Diogenes the Cynic

No.

mdarus

Let me explain more fully.

Yes

Amaleq13

Speak for yourself. The only "wrong" I "sense" is in your special pleading. I consider the applicability of moral standards to be contingent upon the cognitive awareness of the individual not upon their species or the nature of their existence.

Buster Daily

Why? I mean, scripturally, why can't God be a hypocrite? I'm not asserting anything. I want to know your angle.

Buster Daily

Much the same way that battered spouses in abusive relationships hear, "If you ever left me for someone else I would kill you," as the ultimate pledge of undying love. The way ancient Mesopotamian (and some modern Middle-Eastern) men treated their wives, daughters, and slaves was a model for the treatment they expected from their god.

Diogenes the Cynic

Genesis says that Adam and Eve knew right from wrong after they ate the apple. So humans know right from wrong. That means they can recognize when God is wrong. If they can't recognize when God is wrong then Genesis is incorrect. It also explicitly defines right and wrong as being the same for humans as for God ("you shall be as gods, knowing good and Evil").

There are also inumerable scriptural passages which can be cited about God's perfect judgement, omnibenevolence, perfect mercy, unconditional love etc. According to the Bible, God cannot be unjust and punishing people for failing to believe something he has given them no reason to believe is unjust.

I think the 1 Corinthians quotation in the OP is on point as well. If "God is love" and "love keeps no record of wrongs," then either God keeps no record of wrongs or God is not love.

I think that yummyfur's defense that people have to love God first fails to be convincing since it is not possible to love something you have no reason to believe exists and no means of ascertaining which religious "commandments" are correct. It all comes down to a WAG and an omnibenvevolent God could not logically base his judgement on whether people incidentally arrive at a correct belief through nothing but a guess. I like to use the analogy that God expecting people to guess which religion is the "true" one without evidence is akin to basing salvation on whether people can guess what number he's thinking of between one and infinity.

mdarus

Moral standards are contingent on more than cognitive awareness. It should not be surprising that certain prerogatives are retained by God and not extended to his creatures. There are acts that God can do that are forbidden to men. Chief among these is judging. God is permitted to judge while men are cautioned against it. The applicability of moral standards is contingent on position and authority.

It should be noted that God does not always "keep a record of wrongs." He employs mercy and justification to expunge offenses.

sentinel00

Then morality is arbitrary.

He can't expunge a record that does not exist. God, therefore, is not love if he keeps a record of wrongs.

mikem

1 Corinthians 6:1 - 3?

Amaleq13

What is the basis of this assertion? Faith?

What is not surprising is that the Faithful are willing to engage in special pleading for their god.

I consider such a position to be intellectually bankrupt though certainly beloved by all fascists.