatives in order to ask: How can you actually tell that the bible is not the false prophet?

Alternatives are a distraction here. The question is simple.

How can you actually tell that the bible is not the false prophet?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Why? Your claim was something about never failing. You expect people to have a lot of failures in the beginning and then get better and more refined with time as they get more experience anyway. So you might want to target the beginning initially.

Failings? Certainly not Gods. On the whole where man is concerned, these are baby steps in the realm of things. As I said. Revelation is the example of a success story.

I wouldn't call the destruction and murder of 99.999% of life on the planet a baby step. It's a reset. A catastrophic, murderous reset.

If you want to look at the whole chronology, here it is:
"Aw shit, I left them there with the snake."
"Oops. Bad people, get out!"
"Aw shit. Cities of people engage in sin. That's it. I'm going to kill everyone. Except Noah and his clan. Oh yeah and two of each kind of animal where by kind I don't mean species. Everyone else, gets murdered!"
"Now I am going to name a special group of people. I will make them promises of land they can take from others."
Then later on, "Welp, that didn't work out. Here's my son that I made with a 15 year old virgin. Crucify him and then you can all be saved."
After that, "Oh shit. It's still not working. Well, it's just free will. That's the ticket! It works well with some people but not others."
And later on. "I'll be back motherfuckers. Revelation."

To call these things successful is to stretch the meaning of the word beyond recognition.

In your eyes only (and other atheists). You must know I don't ascribe to your anti-biblical view point because of course, I have my own viewpoint on the matter.

Here's the thing. It's not in the eyes of atheists only nor is it that I view these things this way because I am an atheist. It's the opposite. I am an atheist because religion, including Christianity doesn't make logical or moral sense, is contradictory and counterfactual. It isn't just atheists who realize this. Many Christians get so upset by what the bible actually says that they come up with ways around it, like "don't take it literally" or "well, if you go back and look at the hebrew word for blah it meant not blah. see?" or "i don't understand it either. that's because the lord works in mysterious ways."

These terrible failures boggle Christians' minds so much that they are willing to pay money to explain them away:

God inspired the Biblical author to record that He sent the flood, not because He did send it, but because it was such a terrible thing that happened in His creation and as a good God who watches over His creation, He takes responsibility for things that happen in His world, even though He Himself did not “do” it.

This is like re-translating Mein Kampf to say that Hitler was merely a good guy who was taking responsibility because he knew the Holocaust would happen on his watch.

But your version is worse--you have to break a few eggs to make an omelette, right? That's the kind of thing a devil or a demon would try to trick you into thinking is a success or a "baby step."

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Because how can you actually tell that the bible is not the false prophet?

You can’t.

There has to be others to counter the bible. So which alternatives do you consider as contenders?

Why must there be a counter to the bible? Why must a creator have a holy book? What if creation was the book?

 

[Rhea]

This would require the god in this story to be "non-omniscient" in order for satan to be that successful. Would that concept go down well? Hmm, 'go down' I think it will.

I mean - it already does, doesn’t it? Your religion has your god as non-omniscient?

You god couldn’t NOT create Satan, in your telling of it. He was unable to avoid letting evil into the world. Also can’t manage to get his message to everyone on his own and needs white-shirted missionaries to sail the seas on his behalf. Also needed to arrange to have a son in order for him to be murdered so that he could forgive. In your story Yahweh is already not-omniscient. And the story seems to have gone down okay with y’all.

The god in your fantasy doesn't sound like the "main creator" at all, and he seems quite oblivious to satans guile.

God works in mysterious ways.

Although, how is this any different from your version? You god is oblivious to satan in the actual garden of eden when he only has two humans to watch! Although Yahweh is certainly not oblivious when he has a little bet with Satan and invites Satan to murder all of Job’s family to see if he’ll break. I re-read that section recently, and it’s so horrible that I really have a terrible time picturing any of the “good Christians” not throwing up at it. But…. They still keep carrying around that book intact, so that perplexes me.

So this would be your ideal concept for God and satan, ok.

Good grief, no. That’s my concept off the cuff in 5 minutes. An “Ideal” concept would require years of living in a SoHo studio next to a train track and a collaboration with Quentin Tarantino.

 

[Rhea]

Because how can you actually tell that the bible is not the false prophet?

You can’t.

There has to be others to counter the bible. So which alternatives do you consider as contenders?

Oh, darling.

Nature.

There does not have to be another human-made (sneers with low expectation derision) ~book~ to counter Satan’s lies when Nature stands around you as the very testament to the God’s powers?


Here’s another scenario:

On love: turn to God’s Gospel chapter Penguins1:30 and read about the homosexual pairings of penguin male pairs raising eggs to chicks together in a mutual effort In a harsh environment.

On Justice: turn to God’s Gospel Chapter Elephants 3:12 and read about how the herd will shun someone for bad behavior to bring them back to good behavior.

On helping the poor: turn to God’s Gospel chapter Cats 89:120 (there is a lot of wisdom in the book of cats) to read about how a mother cat will nurse another cat’s kittens or even different species when there is a need, or Cats 46:3 to read how cats will bring you food when you don’t appear to know how to hunt for it.

On industry and hard work: turn to God’s Gospel chapter Galaxy Cluster 1,453,927:29,306 and read about the beauty and power of billion-year projects.


The “other scenario,” the competing gospel, is not some cheap, shallow human-made book that is small enough to put in your pocket and contains all the lies of Satan. It is Nature itself; vast, beautiful, inexorable.


And the true followers, the Monks and Sisters of Science have been studying it with fervor for lo, these many years In their towers and halls, revealing God’s wishes and plans through principles, theories and laws.

 

[ideologyhunter]

Robert Ingersoll wrote somewhere that if Satan did write the Bible, "he" (I'll give him a gender, like the Bible does) would have quite a time portraying Biblegod in a worse light than our present Bible does. If God is shown, variously, as being okay with -- or even ordering -- the slaughter of whole populations, with no exceptions for infants and the unborn; with chattel slavery; with rape of female captives...what would he have to do, to fall lower than that?

 

[Rhea]

Robert Ingersoll wrote somewhere that if Satan did write the Bible, "he" (I'll give him a gender, like the Bible does) would have quite a time portraying Biblegod in a worse light than our present Bible does. If God is shown, variously, as being okay with -- or even ordering -- the slaughter of whole populations, with no exceptions for infants and the unborn; with chattel slavery; with rape of female captives...what would he have to do, to fall lower than that?

I know! Impregnate a teen and arrange to have his son murdered!

 

[DBT]

Drown the whole world, guilty and innocent alike, in a fit of discontent over how people are behaving.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Ezekiel 36
26 A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.
27 And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.

If God can do this, and failed to use his great power to make mankind pre flood, moral, and to know God's commandments, why did God not do so? God seems to not be very smart, or a good problem solver.

See also Jeremiah 32:37-41, 31:33-34, Isaiah 59, Hebrews 8:10, 10:16. This list is not exhaustive.