God vs Human Rights

Newbirth

Well-known member
So no humans at all are upstanding and upright according to the law because all humans die.
Your logic is not sound...Humans were dying before the law. The Law only identifies what people do wrong and the penalties
Jesus died on the cross; does that mean that He was not upstanding and upright according to the law?
No Jesus died because he was killed. Crucifixion does not treat the upstanding and upright differently from those guilty of crimes.
You seem to be getting your theology in a tangle here.
Your logic does not show a tangle.
 

The Pixie

Well-known member
I am curious how you arrive at God is against human rights when the people who wrote article 9 also believe God created humans.
I wrote quite a length post at the start of the thread explaining how I arrived at it. Which bit do you not understand?
 

The Pixie

Well-known member
most people do not know what freedom is.
How is that relevant to the topic?

Do you think people who not not properly understand freedom should not be given it?!?

If freedom is a human notion then humans would be free to do whatever they please.
The fact that every society every has devised laws for its people indicates otherwise.

But this is specifically about freedom of religion, so in that regard, what you say is true. Humans invented the notion of freedom of religion, and then - hopefully - allow humans to worship whoever they please.

I don't see how what most people consider has to do with what God does.
I see that a lot. Christians often take the view that just because humans consider killing and torture wrong, that consideration does not extend to God.

i can kind of see it, but I think it misses the point here that a god who indulges in wholesale killing and torture is not a god of love, even if we suppose killing and torture are perfectly moral for that god.
 

stiggy wiggy

Well-known member
........... a god who indulges in wholesale killing and torture ........

Still coming up empty-handed finding a Bible verse stating that God tortures? Oh, that' right, the Bible doesn't say it, "Christianity"does, so let me rephrase that: Still coming up empty-handed finding a single CARM Christian stating that God tortures?
 

Howie

Well-known member
How is that relevant to the topic?

Do you think people who not not properly understand freedom should not be given it?!?


The fact that every society every has devised laws for its people indicates otherwise.

But this is specifically about freedom of religion, so in that regard, what you say is true. Humans invented the notion of freedom of religion, and then - hopefully - allow humans to worship whoever they please.


I see that a lot. Christians often take the view that just because humans consider killing and torture wrong, that consideration does not extend to God.

i can kind of see it, but I think it misses the point here that a god who indulges in wholesale killing and torture is not a god of love, even if we suppose killing and torture are perfectly moral for that god.
You are absolutely controlled by your emotions.
 

rossum

Well-known member
Scripture says He is without sin. (Heb 4:15)
Then death is not caused by sin if someone without sin can die, is it. There must be some other cause that applies to Jesus a well as to all other humans. I pick birth as the cause of death. Jesus was born, as all other humans are born.
 

Algor

Well-known member
I'm glad you put some effort into morality. I'm not trying to knock that.

But there is a veil of deception over our own motivations. We are not pure, but we really love to think we are.
Everybody likes to flatter themselves, not only that their own motives are good, but that they have a particular insight into the truth of things.

When you value something besides the infinite source of value, somewhere you have to decide what value you make primary, what you put first, and these are all in relation to what things make you feel about yourself.

How does one reliably establish what the source of value is, and whether or not it is infinite? (edited for clarity)
For example, suppose you decide you want to give up your own organs/blood for someone else who is going to die, and you are the only compatible match in the world. Here you are being noble and selfless, giving up your life for another person. Most people wouldn't even do that much. But even when you do, how do I know why you are doing? Maybe you are doing it because you just hate life and want to die, maybe you are doing it because you think you are noble and virtuous and in the end are just glorifying yourself, maybe you feel guilty about something you did and hope this noble act will somehow make it up.

Most people think shallow, and most people measure an act only by its result, not by its motivations.
Nietzche once pointed out that the decision to measure an action by its motives was mere prejudice: why ISN'T outcome a better way? In societies that emphasize fairness, motive is important, because we ask ""Could anyone have made a better decision themselves"?. In societies that emphasize honor and authority, outcome is more important, because they ask "Did you injure or help those to whom you owe deference?"

(note: I think motive is very important, but the question is still a good one, and, of course, I come from a society where intent/motive is important).

And the one most devalued thing in the whole world is in fact, the single most valuable thing, the thing that created the ability to value itself, and what is good and right for something that thinks the most precious thing is worthless?
I think that the thing that created the ability to value is probably the universe. Seems difficult to employ as a measure to distinguish valuations.
 
Last edited:

Newbirth

Well-known member
I wrote quite a length post at the start of the thread explaining how I arrived at it. Which bit do you not understand?
I read the OP...it didn't explain how you arrived at anything. You put article 9 vs Ex20:3-4 as a background to say...anyone exercising their basic human right to freedom to religion will get tortured by God for doing so.
 

Howie

Well-known member
Then death is not caused by sin
You are picking and choosing to use the scriptures you believe support your position. I have cited scripture that asserts death is the consequence of sin, and that Jesus is without. I am consistent. You are not.
if someone without sin can die, is it. There must be some other cause that applies to Jesus a well as to all other humans. I pick birth as the cause of death. Jesus was born, as all other humans are born.
You pick why things are. I learn why things are by revelation from God through the writers of scripture.
 

SteveB

Well-known member
So you are saying you have the freedom to worship who you like, but if you choose not to worship God, you get punished.
According to your fraudulent use of the idea, sure, why not.

According to the bible, you'll be handed your hat and shown the door.
God won't force you to be where you don't want.

