Is god kind?

[murphy7801]

I am my own God

 

[Zyxzy]

and Hell is merely the fulfillment of the sinners desire to leave God.

Damn right. Who the fuck would want anything to do with the kind of sadistic fuck of a god who would come up with something like hell?

So you think God enjoys damning those he loves to hell?

Jonah 4

10 But the LORD said, "You have been concerned about this vine, though you did not tend it or make it grow. It sprang up overnight and died overnight. 11 But Nineveh has more than a hundred and twenty thousand people who cannot tell their right hand from their left, and many cattle as well. Should I not be concerned about that great city?"

 

[DrDeath3191]

I'd say that God is Chaotic Good.

 

[Dys]

If there's an omnipotent god, he/she/it is a sadist given the current state of the world (or if you want to go off of biblical readings you'll find more often than not he's/she's/it's a jelious, immature, spiteful asshole).

and Hell is merely the fulfillment of the sinners desire to leave God.

Damn right. Who the fuck would want anything to do with the kind of sadistic fuck of a god who would come up with something like hell?

So you think God enjoys damning those he loves to hell?

Jonah 4

10 But the LORD said, "You have been concerned about this vine, though you did not tend it or make it grow. It sprang up overnight and died overnight. 11 But Nineveh has more than a hundred and twenty thousand people who cannot tell their right hand from their left, and many cattle as well. Should I not be concerned about that great city?"

He really doesn't seem to be a fan of giving people a second chance at life and therefore an opportunity to redeem themselves.

And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.

If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

And he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him: as well the stranger, as he that is born in the land, when he blasphemeth the name of the Lord, shall be put to death.

Well, it appears that I'm boned.

And he that killeth any man shall surely be put to death.

A man also or woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be put to death: they shall stone them with stones: their blood shall be upon them.

Clearly this is a god of mercy and love, who avoids sending people to hell. Couldn't even be bothered finding the quotes about Moses and the encouraging soliders to molest young girls, or the one about murdering all those who worshipped the golden cow, or any of the countless others.

 

[WaffleTron]

What if... the sims game isn't a game, its a representation of our universe, we are the sims and god is sitting at his PC taking away our toilets and making us work crappy jobs, forcing us to mate with others and eventually getting bored and burning our houses down! O.O
So with that answer I'm gonna go with no.

 

[GloatingSwine]

So you think God enjoys damning those he loves to hell?

He (allegedly) created man and decided what things were going to be sins worth damning people to hell for. In short, he is in total control of who goes to hell and why. If he didn't like doing so, he wouldn't.

I mean let's get this in perspective here, the god of the bible has been setting mankind up to fail right from the start.

Consider the garden of eden, the god of the bible creates this garden, and creates man and woman as completely naive creatures with no concept of right or wrong, and then tells them "don't eat the fruit of this one tree, or you'll die" (Note this last bit, it's important later).

Along comes the serpent, tells woman that not only will they not die, but they will gain knowledge of right and wrong. (Note that first bit, it's important later).

So they eat the fruit, and the god of the bible gets in a hissy and kicks them out.

Now, where's the problem with that? Well, it's the whole bit that before they ate the fruit, man and woman had no framework by which to judge the moral impact of their actions. They could, therefore categorically not have made a judgement that eating the fruit was wrong, because they had no concept of wrong before they ate the fruit.

The god of the bible intentionally set mankind up to fail by creating a test where the only way to understand the concept of success or failure in the test is to fail it.

Oh, and those bits I told you to remember. The god of the bible lied. The serpent told only the unvarnished truth.

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

Adam and Eve ate the fruit and did not die that day, or if the story is to be believed for 900 years afterwards.

And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:

For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

The serpent was entirely truthful.

 

[knight steel]

Wow such great answers and ideas all with there unique point.Thank u guys u have made this a great thread.

