NationStates Jolt Archive

This is not a 'does God exist?' thread, but a thread to discuss the morality of God as presented in the Bible. I am no theologian by any means, but here is what I consider to be a good website on the topic.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/imm_bibl1.htm

"The near murder of Isaac:
In Genesis 22:1-18, God decided to test the depth of Abraham's faith. God ordered Abraham to travel to the top of a mountain in the land of Moriah, and there murder his own son, Isaac, as a human sacrifice. At the last minute, as Abraham was about to stab his son to death, an angel appeared and ordered Abraham to stop. A ram which was caught in a thicket was used as a substitute for Isaac. The passage assumes that God is not omniscient, because he did not know the depth of faith of Abraham without testing him in this way. The immorality of this story is the massive traumatic stress that both Isaac and his father experienced during this event. Compounding this is the willingness of a father to murder his own son. It is doubtful that either would have been able to be fully normal afterwards."

I am not a Christian, and I do not understand how Christians can reconcile their worship with their deity with some of the downright rotten things He does in the Bible. So my question for the Christians in the audience is:

How do you reconcile your belief with a good, omnipotent God with the 'hard passages' in the Bible?

Judge and Ye shall be judged.

That's pretty hardcore, being it's one of the hardest things Not to do.

it was test of faith...nothing was going to happen to issac.

Are you saying that doesn't hold true to the rest of us?

it was test of faith...nothing was going to happen to issac.

Meaning the sign of a good faithful Christian is that they would be willing to violently murder their own innocent children on command? And so Abraham... displaying this particular characteristic... therefore "passed"?

Yeah, I can't see why anyone might have any problem with that concept... :rolleyes:

"The near murder of Isaac:

[In Genesis 22:1-18] How do you reconcile your belief with a good, omnipotent God with the 'hard passages' in the Bible?

Well, read it for yourself.

Allah didn't suddenly just change His mind. Nothing bad was ever going to happen to Isaac and Abraham knew it. He even says to Isaac, when Isaac asks where the sheep is, "Allah will see to the sheep for His burnt offering, son." [ibid. 8]

Allah specifically blessed Abraham with his son Isaac by Sarah. Abraham knew Allah as though he would know a close friend. Do you honestly think for a second that Allah was really asking Abraham to sacrifice Isaac?

I don't know versus by heart.. but don't need to. I know that what ever measure I judge others .. I will be judged. All sins to themsleves .. whats a sin to me may not be sin to you.. to a certain extent or maybe to one.

Meaning the sign of a good faithful Christian is that they would be willing to violently murder their own innocent children on command? And so Abraham... displaying this particular characteristic... therefore "passed"?


Three points:

1] Christians are not the only ones who have Abraham. Abraham comes from the Jewish Torah and is the father of Isaac (Jews) and Ishmael (Muslims). Christians are like bastard cousins adopted by proxy.

2] If Allah asks you to sacrifice your son, you damn well better get to it. Allah may or may not choose to stop you, but if Allah asks, do it and do it right. Allah has only ever asked Abraham. Nobody else has been asked.

3] Abraham wasn't a Christian.

Well, read it for yourself.

Allah didn't suddenly just change His mind. Nothing bad was ever going to happen to Isaac and Abraham knew it.


So much for the test of faith then.

If Abraham knew (or even suspected) such a thing and had no intention of ever actually killing his son, there was no test of faith involved. It would have just been Abraham humoring God by playing along until the game was over.

So much for the test of faith then.

If Abraham knew (or even suspected) such a thing and had no intention of ever actually killing his son, there was no test of faith involved. It would have just been Abraham humoring God by playing along until the game was over.actually, had God allowed the Sacrifice to go through, then Abraham could rest assured that Issac would be with God for eternity. And that he would be reunited with Issac when his time on earth was over.

So much for the test of faith then.

If Abraham knew (or even suspected) such a thing and had no intention of ever actually killing his son, there was no test of faith involved. It would have just been Abraham humoring God by playing along until the game was over.

