to OP and likeminded others,

Everyone seems so troubled that an O3 God would have what is described as petty desires. I believe that when God issues commandments the purpose isnt His benefit but ours. He isn't commanding us to Love,Worship, Honor, etc Him to satisfy His ego, but because it benefits us to do so. Man is very self-centered. God wants us to get our focus outside of ourselves.

To be fair, the parts I ignored were irrelevent to the question postulated (which was based on what I believe is the most common understanding of Christianity... that is, you accept Jesus and be a good christian=heaven, otherwise, hell)

The part you added, questions the most commonly accepted beliefs of Christianity. If you want to ask the same question above where there is no hell, then certainly the answers might change. But then we might as well not discuss Christianity as its generally known.

Somewhat irrelevent. (well, 0% isn't irrelevent.) If the choice was 99% chance of heaven or oblivion, then oblivion, I believe is still the correct choice. Because the consequence of 'losing' is infinite.

You'll find no disagreement here. Or at least its hard to understand if you wish to believe that God is all good, all loving. This is why many non--Chrisitians find the logic of Christianity to be horribly flawed.

I haven't reviewed the whole thread. But this is a problem that comes up a lot in these forums. People address a criticism of Christianity. Then some Christian argues against it because its not what he believes. We tend to argue from what I see as the most accepted tenants of Christianity. So while some believers may not believe in hell, MOST do (and there is scriptural support)

If you have your own unique take on Christianity, then you're arguing how your unique beliefs contradict what the person says but you're not representing mainstream Christianity.

So when he says he's a jealous god, it's just a little white lie for our own good?

not a lie at all and dont see how this is any kind of contradiction. God loves us more than any man loves any woman. Of course He's jealous when we exchange Him for lesser things.

so jealousy != petty desire?

here is how irrational people are:

on one hand, the bible is literal truth.

on the other hand, Matthew 22:36-40 doesn't apply and branches of christianity can make up their own rules which judge and discriminate and invade people's private lives...


Matthew 22:36-40 (New International Version)

36"Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" 37Jesus replied: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.'38This is the first and greatest commandment. 39And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' 40All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."

pretty clear cut imo.

of course, this is if you believe that the bible is literal fact, which i do not... :-)

Well, I agree that commanding all these beneficial things does make him loving god.

What doesn't make him a loving God though, is throwing us into unbeneficial Hell.

Im pretty sure jealous as used here isnt meant as a petty emotion like when you're 14 and your neighbor gets jordans and then when you both turn 16 and he gets an Audi or when he gets the girl you both like at 17.

But you know that already.

This seems like a debate for another thread.

I dunno, you tell me?

Seems to me to be an effort to squelch any belief in other gods, rewards his followers with good lands, and explains that the lord is jealous in a consuming fire kind of way.

He goes on:

im sorry I just am not seing the contradiction in what you are posting. Of course He doesnt want us following other gods. this isnt petty jealousy by any means. And of course He means business. There are consequences for our disobedience some of which are severe.

God does not allow us two masters so if you choose something else then you reject Him. He isnt going to share our affections. Just like your wife doesnt want you having a girlfriend/mistress/concubine etc.

My wife shares my love with plenty of people; my kids, extended family, my friends.

Apparently humans are more loving and accepting then the Christian God. Though this is hardly new. No loving human I know, for instance, would send people to eternal damnation for finite transgressions.

You've got to keep your position straight. You said:

"He isn't commanding us to Love,Worship, Honor, etc Him to satisfy His ego, but because it benefits us to do so. Man is very self-centered. God wants us to get our focus outside of ourselves."

Severely punishing not only us but our descendants for merely not believing in him or worshiping some other deity is not the mark of a god who simply wants you to put your focus somewhere else. What is the other deity is Gaia and the person is lovely, an environmentalist, would never hurt a person or animal, is kind and gentle. Would this God give that person a pass? Not according to the above.

No, the word jealous seems to have been picked because it describes exactly what is going on. There are much better ways a deity could put our focus away from ourselves than to simply couch in terms of jealousy. As I've argued in this thread, I beleive a just and loving god would want to put every emphasis on us loving each other, and very little on us loving him. Instead, what he's done, is put the emphasis on both, but giving the edge to loving god (hence the sword not peace, and fathers and sons, etc.). This is not loving IMO. If his primary goal is that we are good to each other, I'm all for that. If his only goal in getting us to focus on him was with an eye to us treating each other better, then I would go along with that too. But he gets so mad when you don't worship him that he punishes not just you, but your descendants to several generations.

