god has no moral compass

I would like to first point out that I meant to show Genesis 2:16-17 not just Genesis 2:16 in my last post. Genesis 2:16-17 goes like this: "16 And the Lord God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die."" Now on to my first rebuttal: "Since you only have done a "quick perusal" how can you judge correctly?" When I said, "quick perusal" all I meant was that did a cursory overview of your verses. Your original argument consisted mostly of a bunch of verses you gathered from the Bible. I didn"t address your ten, initially, because I thought that your postulation was an untenable one and that I should address exactly why. I will address the nine remaining points by the end of this "rebuttal." "Well 1. I didn"t state it. The Dossier of Reason did." Since you are representing the "Dossier of Reason" by taking the pro-side of the debate, I have to address you when I point out a certain flaw. Since you choose the quotes and material that you present in you arguments, I presume, that you agree with whatever is being conveyed. If you don"t agree with your own position then why are you debating that side? You could be doing it purely for fun but, having taken a look at your profile, I highly doubt this is the case. "Well you nor anyone can prove that the christian god even exists. 5. much less "an Aristotelian "unmoved mover."" Is completely false." True, I am unable to prove that God exists 100 percent, but you are also at a roadblock too; you are unable to prove that God doesn"t 100 percent exist. God is unfalsifiable. Now, you could make a case that the burden of proof is on me to prove my proposition true, but regardless of this point, this is actually not pertinent to this debate? We are not discussing whether or not God exists, but we are dealing with a hypothetical question of, IF the Judao-Christian God did exists, then would He be immoral. If you wanted the subject of the debate to be about God"s existence then you didn"t make this clear in your starting argument. ""I believe" Well at least you had the nerve to say that. Because that"s not a 100% proven then. "God to be an "unmoved mover" by using scriptures found in the Bible." Well that"s totally false". "...Your god "moves" all---the---time. But then again, you cannot even prove that this god of "yours" even exists." I am not sure if you get exactly what an "unmoved mover" is. Maybe I didn"t explain it well. An "unmoved mover" is the "first cause." It is what caused all that IS. It is called,"unmoved" because unlike the rest of creation, It has no cause behind it. It is "eternal" Having no beginning. It is not bound by the principles of cause and effect. "There are a few passages/verses in the Bible that support this idea:" But if you prove that, then that would be a contradiction. And there are a good thousand or more contradictions and inconsistencies in your bible proving it to be unreadable." Unless we have different ideas of what a "unmoved mover" is, I believe that I have presented you with scriptures that will bolster this contention. I will let the voters decide on this, though. "Now I have no idea as to what version of the bible you are reading, but it is a clear abomination without question." You are correct that I used a slightly different version. I used the NIV instead of the KJV. Still, I addressed the evil issue in my last post. I will, however, go into a tad bit more detail here. Evil is a result of human doing wrong. When humans do not love,(as God commanded to do), and instead hate, it caused all sorts of problems in the world. Relationships are broken, things are stolen, people are murdered, racism, and rape occurs. Now God gave us the freedom to choose right and wrong. We"re totally free to choose. Unfortunately, freedom to choose good, requires that evil also exist. If humans could only do what is good, then we don"t really have a choice. We would be stuck doing only good. So, to give humans true freedom, evil needed to exist. Now, God, being creator needed to make a way for evil to come about. How did He do it? He probably created the circumstances where within evil could exist. Creating the "circumstances" is very different than if He had actually committed something that was evil. "Another form is "1 Colossians 1:15-17" does not exist in the KJV. It also does not exist in the NLT. Only in Colossians 1:15-17 does it exist." I made a mistake there. I didn"t mean to write the number one before Colossians. "What a boring little unproved story. You MUST prove the validity of YOUR god in order for it to be true." Again, we are not dealing with the validity of God, we are talking about a purely hypothetical situation. The reason I brought up the "transcendent objects" was to show that there are really only three possibilities in regards to God"s relationship to the concept of Morality. God can only be the creator