I never said it was a test of faith. It wasn't. Abraham didn't need faith. Abraham spoke to Allah face to face every day. It was a test of submission ... of obedience.

actually, had God allowed the Sacrifice to go through, then ...

there would have never been any Jews.

Abraham , Issac and Jacob .. .Thay are major contributors in my faith.. To try to dismiss their conection with a "religion" isn't gonna detour me. Religion itself is here to seperate us being in Christ or not.

Meaning I don't put faith in "Religion".. its man made. Don't ask me to explain. Yes I go by the Holy Bible on many aspects .. no I don't go by what every Pastor or Evangelist has to say. I'm a sinner.. I know that in my heart.. I also love God. God knows my heart. My conscience guides me in many ways.. God is always in my heart. I have nothing more to say.

Well, people seemed to think that one was easy.

How about this:

Murder of 42 little children:

2 Kings 2:23-24: "And he [Elisha] went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head. And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the LORD. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them."

Elisha, a Prophet, was ridiculed by some little children who called him a name like "old baldy". Elisha laid a curse on them in God's name. God appears to have responded to the curse by sending two bears out of the woods who tare (tore up, killed) 42 of the little children.

That's easy. Nyarlathotep hates people.

[2 Kings 2:23-24]
Elisha, a Prophet, was ridiculed by some little children who called him a name like "old baldy". Elisha laid a curse on them in God's name. God appears to have responded to the curse by sending two bears out of the woods who tare (tore up, killed) 42 of the little children.

God didn't curse them, Elisha did. Huge difference. Also, Elisha was the container of the spirit of Elijah, one of the most powerful prophets to ever walk the planet. Elisha, however, had a temper. It didn't mix well, but it got the job done as needed.

For one.. the words in what you wrote sound foreign to me.. Yes.. I know the King James isn't the first version..not sure what version your's is. I'd have to read it for myself.. on my own time.. without animosity in order to get the meaning without prejudice as much possible.



Job is a good book as far as self sacrafice and hurt. That I have read.

God didn't curse them, Elisha did. Huge difference. Also, Elisha was the container of the spirit of Elijah, one of the most powerful prophets to ever walk the planet. Elisha, however, had a temper. It didn't mix well, but it got the job done as needed.

Elisha a prophet of God murdered 42 children for no good reason. Why doesn't that make me feel all warm and fuzzy?

And, who sent the bears to murder the children? Seems that was God.

Elisha a prophet of God murdered 42 children for no good reason. Why doesn't that make me feel all warm and fuzzy?

And, who sent the bears to murder the children? Seems that was God.

Nah ... Elisha laid the curse, it was Elisha's reponsibility. A magician is a magician. We've seen from the story of Moses and Pharoah that people can cast spells to change weather, turn sticks into snakes, and all kinds of things without Allah's help.

Elisha is the first and only prophet not appointed by Allah. Elisha came into power by picking up an artifact of Elijah's after Elijah was carried into Paradise.

It makes Elisha a strange and special case among the prophets. Many chassidic scholars studying this part of the nevi'im strip Elisha of his "prophet" status and attribute to him nephilim status because he was "born" (read: created in life, not from the womb) of the spirit of Elijah and not of the Word of Allah. Read 2:9-13

Edit: Incidently, did anyone ever promise you constant warm, fuzzy feelings when it comes to the Divine?

Oh ... if you need more:

http://www.evilbible.com/

I can rebutt anything they've got that comes from Torah, Nevi'im, or Kethuvim. I'll leave the NT to other people.

Oh ... if you need more:

http://www.evilbible.com/

I can rebutt anything they've got that comes from Torah, Nevi'im, or Kethuvim. I'll leave the NT to other people.

I was just thinking I'd move to the NT ....

But "rebut" is a bit strong. Explain maybe.

I was just thinking I'd move to the NT ....

But "rebut" is a bit strong. Explain maybe.

I can refute any verse evilbible.com uses as proof of how evil the god in Torah is portrayed. I added the extra 't' cuz it was amusing to me. :D

The NT is great. Paul was a sick bitch. Easy enough to find thousands of things wrong with what he had to say.

