|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 866 days) Posts: 2339 From: Socorro, New Mexico USA Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Are Fundamentalists Inherently Immoral | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
anglagard Member (Idle past 866 days) Posts: 2339 From: Socorro, New Mexico USA Joined: |
In the discussion on the thread "What Would You Do If You Were God?" starting at Message 84 Dr. Adequate issued a direct challenge to Mike the Wiz to unequivocally condemn rape. In fact he challenged any and all creationists/anti-evolutionists to condemn rape under all circumstances.
So far none have responded. I think this dilemma should be a thread in and of itself rather than buried within another, therefore the PNT. I realize this may be seen as baiting to some degree, however, the motto is understanding through discussion. I want to know the reasoning behind not condemning acts considered immoral by any civilized person today; namely rape, slavery, genocide, or physical abuse and degradation of women and children; and why such acts are not firmly and loudly denounced by fundamentalists. I am confused. The literalists claim that morality is absolute yet they have refused to condemn rape as at least 8 atheists have done so far in the thread I mentioned. So which side is believes in absolute morality and which believes in relative morality? It appears to me that if something is condoned in the OT, then it is OK under at least some circumstances to fundamentalists while "evolutionists" seem to condemn such behavior under all conditions. What I expect to is to see either the upstanding rejection of relative morality offered in the OT or more likely the amazing twists of apologetics in defending what any person with the slightest hint of morality would unhesitatingly denounce as evil. Ball in your court, fundamentalists. Please surprise me. Faith and belief? Edited by anglagard, : replace want with expect as the word did not fit in with my desires. Edited by anglagard, : grammerr Edited by anglagard, : ID the direct post, still not used to the new update The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes. Salman Rushdie This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It’s us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminNosy Administrator Posts: 4754 From: Vancouver, BC, Canada Joined: |
Thread copied here from the Are Fundamentalists Inherently Immoral thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Holyfire23 Inactive Member |
I clicked the link and read the thread where you got this question.
I am a Christian.I can say that beyond the shadow of a doubt that rape is morally wrong. The Bible is very clear about sexual immorality. Matthew 15:19 "For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taz Member (Idle past 3321 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: |
Numbers 31: 15-17 "Have you allowed all the women to live?" he asked them. "They were the ones who followed Balaam's advice and were the means of turning the Israelites away from the LORD in what happened at Peor, so that a plague struck the LORD's people. Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, 18 but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
lyx2no Member (Idle past 4746 days) Posts: 1277 From: A vast, undifferentiated plane. Joined: |
Is it morally wrong because the bible says it's wrong, or because Suzy might not be a big fan?
It's not the man that knows the most that has the most to say. Anon
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kbertsche Member (Idle past 2161 days) Posts: 1427 From: San Jose, CA, USA Joined: |
quote:I don't believe your questions or Dr. Adequate's in the other thread are serious. Perhaps that's why he had such a poor response. Your question and thread title aren't baiting, but trolling.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Holyfire23 Inactive Member |
Numbers 25:16-18
"The LORD said to Moses, 'Treat the Midianites as enemies and kill them, because they treated you as enemies when they deceived you in the affair of Peor and their sister Cozbi, the daughter of a Midianite leader, the woman who was killed when the plague came as a result of Peor.' " At the time of Moses the Hebrew nation took its orders directly from God. God was the Ruler; Moses was the messanger. The Bible says that "the wages of sin is death" (Romans 6:23). Jesus came to die for the sins of man (John 3:16). In the Old Testament, however, Jesus had not come to earth yet and man still had to pay the price. Numbers chapter 31 is an example of God's just wrath--not of his immorality. The Midianites sinned and were therefore punished. According the Law of God. Justice cannot be counted as immorality. They are opposite.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3487 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
quote:Anger is only justified when one has purposely wronged you. God is justified in his anger towards Israel, but not the Midianites. From the text, the Midianites were being hospitable. The Israelites came to them, they didn't go find the Israelites.
Numbers 25 While Israel was staying in Shittim, the men began to indulge in sexual immorality with Moabite women, who invited them to the sacrifices to their gods. The people ate and bowed down before these gods. So Israel joined in worshiping the Baal of Peor. and the Lord's anger burned against them. As I understand it, it was a common practice in that time to worship the god of the place one is visiting or passing through. God's anger towards the Midianites was not justified and revenge is not justice.