That said, since everything belongs to him, when he's done, everything that is corrupted and brought to ruin by sin will be cast into the lake of fire.

This means that death, hades, sin, all the other religious traditions, which are inherently a corruption, and the people who refused to place their trust in Jesus, they'll all find themselves in the lake of fire.
Not because that's what God wanted, but because they didn't want to follow Jesus.


Using that doublethink, the Soviets allowed freedom of religion. You could certainly worship whoever you like. If they found out, you would be arrested and thrown in a gulag, but you certainly had the right to worship.
Then I'd say you should stop using it.


I have yet to have such a warning from God, so I must be fine.
The gospel of Jesus IS the warning.
Failure to engage YHVH on his terms will result in your condemnation.


And obviously you cannot reveal where you get it from unless someone asks you directly because....
The bible. It's all contained in the bible.

Er, because, er.... reasons.
I see you still don't bother asking.

No, you really don't, Steve.
You can indeed claim that. You'd be erroneously in serious wrong.

That is a wonderful straw man Steve. Utterly unrelated to anything I said, but why let that stop you when you are in mid-rant.
Oh, it's related. You have however just demonstrated that you have no interest whatsoever in actually learning to understand.


Just to be clear, my parents never threatened to torture me if I failed to love them.
Neither did mine.

They did however chasten and discipline me when I failed to follow their instructions. They'd also threaten to discipline me for failing to follow their instructions.

If your parents never did that, according to the bible, they hated you.


I take it yours did?
See above.
 

Newbirth

Well-known member
How is that relevant to the topic?
you based your findings on what people assume freedom to be..
Do you think people who not not properly understand freedom should not be given it?!?
Who took it from them? Your statement shows that you believe people who do not properly understand freedom are not free and someone should give them freedom.
The fact that every society every has devised laws for its people indicates otherwise.
Laws are designed to restrict freedom. You are not making any sense.
But this is specifically about freedom of religion, so in that regard, what you say is true.
So we are on topic, good.
Humans invented the notion of freedom of religion,
Yes in your article 9, but you assumed it was a religious construct.
and then - hopefully - allow humans to worship whoever they please.
That would be in your article 9
I see that a lot. Christians often take the view that just because humans consider killing and torture wrong, that consideration does not extend to God.
Then you would be doing the same(taking a view)...because if you consider killing and torture not wrong, that consideration may not extend to God.
i can kind of see it, but I think it misses the point here that a god who indulges in wholesale killing and torture is not a god of love, even if we suppose killing and torture are perfectly moral for that god.
Have you considered what you call love may not be what God calls love?
 

Algor

Well-known member
Have you considered what you call love may not be what God calls love?
Well, sure, but anyone can do that.

"President Biden is always truthful. He even says so!"
What? He lied when he said X!
"Well, what YOU call truthful and what HE calls truthful are different."

I love you and care about you, and I always have.

How can you say that? You took all my money and walked out on me!
So we disagree on what loving and caring means. Let's not let that get between us!

and so forth. The point simply being that definitions can only be stretched so far.
 
Last edited:

Furion

Well-known member
God isn't anyone's friend. He is everyone's creator. He is also very dangerous.
He can twist your plans into a pretzel, have you doing something you never thought you would do, and you'll never know what hit you. Not that something like that has ever happened to me.
 

Newbirth

Well-known member
Well, sure, but anyone can do that.
then you agree with my position
"President Biden is always truthful. He even says so!"
What? He lied when he said X!
"Well, what YOU call truthful and what HE calls truthful are different."
There is a clear definition of lying.
I love you and care about you, and I always have.
How can you say that? You took all my money and walked out on me!
So we disagree on what loving and caring means. Let's not let that get between us!
Not so clear with love and loving.
and so forth. The point simply being that definitions can only be stretched so far.
For those who are stretching.....In Greek, there are different words for love. Translators used one word for all.
  1. Eros: romantic, passionate love. ...
  2. Philia: intimate, authentic friendship. ...
  3. Ludus: playful, flirtatious love. ...
  4. Storge: unconditional, familial love. ...
  5. Philautia: self-love. ...
  6. Pragma: committed, companionate love. ...
  7. Agápe: empathetic, universal love.
 

Electric Skeptic

Well-known member
I agree God can be dangerous, but you are missing out if you think he's not anyone's friend.

Abraham was a friend of God. Jesus said, "I no longer call you servants, I call you friends."
So it's my friend that will torture me forever because I don't believe in him. That's comforting. It's also stretching the definition of 'friend' rather ridiculously.
 

Algor

Well-known member
then you agree with my position

There is a clear definition of lying.

Not so clear with love and loving.


For those who are stretching.....In Greek, there are different words for love. Translators used one word for all.
  1. Eros: romantic, passionate love. ...
  2. Philia: intimate, authentic friendship. ...
  3. Ludus: playful, flirtatious love. ...
  4. Storge: unconditional, familial love. ...
  5. Philautia: self-love. ...
  6. Pragma: committed, companionate love. ...
  7. Agápe: empathetic, universal love.
I agree not so clear with love and loving. But occasionally one sees things that are pretty much the opposite of loving: horrible suffering, despair, unending pain, mental illness....It's pretty hard to watch an obsessive compulsive pick gaping bloody holes in their own face with their fingernails and say "Hey, God loves this woman". I'm not seeing it. None of those 7 definitons fit "Sustain an existence in which people's delusions and compulsions drive them into misery and pain".
 
Last edited:
Top