You all are missing the point. Where Isaac was in danger or not is irrelevant, what people have a problem with is Abraham being told to murder his son for no justifiable reason, and the fact that Abraham would have perfectly been willing to do this had it not being for the fact that an angel leapt up shouting "AHAHA KIDDING DUMBASS! Go kill the baby goat trapped over there instead".

Firstly, anyone who hears voices (God's or otherwise) telling them to tie people down and then kill them, is not a worthwhile Christian soul, they are a dangerous schizophrenic.

Secondly, I don't know about you, but if someone asked me to tie my brother down and kill him, I would tell that person to go fuck himself be they human or "supreme being".

Thirdly, if we take this passage literally, it suggests God requires from his followers complete and total obedience with no room for free thought, introspection, questioning or a persons own moral reason. The thought of a God who requires his followers to kill without reason at a seconds notice is creepy- besides, who can you tell is misled by the devil and who is hearing the voice of the REAL god?

Fourth, it also calls into question the nature of the god who would directly lie to his followers about what he wants of them, for no good reason. This pretty much calls into question every single thing written in the bible- how do you know he REALLY wants you to love your neighbours, huh?

Fifth, this is a test, right? And Abraham passed. So logically, had he steadfastedly refused to kill his son, had he been so mortified by the idea of human sacrifice and/or so morally outraged by the whole request that he DARED have the balls to defy your might and say "No, dammit, I will not kill my son for no reason. And if that makes me a bad person, then Iam a bad person. But Iam not such a bad person that I will do this thing"- had this been Abraham’s response, would he have failed? Does this mean God doesn't want men of conscience for his children? Or does God believe willingness to murder your flesh and blood at the drop of a hat makes you a "moral" person? If so, how does this fit into the scheme of...well...practically every modern society and system of law and order ever conceived?

Sixth and most importantly, either Abraham was a raving psychotic lunatic who hated his son, or an easily impressionable, indoctrinated moron who nonetheless loved his son, didn't want to kill him, but felt compelled to do so. Now, is it fair to make this man believe that his son is going to be murdered, by the man's own hand no less? That in order to maintain favour with the being he loves more then his own family, he must tie down his own son and make a blood sacrifice?

Would you put a parent though this? Does the fact that you stop him right at the last minute, just when he realises that yes, he DID have it in him to kill his own son and would have done so- does the fact you were kidding make the inherent sadism of your actions justifiable? And does the fact that your SOLE motivation for putting this creation-of-your-own-body-whom-you-love-so-dear through this horrendous torture, is because you wanted to test him. You wanted to see how strong his faith was. Never mind that arguably you already KNOW the answer to this because you can read his soul, never mind that there are one hundred million ways you could have done this better. Never mind that even a 10 year old could come up with some test less fucked up then this, and that you in your infinite wisdom could doubtlessly come up with a million more. Never mind ALL that. You wanted some petty validation, dammit, and you got it, and it's all a happy ending. Does this blatant sadism fit in the profile of a kind and loving parent-god?

Please note, Iam NOT beating up on Christianity. Not at all.

However, this demands an answer, some kind of response. You MUST reconcile yourself to this passage, one way or the other, to be a christian worthy of the name. If you do not, you are a hypocrite. And there are many answers. Reject the whole passage, if you like-after all, even the word of god must get muddled after hundred of thousands of years of transcription from savage tribe to savage tribe, from language to language, and being ripped up and rebuilt and altered countless times. Hell, reject all of Old Testament entirely, provided you can find a way to explain Jesus's whole "the old testament is still valid" thing.

But then, you must either not take ANY of the bible literally, or devise a logical, coherent system for determining which parts are accurate and which are not. Do NOT, however, pick and choose what parts to obey, and do NOT treat the bible as the dictated, letter perfect transcription of God's word.

Alternatively, reconcile yourself to the passage as a fable or a metaphor, and don't read it literally. This viewpoint demands tolerance of other interpretations, though, so if you choose this you can no longer afford to be a prick about how exactly other people choose to see the analogy differently.

