Should atheists be allowed to serve in the US military?

[Archaeopteryx]

So you have just decided in your own good wisdom that what they believe in just another version of the religion. Just like the IRA's version is another version of Christianity. It didn't ever occur to you that it may not be another version but it may just be a crazy made up interpretation of something that they made up themselves. Why does it have to be one alternative that is another version of the same religion.

There are many reasons: The adherents self-identify as members of the religion; they rely on the same sacred texts; apart from some fundamental differences, the core teachings are similar; the same prophets and saints are revered; the same rituals and symbols, etc.

I thought religion was suppose to be good to others and promote love and kindness.

You thought wrong.

Isn't that how its suppose to be. How do you know its not a crazy idea that ISIS made up as they went along and just used a bit of the religion and twisted the truth of it by mixing it with man made interpretations of influenced by hate and cruelty. Isn't hate something that doesn't come from religion.

No. Hate can be religiously motivated, as ISIS aptly demonstrates.

Then if thats the case why do they also acknowledge that there can be many versions of morals like ISIS, the IRA's and all the other versions you have just been defending with abortion. I was stating that the common majority of beliefs in Muslims was that of the people who are living good lives with good morals. But you were saying this doesn't prove anything. ISIS version of moral belief can be just as valid and have expert opinion behind it to make them believe that they are just as right. You argued that other religions who believe that abortion is ok have their version of morals that say the opposite of what those who say abortion is wrong. So all this isn't having some common well established moral standards. Its dividing them and allowing many different versions.

You're confusing the two senses of the word again.

Well thats where the confusion is because I'm not making the claim. I am stating a truth based on my moral position which is what I believe to be the objective moral truth. We have to have a standard to go by so we can make some judgements about things. So we can say this is definitely wrong and that is right. But Ill revert back to what you said earlier about abortion. You said that some religions can think that abortion is OK with their moral views just like other religions say that its wrong with their moral views. They both cant be right at the same time. Who is right and who is wrong.

You seem to have forgotten the point of that example. It was not to argue over which moral position on abortion is the right one, but to illustrate how individuals with similar values can still hold different moral positions on the issue.

Well thats what you were saying before with abortion. You were giving me examples of religions that said that abortion was morally OK. Yet we both knew we had religions that said it was morally not OK. So you were implying that we can have some saying its OK and some saying its not at the same time. I was saying no you cant and that they were not saying it was OK but were actually still saying it was wrong and they were all agreeing. The truth is there is only one moral truth and that is Gods. But people try to side step the truth by adding this subjectivity and then we begin to have all these many versions.

How do you determine which version is God's? How do you determine that a particular religiously based moral claim is true?

A moral position that killing is wrong is a truth that can stand the test of time and what different people may think. I believe its a truth from God and not a man made thing. It hasn't been formulated or developed over time so that we have eventually come to a realization that killing is wrong. Its just in us from the beginning. When Cain killed Abel in the beginning he knew without having to be pointed out that he had done wrong. There wasnt a time where we were killing and each other and then we gradually eveolved to think killing was wrong. Its always been wrong and we have always know that. Thats the moral truth of God which is eternal.

The value of life has always been known as well. But we can have a different view of what is valuable. Like I said with life and non life. If its seen as just a egg with no life then it cant have any value. But then there has to be an assessment of what is life to find out the facts. Many religious people say that life starts at conception. So life is valuable from the beginning. So if someone doesn't think there is any life then abortion can be justified. But we also have to assess are they believing that the fetus is not life to justify their actions of having an abortion. So here we can see if there is any value and this can apply to many things like euthanasia and the death penalty. But the value is going to be similar is it life. Does it have a value of life or no life.

Not sure where you're going with this.

C. S lewis's argument for morals being from God is probably the best explanation I can think of.

My argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust. But how had I gotten this idea of just and unjust? A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line. What was I comparing this universe with when I called it unjust? If the whole show was bad and senseless from A to Z, so to speak, why did I, who was supposed to be part of the show, find myself in such violent reaction against it? A man feels wet when he falls into water, because man is not a water animal: a fish would not feel wet. Of course I could have given up my idea of justice by saying it was nothing but a private idea of my own. But if I did that, then my argument against God collapsed too — for the argument depended on saying that the world was really unjust, not simply that it did not happen to please my private fancies. Thus in the very act of trying to prove that God did not exist — in other words, that the whole of reality was senseless — I found I was forced to assume that one part of reality — namely my idea of justice — was full of sense. Consequently, atheism turns out to be too simple. If the whole universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning: just as, if there were no light in the universe and therefore no creatures with eyes, we should never know it was dark. Dark would be without meaning.*
CS Lewis’ Moral Argument | Atheology

You've posted this before, but I don't see how it answers the question. How does God serve as an explanation for morality?

