Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
03-29-2002, 08:30 AM | #31 | |
Contributor
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: With 10,000 lakes who needs a coast?
Posts: 10,762
|
Quote:
|
|
03-29-2002, 08:32 AM | #32 | |
Contributor
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: With 10,000 lakes who needs a coast?
Posts: 10,762
|
Quote:
|
|
03-29-2002, 08:57 AM | #33 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,777
|
Quote:
|
|
03-29-2002, 11:42 AM | #34 | |||
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Greensboro, NC, U.S.A.
Posts: 2,597
|
Quote:
Quote:
I suppose that would be "B" from the two possibilities you list (leaving aside the question of whether or not the death penalty is morally justifiable). Quote:
I specifically touched on this in my previous post. I'll repost it as you didn't address it: Your contention that the primary motivation of god's genocidal acts (of which the slaughter of the Midianites was only one example) was that the victims were "evil" and that the fact that the totality of members of a particular group were eliminated is somehow "coincidental" or ancillary must necessarily include the contention that every member of that group including newborn infants were "evil" as well. In addition, it includes the implicit contention that none of the Hebrews were evil (otherwise god would have ordered them destroyed also). So, in what way can we regard the Midianite and Amalekite infants as "evil"? Regards, Bill Snedden |
|||
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|