Both methods above also require you to come up with an explanation for why God left such an ambiguous instruction manually, however. There are plenty of other ways. Maybe God isn't perfect and omnipotent- maybe the poor guy is just doing his best. Maybe he changes and grows like everything else that's alive. Maybe he IS perfect, but at one point he wasn't and he's all growed up now. Another way is to morally reconcile yourself to each of the six points above, in which case, definitely post, Id love to read them. (No sarcasm, I genuinely curious.)

Either way, post about 'em here, why don't you? This thread is indeed about how you deal with "Hard Passages" in the bible. Once again, Iam SO not beating up on Christians here. I know quite a few thinking, intelligent christians who's beliefs have actually made them BETTER people and given them a source of comfort. However I do strongly dislike christians who have never had a thought of their own in their entire pathetic existence and yet feel that they are uniquely qualified to tell more thoughtful and conscientious people that they are "going to hell" because they read a book one time that says so. These people are ignorant assholes and it is them that has turned organised religion into a tool of ignorant, evil men to do evil actions with ethical impunity.

You aren’t morally required to not be a christian but you are morally required to be consistent in your moral beliefs, and be aware of the weaknesses in them. Alternatively, don't and just be a christian for no apparent reason. But then don't you dare judge another or cast the first stone because you have even less claim to moral superiority then the rest of us do.

*cracks knuckles in satisfaction*

Heh. I do declare this thread pwned.

Thirdly, if we take this passage literally, it suggests God requires from his followers complete and total obedience with no room for free thought, introspection, questioning or a persons own moral reason.

Well ..... duh. That is exactly what God requires from us. Very few are willing to give it. This thread isn't "pwned" by someone who merely states the obvious.

You want me to go through your whole post bit by bit and "unpwn" the thread?

You want me to go through your whole post bit by bit and "unpwn" the thread?

Go for it. And while you are at it, explain how God makes beings with the capacity for Free Choice and thought and then expects them to obey his commands when they seems almost hellish in their immorality, and yet expects us to not pay heed to the siren call of the devil.

You all are missing the point. Where Isaac was in danger or not is irrelevant, what people have a problem with is Abraham being told to murder his son for no justifiable reason, and the fact that Abraham would have perfectly been willing to do this had it not being for the fact that an angel leapt up shouting "AHAHA KIDDING DUMBASS! Go kill the baby goat trapped over there instead".

That isn't how the story goes, but that's ok. Later you bitch about people who haven't read the Bible and use it as a tool for self purpose, but you just did it yourself. I would suggest you stop casting stones.

Firstly, anyone who hears voices (God's or otherwise) telling them to tie people down and then kill them, is not a worthwhile Christian soul, they are a dangerous schizophrenic.

We all agree with this. Like I said ... only one person in the history of mankind has been put through this particular test. Abraham. That's it.

Secondly, I don't know about you, but if someone asked me to tie my brother down and kill him, I would tell that person to go fuck himself be they human or "supreme being".

Well, if it's the Almighty, then you'll just have to deal with any consequences that come of it. However, lucky for you, the Almighty already knows how you'd respond, so you won't be tested in that manner.

who can you tell is misled by the devil and who is hearing the voice of the REAL god?

By their fruits shall ye know them.

Fourth, it also calls into question the nature of the god who would directly lie to his followers about what he wants of them, for no good reason. This pretty much calls into question every single thing written in the bible- how do you know he REALLY wants you to love your neighbours, huh?

Has the Almighty ever asked you to kill one of your neighbors? I'm pretty sure the commandment is to love them.

If so, how does this fit into the scheme of...well...practically every modern society and system of law and order ever conceived?

You're somehow taking this story to mean that Allah demands us to kill children and that it's a commandment to do so. Abraham was given this test, not all of mankind. I think you need to re-examine your thinking here.