My interpretation of the bible is what it says. Its not some matrix book that we can get several different versions from. Its quite easy to understand. The parables of Jesus are written in a way so that it is easy to understand. Its like a cake receipt. You dont have different versions of the receipt otherwise you will get a flat or burnt cake. If all else fails follow the instructions on the back of the pack.

But the Bible isn't like a recipe book. People have varied interpretations of the text, hence why we have Biblical hermeneutics. You didn't answer my question: do you consider your interpretation of the Bible infallible?

 

[Nithavela]

Wonderfull. "Kill them and their children before they can kill their children!"

 

[stevevw]

Actually, that's what a Christian site told me. Also, God didn't do it, the Israelites did. They just claim God told them to.

[FONT=&quot]Sometimes this was the case. But more so that the Israelites exaggerated their language or the interpretation is misunderstood and it didn't mean that everyone was killed but that the people of that race were finished as in excluded and expelled. But God also did completely wipe out some peoples as they had become completely corrupted to the point where even the children and babies were corrupted. Any future peoples would become the same and bring sin and corruption when they grew older.

But also that the Israelites didn't completely destroy some and they came back to reek havoc 100s of years later. God had said to completely destroy some for a reason and when this was not done the consequences were great and many more ended up be affected and dying. Sometimes God would not destroy people but expel them from lands just like with Adam and Eve being expelled from the Garden. So God was wise in His judgments and they were for a purpose. He knew what the consequences were and how it would affect things in the future.
[/FONT]

I should also add, that the website I got the scripture from, not only gives a different analysis of the passage, and why genocide is permissible, but gives an explanation that is contradictory to yours.

[FONT=&quot]Well I don’t know which one you are talking about. But what I have said is the common recognized understanding. We have to remember that we can get to understand some of the reason why God did things but we will never know completely as only God knows and has the great wisdom to judge and see things from his divine purposes. This was a greater picture of God establishing His laws and covenants with His people. This was in preparation for the coming of His Son Jesus Christ.
[/FONT]

Citation? The website I borrowed the passage from gives a contradictory explanation.

[FONT=&quot]You will have to give me the website for me to comment on whether they have misunderstood or that you have misunderstood or both. But you keep saying this without linking the site so I only have your word for it.
[/FONT]

So God punished them for the sin of sacrificing their children...by slaughtering their children? Couldn't ISIS make the same claim? Have you not completely rejected Allah? Have you not engaged in rites and practices forbidden by their God?

[FONT=&quot]No because [/FONT][FONT=&quot]ISIS[/FONT][FONT=&quot] are attacking people for no good reason. They have done nothing wrong. They are decent people like the ones beheaded. Only yesterday two policemen were stabbed by a [/FONT][FONT=&quot]ISIS[/FONT][FONT=&quot] supporter in [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Australia[/FONT][FONT=&quot] for nothing. They are mad people who are hateful murderers. God of the Old Testament did not just punish people for belonging to a different religion. The people were vile and committed all sorts of sin. They were the ones killing their children and committing sexual acts and other depraved acts. Some were attacking the Israelites and murdering their children and elderly as well and trying to wipe the people out as a nation.
[/FONT]

Things brings up the question, how much sin is "all sorts of sin"? What is the threshold of sin where extermination and genocide becomes okay? Is it okay to kill those who have "rejected God" or rejected your God? Afterall, these nations were not atheist, they believed in a different God(s)

[FONT=&quot]It was different back then. There were many pagan Gods. But like [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Sodom[/FONT][FONT=&quot] and [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Gomorrah[/FONT][FONT=&quot] these people were beyond redemption. You have to remember God didn't just go in and judge them and then kill them right away. They were warned over many years and sometimes over 100 years. God gave them ample time. They were made aware of their ways and given time to repent. Many people did repent in other situations and were not punished. Some sinned and were not destroyed because God knew they would eventually repent. But occasionally there were some after all the warnings and time given would not change and repent. Sin had infiltrated them so deep that there was no hope. They would now be a threat to all and cause sin to spread like a cancer. They could destroy others and Gods people if nothing was done. It was a bit like the Nazis or Poll pot or even [/FONT][FONT=&quot]ISIS[/FONT][FONT=&quot] at the moment.
[/FONT]

