The Moral Argument

[anonymous person]

Here you go folks. See if any of these 6 reasons listed, relate to what is exhibited in these threads:

https://www.barna.org/barna-update/...ns-young-christians-leave-church#.Vwk3Fkc8OFo

This is totally off-topic.

 

[anonymous person]

I've already answered that. Take my answer for what it is.


eudaimonia,

Mark

What post was this answer given in?

 

[bhsmte]

I just find it disturbing and creepy to see people attempt to justify atrocities and claim that it is all moral and good. It explains much about history.


eudaimonia,

Mark

I agree, but it also explains, the power of; the psychology of belief and how some folks, will create powerful defense mechanisms, to protect the same.

 

[Eudaimonist]

What post was this answer given in?

I was referring to post 1581.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Moral Orel]

What if the command to destroy them achieved a greater good than would have been achieved had He let them just continue to terrorize people?

But that's still only two options. I didn't say He would just let them go about their business, I asked why He didn't stop them in some other fashion. So why did He stop them in this fashion as opposed to one of a million ways He could have stopped them?

 

[bhsmte]

I just find it disturbing and creepy to see people attempt to justify atrocities and claim that it is all moral and good. It explains much about history.


eudaimonia,

Mark

The disturbing part, is the; hypocrisy, dishonesty and arrogance, which is clearly revealed, when some sense a tightly held belief, is threatened.

 

[anonymous person]

Because He had other options. The trolley problem can't be applied to Him because He isn't limited to just flipping a switch like we are. So He would choose to kill one child, when He could choose to save everyone. Now if you make a choice, then you want that choice to happen more than all your other choices. So sure, I want one child to die if it means saving two, but it means that God wants one child to die instead of one. Same can be applied to the Amalekites.

You seem to think that because God commanded the Amalekites to be destroyed that that was something He wanted to happen. That He wanted them to continue in rebellion. The very fact that He gave them 500 years to repent would argue against this. Numerous passages in the bible, far more than those few which speak about Him judging people, speak to His longsuffering and mercifulness and His kindness and His desire for people to repent and to choose life over death.

If God has given men freedom to love Him and their neighbor or to hate Him and their neighbor, then it follows that men can do things God does not want them to do.

He could have done a lot of things that made them stop being a danger to the Israelites. He could have mind-controlled them to not attack. He could have given the Israelites superpowers. If they really needed to be exterminated, He could have done it himself a-la-Sodom-and-Gamorah style. So He even wanted the Israelites to suffer the mental trauma of plunging their swords into babies. Why did He want all of this horrible stuff to happen?

He did not want it to happen.

Once again, you are associating God permitting something to happen with Him desiring for it to happen. God cannot mind control free moral agents. It is logically impossible just like Him making a round square or a married bachelor is logically impossible.

To think that God can do the logically impossible is to betray a misunderstanding of divine omnipotence.

 

[anonymous person]

I was referring to post 1581.


eudaimonia,

Mark

You stated that the command involved the death of innocents.

How does that demonstrate that God could not have had a morally sufficient reason for commanding the death of innocents?

 

[anonymous person]

But that's still only two options. I didn't say He would just let them go about their business, I asked why He didn't stop them in some other fashion. So why did He stop them in this fashion as opposed to one of a million ways He could have stopped them?

God did not desire to abrogate or nullify their free will.

 

[Moral Orel]

Once again, you are associating God permitting something to happen with Him desiring for it to happen.

No. I think things might be getting a bit mixed up. I'm talking about the order he gave. He didn't want the Amalekites running around slaughtering, but He wanted a slaughter of the Amalekites to stop it from continuing.

 

[bhsmte]

I love it when some claim to speak for a God.

 

[Moral Orel]

God did not desire to abrogate or nullify their free will.

But why not if it meant preserving the lives of innocents? Even some Israelite soldiers died during the attacks, assuredly, so why not to keep them from dying by doing something else? And mind-control is only one of a million options. Why no superpowers for the Israelites? Why not just warn the Israelites of impending attacks before they happen to protect them that way? Why specifically this exact answer to the problem?

 

[anonymous person]

No. I think things might be getting a bit mixed up. I'm talking about the order he gave. He didn't want the Amalekites running around slaughtering, but He wanted a slaughter of the Amalekites to stop it from continuing.

He wanted to preserve their freedom while simultaneously executing judgment on them after giving them 500 years to get their act straight. So He ordered them to be killed and those who for all their lives were subject to their barbarous machinations rejoiced along with Israel for having taken vengeance on them for the evil they did and were intent on doing.

We don't desire to have to subject cancer to radiation, or to cut a gangrene limb off that will surely kill the person from whom it is cut. But we do it for a greater good.

 

[anonymous person]

But why not if it meant preserving the lives of innocents? Even some Israelite soldiers died during the attacks, assuredly, so why not to keep them from dying by doing something else? And mind-control is only one of a million options. Why no superpowers for the Israelites? Why not just warn the Israelites of impending attacks before they happen to protect them that way? Why specifically this exact answer to the problem?

Because God decided it should be so.

One thing that will help you, is if you sat down and read the entire Bible, not just the few verses out of 600,000 which speak about God and who He is.

I can't help but think you have a very skewed and narrow view of who God is.

 

[Moral Orel]

He wanted to preserve their freedom while simultaneously executing judgment on them after giving them 500 years to get their act straight. So He ordered them to be killed and those who for all their lives were subject to their barbarous machinations rejoiced along with Israel for having taken vengeance on them for the evil they did and were intent on doing.

We don't desire to have to subject cancer to radiation, or to cut a gangrene limb off that will surely kill the person from whom it is cut. But we do it for a greater good.

But that's why people keep bringing up the women and children. It can't just be judgement because the women and children didn't do any of the attacking.

 

[anonymous person]

I love it when some claim to speak for a God.

I love it when you have nothing at all to contribute to this conversation but off topic links and comments. Shows you have nothing better to say, which is what I have been aware of all along.

 

[bhsmte]

But that's why people keep bringing up the women and children. It can't just be judgement because the women and children didn't do any of the attacking.

Much of the bible is about creating fear. Fear is a good short term method to get people to go along. Nothing like wiping out women and children, to create a bit of fear.

 

[anonymous person]

But that's why people keep bringing up the women and children. It can't just be judgement because the women and children didn't do any of the attacking.

Women did do the attacking. They fought alongside the men. The children old enough to wield a weapon fought also. This was how it was back then with these nomadic people.

 

[Moral Orel]

Because God decided it should be so.

Why? That's sort of a "because I said so" to they question "why did you say so?".

One thing that will help you, is if you sat down and read the entire Bible, not just the few verses out of 600,000 which speak about God and who He is.

You shouldn't make assumptions about just how much of the Bible I have read just because I've only pointed out a few.

 

[anonymous person]

Why? That's sort of a "because I said so" to they question "why did you say so?".

You shouldn't make assumptions about just how much of the Bible I have read just because I've only pointed out a few.

I am just going by what you told me. Remember?