of Morality, be an "aspect" of Morality, or God could be separate from Morality and must thus abide by it. I then went on to show that is is next to impossible--if one believes that Morality is "transcendent", to prove that God is immoral. You do seem to believe that Morality is absolute, and everyone should abide by it. If you believe this, you must also believe that humans didn"t invent it, and that it must be transcendent. Now I will address the rest of your points. "2. God is unquestionably just and righteous in all of his works Duet 32:4, Dan 9:14" God is completely righteous. I addressed earlier how one could be wholly good, and still be the cause of evil. 3. God should be feared because he can send you to hell Matt 10:28, Luke 12:5, Heb 10:31 It is scary to be judged. You must keep in mind though, that the same God who is judge, is also the God who made a way to easily escape that judgement(Romans 8:1, John 3:16). It is out of great love that Christ laid down His life for us while we were still being disobedient(Romans 5:8). A God who is not willing to punish those who commit evil is not one who is truly loving. He would be allowing people to commit wrongs and then getting away with it. Likewise, a god who is unwilling to forgive, is not a god of love. Love always forgives. Hell is primarily relational--it is what one experiences when one it not in the presence of the Lord(2 Thessalonians 1:9). Unfortunately, not being in the presence of the Lord means being stripped of all that is good and pleasurable since God is the root of all things good(James 1:17). The fact of the matter is, Hell is where you go if you choose to be away from God. God will respect that decision. God can not coexist with sin forever without casting judgment(Psalm 7:11). if one does not accept what Christ"s sacrifice, then He can not have a relationship with God. If God could circumvent this reality, he would(2 Peter 3:9), but He can"t. Those in Hell, have chosen to be in Hell, because they do not want to be with God. "God causes blindness, deafness and dumbness Ex 4:11" (The context of the verse was God assuring Moses that He is sovereign over everything. It was supposed to be be comforting. Also, you presume that deafness and blindness are bad. Now, I certainly never want to go deaf, but what we view as a disability, God may see as a strength(2 Corinthians 12:9). "God causes suffering so that his great works can be demonstrated John 9:1-9, 11:4, Isa 30:20, Ezek 38:16" I already addressed this point. 7. "God Kills Deut 32:29, 1 Sam 2:6" Let's take a look at the second verse, 1 Sam 2:6 . The verse actually states that God gives life as well and brings death. First off, death, by itself, is not inherently evil. Animals die all the time. If nothing ever died, there would be overpopulation. Death is necessary in our world. Secondly, killing is not inherently bad either. Killing may be necessary to survive--in the case of self-defense, or in times of war. Murder, however is wrong. God is the giver of life, so he basically has "ownership" over life itself, and can therefore take it away at will. We do not have ownership over life, so we can not intentionally rob another human of that right. God causes rain, tempest, drought and hurricanes Job 5:10, 37:2-12, Isa 30:30, 42:15, Matt 5:45 You already stated in your last post that "disaster" and "evil" aren't related, so here you are, in a way, contradicting yourself. You said, "how does someone, well actually any blithering idiot translate the words "disaster" from "evil"? The two words have 0% to do with each other." 8. God sends lying spirits and deceives prophets before destroying them 1 Kings 22:19-23, 2 Thess 2:11, Ezek 14:9, Num 23:19, 1 Sam 15:29, Tit 1:2 God can send evil or deceiving spirits to bring about a certain result or to test people to see if they will sin. Tests are not evil, they are meant to strengthen or to show where one's abilities are inadequate. Also, the prophets, by speaking falsely, are still sinning and therefore can still be held accountable for their sin. 9. God hates violence of mankind so he violently destroys all life Gen 6:11-13, Ezek 8:17 God hates unnecessary violence. God will, of course, use violence on people who are abusing others. If another person was attacking a friend of yours would you sit idly by and allow them to do it? 10. God rejoices in the destruction of sinners Deut 28:63, Ps 37:13, Pr 1:26 God is rich in love(Psalm 145:8), but there are those who are saturated with evil and will not stop terrorizing others. Looking at the contexts of the verses you provided, the "sinners" in them are referring to thoroughly wicked people. God delights in their death only because they will never repent from evil and their destruction will bring peace and rescue to other humans. Remember God is also the one who doesn't wish for any person to perish(2 Peter 3:9).