The passage makes it clear: "Otherwise, they will teach you to follow all the detestable things they do in worshiping their gods, and you will sin against the LORD your God." Deut. 7:1 says: "When the LORD thy God shall bring thee into the land whither thou goest to possess it, and hath cast out many nations before thee, the Hittites, and the Girgashites, and the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and mightier than thou;"

Sure sounds like they want their land. Does that justify genocide?

[FONT=&quot]These nations come under the Canaanites. All were judged as being part of the same and corrupted beyond hope. But they also wanted to destroy The Israelites. It wasn't just about the land.
[/FONT]

I'm not saying it isn't evil. But given that you have no problem with the Israelites when they did it, I don't see how you can comment on the morality of it when ISIS does it. The Israelites slaughtered these people because God commanded it, ISIS is slaughtering people because Allah commands it. If genocide and killing is wrong then it's wrong, right? If genocide is okay, then it's still okay, right? How do you make exceptions?

As I have explained they are completely different situations. ISIS have no justification and are committing evil and murderous acts on innocent people like the policemen and aid workers and poor Yazidi people who are an ancient people who are harmless and good kind people. It’s like the school yard bully picking on a disabled person. The people of the Old Testament were evil like the ISIS but even worse. They were doing all sorts of evil acts to their children and others. They murdered and sacrificed people and children. They committed all sorts of sexual acts and other depraved acts. God could find not one good or innocent among them. They were judged after many warnings and it actually saved many by taking this action. Even the babies that were destroyed went to heaven and if they had grown would have ended up sinning and in hell.

 

[JGG]

Sometimes this was the case. But more so that the Israelites exaggerated their language or the interpretation is misunderstood and it didn't mean that everyone was killed but that the people of that race were finished as in excluded and expelled. But God also did completely wipe out some peoples as they had become completely corrupted to the point where even the children and babies were corrupted. Any future peoples would become the same and bring sin and corruption when they grew older.

But also that the Israelites didn't completely destroy some and they came back to reek havoc 100s of years later. God had said to completely destroy some for a reason and when this was not done the consequences were great and many more ended up be affected and dying. Sometimes God would not destroy people but expel them from lands just like with Adam and Eve being expelled from the Garden. So God was wise in His judgments and they were for a purpose. He knew what the consequences were and how it would affect things in the future.

God was wise? God commanded the Israelites to commit genocide. To wipe out multiple races. And then when some survived, and they wreak havoc, God is wise because he knew how awful they were? They weren't the ones who committed genocide, and it's kind of understandable when they were upset about it.

Well I don’t know which one you are talking about. But what I have said is the common recognized understanding. We have to remember that we can get to understand some of the reason why God did things but we will never know completely as only God knows and has the great wisdom to judge and see things from his divine purposes. This was a greater picture of God establishing His laws and covenants with His people. This was in preparation for the coming of His Son Jesus Christ.

No, I see where it says that they were guilty of having unacceptable practices in the eyes of God. But if the problem is that they kill their children, what is the logic behind ordering the Israelites to kill all the children? Why were the Israelites condemned for killing the same children the Hittites were going to kill.

It's fairly obvious that they were guilty for having different religious rites. The exact same way you and I are guilty of having different religious rites from ISIS.

No because are attacking people for no good reason.

I'm sorry, I'm still stuck on what good reason the Israelites had for killing the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites. What was that good reason again?

They have done nothing wrong. They are decent people like the ones beheaded. Only yesterday two policemen were stabbed by a supporter in Australia for nothing.

Right. Again, what had the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites done wrong before they were decimated other than worship false gods?

They are mad people who are hateful murderers. God of the Old Testament did not just punish people for belonging to a different religion. The people were vile and committed all sorts of sin. They were the ones killing their children and committing sexual acts and other depraved acts. Some were attacking the Israelites and murdering their children and elderly as well and trying to wipe the people out as a nation.

Oh. They were sacrificing children, and they were gay. Funny, it doesn't mention the gay part in the Bible. If it had just been killing their children, the Israelites then went in and did that job for them.

