How about this?

1. God is morally neutral, although His energy is overwhelmingly positive.

2. Any act that occurs under God's reign, good or bad, does so because God has given His people free will.

3. People impose their own morality (judgement of good and bad) on the things that they do. God neither permits nor denies people from this vanity.

4. The Bible accurately reveals many acts, good and bad. Some are attributed to God, some are attributed to the Devil.

5. In the Bible there are acts which God forbids, but which God also condones, commands, or causes. The nature of these acts is different at different times in the Bible.

6. Because God does not impose a specific morality, it is consistent for both good things and bad things (according to peoples' judgements) to happen.

7. The God of the Bible is consistent, in the sense that He has consistently allowed people to make their own choices.

My logic is not any less coherent than the logic of the atheists.

Hello…

Firstly, the reason that I refer to the GOD of the Bible as the “Biblical GOD” is to distinguish Him from ALL the other names which He is INCORRECTLY given on this site. In this manner, visitors will be able to see the difference when they read the specific posts. As much as it may offend you or your belief system, you must eventually come to the realization that the Biblical GOD is faithful and consistent only to His Words. Therefore, it would be totally irresponsible on your part to invoke the name of GOD and Jesus Christ and associate them to “spiritual truths” which are OUTSIDE the scope of the Bible. You must eventually realize that the Words of Jesus Christ are only found in the Bible and must be interpreted within its confines for proper understanding. If I were to misquote the words of Abraham-Hicks, Bashar, or Equinox in one of my posts, would you not want to correct me and warn me about my errors in interpretation? Would I not have to humbly accept your correction? Therefore, we should all appreciate the fact that "spiritual truths" are different and that the Bible stands on its own merit and authority.

Secondly, the Biblical GOD is a “HE”, not a “SHE” or an “IT”. If you want to get rid of your confusion, maybe you should stop visiting Atheist Websites. An atheist knows absolutely NOTHING about Biblical matters. An atheist does not even believe in a “god”. An atheist does not have the answer to the question: [HOW DID WE GET HERE?]. All an atheist will do is lead you astray with the wisdom of the world without having ANY intimate knowledge of the GOD in whom he supposedly does not believe.

Let us examine their “argument”…

Point (1): GOD is morally perfect (premise)

Of course, GOD is morally perfect. However, the atheist is unaware that part of being morally perfect is having the capacity to JUDGE. A morally perfect GOD that cannot judge has absolutely no moral AUTHORITY. How can GOD claim and display moral perfection without exposing moral IMPERFECTION? To what would you compare moral perfection in order to establish its “perfection”? This is the Mystery of Iniquity that began in The Garden of Eden and will finally be destroyed before the start of Eternity. The Mystery of Iniquity exists because of CHOICE. Man’s choice is to SIN. SIN leads to JUDGMENT. And JUDGMENT is the act of a MORALLY PERFECT GOD WITH COMPLETE MORAL AUTHORITY. Thus, from the start, the atheist has a FLAWED and LIMITED definition of moral perfection. Once you understand how Choice, Sin, and Judgment fit into the parameters of a morally perfect GOD, then Points (2), (3), and (4) can be read accordingly.

Point (5): In the Bible, there are acts which God forbids but which God also condones, commands, or causes.

Which acts are these? Chapter and verse, please? From within the framework of Choice, Sin, and Judgment from Point (1), where does the Biblical GOD contradict Himself or His Judgments?

Point (6): It is incoherent for a morally perfect being to condone, command, or cause immoral acts.

I totally agree. But, again, from within the framework of Choice, Sin, and Judgment from Point (1), where does the Biblical GOD contradict Himself or His Judgments? Chapter and verse, please?

Point (7): The God of the Bible is incoherent and, therefore, cannot exist.

I do not think so. Rather, the God of the ATHEIST is incoherent and, therefore, cannot exist. This is because the God of the ATHEIST is a flawed and limited God without any concept of the existence of Choice, Sin, and Judgment within moral perfection. The God of the ATHEIST has absolutely no moral authority and is INCOMPLETE in his moral perfection.

What does the Biblical GOD say about a false balance?

“A false balance is ABOMINATION to the Lord: but a JUST weight is His delight” [Proverbs 11:1].

The Biblical GOD does recognize Choice, Sin, and Judgment and is, therefore, COMPLETE in His moral perfection.

As expected, the atheist’s argument FAILS.

Thanks for reading.

Concerned Citizen

"Your definition of judgement seems to suggest that what may be moral in some circumstances could be immoral under different circumstances. Which, I suppose, explains why the God of the Old Testament is so different from the God of the New Testament. Aren't Christians supposed to be moral absolutists?" – Vesuvius

Thank you for this follow-up comment, Vesuvius.