Sixth and most importantly, either Abraham was a raving psychotic lunatic who hated his son, or an easily impressionable, indoctrinated moron who nonetheless loved his son, didn't want to kill him, but felt compelled to do so. Now, is it fair to make this man believe that his son is going to be murdered, by the man's own hand no less? That in order to maintain favour with the being he loves more then his own family, he must tie down his own son and make a blood sacrifice?

Actually, you'll find there was no moment of hesitation in Abraham. There was only submission to Allah. He didn't think his son was going to be murdered, he was thinking he was asked to give his son in sacrifice. Huge difference. In all things, Allah comes first. Before your family, before your TV, before your country. That's just how it's supposed to work.

Does this blatant sadism fit in the profile of a kind and loving parent-god?

Who ever said that a "loving parent-god" was the sole nature of Allah? Anyone who does is a liar or trying to sell you something.

However, this demands an answer, some kind of response. You MUST reconcile yourself to this passage, one way or the other, to be a christian worthy of the name.

I'm sorry ... did somehow this story relate only to Christians? Methinks you're forgetting Jews and Muslims.

Do NOT, however, pick and choose what parts to obey, and do NOT treat the bible as the dictated, letter perfect transcription of God's word.

We don't pick and choose. We do, however, realize that Abraham's test doesn't apply to all of us. You seem to miss that somehow.


Both methods above also require you to come up with an explanation for why God left such an ambiguous instruction manually,


What's so ambiguous? I find it to be perfectly clear.



Is the thread unpwned now or should I go on?

Go for it. And while you are at it, explain how God makes beings with the capacity for Free Choice and thought and then expects them to obey his commands when they seems almost hellish in their immorality, and yet expects us to not pay heed to the siren call of the devil.

What do you think Free Will is? It is the freedom to choose whether or not to submit to the Divine. The whole idea of Free Will comes out of the Bible itself and cannot exist without the Divine.

You ask how to know the difference between the Almighty and the Devil, well, that's a privilege you get for choosing to submit your will. Free Will, however, is not Free. Everything comes with a price. Everything.

Although I was addressing the Christians, I still appreciate your contribution to the thread.

Three points:

1] Christians are not the only ones who have Abraham. Abraham comes from the Jewish Torah and is the father of Isaac (Jews) and Ishmael (Muslims). Christians are like bastard cousins adopted by proxy.

2] If Allah asks you to sacrifice your son, you damn well better get to it. Allah may or may not choose to stop you, but if Allah asks, do it and do it right. Allah has only ever asked Abraham. Nobody else has been asked.

3] Abraham wasn't a Christian.

But if Allah asked me to a terribly evil act, I would refuse. But I doubt he will. I do not actually believe that he (or God) exists, anyway.

That isn't how the story goes, but that's ok. Later you bitch about people who haven't read the Bible and use it as a tool for self purpose, but you just did it yourself. I would suggest you stop casting stones.

I agree with you. The voice of god probably did not use the word "Dumbass" in reference to Abraham. However, neither was I serious in quoting the passage as such. At most Im guilty of hyperbole or smart alec exageration.

We all agree with this. Like I said ... only one person in the history of mankind has been put through this particular test. Abraham. That's it.

So what you are saying is, anyone today that believes they have been presented with an identical scenario is schizophrenic, but Abraham himself was the real deal.

Well, if it's the Almighty, then you'll just have to deal with any consequences that come of it. However, lucky for you, the Almighty already knows how you'd respond, so you won't be tested in that manner.

If there were consequences for my refusal to murder my progeny, I should hope I have the courage to face them. Surely the Almighty knew how Abraham would respond just as he does me, so why the need for the test?

By their fruits shall ye know them.

And if God issues such immoral commands, he's gonna have a hard time differentiating his fruit from that of the devils. I was having trouble understanding how you were disagreeing with me on this one.

Has the Almighty ever asked you to kill one of your neighbors? I'm pretty sure the commandment is to love them.

That's not the point. According to the bible, God asked Abraham to do something that God did not want Abraham to actually do. God misled Abraham about His wishes in this matter, and I dare say royally fucked with Abraham's head in doing so. If God can and does lie, that means he might not be telling the truth on occasion. Therefore it seems you cannot state with confidence that everything God says is true.