I am also decided to look it up, but I decided to investigate the historical Hittites and child sacrifice. Not only were the Hittites not wiped out, it does not appear that they sacrificed children either. In fact, it seems they celebrated Passover the celebration where children were saved. (Religions of the Ancient World, Sarah Iles Johnson). So why was this civilization attacked by the Israelites?

On top of that aren't we trying to wipe out ISIS?

It was different back then.

Oh, genocide was okay back then, because it was different then. But genocide is wrong now because ...it's different now? That's called relative morals.

There were many pagan Gods. But like Sodom and Gomorrah these people were beyond redemption.

Firstly, what constitutes "beyond redemption" I thought all could be saved.?Secondly, are you saying that when someone is "beyond redemption" we should just kill them? Who is around in the United States that is "beyond redemption"?

You have to remember God didn't just go in and judge them and then kill them right away. They were warned over many years and sometimes over 100 years.

I hate to tell you this, but Allah, by way of radical Islam, has been warning people about His wrath for at least six decades now.

God gave them ample time. They were made aware of their ways and given time to repent. Many people did repent in other situations and were not punished. Some sinned and were not destroyed because God knew they would eventually repent. But occasionally there were some after all the warnings and time given would not change and repent. Sin had infiltrated them so deep that there was no hope. They would now be a threat to all and cause sin to spread like a cancer. They could destroy others and Gods people if nothing was done. It was a bit like the Nazis or Poll pot or even ISIS at the moment.

Who really isn't a threat to everyone else at them moment? Could we not invade France claiming that because they have nuclear weapons they are a threat to the rest of the world? Can we bomb France?

These nations come under the Canaanites. All were judged as being part of the same and corrupted beyond hope. But they also wanted to destroy The Israelites. It wasn't just about the land.

Okay, but they hadn't. They were punished for a crime they had not committed.

As I have explained they are completely different situations. ISIS have no justification and are committing evil and murderous acts on innocent people like the policemen and aid workers and poor Yazidi people who are an ancient people who are harmless and good kind people.

Right, but they have offended Allah, the same way these sinners offended God. They are no more innocent in the eyes of Allah than the Canaanites in the eyes of God.

It’s like the school yard bully picking on a disabled person.

The Israelites were clearly not disabled. Perhaps they were the bully, and said "God told me to beat up the disabled person."

The people of the Old Testament were evil like the ISIS but even worse. They were doing all sorts of evil acts to their children and others. They murdered and sacrificed people and children. They committed all sorts of sexual acts and other depraved acts. God could find not one good or innocent among them. They were judged after many warnings and it actually saved many by taking this action. Even the babies that were destroyed went to heaven and if they had grown would have ended up sinning and in hell.

Well...if they were sacrificed would they not also have gone to heaven?

But to clarify, you're saying genocide is wrong...unless God says it isn't?

 

[stevevw]

[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]

No, I see where it says that they were guilty of having unacceptable practices in the eyes of God. But if the problem is that they kill their children, what is the logic behind ordering the Israelites to kill all the children? Why were the Israelites condemned for killing the same children the Hittites were going to kill.

[FONT=&quot]I don’t understand what you mean by why were the Israelites condemned for killing the same children. But God ordered some peoples who had become completely corrupted from adult down to child. Any child of knowing age would have been corrupted with the sin of they parents and would then go on to do the same things later as was proven when the Israelites didn't completely kill some people. They came back to attack and them in the future. But any babies who were not old enough to know better would go to heaven anyway. If they had grown then they would have ended up in hell as sinners like their parents.
[/FONT]

It's fairly obvious that they were guilty for having different religious rites. The exact same way you and I are guilty of having different religious rites from ISIS.

[FONT=&quot]It wasn't about them having a different religion. They were corrupted and lived in sin. But part of that was that they worshiped idol gods who demanded sacrifices of blood from humans and other strange rituals. Back in those times there were many pagan gods. But they had rejected God and God had warned them many times to repent. They had corrupted things and their sin was spreading like cancer. From generation to generation and parent to child.
[/FONT]

I'm sorry, I'm still stuck on what good reason the Israelites had for killing the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites. What was that good reason again?

