Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Gamut · 06-05-2005, 07:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lee_merrill

I'm not sure what you mean here, but this woman is not God, people do not have this prerogative.

And Joseph did have the prerogative? I don't understand the difference. How is God telling Joshua to murder, different from God telling this woman to murder? :huh:

Quote:

How could there be the possibility of overcoming evil without any evil, though? All might does not mean the ability to do what is logically impossible.

This is a glaring contradiction and quite funny too. You cannot "overcome" evil if you are creating more of it. You just said the almighty did something logically impossible before saying he couldn't! Nice gear switch.

Also.....and I think this is the point of the whole discussion...you just plainly admitted that what Joshua did was evil!

Gentlemen, I think the conversation is over, and lee_merrill does not know what he believes, he just will not admit it.

Quote:

Are all deaths not ok, in just this way, then? If so, then would infinite life here on earth be the best of all?

Is it your position that there is no such thing as an evil act that takes lives? Are you saying there is no better way to die than to be hacked up?

Quote:

I do believe that death per se is not ultimate evil, and that God has a good purpose, even in the penalty of death, so we may accept God's decision in each person's death, even in these people's deaths. Why is it that if they had died at various times, we would not be raising this question, but if they all die at once, then this question is raised?

Wow....so it's no big deal to get murdered. I'll make sure and tell that to the victims when I see them in Hell.

Quote:

Can I not write a counter-description that says just that? In the same way others have added details? "Their swords shot with lightening, and they all painlessly dropped down dead."

Sure you can, but then you'd be adding to scripture. It seems we are being more faithful to interpret scripture based on what it says than you are. You really should learn to take it at face value and stop trying to force your morality on God. If it says He did it one way...why do you try to make it into another?

Another glaring admission that you really think these actions are evil and immoral.

Quote:

Leviticus 10:2 So fire came out from the presence of the Lord and consumed them, and they died before the Lord.

The difference is, we are actually told this. Since it is not mentioned in the other account, how can you assume it happened? Why didn't it happened just as described?

Quote:

I can think of other possibilities, however, I do not know enough to evaluate them, we need this information, more knowledge of the past, and the future, in order to decide this.

You are plain wrong here. Are you saying that God in His wisdom did not understand what shoud be revealed to us? Are you complaining about what God has given you?

He has given you everything you need in that book to help you understand Him. This is His revelation to you so that you may know Him and His character.

You do not need more revelation. If this book is the wonderful word of God, you should be more respectful of it and stop adding to it and complaining that it is not enough information. You should only be grateful to have such a wonderful book and believe exactly what it says.

If you don't understand why something in the Bible happened the way it did, all you can say is "God's ways are higher than ours" or "The wisdom of God is the folly of man."

:down:

lee_merrill · 06-05-2005, 01:15 PM

Hi everyone,

Quote:

Lee: "Do you agree that this this particular exercise of God's prerogative to decide on the end of a person's life was just?" You see, I have put my view in here, and a simple "yes" or a "no" answer will implicitly endorse my view.

Badger3k: Nope - simple question, simple answer. Once again - God orders Joshua to kill everyone - men, women, children, fetuses. Is that a good action.

Well, you must also answer my simple question, then! This question still requires an endorsement of your view, here, saying yes will be taken to mean that putting all these people to death is good, in and of itself. Which certainly is not true.

"Do you agree that this this particular exercise of God's prerogative to decide on the end of a person's life was just?"

Yes or no, please.

Quote:

Badger3k: But she had the perogative - God told her to do it.

Well, I find part of my previous reply appropriate here: "Upon hearing the voice of a person saying 'I am a policeman, open the door!' wouldn't we want to check first, to be sure the person really was a policeman? People do abandon their usual caution somehow, in dealing with the supernatural..."

Quote:

Badger3k: maybe God prevented those outside the house from hearing anything? Perhaps people heard the noise but God had them turn a blind eye to it and forget about it.

Well, this is script-writing, again, the point I was making is that with your conclusion, we have to write every death as an indictment on God.

