[TrashMan]

Originally posted by Flipside
Look at the classic and frequently contested tale of Onan.
Why was Onan killed by God? Because he 'wasted' (I believe the word used is stronger than 'spilt') his seed on the ground. He 'murdered' the life that could have been created. I think this part of the bible is showing that God REALLY means 'A life for a life'.
I would not call soldiers murderers because they are doing their job, for what they believe is right. And the ethos that travels with the tag 'murderer' is unfair to apply to them.
However a war is state-santioned murder in the coldest, most unemotional view (I'm not even beginning to consider things like 'just' or 'unjust' or other opinion related things, purely the facts, which is a War is premeditated, and once it is started, it is undoubted that people will lose their lives).
That is why I cannot accept that any God would sanction the killing of his own creations, regardless of who, if anyone is 'right'.

Edit : I AM aware that sometimes the death of one person can save the lives of many, etc, just want to restress, I am not sitting in judgement here, so please don't take anything I say personally

War is hell. Any soldier that kills in anything but self-defence(country defence) is a murderer.
If a army general would one day come to me and tell me that my country is going to war against someone and tell mo to go there and start shooting "enemy soldiers" the first one I would shoot would be either the general or the president.
ONLY defense. NO attack or "preemptive" strike....

[mikhael]

Originally posted by Sandwich
I am? How? I was merely trying to correctly define "murder" there.

Defining words is so problematic, isn't it?

Here's some definitions for murder. The agree more often than they don't, but not entirely:

[list=1]

• The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.
• To kill (another human) unlawfully.
• To kill brutally or inhumanly.
• To put an end to; destroy
• To kill with premediated malice; to kill (a human being) willfully, deliberately, and unlawfully
• To mutilate, spoil, or deform, as if with malice or cruelty; to mangle
• unlawful premeditated killing of a human being
• A flock of crows

So, "No Murder", Sandwich. Which is it? No unlawful killings? Or no unlawful PREMEDITATED killings? Does it involve mutilation? Does it have to satsify the most strict of these (unlawful, premeditated deliberate, willful and only a human being)? I know I'm being pedantic, but I'm trying to illustrate how sticky things can be when one tries to ignores the fact that all forms of communication involve interpretation.

More importantly, by going back to an older version and translating it, you are interpretting. No language can be precisely translated into another. Nuance and meanings are subtly different. Semantic loadings of words changes from language to language. You say the original verse meant 'no murder', not 'no killing' and that the the imperitive form was implied and not stated.

When you render up your judgement to the rest of us that it really means 'no murder' and not 'Thou Shalt Not Kill', you're giving us a different interpretation than many of us were taught. After all: the Bible is the inerrant word of God (so I'm told) and whatever is written therein is God's Word, no matter what language it is in. My Grandmother's says "Thou Shalt Not Kill". If both are the Word of God, which one is correct? That's left to the reader to interpret.

What if God was saying "No flocks of crows"? ;)

[Omniscaper]

Oh the joy of symantecs. People always forget the important factor that a word's meaning is defined by the context in which it is used.

Oh what I would give to have telepathy. It would solve many miscommunication problems.

PS - WHOHOO!!! An extra 1% for God/Jesus poll!!! I thought my vote wouldn't make a dent.

[Goober5000]

Originally posted by mikhael
8. A flock of crows

[Flipside]

A Flock of Crows is called a Murder of Crows

[mikhael]

Hence my inclusion of it in the list of possible meanings for 'murder', Flipside.

[wojta]

Unfortunately there are still many things that could not be explained by the science. We don't like empty spaces in our mind and we need to put something there. This thing is some god (written with small first letter !).
I have simply no need to worship any higher power.
If any god exists and if he (or she) is all-powerful, why he (she) wants to be prayed.
I'm for third option from the bottom.

[Ghostavo]

The things is... if god exists, why are we not perfect?

[Omniscaper]

Cuz humanity was gullible and messed things up. Now we're stuck with this nasty human condition that is not without remendy.

[mikhael]

If humanity were perfect in the first place, they could not have messed things up. They would have been immune to temptation.

[Omniscaper]

Didn't mean to imply that humanity was perfect at some point. But we were in a state of grace and was in perfect communion with God (yes thats a capitol "G"). We were created in His "likeness", not His perfection.

Considering for a moment the possibility that humanity was created by God to form a relation and communion with. Like all human relationships, its much more meaningful when the significant other chose to be with you rather than to do so because of lack of options. Otherwise the relationship would be empty.

[Flipside]

Mik, I know, I was just saying to Goober cos he wtf'd it

Possibly the imperfection was 'deliberate'. Maybe we have been given deliberate hurdles to climb over to discover who and what we are. After all, if it was easy, everyone would do it
Possibly it is how we deal with these problems and whether we can become more than our own fears make us, which is what 'God' is waiting for?

