|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 916,387 Year: 3,644/9,624 Month: 515/974 Week: 128/276 Day: 2/23 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 857 days) Posts: 2339 From: Socorro, New Mexico USA Joined: |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Pick and Choose Fundamentalism | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Perdition Member (Idle past 3258 days) Posts: 1593 From: Wisconsin Joined: |
Do world rulers on one hand work to save the lives of their citizens, and on the other hand go to war to kill lives of enemies? So, if I determine that the family across the street is an "enemy" I'm ok if I decide to run my car over their 3 month old?
In this case, it was the Isrealites themselves who God had called to account for their actions. They had begun to act in the same manner as the nations around them and because God is consistent and righteous, he judged them the same way he judged and dealt with them the same way he did the cannanites. But God doesn't discern. How many pople in a vast society have to disobey to qualify the entire society for being punished? Again, if the family across the street has 5 people: 2 Adults over 40, two teenagers and the aforementioned 3 month old. If the teenagers run riot, does that make it ok to kill the entire family? Or should we limit our punishment to only those who are actually doing wrong? Or do you think the fact that the parents didn't kill their own children mean they were evil by proxy? And still, what does the 3 month old have to do with this at all? Does god expect all babies to be like Stewie and build a ray gun to kill their family if they act up?
the bible has enough coherency to prove itself true, there is enough archeological evidence to prove the bible true, and there is enough consistency to prove it true. The Bible lacks coherency...and even if it didn't, coherency doesn't prove a story true. All good fiction is coherent, otherwise no one would read it. There is enough archeological evidence to prove the Bible false, but even if there were reams of archeology present, that wouldn't prove the entire Bible true, it would merely show that the writers of the Bible weren't dumb. They wanted people to believe the stories, so they used real places and people rather than making shit up...like L. Ron Hubbard... There is some consistency, but there are a lot of contradictions as well, but again, you're three for three here, consistency doesn't prove something true. All good fiction is consistent, otherwise no one would read it. What proves something true? Evidence. What does evidence prove? The specific claim is true, not an entire body of work. You seem to think that if a person proves one word out of every 100 is right, then the other 99 must be, but that's just poor reasoning.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
themasterdebator Inactive Member |
civil disobedience. Authorities have the right to act when their citizens are not acting in harmony with the laws. God was the lawmaker and he was the one who the people had to answer to. In this case, it was the Isrealites themselves who God had called to account for their actions. They had begun to act in the same manner as the nations around them and because God is consistent and righteous, he judged them the same way he judged and dealt with them the same way he did the cannanites.
I would prefer if you addressed the numbered points, they each mean different arguments. grouping my entire post as a whole does not accurately represent my viewpoints. The behavior is not consistent with God punishing those offending him. The Caananites had been following these practices for hundreds of years. If God had been offended by them he would have properly punished all perpetrators over this long period of time. Yet none of the generations prior to the Israelites arrival suffered the wrath of God for their pagan practices. So if God is really trying to punish those offending him, he is missing a large number of offenders. Many Caananites commited offensive practices yet died peaceful deaths because God had not decided to purge them yet. That is in addition to all the other societies which had similar practices yet never faced the wrath of God(Greeks and several Indian societies) The Israelite Priests however, do have reason they would want to kill all the Caananites. It would strike fear into their enemies they would fight future wars against(important if you are not all powerful, but if you are it serves no purpose), they could simply want revenge(How dare the Caananites defend the land they have owned? Its ours because God says so). The point of this argument being that while the events may have happened, that does not mean they were sanctioned by an all powerful diety. Killing the caananites in this manner is not an effective way to punish those offending Gods will, but are useful for the high priests and leaders of the Israelites. Saying they are sanctioned by God just makes the acts much easier to commit.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peg Member (Idle past 4950 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