Quote:

It's called scale. One murder is a crime and evil. Genocide, thousands of deaths, is beyond Capital Murder and is EVIL.

Certainly it is, unjust death is always evil, and the question is then "Does God have the prerogative to determine the time and manner of each person's death?" Even painful deaths, if suffering can have a benefit, and death is not the end, even this could result in good for a person.

Quote:

John: Want to try again? 20th Century 20th Century 20th Century

Give me one single prophecy that a person could look at and say: "The bible said it was going to happen sometime during the past hundred years, and by gosh it did!!"

Why won't these prophecies I mentioned do, though? A forever prophecy involves every century, including the 20th one, and this is not evasion.

If you wish, I can state this as a 20th century prophecy! "There will always be Jewish people during the years 1900 to 2000." Quite specific! Or "Babylon will not be rebuilt, during that time interval."

But surely you won't insist on a prophecy specific only to every possible interval of 100 years...

Quote:

Gamut: And Joseph did have the prerogative? I don't understand the difference. How is God telling Joshua to murder, different from God telling this woman to murder?

I don't hold that God told the woman to do what she did, though, nor did Joshua murder, if God has the prerogative to determine the time and manner of a person's death.

Quote:

Lee: How could there be the possibility of overcoming evil without any evil, though? All might does not mean the ability to do what is logically impossible.

Gamut: You cannot "overcome" evil if you are creating more of it.

I don't suppose anyone puts out those hurdles on the racing track?

Quote:

Gamut: Also.....and I think this is the point of the whole discussion...you just plainly admitted that what Joshua did was evil!

That was an example, I also just mentioned overcoming hurdles, does that imply I think Joshua was setting up a modern racecourse?

Quote:

Lee: Are all deaths not ok, in just this way, then? If so, then would infinite life here on earth be the best of all?

Gamut: Is it your position that there is no such thing as an evil act that takes lives? Are you saying there is no better way to die than to be hacked up?

No, I'm not, and these questions are not an answer! But in reply, I do believe that even terrible pain can bring about great good, as overcoming small pain and difficulties can bring about good on a lesser scale.

Quote:

Lee: Why is it that if they had died at various times, we would not be raising this question, but if they all die at once, then this question is raised?

Gamut: Wow....so it's no big deal to get murdered.

I'm not saying it's not a big deal, I'm asking instead, why there is this apparent discrepancy in the skeptic's questions? Why ask this question here, and not there?

Quote:

Lee: Can I not write a counter-description that says just that? In the same way others have added details? "Their swords shot with lightening, and they all painlessly dropped down dead."

Gamut: It seems we are being more faithful to interpret scripture based on what it says than you are.

Well no, I was adding a detailed description, like others have been adding descriptions and details.

Quote:

Leviticus 10:2 So fire came out from the presence of the Lord and consumed them, and they died before the Lord.

Gamut: The difference is, we are actually told this. Since it is not mentioned in the other account, how can you assume it happened?

I only mention this to show it was indeed possible, though I'm not saying (as others do seem to be doing) that this is really what happened.

Quote:

Gamut: You do not need more revelation.

I wasn't complaining, though. I was only noting that I do not know the past or the future, and that extensive knowledge of both is required, in order to evaluate whether God's command here could have been actually just.

Regards,
Lee

Biff the unclean · 06-05-2005, 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lee_merrill

I don't suppose anyone puts out those hurdles on the racing track?

That was an example, I also just mentioned overcoming hurdles, does that imply I think Joshua was setting up a modern racecourse?

But in reply, I do believe that even terrible pain can bring about great good, as overcoming small pain and difficulties can bring about good on a lesser scale.

The more I read Christian replies to the various Joshua Challenges posted on this board the more convinced I am that Christianity is basically an immoral belief system.
Evil and suffering are seen as seen as a sport. Infanticide and even genocide as a “prerogative.�? Cruelty and madness if they are thought to come from god are smiled upon. And most frightening of all there is no real discernable difference in this Christ centered depravity between the liberal and the fundamentalist Christian.

badger3k · 06-05-2005, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lee_merrill

Hi everyone,

Well, you must also answer my simple question, then! This question still requires an endorsement of your view, here, saying yes will be taken to mean that putting all these people to death is good, in and of itself. Which certainly is not true.

