Should we declare gods public enemy # 1.? Do you understand why we call immoral

[Greatest I am]

Should we declare gods public enemy # 1.? Do you understand why we call immoral gods, “Gods”?

Not all gods are immoral but our mainstream ones are definitely that.   

God’s law, should he/she/it ever show up, --- is supposed to become earth’s law, imposed by force, --- as need be, --- and the religious way, --- instead of sound moral arguments.

God is demonstrably not moral.

One of the more important commandments to us is that of not killing humans. God kills humans.

I assume that that law would be high on our commandment list; commands to a slave from a master. Yet God exempts himself from that good law and does this evil will and kills humans.

That commandment is a subjective position and as I can think of a few instances where killing a human would be the moral thing to do. That commandment is thus immoral.

I do not think it’s a good idea to give an obviously and demonstrably immoral Gods respect but many theists do.

The power to make human laws should never be given to our immoral gods. Especially Yahweh and Allah, who I think are the bottom of the barrel on morals.

Human law seeks to be moral and humane and should never be putrefied by the immoral Gods that mankind has create in our image.

To do so would be insane.

So tell me please, --- fellow religionist and believers, --- something I do not understand.

Why you and I call our gods, “God”, --- when he is such an immoral character, --- fictional or not?

Are we such immoral entities ourselves? I am immoral. Are you?

Regards
DL

P.S. When you reply, I might have to do this to those who will not answer from the heart and try to use their holy book of myths and turn to preaching.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3O1_3zBUKM8
Remember also my fellow religionists and believers, all clergy of all faiths are liars. God himself told me this when he told me to think more demographically.
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjRy29R4gP8

[Mopsus]

God doesn't want to impose His laws by force, He wants us to accept them freely. Our obstinacy requires the imposition of force, yes, but that's our own fault. 

[Greatest I am]

God doesn't want to impose His laws by force, He wants us to accept them freely. Our obstinacy requires the imposition of force, yes, but that's our own fault. 

Sure. Freely. That is what hell is all about.

Free will is anathema to threats and commandments.

Fools will not see that.

Regards
DL

[Mopsus]

God doesn't want to impose His laws by force, He wants us to accept them freely. Our obstinacy requires the imposition of force, yes, but that's our own fault. 

Sure. Freely. That is what hell is all about.

Free will is anathema to threats and commandments.

Fools will not see that.

Those who deny their free will already spend every day in hell.

What can I say? "The beast is driven by blows".

[Greatest I am]

God doesn't want to impose His laws by force, He wants us to accept them freely. Our obstinacy requires the imposition of force, yes, but that's our own fault. 

Sure. Freely. That is what hell is all about.

Free will is anathema to threats and commandments.

Fools will not see that.

Those who deny their free will already spend every day in hell.

What can I say? "The beast is driven by blows".

Only the biggest fools will try to use your free will gambit 6hese days.

Christians are always trying to absolve God of moral culpability in the fall by whipping out their favorite "free will!", or “ it’s all man’s fault”.

That is "God gave us free will and it was our free willed choices that caused our fall. Hence God is not blameworthy."

But this simply avoids God's culpability as the author of Human Nature. Free will is only the ability to choose. It is not an explanation why anyone would want to choose "A" or "B" (bad or good action). An explanation for why Eve would even have the nature of "being vulnerable to being easily swayed by a serpent" and "desiring to eat a forbidden fruit" must lie in the nature God gave Eve in the first place. Hence God is culpable for deliberately making humans with a nature-inclined-to-fall, and "free will" means nothing as a response to this problem.

If all sin by nature, then the sin nature is dominant. If not, we would have at least some who would not sin. That being the case, for God to punish us for following the instincts and natures he put in us would be quite wrong.

Psalm 51:5 "Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me."

[Mopsus]

You're reading too much morality into the concepts of "sin", "fall", and "punishment". They're all parts in a system of excess and correction; you can choose to be in control of that system (the path of free will) or let the system control you (the path of damnation).

[HisGrace]

God doesn't want to impose His laws by force, He wants us to accept them freely. Our obstinacy requires the imposition of force, yes, but that's our own fault. 

Sure. Freely. That is what hell is all about.

Free will is anathema to threats and commandments.

Fools will not see that.

Those who deny their free will already spend every day in hell.

What can I say? "The beast is driven by blows".

Only the biggest fools will try to use your free will gambit 6hese days.