 

[Chiddy]

If there is a god he simply is not unkind but just has no time to be kind, much like that futurama episode

 

[IrrelevantTangent]

since god is imaginary he is whatever you want him to be.

i can recommend this video on youtube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEtfdzNAE74

Words fail me.

As for what I think, I believe it doesn't really matter. If God ever intervened in worldly affairs, as the Bible said he did, he doesn't anymore, rendering him either 'apathetic or uncaring', as an insightful poster above put it. Or maybe he's endlessly working on alternate universes in an attempt to perfect his work. Or maybe he's just sleeping. Who can say? What matters is what we choose to do with our lives.

 

[alygishere]

it [why the gender?]

because back then men were thought to be superior to women

 

[Ironic]

I'm going to respond with my favourite Epicurus quote for this:

?Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God??

 

[la-le-lu-li-lo]

it [why the gender?]

because back then men were thought to be superior to women

true, but we're not back then anymore. but then again i imagine 'correcting' the bible would be herasy.

 

[Arkhangelsk]

I say now what I've always said about God. He's like you in the Sims. Sure, he makes you all happy, but soon it must get really boring, so he throws you in front of a truck or set your house on fire and slowly watches you die as to try to fill a void of loneliness and boredom.

 

[Arkhangelsk]

it [why the gender?]

because back then men were thought to be superior to women

true, but we're not back then anymore. but then again i imagine 'correcting' the bible would be herasy.

I like to think that God isn't a him. I like the argument to think that he might as well be a lesbian black woman. Or in my case, Morgan Freeman.

 

[Ursus Astrorum]

Ahem.

"Is God willing to prevent evil but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able, and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither willing nor able? Then why call him a God?"
--Epicurus​

I'm taoist, so this is largely a moot point to me. I still agree with this thought, though. Evil exists as a balancing force, yes, but if God was half as benevolent and omnipotent as that book of yours makes him out to be, he would have done something by now.

Oh, and the world won't end on 2012. If it does, I will personally ship you a million dollars.

 

[Scrittore]

I think it was The Moustache Philosopher himself who said "God's only excuse is that he does not exist." or it may have been a friend of his, it's too late at night to go digging through Nietzche's innumerable rantings...

it [why the gender?]

because back then men were thought to be superior to women

true, but we're not back then anymore. but then again i imagine 'correcting' the bible would be herasy.

It's customary to use the masculine pronoun whenever we deal with gender ambiguity, except where countries, boats and cars are concerned (for some curious 19th century reason). It'd make sense for the 21st century to develop a gender neautral alternative though, 's/he' and 'his/her' both ruin the sentences they're in.

 

[la-le-lu-li-lo]

I like to think that God isn't a him. I like the argument to think that he might as well be a lesbian black woman. Or in my case, Morgan Freeman.

i go with genderless personally. :]

 

[la-le-lu-li-lo]

It's customary to use the masculine pronoun whenever we deal with gender ambiguity, except where countries, boats and cars are concerned (for some curious 19th century reason). It'd make sense for the 21st century to develop a gender neautral alternative though, 's/he' and 'his/her' both ruin the sentences they're in.

it and its works!

 

[Scrittore]

It's customary to use the masculine pronoun whenever we deal with gender ambiguity, except where countries, boats and cars are concerned (for some curious 19th century reason). It'd make sense for the 21st century to develop a gender neautral alternative though, 's/he' and 'his/her' both ruin the sentences they're in.

it and its works!

Haha, It and Its work perfectly, but they're usually applied to innanimate objects or unintelligent life (except for "Who is it?" "It is I", so if I were religious I'd be uncomfortable about the connotations. That's a cultural problem though, grammatically you're completely correct and I can't but wonder why it didn't occur to me strait away.

la-le 1, Scrittore 0

 

[Daveman]

I love old religions like norse and greek religion because in that the gods weren't perfect which explained a lot better why we don't live in a perfect world. as soon as you say he's "all-loving" or something you have to question how that is even remotely possible.

[all-purpose theist cop-out argument="god moves in mysterious ways"]