You're somehow taking this story to mean that Allah demands us to kill children and that it's a commandment to do so. Abraham was given this test, not all of mankind. I think you need to re-examine your thinking here.

Im just calling it how I see it. Im reading the story and the story is about a god who commands a father to kill his son, to see whether he would actually go through with it, as some twisted test of "faith".

Actually, you'll find there was no moment of hesitation in Abraham. There was only submission to Allah. He didn't think his son was going to be murdered, he was thinking he was asked to give his son in sacrifice. Huge difference. In all things, Allah comes first. Before your family, before your TV, before your country. That's just how it's supposed to work.

Well, that certainly says that Abraham was even more of a dick then I first took him for, but it doesn't really refute my point. This is not a fair or just position to force someone in.

Who ever said that a "loving parent-god" was the sole nature of Allah? Anyone who does is a liar or trying to sell you something.

I was narrowing my scope by targetting the common judeo-christian perception of god, admittedly.

I'm sorry ... did somehow this story relate only to Christians? Methinks you're forgetting Jews and Muslims.

Iam saying if you believe X, you should probably be able to deal with the prescence of Y and Z and react in a way that is consistent with your belief in X. If you don't believe in X, more power to you. But believing that mindless acceptance of and submission to a self-procraimedly higher authority is a a goal one should work towards, Im going to have to disagree. I might ask "What if God asks you to do something horrendous and terrible?" But I have a feeling you'd just say "He would never because he is all-knowing, and he is all-knowing because I believe he is and trust his judgement better then my own." Seeing as we arn't even going to agree on basic tenets there, the argument isn't going to get much further

We don't pick and choose. We do, however, realize that Abraham's test doesn't apply to all of us. You seem to miss that somehow.

So how does the fact that you won't be in Abraham's exact situation change the fact that Abraham's test was cruel, sadistic, completely illogical, and required Abraham to be ready to commit an immoral and reprehensible sin in order to prove his belief in a benevolent deity that wouldn't want him to commit such a sin?

What's so ambiguous? I find it to be perfectly clear.

It's only ambiguous if you refuse to take the scenario at face value and try to explain it away by basically saying the bible is ambigous. It doesn't apply to you as you seem to accept the idea of such a test.

What do you think Free Will is? It is the freedom to choose whether or not to submit to the Divine. The whole idea of Free Will comes out of the Bible itself and cannot exist without the Divine.

Hmmm. So free will is only there so we can other choose to submit totally to your idea of god, or choose not to do so. And it's not the freedom to arrive at our own conclusions and develop our own ideas, so that we might either commit ourselves to god fully by saying "I understand at least some of your purpose and agree with it completely and utterly", or just forge our own paths entirely?

You ask how to know the difference between the Almighty and the Devil, well, that's a privilege you get for choosing to submit your will.

Heheh, is it, indeed? Would not the devil (Or any other malicious supernatural you care to bring to the table) say the same thing of those he thinks he could get to mindlessly submit to him?

There's a lot you still havn't addressed here if you still feel up for debate.

I agree with you. The voice of god probably did not use the word "Dumbass" in reference to Abraham. However, neither was I serious in quoting the passage as such. At most Im guilty of hyperbole or smart alec exageration.

Heh ... well, even the exaggeration was a tad inaccurate. It paints an off picture of the actual story. I'm all for a humerous take on things, but let's try to stick to the actual story.


So what you are saying is, anyone today that believes they have been presented with an identical scenario is schizophrenic, but Abraham himself was the real deal.

This wasn't a sudden awakening on Abraham's part. Abraham had been in conversation and day to day communication directly with the Almighty his entire adult life. Nobody else in the history of mankind, not even Jesus, can make such a claim.

If there were consequences for my refusal to murder my progeny, I should hope I have the courage to face them. Surely the Almighty knew how Abraham would respond just as he does me, so why the need for the test?