I apologize if I gave you the impression that GOD’s judgment may be moral at times and immoral at other times. This was certainly not my intention because it would contradict the very premise that “GOD is morally perfect”. Pertaining to Judgment, the Biblical GOD’s judgment is always consistent and in reflection of His moral perfection. A morally perfect GOD will always judge in a morally perfect manner. If a morally perfect GOD judges in a morally imperfect manner, then there exists a serious flaw in GODLY character. Therefore, for a morally perfect GOD, the STANDARD of judgment must always be in reflection of His moral perfection. You will find this consistency of morally perfect judgment with GOD in both the Old and New Testaments in relation to man’s Choice and Sin.

The reason most people confuse the Old Testament GOD with the New Testament GOD is because the CONDITIONS of judgment change. The STANDARD of morally perfect judgment is still the same because the GOD of the Old Testament and the GOD of the New Testament are the SAME GOD. However, the CONDITIONS of judgment are NOT the same:

(1) In the Old Testament, GOD gives Israel the written Law. Within the Law is a collection of moral and civil codes which allowed Israel to receive many blessings through national and personal obedience. In contrast, national and personal disobedience brought chastisement and judgment. Thus, an Israelite or convert under the Law was judged by his faithfulness towards the perpetual demands of the Law. GOD met with the nation of Israel in the Temple with the services of the Levitical priesthood as mediator.

(2) In the New Testament, because of Israel’s blindness to accept Messiah, GOD gives the world Jesus Christ (the Living Law) as mediator. Through the blood-sacrifice of Jesus Christ (GOD in the FLESH), GOD is now dealing with INDIVIDUALS placed in the invisible Body of Christ (the Church). Presently, GOD is not dealing with the nations and cannot be found in any physical Temple. Thus, a man (Jew or non-Jew) is now judged in relation to whether or not he has personally accepted the blood-sacrifice of Jesus Christ and become BORN-AGAIN.

With this change of Testaments, did GOD’s moral perfection change? Absolutely not. The 10 Commandments given to Moses for the nation of Israel are still valid for the BORN-AGAIN Christian today (not for salvation, but for the success of his personal testimony). All the things which were abomination to GOD in the Old Testament are still abomination to Him in the New Testament. GOD’s character and standard of judgment have never changed. The only things which have changed are the conditions of judgment. For example, under the Law in Israel, the man and woman discovered in the act of adultery were to be stoned to death in order to remove SIN from the land. How many people would we be stoning today for this sin? Today, GOD is dealing with individuals, and individuals are subject to the laws of their own land. Thus, just because men and women are committing adultery and not getting stoned for the act, are we to assume that GOD condones the act of adultery in every nation? Absolutely not. The GOD who said, “Thou shalt not commit adultery” in the Old Testament through Moses [Exodus 20:14] is the same GOD who said, “Thou shalt not commit adultery” in the New Testament through Paul [Romans 13:9]. If there is no repentance for the sin of adultery, GOD’s morally perfect judgment will be rendered accordingly in due time on the guilty of any nation. This is just one example from among thousands of verses which prove that the Old Testament GOD is also the New Testament GOD with consistent moral perfection in judgment.

Yes, BORN-AGAIN Christians are moral absolutists in the SPIRIT. In other words, the Bible indicates that having the Spirit of GOD in you gives you the mind of Jesus Christ. Therefore, you should recognize the uniformity of GOD’s Words throughout both Testaments, establish His Law in your heart, and become a doer of the Word and not a hearer only. If you choose the things of the Spirit of GOD, then it will be profitable for you in blessings and rewards. Because GOD’s moral perfection is the SAME in both Testaments, a BORN-AGAIN Christian’s understanding of moral absolutes is also the SAME in both Testaments.

I hope this clarifies some points made in my previous post.

Thanks for reading.

Concerned Citizen

The unknown is always incoherent.

Ignorance is excusable by God (Matthew 5:3), but not for human official laws; the balance of tolerance is on the hand of God, but not on the hand of man. (Where is the Principle of correspondence? = "as above,so below; as below, so above.")

Not believing the unknown is reasonable and undestandable. Denying the unknown seems to be foolishness. To raise deliberately the ignorance to the rank of science is irresponsible. To use the ignorance against the ignorants for manipulate and subdue them is wretchedness and it is unpardonable

The human world is enough large for containing all the specimens of individuals and situations.

We have the free will TO CHOOSE, ASSUMING THE CONSEQUENCES.

now come on people. God is impersonal and is for the good of ALL (no favortism). Therefore, if condoning an immoral act by god will benefit the most good in god's all knowing wisdom, who are we to say it is immoral, since we can't even begin to understand and know what the acts of today moral or immoral will do 1000's of years down the future. Therefore, biblical contradictions only god knows why certain acts are condoned and sometimes the same acts aren't.

in thanking god for his divine choice the first premise, OAWNMBS is second premise, he thought of a plan third premise, the plan is current (in an active phase) The second question, whose intrepertation of the 'bibical god'impressed you the most?