When I googled "biblical GOD" the 1st listing was this:

An argument against such a god can be formally stated thus:

  1. God is morally perfect (premise)

  2. Any act that God condones, commands, or causes is morally permissible or mandated (from 1)

  3. Any act that God forbids is morally impermissible (from 1)

  4. The Bible accurately reveals many acts condoned, commanded, or caused by God

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

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

  7. The God of the Bible is incoherent and, therefore, cannot exist.


asked 08 Jul '10, 20:06

ursixx's gravatar image


edited 10 Jul '10, 00:11

Vesuvius's gravatar image


I edited the title to make it more consistent with the subject matter of the question and subsequently posted answers.

(10 Jul '10, 00:13) Vesuvius

How can an imperfect being begin to understand a perfect being? Your logic is flawed by that reason alone. To try an understand GOD is to try and place yourself on the same level. Your trying to use cause and effect to define something you do not have the capacity to understand. So any conclusion you arrive at is flawed and therefore wrong.

(10 Jul '10, 01:03) Goodisevil

thanks @Vesuvius .. appreciated :)

(10 Jul '10, 09:35) ursixx

@Goodisevil an imperfect being made in Gods(Genesis 1:27) image ,so then an imperfect God? I believe My God is on the same level with me.

(10 Jul '10, 10:43) ursixx

URSIXX: [Genesis 1:27] is BEFORE the Fall. At that time, Adam and Eve had a perfect image. They lost their perfect image AFTER the Fall through disobedience. From that point onwards, all the offspring had Adam's fallen image. Observe [Genesis 5:3]: "And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his OWN likeness, after HIS image; and called his name Seth:" The perfect image that man had BEFORE the Fall is re-acquired by becoming BORN-AGAIN.

(14 Jul '10, 01:54) Concerned Citizen

I will believe you are both on the same level when you can creat life or a tree out of nothing. using the argument that a man and woman creat life when she gives birth does not qualify as Man and Woman did not creat the mechinism that created that life, the mechanism was created by GOD. Just as people fight about creationism and darwinism, evolution was created by GOD as the mechanism for survival of the species. Those that can not adapt die, those that adapt survive. When you can creat a universe then I will believe you are on the same level as GOD.

(14 Jul '10, 02:00) Goodisevil
showing 1 of 6 show 5 more comments

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.


answered 09 Jul '10, 03:38

Vesuvius's gravatar image



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


answered 09 Jul '10, 04:28

Concerned%20Citizen's gravatar image

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?

(09 Jul '10, 05:31) Vesuvius

Thanks CC ..still confused but thanks anyway seems more and more like doublethink http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublethink

(09 Jul '10, 16:12) ursixx

VESUVIUS: Thanks for your follow-up comment. I have responded below in order to clarify some points for you.

(09 Jul '10, 20:51) Concerned Citizen

URSIXX: All I said was that a morally perfect GOD will judge in a morally perfect manner in the context of His morally perfect standard in relation to a man's choice and sin. From that, you accuse me of (1) holding two contradictory beliefs in my mind simultaneously and accepting both of them and (2) telling deliberate LIES while genuinely believing in them? I am a LIAR now? What are the TWO contradictory beliefs from my statement?

(09 Jul '10, 21:21) Concerned Citizen

CC I am going to clarify this easy with a quote from Patrica King, she said "Before I was saved, I used to try to read the Bible and it made no sense to me. After I was saved I understood everything and was amazed at the beauty and understanding I received." Someone from the outside can not see what we see on the inside. I will add you did a good job trying though! +1

(10 Jul '10, 04:14) Wade Casaldi

1):6th commandment is for man but not God? Do as I say not as I do? 2):I did not think your a liar: I know you are coming from a place of your beliefs and I respect that. If you said the sky was green I would respect that too because you are coming from a place of your understanding. But my understanding is that the sky is blue and I still find a green sky confusing

(10 Jul '10, 22:47) ursixx

URSIXX: The first 4 Commandments are in relation to GOD. Everything from the 5th Commandment onward is aimed at individual CONDUCT, and Jesus Christ interprets the 6th Commandment for us as MURDER [Matthew 19:18]. The Bible makes a clear distinction between the acts of Manslaughter [Numbers 35], Murder [Numbers 35], Capital Punishment [Genesis 9], Self-Defense [Luke 22:36], Government Executions [Romans 13], and Armed Combat or Warfare [Numbers 31]. Invoking the 6th Commandment in relation to ALL of these different circumstances is not correct.

(12 Jul '10, 02:26) Concerned Citizen

when your dead, your dead.

(14 Jul '10, 18:56) ursixx

When you're judged, you're judged.

(17 Jul '10, 15:32) Concerned Citizen
showing 2 of 9 show 7 more comments

"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


answered 09 Jul '10, 20:48

Concerned%20Citizen's gravatar image

Concerned Citizen


Why GOD, in His moral perfection, allowed (maybe recommended?) more wives for a man (harem), but for the women the same behaviour is an adultery sin? Is equitqble for God, this different measure for mankind and womankind? Did God create the womankind for vasality, or for equal partner? The suffering by frustration of woman soul, isn't matter neither for God's moral perfection?

(09 Jul '10, 23:03) Gleam

Actually, you make a lot of sense in this post. One of your more coherent posts! +1

(10 Jul '10, 01:06) Vesuvius

@Citizen. Until I am waiting for an answer from you, it happens a bizare coincidence: I just received a new call from AVAAZ.com for a collective petition against the actually practice of stoning to death for adultery, in Iraq. I put this as separate question.Please, answer there, your opinion is truly important for me (and I hope, also for others).

(10 Jul '10, 07:03) Gleam
showing 2 of 3 show 1 more comments

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.



answered 09 Jul '10, 07:55

Gleam's gravatar image


edited 10 Jul '10, 09:01

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.


answered 10 Jul '10, 00:37

RPuls's gravatar image


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?


answered 10 Jul '10, 00:55

fred's gravatar image


Click here to create a free account

If you are seeing this message then the Inward Quest system has noticed that your web browser is behaving in an unusual way and is now blocking your active participation in this site for security reasons. As a result, among other things, you may find that you are unable to answer any questions or leave any comments. Unusual browser behavior is often caused by add-ons (ad-blocking, privacy etc) that interfere with the operation of our website. If you have installed these kinds of add-ons, we suggest you disable them for this website



Asked: 08 Jul '10, 20:06

Seen: 1,261 times

Last updated: 10 Jul '10, 09:01

Follow this question

By Email:

Once you sign in you will be able to subscribe for any updates here



Answers and Comments

Markdown Basics

  • *italic* or _italic_
  • **bold** or __bold__
  • link:[text](http://url.com/ "title")
  • image?![alt text](/path/img.jpg "title")
  • numbered list: 1. Foo 2. Bar
  • to add a line break simply add two spaces to where you would like the new line to be.
  • basic HTML tags are also supported

Related Questions