Christians are always trying to absolve God of moral culpability in the fall by whipping out their favorite "free will!", or “ it’s all man’s fault”.

That is "God gave us free will and it was our free willed choices that caused our fall. Hence God is not blameworthy."

But this simply avoids God's culpability as the author of Human Nature. Free will is only the ability to choose. It is not an explanation why anyone would want to choose "A" or "B" (bad or good action). An explanation for why Eve would even have the nature of "being vulnerable to being easily swayed by a serpent" and "desiring to eat a forbidden fruit" must lie in the nature God gave Eve in the first place. Hence God is culpable for deliberately making humans with a nature-inclined-to-fall, and "free will" means nothing as a response to this problem.

If all sin by nature, then the sin nature is dominant. If not, we would have at least some who would not sin. That being the case, for God to punish us for following the instincts and natures he put in us would be quite wrong.

Psalm 51:5 "Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me."

The "free will" argument makes sense for sins that don't directly effect other people. Things like getting drunk, gambling, consensual fornication, and so forth. God told you not to do it, but lets you decide to test your faith in him. But if it's a sin against another person, that's something different. Everyone would agree that someone who has the capacity from stopping a murder from taking place, but doesn't, is morally culpable for it. That doesn't make the murderer any less responsible for their own actions, it's just that the indifferent bystander is responsible as well. I think just about every Christian would say that was a sin. So why isn't god sinning when he doesn't intervene to protect people? If the damage being done against another person by a sin is significant enough to send a sinner to hell, than why isn't it significant enough for god to stop it? That's the reason I can't believe in an engaged god who cares about people.

[Greatest I am]

You're reading too much morality into the concepts of "sin", "fall", and "punishment". They're all parts in a system of excess and correction; you can choose to be in control of that system (the path of free will) or let the system control you (the path of damnation).

I am a Gnostic Christian. That should be all I need say if you know your religions.

Christians used their Inquisitions on us for good reasons. Good to them that is.

Regards
DL

[Greatest I am]

God doesn't want to impose His laws by force, He wants us to accept them freely. Our obstinacy requires the imposition of force, yes, but that's our own fault. 

Sure. Freely. That is what hell is all about.

Free will is anathema to threats and commandments.

Fools will not see that.

Those who deny their free will already spend every day in hell.

What can I say? "The beast is driven by blows".

Only the biggest fools will try to use your free will gambit 6hese days.

Christians are always trying to absolve God of moral culpability in the fall by whipping out their favorite "free will!", or “ it’s all man’s fault”.

That is "God gave us free will and it was our free willed choices that caused our fall. Hence God is not blameworthy."

But this simply avoids God's culpability as the author of Human Nature. Free will is only the ability to choose. It is not an explanation why anyone would want to choose "A" or "B" (bad or good action). An explanation for why Eve would even have the nature of "being vulnerable to being easily swayed by a serpent" and "desiring to eat a forbidden fruit" must lie in the nature God gave Eve in the first place. Hence God is culpable for deliberately making humans with a nature-inclined-to-fall, and "free will" means nothing as a response to this problem.

If all sin by nature, then the sin nature is dominant. If not, we would have at least some who would not sin. That being the case, for God to punish us for following the instincts and natures he put in us would be quite wrong.

Psalm 51:5 "Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me."

The "free will" argument makes sense for sins that don't directly effect other people. Things like getting drunk, gambling, consensual fornication, and so forth. God told you not to do it, but lets you decide to test your faith in him. But if it's a sin against another person, that's something different. Everyone would agree that someone who has the capacity from stopping a murder from taking place, but doesn't, is morally culpable for it. That doesn't make the murderer any less responsible for their own actions, it's just that the indifferent bystander is responsible as well. I think just about every Christian would say that was a sin. So why isn't god sinning when he doesn't intervene to protect people? If the damage being done against another person by a sin is significant enough to send a sinner to hell, than why isn't it significant enough for god to stop it? That's the reason I can't believe in an engaged god who cares about people.

Indeed. It is hard for a God that never pops up, to have those he says he loves believe a deadbeat dad who never shows up.

Yet Christians idol worship that deadbeat prick.

Regards
DL

[Mopsus]

I am a Gnostic Christian.

Are you a member of the Eleusinian mystery cult as well?

It is hard for a God that never pops up, to have those he says he loves believe a deadbeat dad who never shows up.

Yet Christians idol worship that deadbeat prick.

Retrieve your father from the belly of the whale.