"Do you agree that this this particular exercise of God's prerogative to decide on the end of a person's life was just?"

Yes or no, please.

Well, to answer it yet again, and I'll quote what you quoted:

Quote:

Badger3k: Nope - simple question, simple answer.

So, yeah, this was not a just action. Asking a hundred times will not change my answer to yes, Lee. Now can you finally give a yes or no answer? It really is simple.

Quote:

Well, I find part of my previous reply appropriate here: "Upon hearing the voice of a person saying 'I am a policeman, open the door!' wouldn't we want to check first, to be sure the person really was a policeman? People do abandon their usual caution somehow, in dealing with the supernatural..."

Why not read what I wrote instead of cutting and pasting your own replies. I'll save you the trouble of going back:

Quote:

Originally Posted by badger3k

But she had the perogative - God told her to do it. I showed you with that one quote, and can find many others, that shows that Scripture and the Bible support her actions, so you can't claim that they don't. Again, who said it had to be a voice - do you hear voices, since you say God talks to you? If not, how do you know that isn't what happened to her?

Quote:Lee:
Upon hearing the voice of a person saying "I am a policeman, open the door!" wouldn't we want to check first, to be sure the person really was a policeman? People do abandon their usual caution somehow, in dealing with the supernatural, oftentimes.

Missed the point. The intervention of God was preventing that from happening. Her kids probably screamed and made noise as they died in horrific pain - maybe God prevented those outside the house from hearing anything? Perhaps people heard the noise but God had them turn a blind eye to it and forget about it. Perhaps a policeman was going to go to the door just before she started, and God changed his mind and let her do her Holy Work. God hardened Pharoahs heart so that thousands would die, so why wouldn't he change the minds of a few people?

Care to address the issue?

Quote:

Well, this is script-writing, again, the point I was making is that with your conclusion, we have to write every death as an indictment on God.

Why? I've shown that her actions fit the criteria for a real message from God. There are millions of others every day that are not specifically picked out to happen by God. Do you say there is absolutely NO difference between a person dying in their sleep at the age of 92 and GOD ORDERING BABIES TO BE HACKED TO DEATH? Absolutely no difference?

Quote:

Certainly it is, unjust death is always evil, and the question is then "Does God have the prerogative to determine the time and manner of each person's death?" Even painful deaths, if suffering can have a benefit, and death is not the end, even this could result in good for a person.

So, again, to you the ends justify the means. That is such a selfish and inhumane answer - what are the benefits to the children who were hacked apart? What was the good that came out of the parents who watched their children torn apart before they were slain brutally by the by-now dull edged blades. Such brutality, such agony, such terror. What is the good that can come from such an evil act? I see the usual "It is Just because God ordered it", so there is no absolute Good or Evil. What's evil one day can be good just because God orders it. Remember, the Commandment is "Thou shalt not kill unless I order you to, then it's perfectly OK."

Why do you hate humanity so much, Lee? What is it about most humans that make you feel so superior that their lives mean less than nothing to you?

Casper · 06-05-2005, 06:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Therese

(this is not to you specifically Therese, just using your post as an address to the discussion)

... so all those men women and children didn't actually feel any pain as they were being butchered?

Technically they may not have, they may have been supernaturally anesthetized...in fact I would think that a just and kind God would do that much so it needn't be mentioned in the account.

Biff the unclean · 06-05-2005, 07:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Casper

Technically they may not have, they may have been supernaturally anesthetized...in fact I would think that a just and kind God would do that much so it needn't be mentioned in the account.

There's just the tiniest, eensy weensy problem with the "just & kind" part. These people who Joshua committed genocide on didn't do anything to deserve it. They were being punished for what their ancestors, 400 years dead, had done. It's about as just and as kind as "putting you to sleep" like a dog for crimes committed by Oliver Cromwell's henchmen one of whom was your ancestor on your mom's side.