[FONT=&quot]Deuteronomy [/FONT][FONT=&quot]20:18[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
18so that they may not teach you to do according to all their detestable things which they have done for their gods, so that you would sin against the LORD your God.…
[/FONT]

Right. Again, what had the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites done wrong before they were decimated other than worship false gods?

Oh. They were sacrificing children, and they were gay. Funny, it doesn't mention the gay part in the Bible. If it had just been killing their children, the Israelites then went in and did that job for them.

I am also decided to look it up, but I decided to investigate the historical Hittites and child sacrifice. Not only were the Hittites not wiped out, it does not appear that they sacrificed children either. In fact, it seems they celebrated Passover the celebration where children were saved. (Religions of the Ancient World, Sarah Iles Johnson). So why was this civilization attacked by the Israelites?

[FONT=&quot]Yes it seems there was a time when the Hittites were the friends of The Israelites. They took on some of the beliefs of the Hebrews and for a time they shared in the truth. In fact this is where some of the great men were buried in the lands with the Hittites such as Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. But they eventually took on the idolatrous gods of the Canaanites and began to join forces with them[/FONT]

On top of that aren't we trying to wipe out ISIS?

[FONT=&quot]Because we are trying to wipe out [/FONT][FONT=&quot]ISIS[/FONT][FONT=&quot] doesn't mean we are representing God. I believe we are justifying our actions in the way this world would see what is right. We will always see that killing is wrong but it is the motives that are mixed with our deceitful intentions that I don’t really justify our actions. Yes we should be taking action against evil acts. But I don’t think we have the right as the west are doing more or less the same thing. Its like a tit for tat thing.
[/FONT]

Oh, genocide was okay back then, because it was different then. But genocide is wrong now because ...it's different now? That's called relative morals.

[FONT=&quot]God is the only worthy judge who can punish those who have sinned and corrupted themselves and others. When we act on our deceiving motives it only makes matters worse and that’s exactly what is happening. It will end up in a massive confrontation of two opposing forces who are more or less doing the same thing but in different ways.[/FONT]

Firstly, what constitutes "beyond redemption" I thought all could be saved.?Secondly, are you saying that when someone is "beyond redemption" we should just kill them? Who is around in the United States that is "beyond redemption"?

[FONT=&quot]All can be saved but you have to want to be saved. Also back then it was different. Jesus was not there as the savior so things had to be dealt with differently. I don’t know all of Gods ways and can only try to learn what happened in those times. But all these times were leading to Jesus coming. There may have been a different approach to how sin and judgment was done. It seems like it was the time when things were being established. But I am not the one to judge these things. Beyond redemption was like with [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Sodom[/FONT][FONT=&quot] and [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Gomorrah[/FONT][FONT=&quot]. They were committing all kinds of depraved sins. It was spreading like a cancer. God knew they were never going to repent so there was no hope for them. If left they would corrupt all again like in the time before the flood. God knew that He had to setup the way for Christ to come and not allow things to go the way they did before the flood. So maybe there were good people and bad people who were like those before the flood. God had to try and keep the balance so there was a chance without interfering to much with mankind. [/FONT]

I hate to tell you this, but Allah, by way of radical Islam, has been warning people about His wrath for at least six decades now.

[FONT=&quot]I am not sure about Allah and his ways. But just because he says this or they claim this doesn't mean its true like God was doing it. Nothing what Islam or at least what ISIS is doing is like what happened with God and the Israelites. [/FONT][FONT=&quot]ISIS[/FONT][FONT=&quot] are killing innocents and it is based on hate and anger. Have a look at what is going on in some of the Muslims countries. Of all the Muslims killed 90% have been killed by their own Muslims. This is how crazy they are. There is no divine judgment it is based on hate and anger and fear.
[/FONT]

Who really isn't a threat to everyone else at them moment? Could we not invade France claiming that because they have nuclear weapons they are a threat to the rest of the world? Can we bomb France?

[FONT=&quot]There are innocents in [/FONT][FONT=&quot]France[/FONT][FONT=&quot]. God did not kill one innocent and allowed them to repent. We cannot be the judge as our worldly version is corrupted. We allow corruption of the truth and revenge and other things to take the truth away. That’s why we never have peace as it’s always corrupted and has hidden agendas and motives.
[/FONT]

Okay, but they hadn't. They were punished for a crime they had not committed.