Who knows? Knowledge is like a spring coming up from the ground. It comes from the source, pushing ever upward, but then stops when it breaks the surface of the ground and goes up no further. There are limits to knowledge. That's just the way it is. We can never know the mind of Allah, only the word.

And if God issues such immoral commands, he's gonna have a hard time differentiating his fruit from that of the devils. I was having trouble understanding how you were disagreeing with me on this one.

As no harm was ever going to come to the boy, it was not an immoral request - you'll note I say request ... Abraham is not commanded, but asked.

That's not the point. According to the bible, God asked Abraham to do something that God did not want Abraham to actually do. God misled Abraham about His wishes in this matter, and I dare say royally fucked with Abraham's head in doing so. If God can and does lie, that means he might not be telling the truth on occasion. Therefore it seems you cannot state with confidence that everything God says is true.

This, my friend, is a struggle that's been going on for centuries. The nature of the Divine. Somehow I don't think we'll solve it in this thread. Frankly, I'm too tired to try right now even with a worthy partner as yourself.

Im just calling it how I see it. Im reading the story and the story is about a god who commands a father to kill his son, to see whether he would actually go through with it, as some twisted test of "faith".

Not a test of faith, a test of obedience. Abraham needed no faith as he looked Allah in the face every day. Abraham even argued ... yes *argued* ... with Allah concerning the fate of the people of Sodom and Gomorrah (see Gen 18:22-33). That little argument is probably what spawned the test of obedience in Gen 22.


Well, that certainly says that Abraham was even more of a dick then I first took him for, but it doesn't really refute my point. This is not a fair or just position to force someone in.

Nobody ever said Allah was fair. Look at poor Job ... or, even worse, Judas.

I was narrowing my scope by targetting the common judeo-christian perception of god, admittedly.

Christian, maybe, but certainly not Judeo.

But believing that mindless acceptance of and submission to a self-procraimedly higher authority is a a goal one should work towards, Im going to have to disagree.

Meh ... beats mindlessly striving for a bigger bank account.

So how does the fact that you won't be in Abraham's exact situation change the fact that Abraham's test was cruel, sadistic, completely illogical, and required Abraham to be ready to commit an immoral and reprehensible sin in order to prove his belief in a benevolent deity that wouldn't want him to commit such a sin?

Abraham knew Allah was not always a "benevolent" deity. Read Gen 21 ... before the test. Bloody mess, it is. Abraham was also post-flood, remember? He knew Allah would sometimes smack the lot of us, often without telling us why.


It's only ambiguous if you refuse to take the scenario at face value and try to explain it away by basically saying the bible is ambigous. It doesn't apply to you as you seem to accept the idea of such a test.

Well, it's how things work. I was teaching my daughter how to boil pasta earlier tonight and she got a very mild, but painful steam burn. She got this burn because when I told her to keep her hands away from a certain part of the pot, she didn't listen. Was this burn the result of failing some sort of cruel parental test? Sort of ... it was a test of whether or not she'd listen to me.

God just seems to have a much broader way of doing things. I am, however, only in the Divine image and not the Divine itself, so I am but a microcosm.


Hmmm. So free will is only there so we can other choose to submit totally to your idea of god, or choose not to do so. And it's not the freedom to arrive at our own conclusions and develop our own ideas, so that we might either commit ourselves to god fully by saying "I understand at least some of your purpose and agree with it completely and utterly", or just forge our own paths entirely?

That's right. That's all Free Will is. You can choose to follow Allah's word or your own. Take your pick. You've been given a whole lifetime to decide. You don't have to pick now.

Heheh, is it, indeed? Would not the devil (Or any other malicious supernatural you care to bring to the table) say the same thing of those he thinks he could get to mindlessly submit to him?

Chuckle ... well, maybe. However, it's pretty obvious which is which if you know what to look for.

There's a lot you still havn't addressed here if you still feel up for debate.

Oh let's not call it a debate. Debate is a tool of persuasion and I'm not here to persuade. Let's call it a conversation.

My nice easy argument. You can't understand God! You can't epect to understand God! You can't even begin to think about it.