I quoted it because you contradicted yourself. ''objective morality stems from God because all actions that God takes are morally correct.'' ''so God Himself would be incapable of immoral action because what is right is defined as what He does.'' Its the same thing.
How can you make a moral judgement then, if your criteria for whether something is good or bad is to compare it to a being which contradicts itself on certain things?
It would depend on the circumstance. Give me an example. Though that's a loaded question because we're assuming God actually does contradict Himself. It should be noted that I'm not a fan of objective morality in the first place.
Of course, not all fundamentalists are Christians, nor the other way around. But the Christian God is what we were talking about, so that's what I was referring to. And indeed, God doesn't prevent crusades, He's the reason for it. He demands all who don't believe in him to be killed. God was the justification of the Crusades. In the end, it might not have been the reason to declare the wars, but the reasoning is what fooled the indoctrinated population. The ancient Romans sought to bring civilization to the conquered nations and wealth to themselves. The minds behind the Crusades merely sought power, wealth and destruction. Jesus died because he was a threat to Rome. That's all there is to it. What other deities, then? Also, what is worse than eternal torture? A human life is on average 70 to 80 years. That's negligible compared to eternity. Heck, a million years is negligible, the age of the Earth and even the universe itself are all negligible when being compared to infinity. The life we live and the state we live it in is completely insignificant if all that waits is an eternity of terror and torture. And why is that? Because God invented it? Setting the speed limit for a road doesn't mean the one that set it can go faster, for the single fact that he invented and implemented the speed limit. (kind of a weak comparison, I'd agree, but I hope you get my point). The Roman gods were not without fault. They weren't perfect, yet still ruled the world after defeating those who created it. If God's knowledge is perfect, there's no need to continuously "test" mankind, as he knows all, and thus should know the outcome. These attributes describing God either aren't true, or are the evidence of God being a jerk. The same goes for the Bible. It's God's word, yet a small child with basic knowledge can disprove large parts of it. Did God lie? Why would He? Was He wrong? Impossible, but not because he knows all. Then did He not write the Bible? Then there'd barely be anything that would support His existence, and there'd be no reason to believe at all.
So were in the new testament does god/Jesus say you should kill in my name? Stuff that happens in gods name does not mean god wants it to happen or likes it.
Ah, yes, I planned on elaborating that further, but I forgot. Anyway, mostly it's used by people in power to distract the indoctrinated masses to believe them. At least this was the case for the Crusades. Not to mention I'm sure there are enough passages in the New Testament, or the Old Testament (even though it hardly makes sense, as both are made by God and are based on His words and actions, and are apparently instantly right) where there's called for the extermination of unbelievers and such, or at least they are promised eternal suffering (of which I just explained how unjust and evil it is).
If somebody uses the old testament to fool the masses... So? It doesn't make god wrong just makes the people stupid. 1.believing they should follow the old testament... Its invalid because of Jesus. 2. Believing everything somebody say's. "I am sure" is not good enough answer BTW old testament is mostly false. (too lazy to explain, its irrelevant to the topic at hand)
The Old and New testament both are filled with errors, contradictions and inconsistencies, like every single other religious text. And with the fooling of the masses with any text or anything, I didn't mean to say God was bad because of it. The problem is that people use God's supposed power and knowledge to justify their own actions by saying "Meh, God'll forgive me anyway". While it wouldn't be what God intended, it's still something man abuses, and without God, that opportunity wouldn't be there.
Then is there a central and "correct" view of both God and Hell? Or are there different interpretations that differ per person, basically meaning this entire discussion is useless, as all definitions are different?
No discussion is useless. Despite the futility of trying to debate such an amorphous and tangential topic, it's intellectually stimulating and forces the participants to have their views challenged and not take things for granted. Nothing causes more critical thinking than trying to understand God or develop/dispute a theodicy. EDIT: Ah, wonderful autocorrect on my phone decided to turn things into thongs.
That is very true and now I feel stupid because I thought basically the same thing this very day and completely forgot about it.
I dont think that hell exists,god should forgive everyone and understand us,because as I understand its a holy being.
I can sort of get the punishment thing, although God doesn't really seem to make a real effort of showing us he exists and all. The punishment itself is something I have a problem with, even if my views on Hell are from a fundamentalist viewpoint. The Roman way seems to be a great alternative.
