About Psalm 137

[Cow Poke]

Human standards are all we have to go by CP.

I can't believe you're that dense, Jimmy --- GOD would not be judged by human standards. Humans will be judged by GOD's standards.

[JimL]

I can't believe you're that dense, Jimmy --- GOD would not be judged by human standards. Humans will be judged by GOD's standards.

Humans can only judge the God of the Bible and his actions with human standards CP. You can give him a pass of course and say to yourself that good and evil according to human standards aren't relevent with respect to God, but you won't convert many sensible non believers with that kind of logic.

[Adrift]

Hmmmmm.... measuring God by human standards.... I guess that's par for the course for JimLy logic!

Which humans I wonder?

[Adrift]

Humans can only judge the God of the Bible and his actions with human standards CP. You can give him a pass of course and say to yourself that good and evil according to human standards aren't relevent with respect to God, but you won't convert many sensible non believers with that kind of logic.

I take it, you're one of the sensible ones.

[JimL]

Which humans I wonder?

Any humans.

[JimL]

I take it, you're one of the sensible ones.

Of course. If the killing of innocents is evil, which I assume you agree with, then the God of the Bible is evil, and not a God that I would worship.

[Adrift]

Any humans.

So, how about the humans who wrote the text?

[Adrift]

Of course. If the killing of innocents is evil, which I assume you agree with, then the God of the Bible is evil, and not a God that I would worship.

But now you've moved the goal post. What I specifically replied to was the following:

You can give him a pass of course and say to yourself that good and evil according to human standards aren't relevent with respect to God, but you won't convert many sensible non believers with that kind of logic.

[shunyadragon]

Oh, no doubt about it, thats why I said perhaps, but the fact that the God of the Bible is, by human standards, evil, is in itself, enough to turn away many potential converts.

In the context of the time God would not be evil, but from the human perspective a God among and above other God(s), to be feared and obeyed. Today this view is enough turn off rational potential converts. There is a good side to the progression of religions, but it may be difficult for the hard core-skeptic to see the bright side.

I understand that is the Bahai perspective, but it seems to me that the human view of revelation and the actual revelation from God would be two distinct and contrary notions of revelation. It can be one or the other, but it can't be both.

Not really contrary, because through the religions there is a growing sense of compassion and, love in humanity even the most ancient of religious worldviews. Unfortunately dwelling in ancient worldviews often brings out the dark side of humanity.

Yes, the evidence supports the progressive evolution of humanity, but the evidence doesn't support that evolution to have been supernaturally directed, nor is supernatural direction needed in order for humans to evolve. Btw, I like the Bahai faith in as much as I know of it, its very beautiful, but its evidence of a God is as lacking as any religion.

The evidence is of course neutral. That is not the argument for the Baha'i Faith. Maybe more later.

[Cow Poke]

Humans can only judge the God of the Bible and his actions with human standards CP.

Any human with half a brain would know that GOD is not held to human standards, Jimmy.

You can give him a pass of course and say to yourself that good and evil according to human standards aren't relevent with respect to God, but you won't convert many sensible non believers with that kind of logic.

It's RELEVANT! Not "relevent".

UES SPEELCHEKKER For crying out lowd!

[Tassman]

I can't believe you're that dense, Jimmy --- GOD would not be judged by human standards. Humans will be judged by GOD's standards.

Of course we can't judge God by mere human standards. The God of the Old Testament only seems

Human standards are all we have to go by CP.

Just as well. The divine standards are a bit of a worry.

[shunyadragon]

Oh, no doubt about it, thats why I said perhaps, but the fact that the God of the Bible is, by human standards, evil, is in itself, enough to turn away many potential converts.

I understand that is the Bahai perspective, but it seems to me that the human view of revelation and the actual revelation from God would be two distinct and contrary notions of revelation. It can be one or the other, but it can't be both.

Yes, the evidence supports the progressive evolution of humanity, but the evidence doesn't support that evolution to have been supernaturally directed, nor is supernatural direction needed in order for humans to evolve. Btw, I like the Bahai faith in as much as I know of it, its very beautiful, but its evidence of a God is as lacking as any religion.

I think this response deserves a further response. What is neglected by both sides is the bottom line human nature in history. Many Christian theists strive for justification of what 'God said,' and what 'God did' in the Bible, particularly the OT narratives as idealistic God's standard as God's word some quite literally. The skeptics attack them from the perspective of archaic evil God(s). In reality it is a very human narrative from the human perspective and reflects the human culture at the time it was written regardless of whether God exists or not.

[JimL]

Any human with half a brain would know that GOD is not held to human standards, Jimmy.

So, you judge God by Gods standards, which are diametrically opposed to your own? murder is okay, infanticide is okay, genicide is okay, as a matter of fact any actions considered evil by human standards becomes good if done by your God. Sorry CP, but thats just dumb, try using the other half of your brain.

It's RELEVANT! Not "relevent".

UES SPEELCHEKKER For crying out lowd!

Sorry CP, but I'm not here to placate you and your pet peaves.

[JimL]

But now you've moved the goal post. What I specifically replied to was the following:

You can give him a pass of course and say to yourself that good and evil according to human standards aren't relevent with respect to God, but you won't convert many sensible non believers with that kind of logic.

No, I haven't moved the goal posts. What I'm saying is that it is not sensible to differentiate between God and human behavior when it comes to good and evil. If infanticide, genocide, murder etc etc. is evil, then it is evil period and humans who make this differentiation with regards to God, including those who wrote the bible, are not making sense.

[Cow Poke]

No, I haven't moved the goal posts. What I'm saying is that it is not sensible to differentiate between God and human behavior when it comes to good and evil. If infanticide, genocide, murder etc etc. is evil, then it is evil period and humans who make this differentiation with regards to God, including those who wrote the bible, are not making sense.

If I create a work of art, I have every wright to do with it as I wish, including destroy it.
You don't.