Please explain to me how that is loving? Or how its not about God's ego? Or how its not about how a primitive civilization believed a god's ego would be?

kurto,

but your wife has a different type of relationship with those other people. Just like God has a different relationship with His other creations.

Im not sure why the athiest in the forum have been harping on God sending people to eternal damnation so much lately but that isnt exactly accurate Christian theology. To reiterate, our sinful actions create a separation from God such that unless that sin is dealt with and excised from us we cannot be in God's presence. God has told us though that Jesus has paid the price for our sins and if we will confess our sins and repent and accept His grace through Jesus then we can once again be in fellowship with Him and ultimately avoid hell.

So our choices condemn us to hell, not God. Just like one cant blame the legal system if you steal a car or murder someone and have to spend time in prison. It is the action that causes the consequences.

As to why this whole system was set up in the first place as opposed to just letting us all live in ignorance in the garden of eden forever well thats a tougher question. My personal belief is that God wanted to experience love at its purest and highest level which meant creating a being with will and intellect capable of either choosing or rejecting Him. Rejecting Him results in hell.

we hear this a lot but mainstream christianity says otherwise. I'm going by what I was taught (Lutheran Upbringing)... which was, in short, do right and go to heaven, otherwise go to hell. Since God created it all, he is ultimately responsible for all of it.

I don't agree with most of above. I'm a little rushed but, in short, like above, God is the all powerful architect of this system. he established the rules that sends the majority of people on earth to hell. No wordplay excuses this decidely unloving (I would call it evil) system.

It's also kinda like my kid asking me for a lollipop and me saying No, you can't have a lollipop, but I'm just going to leave one here on your table, right in front of you, but if you take it when my back is turned I'm going to throw you out of the house.

Not my fault, right? He took the friggin lollipop!

We can't be in God's presence ---> We must be sent to Hell

If we cannot be in God's presence that doesn't mean he is somehow forced to send is into Hell. He could send us to some other, less torturing places, where we also wouldn't be in his presence or simply destroy our souls.

Our choices only condemn us for hell, because God decided that he will send the sinners to hell. If God decided he would forgive us, then our choices wouldn't condemn us for hell.


Maybe you can't blame legal system for people's actions, but you can blame legal system if he punishes people inapropriatelly for their actions.

Action: God throws you into hell
Consequence: you are in hell

Action: God doesn't throw you into hell
Consequence: you aren't in hell

***

Bottom line: Loving God is sentencing people to eternal suffering in Hell.

I cant prove weather or not humans have the highest level of conciseness on earth or in the universe. Its just a guess we dont.

But regardless if salvation requires me believing that, im screwed, because its not something i can believe in without proof. Which im opened to if you have it.

I got no further than this. I have pointed out dozens of times that this fundamentalist view is not at all the most common understanding of Christianity. The largest single denomination of Christianity is Catholicism and this is not the Catholic view at all. If a theist continued this moronic misstatement of an atheist position there would be a steady stream of atheists lol'ing at the moronic theist.

I give up. Believe whatever you want.

what exactly is "this fundamentalist view" you are referring to? Not that I disagree, but you would be shocked to find that the majority of Christians do indeed have a pretty conservative and fundamental understanding *even if* their denomination's leaders do not.

Just want to know exactly what it is so I can check the stats on it. Is it that you go to hell if you never accept Jesus? or is it that you get to go to heaven if you accept Jesus, period?

This is a strawman.

If you're talking about consciousness without respect to the outcomes (ie the pleasure or pain you'll experience, etc), then you must be suggesting that consciousness itself fundamentally has some utility.

That is, even if the specific objects of my consciousness (pleasure, pain, etc) add up to a net value of 0, my consciousness itself edges it up into a positive bargain.

Nothing too horrible about that, it's a common mistake, after all.

But to not even be able to imagine the alternative, that consciousness is fundamentally negative, that's different. You aren't evaluating the costs and benefits of consciousness, and deciding that the benefits outweigh the costs. You are simply ignoring the costs entirely.

Matthew 22:36-40 (New International Version)

36"Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" 37Jesus replied: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.'38This is the first and greatest commandment. 39And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' 40All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."

Please stop trolling my thread. That passage you keep quoting is in the OP for ****'s sake!

your OP is cluttery and confusing.

cliff's please.

I tend to think texas chuck has posted some very refreshing views, the stuff he says about the stain of sin causing a seperation of God being more akin to an organic cause-and-affect relationship than an "angry parent punishing his child" affair is spot on imo.

Ultimately, a non-spiritual person starts off not caring about spiritual matters, and everything they say, think and do emanates from that starting point. I honestly don't see how they expect any of this to make sense to them, or why they are confused when it does not.