Bible Club: Exodus

[ChrisV]

A little Googling turned up this. I don't really like this explanation, mostly for complicated reasons that go into questions of determinism versus free will. If God knows in advance what any of us will do in a given situation, then how are we any better than computers and how do we have free will?

Anyway, the major question is left unanswered: why should the Pharaoh's intransigence be an excuse to send plagues against the populace, when God presumably has much more targeted methods available? It would be as if the US reacted to Iran's nuclear weapons program by carpet-bombing Iranian villages.

[txag007]

14What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! 15For he says to Moses,
"I will have mercy on whom I have mercy,
and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." 16It does not, therefore, depend on man's desire or effort, but on God's mercy. 17For the Scripture says to Pharaoh: "I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth." 18Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.

19One of you will say to me: "Then why does God still blame us? For who resists his will?" 20But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? "Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, 'Why did you make me like this?'" 21Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use?

22What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction? 23What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory— 24even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles? Romans 9:14-24

[ChrisV]

I don't really see how txag intended us to interpret that post other than "God is allowed to be an evil sadist if he wants to be, because he's God, yo". That way of thinking may have flown a couple millennia ago, when the idea of lords and servants was considered OK, but it blows my mind that anyone can find it a convincing moral argument these days. If a person were to create sentient beings and then abuse them for no reason, on a whim, we'd call him a monstrous psychopath. I don't see why God gets a pass in the same situation.

Take this verse, for instance:

[ QUOTE ]
Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, 'Why did you make me like this?'. Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use?

[/ QUOTE ]

As a concrete example, imagine a woman who deliberately takes teratogenic drugs during pregnancy. Should the deformed child be content with an excuse like "Well, I just felt like making you like this"?

[txag007]

[ QUOTE ]
As a concrete example, imagine a woman who deliberately takes teratogenic drugs during pregnancy. Should the deformed child be content with an excuse like "Well, I just felt like making you like this"?

[/ QUOTE ]

First of all, you are discounting the existence of evil.

Secondly, if God for some reason wants that child to be born deformed, then it is because he intends to use that for His glory.

[John21]

[ QUOTE ]
There is NO way to interpret the god of the bible as loving unless you are in total denial.

[/ QUOTE ]

Obviously I don't agree with your conclusion, but I can accept it. And I'd add to it saying, denial ultimately manifests itself in delusional behavior or acts, or in this instance interpretation of meaning.

Accepting your conclusion, the only inference I can draw is that the Bible isn't the problem, people in denial or delusional behavior is the true culprit. For example, if a delusional person read Romeo and Juliet, they might conclude it advocated teen suicide and want to ban it from high schools. Is the book the problem or the delusional person? I really don't think you can have it both ways.

[PLOlover]

I think part of it has to do with why the jews were in egypt in the first place. they got into debt against their god's advice, and sold themselves into slavery.

Maybe god had to put on a show for them so that maybe they wouldn't disobey him (again) in the future.

[kurto]

[ QUOTE ]
First of all, you are discounting the existence of evil.


[/ QUOTE ]

What if he is? Evil is a point of view. its a judgement. Its not a force or an object.

[ QUOTE ]
Secondly, if God for some reason wants that child to be born deformed, then it is because he intends to use that for His glory.




[/ QUOTE ]

This is the kind of thing that only a theist can say. This is the kind of thing that makes nonbelievers think beleivers are mental. This reminds me of the article posted on this forum where some religious folks were having a kid who was going to be born with a condition that would kill their infant within months of it being born. They considered themselves blessed because, this only happened to like 1 in 500,000 parents... and God chose them! How lucky they were.

Religious cognitive dissonance at its greatest. "Our child will die. What a blessing!"

"Our child is deformed. It must be part of God's glory!"

[John21]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If someone believes God is an evil, spiteful being, the Bible will just reflect that belief back onto him. Or if someone believes God is a loving, compassionate being that belief will get reflected back.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know about this. I mean, I certainly didn't have that opinion about God the first time I read the Bible. I was fairly indifferent about the whole thing, but definitely more sympathetic to Christianity than atheism. And then I read it, and that is what I saw. I don't see how I could have already been harboring this deep, dark presupposition of what God was like.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think some would argue that you allowed your intellect to either over-ride your beliefs or form them. Objectively, I think this is where this entire debate ultimately centers. In the battle for supremacy over our being do we place our intellect/reason or belief/feeling at the top?

It's apparent that a typical atheist would choose the intellect over belief and a typical theist places belief above the intellect. I'm not saying either side completely rejects the input of the other, but as sole judge over pressing questions some choose to follow reason and some feeling. As I mentioned earlier, I chose to believe that God is love; conclude that love is a feeling; and allow that belief/feeling to reign supreme in my being. And no matter how much I tried to reconcile the two "judges" I always ran into situations where I had to make a decision in favor of one or the other. Or as the Bible says, "No man can serve two masters."

[madnak]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If someone believes God is an evil, spiteful being, the Bible will just reflect that belief back onto him. Or if someone believes God is a loving, compassionate being that belief will get reflected back.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know about this. I mean, I certainly didn't have that opinion about God the first time I read the Bible. I was fairly indifferent about the whole thing, but definitely more sympathetic to Christianity than atheism. And then I read it, and that is what I saw. I don't see how I could have already been harboring this deep, dark presupposition of what God was like.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think some would argue that you allowed your intellect to either over-ride your beliefs or form them. Objectively, I think this is where this entire debate ultimately centers. In the battle for supremacy over our being do we place our intellect/reason or belief/feeling at the top?

It's apparent that a typical atheist would choose the intellect over belief and a typical theist places belief above the intellect. I'm not saying either side completely rejects the input of the other, but as sole judge over pressing questions some choose to follow reason and some feeling. As I mentioned earlier, I chose to believe that God is love; conclude that love is a feeling; and allow that belief/feeling to reign supreme in my being. And no matter how much I tried to reconcile the two "judges" I always ran into situations where I had to make a decision in favor of one or the other. Or as the Bible says, "No man can serve two masters."

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps you should work harder at applying your creativity. You put tremendous effort into resolving Bible stories, but still view intellect and emotion as inherently contradictory.

I think it's a false dilemma. Neither can work in isolation.

[madnak]

Who is your target audience, txag? You realize you're only making us more disgusted with Christianity, don't you?