As they say, it's good to have a destination, but it is the journey that makes us

If I believed in a persona based god, I would be of the opinion he had pushed us out of the nest and is still waiting for us to fly before we hit the ground

[mikhael]

Originally posted by Omniscaper
Didn't mean to imply that humanity was perfect at some point. But we were in a state of grace and was in perfect communion with God (yes thats a capitol "G"). We were created in His "likeness", not His perfection.

Considering for a moment the possibility that humanity was created by God to form a relation and communion with. Like all human relationships, its much more meaningful when the significant other chose to be with you rather than to do so because of lack of options. Otherwise the relationship would be empty.

You're splitting hairs. Why would a perfect God choose to create imperfect pets?

[Sesquipedalian]

There is a small difficulty here regarding the term "perfection."  In fact, it is a term that has never be satisfactorily defined in all of history.  What does human perfection look like?  Using the example given above, to say that the ability to choose between good and evil is an imperfection will be flatly contradicted by those who say that it is a perfection.  Who is right?  

There isn't a decisive answer, for one simple reason:  what counts as "perfection" depends on what is being given value in a certain situation.  A perfect wine glass might be one that is beautiful, or one that has no flaws in the glass, or one that is shaped to deliver the wine to the tongue in just the right way, or one that goes well with the room's decor.  If free will is valuable, a perfect human being will be one who possesses that.  If inability to choose evil is valuable, a perfect human being will be one who does not have free will.

It is notable that the descriptions of Adam and Eve never use the terms perfection or imperfection.  The idea isn't on the radar.

[mikhael]

Funny, we can apply 'perfect' to God, but we can't define it for anything else? Convenient bit of logical worming, that.

The question is one of God's perfection, not Adam and Eve's. Why would a PERFECT GOD create imperfect pets? The inference is, naturally, that Adam and Eve are anything BUT perfect. We have, should you buy into the dusty tome, a written account of just how imperfect they are.

So, rather than dodge the question by going off in some odd direction, address the question as it was asked.

[Setekh]

Mik, if a question is flawed in its fundamental assumptions, then addressing it directly is often not possible and usually unhelpful. You understand that, so why not accept Sesq's counterpoint (which, btw, I agree with - Creation was described as good, not perfect)?

That said, I suppose I would ask: can something good ever forsake its goodness? Ever? That, I think, is what the Fall describes.

[mikhael]

The question is not flawed. The assumptions are:
God is Perfect.
Man is not Perfect.
God made Man.

Which one of these assumptions is flawed? The question is NOT flawed in its assumptions. It is flawed in its implications. Its left as an exercise to the reader to find that flaw, describe it and use it in a rational answer to the question. Yes, its intended to be leading.

I want to respond to your statement about the Fall, but that would require getting rather deeply into my personal beliefs. I try to keep those out of the board-at-large. Sorry. :/

[karajorma]

Since we're skirting the issue of Original Sin at the moment can someone answer me this one.

Adam & Eve eat from the tree of life which gave them knowledge of good and evil. Because of this God banished them.

But if they didn't know the difference between good and evil how can it have been evil to eat the apple in the first place?

[TrashMan]

Originally posted by mikhael


You're splitting hairs. Why would a perfect God choose to create imperfect pets?

Why would he make up perfect?

@Mik - Your logic is flawed form the beginning....
How can an unperfect beeing with his unperfect mind and superficial logic even try to explaina perfect beeing???
God  is beyon science and logic...

I have my own theories:

a) Why deons't God show up and do wonders and change the world? Why did he let him/her die?

He didn't. God gave us free will, but allso the responsibility that comes with it. All of our actions have consequences.... If a drunk driver runs over someone, it's not God's will, it's the drivers stupidity.
What about natural phenomenoms? To die from lightining, flood or a brick falling on your head? Well, God created the laws of physics too, and everything in the universe follows them. It's a mtter of multiple factors and chance...not God's will...

Sure...he might interfere, but wouldn't he be trampling our freedom? Wouldn't we than expect Him to come to our aid whenever something happens that we don't like?

b) Can something god forscake it's goodenss?
Sure...look at old Lucy...didn't he turn bad to the core?

[mikhael]

Originally posted by TrashMan

@Mik - Your logic is flawed form the beginning....
How can an unperfect beeing with his unperfect mind and superficial logic even try to explaina perfect beeing???
God  is beyon science and logic...

I recommend going and reading my response to Steak, Trashman.

And to answer your question: just because I'm tall doesn't mean I can't imagine and understand short. Just because I'm a centrist doesn't mean  I can't understand liberals and conservatives. Just becuase I don't share your faith, doesn't mean I can't understand your religion.

In short: just because I am imperfect does not mean that I cannot understand perfection.