Casper · 06-05-2005, 09:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Biff the unclean

There's just the tiniest, eensy weensy problem with the "just & kind" part. These people who Joshua committed genocide on didn't do anything to deserve it. They were being punished for what their ancestors, 400 years dead, had done. It's about as just and as kind as "putting you to sleep" like a dog for crimes committed by Oliver Cromwell's henchmen one of whom was your ancestor on your mom's side.

Maybe they did? Or at least God thought they did? He's a little forgetful at times you know

BadBadBad · 06-06-2005, 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lee_merrill

Well, this question is phrased so that a one-word "yes" answer will not represent my position, and neither will a one-word "no" answer. "Have you stopped beating your wife?"

You've admitted that some were killed at God's command haven't you? This isn't a loaded question if you agree with the premises. If you beat your wife, "have you stopped beating your wife" is not a loaded question.

Quote:

So I write more than "yes" or "no," to state my position, here is a question for you, "Do you agree that this this particular exercise of God's prerogative to decide on the end of a person's life was just?" You see, I have put my view in here, and a simple "yes" or a "no" answer will implicitly endorse my view.

This is still a simple question, and I don't have to buy into any of your premises to answer. No I don't agree. It was not just to butcher children like goats.

Quote:

Well, no, "Thou shalt not kill" certainly includes killing a person without a prerogative to do so, and she did not have that prerogative, the conclusion being she was quite mistaken, or not in her right mind, at best. What she did is against the Bible, for it does seem she did not take any measures to find out the source of this voice.

You've repeated that God had a prerogative to kill over and over. How does God having a prerogative translate to Joshua having a prerogative to kill? Are you saying that if Joshua was commanded by God as told in the story that he too had a prerogative to kill by the edge of the sword? How can you determine if the woman or Joshua had a prerogative to kill from God? Without knowing that with any certainty how can you conclude that she or Joshua was mistaken? Was she insane and imagine God asking her to kill her children, or did she go insane because God was asking her to kill her children? How can you tell the difference?

What measures should you take to verify the unequivocable revelation by an omnipotent God? How do you verify the supernatural? If it's not God making this supernatural revelation what is it? I thought there was only one God.

Quote:

Upon hearing the voice of a person saying "I am a policeman, open the door!" wouldn't we want to check first, to be sure the person really was a policeman? People do abandon their usual caution somehow, in dealing with the supernatural, oftentimes.

How many supernatural policemen are there? If you can't differentiate God from imagination, then what does that tell you about God?

lee_merrill · 06-07-2005, 07:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by badger3k

Well, to answer it yet again, and I'll quote what you quoted:

So, yeah, this was not a just action. Asking a hundred times will not change my answer to yes, Lee.

But you didn't answer my yes or no question, I wasn't asking for you to answer your yes or no question. My question was phrased so as to contain an implicit endorsement of my view, no matter whether you say yes or no...

My phone line is out, it was thundering and lightening today, and so it may be a couple of days before I can reply to all the points being made and further questions being raised...

Regards,
Lee

badger3k · 06-08-2005, 05:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lee_merrill

But you didn't answer my yes or no question, I wasn't asking for you to answer your yes or no question. My question was phrased so as to contain an implicit endorsement of my view, no matter whether you say yes or no...

My phone line is out, it was thundering and lightening today, and so it may be a couple of days before I can reply to all the points being made and further questions being raised...

Regards,
Lee

Sorry if I won't answer your question the way you want me to, Lee, but I can't in any good conscience say that your God was just in killing those people. I know your question was phrased to get me to endorse your view, but I happen to have morals, and can't sanction the evil actions of genocide no matter who says it's OK. Sorry, I won't give up my humanity for your monstrous, cruel deity.

To recap, your question was: "Do you agree that this this particular exercise of God's prerogative to decide on the end of a person's life was just?"

My answer was no, I do not agree. Get over it and answer my question please. I'll still be here waiting when you get back on. :wave:

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.