Numbers 31 The Lord said to Moses, "Take vengeance on the Midianites for the Israelites. Even though in their time what the Israelites did was allowed, from today's perspective it was wrong and unjust; just as it is wrong and unjust today.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Holyfire23 Inactive Member |
Numbers 22:4-7
"The Moabites said to the elders of Midian, 'This horde [Israel] is going to lick up everything around us, as an ox licks up the grass of the field.'So Balak son of Zippor, who was king of Moab at that time, sent messengers to summon Balaam son of Beor, who was at Pethor, near the River, in his native land. Balak said: 'A people has come out of Egypt; they cover the face of the land and have settled next to me. Now come and put a curse on these people, because they are too powerful for me. Perhaps then I will be able to defeat them and drive them out of the country. For I know that those you bless are blessed, and those you curse are cursed.' The elders of Moab and Midian left, taking with them the fee for divination...." The Midianites had conspired with Balak. They were attempting to curse the Israelites. God took vengeance on the Midianites for this reason. You, sir, call God immoral for deciding the fate of the Midianites. Yet you yourself claim that the Midianites should not have been harmed. You call God immoral for judging the actions of the Midianites and yet you do the same thing! God judged the acts of the Midianites to be guilty of wrongdoing and you judged the Midianites to be innocent. What makes it ok for you to judge the Midianites but not God? Explain this contradiction. Edited by Holyfire23, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coragyps Member (Idle past 764 days) Posts: 5553 From: Snyder, Texas, USA Joined: |
What makes it ok for you to judge the Midianites but not God? What makes it OK for me, Coragyps, is that I actually exist. This God feller is a fiction, and a deeply psychopathic one at that. "Curses" are spectacularly ineffective at doing anything at all to their recipients, in any case. Why would anyone sane choose genocide as a "revenge" for a few words, anyway?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3487 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
quote:Actually he didn't. You did read the rest of the story didn't you? From your Message 7 Numbers 25:16-18 "The LORD said to Moses, 'Treat the Midianites as enemies and kill them, because they treated you as enemies when they deceived you in the affair of Peor and their sister Cozbi, the daughter of a Midianite leader, the woman who was killed when the plague came as a result of Peor.' " I assume Chapter 31 is related to that incident although written by the Priestly writer.
quote:Actually, I didn't call God immoral. I said his anger was not justified. I am judging what the author wrote. As the story is written, God was not justified in his anger towards the Midianites for the reason given. His anger was justified towards the Israelites. As I said, revenge is not justice. My comments do not imply that God was immoral for judging the Midianites. My comments would lead to the conclusion that God's orders concerning the Midianites were unjust and immoral by today's standards. Although I'm sure the people who were killed or taken as prisoners who didn't do anything, would not consider the God of the Hebrews to be moral and just. What wrong did the Midianites commit? They invited the Israelites to worship with them. How is that different than a Christian inviting a person of another religion to worship with them? If it is against their religion to worship other gods then they shouldn't have accepted the invitation. The Israelites knew the rules and it is their responsibility to follow them. They suffered a plague because they broke God's rules. The rules they agreed to follow.
quote:You judged them both, why can't I? I didn't say God couldn't judge the Midianites. Of course if he isn't their god, it really isn't his place to judge their actions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 314 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
What makes it ok for you to judge the Midianites but not God? Because I am not a genocidal psychopath. This makes me clearly morally superior to the biblegod. I don't say that I am really qualified to sit in judgment over anyone, but obviously I am better qualified to do so than the imaginary invisible man who lives in your head, because I am obviously his moral superior. On this subject it is scarcely possible for me to say "duh" loud enough. Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given. Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Holyfire23 Inactive Member |
And by whose standards do you base your moral opinion? I encourage everyone to answer this question.
Edited by Holyfire23, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 831 days) Posts: 3193 Joined: |
I, personally, link my moral compass to how I would like to be treated. My morality is based of MY standards, which are derived from my upbringing, and what I have learned is good for mankind.
I don't need a book to tell me how to treat people. Especially one that spews such filth, then turns around and says "love thy neighbor", then "fuck you, your neighbor is a piece of shit, KILL him and his wife and rape his daughters, then make her your slave for raping her"
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Holyfire23 Inactive Member |
I assume you consider yourself to be a moral person. I am not making any accusation that would allude to the contrary. I have a question though. How can there be absolute morality if every person establishes their own definition of morality based on their own unique opinons and upbringing? This question is based on the presupposition that morality is in fact absolute; otherwise you would have no valid arguement against the Bible.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024