Ed

Sometimes he does, depending on the situation. He is not my kind of god, He just IS God.

Quote:

Ed: But in this particular case the Supreme Judge of the Universe has told us that there is a relationship. ng: Tell me where?

In the text God tells David that because of what he did his wives will be raped.

Quote:

Ed: But we know from other scriptures and experience that everything God does is just and he doesnt always tell us all the reasons he does things. ng: I know from the Bible that Yahweh, the mythological God of the Israelites, was nothing but just. You are giving me myth here, Ed. You have to twist everything the bible says in order to maintain this fallacy.

I know you dont know he is just, because you have not experienced him. Also you have yet to demonstrate that He is mythological.

Quote:

Ed: You mean he THINKS he has answered it. ng: Ed, the only person who thinks he is giving answers but does not actually give answers is you.

Where have I not given answers?

Quote:

ng: But the law is the law. The law is not there just for God. Observing the law tells people that justice is made and is for everybody. God can forgive but it was not he who was hurt by the fact that David broke the law. Uriah was hurt, and the community must know that the law stands and justice is made. For that David must die because that is what God's law says. Ed: God was also hurt, it is His Law that was broken. God's law is tempered by mercy. It is far more than just a bunch of do's and don'ts. ng: More nonsense. Laws are not made for God. They were made for humans to live by. Surely you understand this simple fact, Ed. You are saying that what David did was wrong because he broke a law and not because he caused Uriah and his family injustice. This would surely reduce God’s laws to a bunch of do’s and don’ts because they are not related to the injury caused.

Anytime you break God's law you are hurting fellow humans or yourself. But also, since God loves his creations, he also is saddened when we break his law and hurt others or ourselves.

Quote:

Ed: No, he is a person, it is most atheists that think that babies are not persons. But his death is also a means to an end, David's punishment. ng: Really! In direct contradiction that everyone shall die for his own sins. Yahweh breaks his own laws.

See Romans 3:9-23 and 6:23.

Quote:

Ed: If God does it, yes. If man, no. Only God is qualified to do such a thing. ng: Obviously you do not understand the idea of a law. Once again Yahweh breaks his own laws.

No, since God is the giver and creator of life, he has the right to take it away if there is good reason to.

Quote:

Ed: "Or he may have grown up to commit terrible crimes because of his unseemly origin, but instead God took him as child so he would not have gone to hell for his crimes as an adult. " Ed: No, God usually wants man to choose either good or evil, if he killed them at birth they would never have that choice. ng: Ed, try to be consistent.

I said USUALLY, how is that inconsistent?

Quote:

Ed See above about the criminal. In the case of the deformed child not, sometimes he wants them to experience life, and sometimes he doesnt. Why some and not others? We dont always know, though sometimes we do in hindsight. ng: You mean that we do no all get equal chances in life and that is part of God’s plan.

An "equal chance" is not always good for the person that gets it.

Quote:

ed: Yes, but the fact that we don't fully understand everything he does is evidence that he is not manmade. ng: What you call evidence, Ed, is quite amusing. What you see here is explained in a very simple way. The Bible was written by ignorant people. The inconsistencies, errors and general nonsense is due to ignorance and nothing more. The fact that you have to go through gyrations to try and patch it all is proof enough that there no God behind this.

What gyrations?

Ed

It implies that there are witnesses but it also imples that it was consensual. If it had been rape since the man would be the only one doing something wrong it would have said "and HE was found out".

Quote:

jtb: In fact, it implies that a woman's word is worthless: a woman cannot simply claim to have been raped, she will not be believed without witnesses. This rule still exists today in Muslim countries.

No, in ancient times, before DNA testing, witnesses were required in almost all crimes even in crimes against men. Some women would accuse a man of rape just because he spurned her advances or some other frivolous reason.

Quote:

jtb: The rape is made clear from the use of the phrase "lay hold on her", and also from the fact that seduction and consensual sex was already covered earlier in that same chapter: there is no need to cover it twice.

Laying hold of her is also needed in consensual sex. Sometimes the bible repeats laws and sample cases.

Quote:

jtb: Rape was NOT punishable by death, and YET AGAIN you have sought to justify your position by citing the punishment for ADULTEROUS rape. Note the use of the word BETROTHED. Why do you continue to cite Biblical verses which YOU KNOW don't support your position?

No, I demonstrated how they DO support my position.

Quote:

Ed: Where have I ignored evidence and fabricated apologetic red herrings? jtb: In the many, many deliberate lies you have used on this thread.

Prove it.

Quote:

Ed: Because if you go back further enough in time all that exists is a point with no dimensions, ie nothing, therefore there is no matter and energy at that time. But seconds later the Big Bang occurs and presto! There is matter and energy! jtb: It's time you learned some science. If time itself began in the Big Bang, then "seconds later the Big Bang occurs" is a nonsensical statement. There never was a time in which the Universe did not exist!

