The difference is that the law comes from an infallible authority - the government, while God who created all things including morality is infallible.
So to you, god being infallible and orders segregation, you’d do it?
How do you know God didn’t punish Lot’s daughters? The argument from silence won’t cut it here.
Don’t throw stones into glasshouses. You are the one who clearly avoid questions. Will you approve of segregation if your god states it? And what is so bad with the fruit of knowledge? You still haven’t answered that rhetorical question because you probably know already the answer. Silence won’t cut here.
When you die, God judges you, and He judges you perfectly. The ones who don’t get punished aren’t simply waived away.
So those who weren’t punished are punished later. Sounds like selective justice.
It’s because their punishment has already been paid for by them through Jesus Christ’s suffering on the cross, Whom they repented to and embraced. And that offer is open to everyone, including you.
This is something that Christians could never explain. How does sacrificing your own flesh and blood (even early Christians argued whether or not Jesus is Yahweh’s own physical manifestation, or his own offspring, or both) cleanse the sins of the world? Even after Jesus died, people still carried on with their lives. And someone already explained, the accounts of Jesus were written 30 to 600 years of his claimed death. And in that time, dozens of books about Jesus and Christianity were written but the rest were discarded and cherry picked four or five books. If these books are all true then there is no reason for them not to be compiled at all together.
If your god is omnipotent and omniscient, why sacrifice a human being to cleanse the world of sins? An all-powerful god would just snap his finger and make all sins forgiven. But instead a human had to be sacrificed-- and his own flesh and blood at that. Why worship such a sadistic god? That being said, many scholars believe that Yahweh is a god of war from the pantheon of Levantine gods. Which explains the violent accounts. And that implies the true nature of monotheist dogma of Abrahamic religions. Reckon this is what the Bible means from withholding the fruit of knowledge?
If God ordered segregation, then in that case it wouldn’t be morally wrong. So yes, I’d do it.
The problem with the fruit of knowledge is that it gives us the ability to sin as we have the knowledge of what’s right and wrong. It’s not something that needs to be taught to us.
It’s not selective justice, everyone gets punished. For a deity not bound by time, our concept of time doesn’t matter.
The accounts of Jesus are within the 30 years, nowhere near 600. Which is very early compared to figures like Alexander the Great who has an 800 year gap for his accounts which are seen as historical fact.
The discarded books came around 100 years later and are all gnostic heresy, are very inconsistent, even a few of them promote other books made by the same forger. They are very clearly forged. Here’s a video for more detail
If an all powerful being would snap his fingers and forgive every sin, then there’s literally no justice.
As for Yahweh being a god of war or in a pantheon, there are simply no ancient texts that ascribe to such. It’s just an alternative theory on what could have happened if you first discard the Biblical narrative and carries absolutely zero backing whatsoever.
It’s inconsistent to reason that you’d discard the evidence for Jesus which are carried in ancient texts, yet immediately jump onto a theory which has zero evidence to actually back it up.
If God ordered segregation, then in that case it wouldn’t be morally wrong. So yes, I’d do it.
The problem with the fruit of knowledge is that it gives us the ability to sin as we have the knowledge of what’s right and wrong. It’s not something that needs to be taught to us.
If one knows what is right and wrong then one would know what is sin. Ergo, one would avoid committing sin since the person knows the difference, yes? Then why does Yahweh denied such knowledge to people, but instead letting them constantly making sins micromanaging them? The last paragraph is key here because a benevolent god would not create and his/her subjects constantly committing egregious errors. Christians constantly states Yahweh gave human free will and thus. For there truly be free will, then Yahweh should grant humans knowledge to make choices, because one cannot have free will without being informed and thinking for themselves. Denying humans the ability to know does not make them possess “free will”, it makes them controlled.
Therefore, this reinforces the original position that religion is the surrender of agency and freethinking, leading to unquestionable obedience and submission to authority. Akin to supporting segregation, yes? Just because it’s the rules, would you agree? Those Germans who committed to murdering Jews were only following orders, yes?
Yahweh is a war/storm god out of the pantheon of other polytheistic Canaanite religions.12.
So to you, god being infallible and orders segregation, you’d do it?
Don’t throw stones into glasshouses. You are the one who clearly avoid questions. Will you approve of segregation if your god states it? And what is so bad with the fruit of knowledge? You still haven’t answered that rhetorical question because you probably know already the answer. Silence won’t cut here.
So those who weren’t punished are punished later. Sounds like selective justice.
This is something that Christians could never explain. How does sacrificing your own flesh and blood (even early Christians argued whether or not Jesus is Yahweh’s own physical manifestation, or his own offspring, or both) cleanse the sins of the world? Even after Jesus died, people still carried on with their lives. And someone already explained, the accounts of Jesus were written 30 to 600 years of his claimed death. And in that time, dozens of books about Jesus and Christianity were written but the rest were discarded and cherry picked four or five books. If these books are all true then there is no reason for them not to be compiled at all together.
If your god is omnipotent and omniscient, why sacrifice a human being to cleanse the world of sins? An all-powerful god would just snap his finger and make all sins forgiven. But instead a human had to be sacrificed-- and his own flesh and blood at that. Why worship such a sadistic god? That being said, many scholars believe that Yahweh is a god of war from the pantheon of Levantine gods. Which explains the violent accounts. And that implies the true nature of monotheist dogma of Abrahamic religions. Reckon this is what the Bible means from withholding the fruit of knowledge?
If God ordered segregation, then in that case it wouldn’t be morally wrong. So yes, I’d do it.
The problem with the fruit of knowledge is that it gives us the ability to sin as we have the knowledge of what’s right and wrong. It’s not something that needs to be taught to us.
It’s not selective justice, everyone gets punished. For a deity not bound by time, our concept of time doesn’t matter.
The accounts of Jesus are within the 30 years, nowhere near 600. Which is very early compared to figures like Alexander the Great who has an 800 year gap for his accounts which are seen as historical fact.
The discarded books came around 100 years later and are all gnostic heresy, are very inconsistent, even a few of them promote other books made by the same forger. They are very clearly forged. Here’s a video for more detail
If an all powerful being would snap his fingers and forgive every sin, then there’s literally no justice.
As for Yahweh being a god of war or in a pantheon, there are simply no ancient texts that ascribe to such. It’s just an alternative theory on what could have happened if you first discard the Biblical narrative and carries absolutely zero backing whatsoever.
It’s inconsistent to reason that you’d discard the evidence for Jesus which are carried in ancient texts, yet immediately jump onto a theory which has zero evidence to actually back it up.
If one knows what is right and wrong then one would know what is sin. Ergo, one would avoid committing sin since the person knows the difference, yes? Then why does Yahweh denied such knowledge to people, but instead letting them constantly making sins micromanaging them? The last paragraph is key here because a benevolent god would not create and his/her subjects constantly committing egregious errors. Christians constantly states Yahweh gave human free will and thus. For there truly be free will, then Yahweh should grant humans knowledge to make choices, because one cannot have free will without being informed and thinking for themselves. Denying humans the ability to know does not make them possess “free will”, it makes them controlled.
Therefore, this reinforces the original position that religion is the surrender of agency and freethinking, leading to unquestionable obedience and submission to authority. Akin to supporting segregation, yes? Just because it’s the rules, would you agree? Those Germans who committed to murdering Jews were only following orders, yes?
Yahweh is a war/storm god out of the pantheon of other polytheistic Canaanite religions.1 2.