DevilsAdvocate writes: So you think it is good and right that God murders innocent children and babies (is God not all-good as well as all-powerful)? How does that work in your discombobulated brain with promoting pro-life anti-abortion causes? So are you saying since Hitler, Po Pot and other mass murderurs ordered and coordinated the deliberate massacring of innocent men, women and children that it is ok if 'God' does it too? Please elaborate. I think you know that the bible does not condone wanton murder. The mosiac laws reflect a deep respect for life that all were to adhere to and if they didnt, then according to God, they did not deserve to live themselves. The difference here is that when God makes a decision regarding life and death matters, he always acts within his own respect for life principles which is why the Canaanites were deemed as not being worthy of living. They flouted the 'respect for life' principle by their disturbing practices. I cant say why the children died along with their parents, but im certainly not going to go down the path of condemning God. I am most definitely anti abortion and its through my bible trained conscience that i am such. I am also anti war which is what i've learnt from the bible, I am also anti violent movies and games which is what i've learnt from the bible.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peg Member (Idle past 4950 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
themasterdebater writes: The behavior is not consistent with God punishing those offending him. The Caananites had been following these practices for hundreds of years. If God had been offended by them he would have properly punished all perpetrators over this long period of time. Yet none of the generations prior to the Israelites arrival suffered the wrath of God for their pagan practices. So if God is really trying to punish those offending him, he is missing a large number of offenders. im glad you made this point, because it does seem like the issue may have been something other then their practices. But Moses words show that the reasons behind their destruction was two fold. Deut 9:1-5. says that it was "in fact, it is for the wickedness of these nations" and "in order to carry out the word that Jehovah swore to your forefathers, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob" "To your seed I am going to give this land." (Gen 12:1-7)"To your seed I will give this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the river Euphrates." (Gen 15:17-21) its true that God could have given some other land to Israel but by giving them this land, he used them as his instruments to destroy the Canaanites. the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah were also canaanite cities and they were destroyed a long time earlier due to their conduct. There is also the indication that God purposed to set a limit upon the Canaanite badness, he even informed Abraham about the future of the nation at Gen 15:16.: "In the fourth generation they will return here, because the error of the Amorites (the strongest Canaanite tribe) has not yet come to completion." So obviously God had put up with the canaanites for along time and now, with the time for Abrahams children to receive their inheritance, it was also the time for the canaanites to be destroyed completely. Most interesting though is the fact that the Canaanites knew 40 years in advance that Isreal and its God was coming. (Josh. 2:9-21, 24; 9:24-27) Rahab was a canaanite prostitute who chose to join the isrealites and was spared along with her whole family (she even became an ancestor of Jesus) There was also the city of the Gibeonites who asked Isreal for mercy and were also spared. But the other cities refused to seek mercy and chose to fight instead.So there was no injustice on Gods part in ordering the execution of all who opposed the isrealites. The fact is that any canaanites who wanted to be spared could be. But the majority chose to fight. And they lost. Unfortunately, their own actions caused the death of their children.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
themasterdebator Inactive Member |
I think your "bible trained conscience" is the problem here. It allows for massive contradictions. You seem to be aware that the mass murder of children is wrong and if it had happened anywhere other than the Bible, you would say it is wrong, but because God did it any action is instantly validated no matter how horrific. Never mind that there are reasonable explanations for the actions(revenge and to scare other potential opponents). You start with the assumption that God is right before even analyzing the actions taken place.
At this point, I have to ask you and I want you to address this directly. What action could God take that would lead you to believe he is committing a wrong act? I am not say he will commit such an act, but what would it take for you to believe God's action is wrong?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brian Member (Idle past 4980 days) Posts: 4659 From: Scotland Joined: |
There. Now I corrected you. Awww. Hey, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery so thanks for that!