I just used that phrase for dramatic effect. But yes there is a point in cosmological history when the universe began to exist. Ever hear of the space-time theory of general relativity? It proved that space, time, energy and matter had a definite beginning.

Ed

Jude was human just like us, he made mistakes. God only prevented him from making a mistake when he wrote that letter.

Ed

We know that it is extremely unlikely that they are in heaven.

Quote:

sb: But Ed, that still doesn't answer the question of what good was the deterence in the case of Hitler and Dahlmer. It didn't work. You see Ed, it should be impossible for a mere mortal to break the commandments of a real god. Or the other possiblity is that there is a god but your religion has little to no reliable knowledge regarding it. Starboy

How do you know it didnt work? There could be a Hitler out there right now who is worried he could go to hell so he doesnt repeat what Hitler did. Why is it impossible for mortals to break the commandments of God? If he gives us a free moral will then it would be quite simple to break his moral laws.

Ed

No, it is just that he is so morally pure that even the simplest sin cannot exist in his face to face presence. How did I avoid the Amalekite issue? Almost every post on this thread deals with it!

Quote:

Ed: Because he usually lets man use his free will. And also, he sometimes allows evil in order to bring about a greater good. But we don't always know what the greater good is. And we don't always know why he usually lets man use his free will other than that he considers that gift of extreme importance, even though it may be used for great evil. wj: Not good enough. Man also lets man use free will, in most circumstances. Just because your god 'let' bad things happen 'for a greater good' does not let him off the hook! Being guilty by omission is as guilty as committing the act himself..

No, it is not the same. It is like a terrorist with a very sensitive bomb strapped to his back in a crowded mall. He may start raping a woman but if you try to stop him hundreds could die so you may have to let him rape her until a better solution can be determined to stop him. Just because you let him rape her does not mean that YOU are guilty of the rape.

lpetrich

Actually, all that one demonstrates is that one eventually runs into an era where quantum-gravity effects are sizable. And we still do not have a good theory of quantum gravity.

And even if the Universe did have a creator, it could well be that our Universe is simply a lab experiment in some super-Universe.

winstonjen

Fucking PATHETIC ANALOGY, ED!! Your god, if present, is omnipotent (can do anything), according to you. Therefore, he would have no trouble stopping the rape WITHOUT endangering the lives of others! Or do you admit that he is not all-powerful, and end up contradicting yourself?

Fiach

Religious morality and the morality of the Anthropomorphic God.

Ed's comments reflect a very perverted sense of morality. But his God is evil, so it is not surprising. Read the OLD TESTAMENT some tiime. It was commendable to take babies and smash them against the rocks. AND THIS DESPICABLE HORROR WAS NOT CONDEMNED BY THE BIBLE PROPAGANDISTS WHO CLAIM THEIR GOD ORDERED IT.

Either the Israelites were the Nazi SS of the O.T. or their God is really an evil cosmic monster. That is why his modern followers dominate the prison populations of America where Catholics and fundamentalists abound.

http://mypage.uniserve.ca/~tfrisen/m...ts/prisons.htm


Fiach

Jack the Bodiless

Hence the reason why THEY must be found out.

But you still haven't addressed the fact that SEDUCTION is already covered, and rape of BETROTHED women is also already covered.

Still no word on why it's OK to rape handmaidens, I see.
No, you have not. You are lying AGAIN. No amount of repetition of the punishment for ADULTEROUS rape will ever demonstrate that this applies to NON-ADULTEROUS rape.
See above. When asked to provide Biblical support for your belief that the death penalty applied to NON-ADULTEROUS rape, you again cited the penalty for ADULTEROUS rape, in the full knowledge that this Biblical verse did not support your position. There are many other examples I could use.
You repeated the false assertion that the Big Bang involves the Universe "coming from nothing". There never was a "nothing"!
What Hitler did was no different than what the Israelites did to the Amalekites. What Hitler did was in the name of God.

So why shouldn't he be in Heaven?
According to the Bible, God is far from being "morally pure". God is a liar, a murderer, a rapist, and a willing recipient of human sacrifices.

And your "nuclear strap-on" argument has been shown to be fallacious before, so why use it again?

Starboy

Ed, we don't "know" anything about their status in heaven, hell or anywhere else for that matter. All we "know" is that they are dead. That is the point. You may suspect that they are in some location but the only evidence you have is that they are dead.

Ed, listen carefully. It didn't work in the case of Hitler or Dahlmer. These people broke the "law" of god without regard for the consequences. You see Ed; any student of human behavior understands that if people aren’t convinced that something bad will indeed happen to them if they break a human "law", people will ignore it. It doesn't appear that a "law" of god is any more effective or special than a "law" of man. Unless man is the one enforcing it, the “law" is worthless. This very human characteristic of a so called "law" of god is further evidence that they are manmade and have nothing to do with a presumed god. Ed, the "law" of gravity isn't anything like a "law" of god. The "law" of gravity works without any human enforcement, while the "law" of god doesn't. You could make a case that god made the "law" of gravity, but it is obvious that man made the "law" of god.

Starboy