Would a moral God step up to his responsibilities?

[Greatest I am]

Would a moral God step up to his responsibilities?

 

God cannot do miracles. If he could, he would.

 

From God’s POV, all here must be perfect. He began in perfection and would not back slide to anything less. That’s scripture. It is to us to see things as he does.

 

From mankind’s POV, all here is not perfection. This contrary and wrong POV is promoted by religion and is generally accepted to some degree by most people. I tend to agree with God even as most do not.

 

From a moral stand point, most will agree, that if one sees a wrong that they can right; they will do the right thing and right the wrong. This is the right thing to do.

 

The fact that there are preventable human evil acts being perpetrated by mankind, supposedly created by God, and he does not act, means that a moral God does not exist.

 

A moral God takes responsibility and God is not stepping up. A moral God would. If he could that is. Just as all of us would. We are in his image and know that stepping up is a good idea.

 

Perhaps God is not the miracles working super God. You know the one. The one that man has created to hold all of his hopes and wishes, dreams and desires, loves, ---- and hates ---, and although never seen in any real way, --- believers will kill for Him. Insanity.

 

If God does exist, and is not moral, then what good is he to mankind or you?

 

Would you want life without morals?

 

No wonder then that Eve, the first to be as God/human, ----yes there is a difference, ---- had the wisdom to have adam/mankind, eat of it. What a wonderful myth.

 

Believers who follow a God without morals, Bible God, should question why they do.

 

God has a basis in reality but certainly not like the God without morals that has somehow been molded by what was initially, a rather beautiful ideas. The Bible.

 

To think and act God like, is to ----- do unto others.

 

If God creates man, then it should be for a best end. Not an evil end like hell. Fact is, many millions die daily of easily preventable cause. Allowed to by a miracle working God who just does not step up.

 

The fact that God, who by definition, would have the attribute of taking responsibility, as any good entity would, proves beyond any doubt that a moral miracle working God cannot exists.

 

 

 

And if there is a miracle working God, mankind should give him a thumbs down for his lack of morals.

 

Can a moral God exist?

 

Is it moral for God, who wants relevance to mankind, to not step up?

 

As a creator God does he have any responsibility to what he creates?

 

Regards

 

DL

 

 

[Dekan]

Would a moral God step up to his responsibilities?

 

Is it moral for God, who wants relevance to mankind, to not step up?

 

As a creator God does he have any responsibility to what he creates?

 

 

Surely, this is the whole point of the Christian religion.

 

Yes - God does have responsibility for what he created. He created human beings. And we human beings, always fall into sin. Sinning is in our nature. We can't help doing it. So by ourselves, unaided, we cannot attain salvation.

 

God recognised this, and provided the aid we need - in the person of His son, Jesus Christ.

 

Christ took on the burden of human sin. He assumed responsibility for our sins. And paid the price, by suffering in agony, nailed to the cross.

 

What an amazing act of moral responsibility! God, the majestic King of the Universe, submitting to such humiliation, at the hands of us sinners. In order to save us.

 

If that's not stepping up to His responsibilities, I don't know what is.

Edited September 13, 2011 by Dekan

[Edtharan]

Christ took on the burden of human sin. He assumed responsibility for our sins. And paid the price, by suffering in agony, nailed to the cross.

But with an infinitely powerful God, this was unnecessary. Being infinitely powerful, God would have had an infinite number of ways to do achieve this. Not only that, He would have had an infinite number of ways to do this that required no suffering at all, is 100% effective (that is every single soul is saved and punishment and Hell are unnecessary), occurred instantly (and continuously - which didn't require it to occur at a certain point in time so we would have already been saved from the start) and still allowed for everything to have occurred as is has with free will and everything.

 

Now, that He had an infinite number of ways to do this without any suffering means that if He did it with suffering, then it was at His own want that any suffering occurs at all.

 

If the God of the bible exists, then we could sin with out causing suffering and without needing to suffer for our sins.

 

The only solution to this is to either say that: God is not all powerful (but then He ceases to be the God of the bible and the bible is wrong), or God is evil and wants us to suffer for no reason (and also would not be the God of the bible), or that the God of the bible does not exist.

 

Thus if the God of the bible is to exist, then He would have to step up (and to have stepped up) to His responsibilities, or He can not be the God of the bible.

 

However, there are other Gods of other religions where their God(s) are not all powerful and not all of them are good (or at least concern themselves with human suffering (and some even want that), and their responsibilities are different than the God of the bible.

[Greatest I am]

Surely, this is the whole point of the Christian religion.

 

Yes - God does have responsibility for what he created. He created human beings. And we human beings, always fall into sin. Sinning is in our nature. We can't help doing it.

 

If as you say, we are only following our programming as written by God, why would he deny us salvation in the first place. What is there to forgive? Us following the programming he put in us in the first place?

 

Why not just change the program?

 

Is that not a more logical thing to do.

 

So by ourselves, unaided, we cannot attain salvation.

 

Scripture does not agree with you.

 

 

Ezekiel 18:20

The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

 

 

Psalm 49:7

None of them can by any means redeem his brother, nor give to God a ransom for him:

 

 

God recognised this, and provided the aid we need - in the person of His son, Jesus Christ.

 

Christ took on the burden of human sin. He assumed responsibility for our sins. And paid the price, by suffering in agony, nailed to the cross.

 

What an amazing act of moral responsibility! God, the majestic King of the Universe, submitting to such humiliation, at the hands of us sinners. In order to save us.

 

If that's not stepping up to His responsibilities, I don't know what is.

 

 

If God set it up, it is murder. If Jesus did, it was self aggrandizing suicide.

 

Both immoral acts.

 

Is that not a more logical thing to do.

 

Some like to use the analogy of a soldier throwing himself on an enemy grenade to save his chum.

 

No argument. We would respect that act.

 

To have the scenario more accurate though, you have to remember that God set the conditions or ransom to be paid. IOW, God threw the grenade and then sent his son to throw himself on it. That deserves no respect as it is an insane God doing an insane act.

 

Why have you forsaken me----because it is a piss poor lesson to have people think that the murder of an innocent man, will take the responsibility for sin away from sinners.

 

Read that quote above one more time and think about it.

 

Here is some help.

 

 

 

Regards

 

DL