Deux Ex Machina, Suckers!
Deux Ex Machina, Suckers!
Deux Ex Machina, Suckers!
And folks, here in the comments, we have semi-Biblical experts discussing meaning and interpretation like it was LOTR or 40K lore. If someone needs that much explanation for their faith or even a cartoon, then at no point will we ever arrive a solid definition or consensus of the Christian God.
I like to keep things simple. Jesus was a black man and had some really cool ideas. His dad was not really present and second hand-stories about him are often mythical and confusing. Hell, the stories of Jesus are second-hand and often hard to nail down. People can't agree on the word or rules of this religion so they fight other people outside and inside their religion to distract from the fact we are all going to die and there's nothing anyone can do about it.
I just want to say thank you. I know this is not my instance, and I don't really want to intrude or proselytize. I didn't like the comic's premise and I really just meant to just make the one objection.
I've tried to honestly and non-confrontationally to address some if the things people have said to me, but I may have not done that well, and I'm sorry about that if I haven't.
You have been very accommodating, even to the point that I haven't been downvoted to hell (lol). Thanks for the visit. I don't think Atheists are terrible people; actually they think about spiritual/moral things a LOT.
So thanks for your patience. I'll just be leaving, but I didn't want to go without saying that to everyone.
Where does "Infinitely Loving" come from? I have not heard it in any creed of any church.
Omnipotent, Omnipresent, and Omniscient are certainly descriptors of God.
God is not all-loving. He is Love, and He is Justice.
Except for 8 people he killed humanity because they were evil continuously. (Genesis 6:5–8)
He called for the total destruction of the nation of the Amalekites, including women and children. (1Samuel 15:1–3)
This is a straw man argument.
He is often said to also be omnibenevolent. I would argue that giving people free will, then sentencing them to eternal torture for using it, contradicts the omnibenevolence.
Even when the term is used in a Christian context (which isn't often) Omnibenevolence isn't used to mean all-loving except by the sloppiest Bible readers.
God is good, and is indeed the definition, source, and standard of all goodness.
Good isn't "nice." It isn't permissive. "Good" teachers don't let the worst students run the class. It's a poor analogy, but it makes the point.
Surely we don't want Jeffrey Epstein or Jeffrey Dahmer or Adolf Hitler or Donald Trump to go to heaven (although it could happen if God intervened). But WE don't want to be under the microscope! Don't draw the line somewhere above ME!
Bottom line, when we don't agree with God and his judgments, it's our understanding and not his judgments that are at fault.
John 3:16 says God loves "the whole world"
2 Peter 3:9 says God doesn't want "anyone to perish"
Having this desire and being all powerful and yet people ending up condemned is a contradiction
It's actually an answer to a question that was asked back in verse four. The question was:
It's just saying God is not in a hurry to destroy everybody. He's not anxious to get on with it. He wants there to be plenty of time for everyone to come to grips with the fact that they aren't very kind. That they aren't good. That they don't do much practical help for the sick, or the poor, or the downtrodden in this life. That they complain constantly, although their lives are much better than most. That they focus on themselves most of the time and don't think about others very much at all, except in abstract. Practical help is rarely found in their hand.
There are plenty of arguments for/about various gods that fall apart under basic scrutiny. Apologists still use them all the time, and people who doubts often lap them up.
Put so blunty they do sound like strawmen, but people really argue for these things.
Adonai is not omni-anything, even if He's the alleged creator of the univers ex-nihilo (which He isn't.)
Those notions are post-biblical and emerge from Helenic philosophy. So does the notion of Hellfire.
Jesus promised an apocalypse before his apostles all died, which failed to come to pass, and the spiritual ascendence thing is a post-biblical interpretation.
Omnipotence
Omniscience
Omnipresence
In the Bible, concepts from the Bible, not post biblical.
In Matthew 24 Jesus tells the disciples when the temple will be destroyed which happened in 70 AD, which he tells them to be alert and aware of the time when it's happening.
He also tells them of an end time which he says no one will know the day or the time, not even Jesus himself.