Later dude. Hope so.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brian Member (Idle past 4980 days) Posts: 4659 From: Scotland Joined: |
The point of this argument being that while the events may have happened, It has been proven beyond all doubt that the Israelites certainly never put Jericho to the ban. Archaeological evidence from not just Jericho but from all over Palestine has shown that there was never a unified military campaign by the Israelites (even the Bible contradicts itself over Joshua's campaign). The strongest current theory of Israelite settlement in Palestine is that the Israelite emerged from within Canaanite society, which does away with the need for an Exodus and the conquest. The Exodus and conquest of Canaan as per the Bible narratives was discarded decades ago. However, these facts do not affect this particular debate, where we can witness first hand the lack of moral fibre, and the desperation to cling to this erroneous image that our friends here have of the god Yahweh. This is typical fundy theology though, start with a conclusion then look for evidence and if that evidence is either lacking or contradictory to their claims then they will ignore it or say they dont have all the answers but the Bible simply can't say that God is evil despite the obvious vulgar acts God is said to have commanded, and also carried out Himself, in the Bible.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13014 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
I've been worried that this thread might spin out of control, so I'd like to thank the participants for making the moderation job easy. Just a couple brief comments.
I want to complement Peg on maintaining her composure while enduring feedback which in some cases was somewhat extreme. I also want to complement the other side for not going too overboard. There seems to be a sense among most that these are Peg's sincere religious beliefs. It should be possible to challenge those beliefs while remaining respectful.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peg Member (Idle past 4950 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
themasterdebator writes: At this point, I have to ask you and I want you to address this directly. What action could God take that would lead you to believe he is committing a wrong act? I am not say he will commit such an act, but what would it take for you to believe God's action is wrong? i dont believe he can do wrong.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peg Member (Idle past 4950 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
cheers for the thumbs up percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Perdition Member (Idle past 3258 days) Posts: 1593 From: Wisconsin Joined: |
Everything God says is true. God says he respects life, therefore no matter what God does, it's out of respect for life, even when killing indiscriminately. Duh.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hill Billy Member (Idle past 5374 days) Posts: 163 From: The hills Joined: |
themasterdebator.
It's seems to me that if one is to respond to a post one might actually quote the post one is responding to.Masterdebator indeed. The years tell what the days never knew.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hill Billy Member (Idle past 5374 days) Posts: 163 From: The hills Joined: |
In some disputes the points of view are so vastly divergent that it is unrealistic to expect agreement, even agreement to disagree.
It would seem to me that this is what we got here. It seems that the points of view here could be expressed as..... A) Life is exclusive to this life. There is no "afterlife" B) There is an afterlife but it is independent of GOD C) There is an afterlife and and the nature of that afterlife is completely dependant on GOD's will. If one believes in option A then it is unlikely that one could achieve any understanding of the beliefs of those who believe option C.Believers in option A would view this current life as all there is and therefore would place a very high value on this life. It's no wonder that believers in option A would view many of GOD's actions as vile. However, if one believes option C then life here and now hold much less value then the real life to come. This current life becomes only a necessary but temporary diversion. As innocence is the original state of human being (and GOD'S will), it can be assumed that innocence will grant admission to heaven. Once one is old enough to lose their innocence then admittance depends on repentance and confession. (honesty) Based on the beliefs of option C, GOD bringing home the innocent is not a crime but a gift. The reasoning that it is wrong for a human to take a life but not so for GOD is also simple. GOD is aware of a humans future and would know if repentance is in that future. Humans are not. Therefore a human, in taking the life of another human is also taking the possibility of future repentance. Have a nice day. It could be the last one you have. The years tell what the days never knew.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
themasterdebator Inactive Member |
The reply function makes it clear who I am responding to and unless I am responding to a specific part of the post I like to simply use that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Perdition Member (Idle past 3258 days) Posts: 1593 From: Wisconsin Joined: |
Based on the beliefs of option C, GOD bringing home the innocent is not a crime but a gift. So, would you agree that if I go around and kill all the just born babies, I may be damning my own soul, but giving a great gift to all those babies who will never have to worry about their souls being tarnished and will forever live in the innocence and grace that God believes we all should have? Doesn't this belief seem to encourage infanticide? Doesn't this strike you as vile, wrong, and despicable?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024