[FONT=&quot]They weren't just judged for attacking Gods people. It seems all theses nations were part of the same larger area of [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Canaan[/FONT][FONT=&quot]. They were all classed as Canaanites. There was something about these nations and their heritage. I am not sure as I am only learning myself as I go on. But I would assume it was something to do with Cain and able. I think it was more spiritual and these people were connected with a corruption that seem to be a part of their history and grew into something that consumed them. It could be something to do with how the whole of mankind was corrupted before the flood. This was another smaller example and had to be stopped. Maybe there is someone who can give a better explanation as it is something I think you need to have some pretty good knowledge about. I am just new at this but I try to do research as much as possible. I don’t want to go into it to much as it goes beyond what I can fully understand at the moment. But I sort of generally know but not in a lot of detail at the moment.
[/FONT]

Right, but they have offended Allah, the same way these sinners offended God. They are no more innocent in the eyes of Allah than the Canaanites in the eyes of God.

[FONT=&quot]No this is what [/FONT][FONT=&quot]ISIS[/FONT][FONT=&quot] are saying. But like I said if you look at their actions generally there is no measured response. They are erratic and all over the place. They kill their own and if you notice women never get involved. They are always being scared of their own men. They come out and kill good innocent people. One attacked some police the other day and wanted to cut their heads off. They kill aid workers who are helping their people and the poor. These are not evil people they are killing but good innocent people. These are not justified killings from a God who is worthy to judge and measured in Hid actions.
[/FONT]

The Israelites were clearly not disabled. Perhaps they were the bully, and said "God told me to beat up the disabled person."

[FONT=&quot]No because they only killed certain ones. They were the evil and corrupted ones who had a history of evil actions. This was seen by the way they sinned and worshiped their idol gods. They had a track record of evil deeds. They also had a track record of killing innocents in war attacks. They had evil tactics and were wanting to attack others for bad reasons to do with greed and hatred. They had a history of continually attacking the Israelites for no good reason. They were not going to live in peace and were always up to something. They were seen as the evil empires who wanted to rule the world according to mans sinful ways as was the case in the times before the flood.
[/FONT]

Well...if they were sacrificed would they not also have gone to heaven?

[FONT=&quot]The bible says that babies or very young children who do not know the difference of sin will be spared and go to heaven. Even though we are all born in sin there is a special place for these as they have no chance of being able to be saved in save themselves. I would imagine that any that were sacrificed in this way would have gone to heaven as they would know what the adults were doing.
[/FONT]

But to clarify, you're saying genocide is wrong...unless God says it isn't?

It wasn't genocide to God. It was judging and punishing evil sinful people who were not going to change. If they were not dealt with it would be worse and many more would suffer and die and lose their souls. We do the same thing when there are evil people except we don’t have the right like God does.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Very sad to see people trying to justify genocide.

 

[Rubiks]

Very sad to see people trying to justify genocide.

woah, woah, woah, how'd we get from atheists serving in the military to genocide? If you're talking about the Canaanites, calling it "genocide" is a bit of a misrepresentation. It was an act of judgement of God due the the sinful practices of that group, not because they belong genetically to that group. I believe God has all the authority to give or take life as he sees fit. Assuming God exists, would you agree or disagree with that?

 

[Chany]

Very sad to see people trying to justify genocide.

I always find it sad when people so readily abandon their moral compasses without any good argument to do so.

I know that, at some point, we have to say our moral intuitions are wrong. Genocide by a being who literally has the power to do anything and apparently loves us infinitely is not one intuition I'm willing to abandon.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

woah, woah, woah, how'd we get from atheists serving in the military to genocide? If you're talking about the Canaanites, calling it "genocide" is a bit of a misrepresentation. It was an act of judgement of God due the the sinful practices of that group, not because they belong genetically to that group. I believe God has all the authority to give or take life as he sees fit. Assuming God exists, would you agree or disagree with that?

That's the justification I was talking about. "Let's not call the destruction of an entire people 'genocide,' let's make up some stuff about how it was God's righteous judgment. That'll fly."

 

[stevevw]

That's the justification I was talking about. "Let's not call the destruction of an entire people 'genocide,' let's make up some stuff about how it was God's righteous judgment. That'll fly."

But what your not doing is even acknowledging that God had any justification. If you want to use the bible against God then use it properly. Don't take something written and turn it into something else by picking parts out of it. The bible clearly states that the people who were punished were sinful and evil to the point where they were doing acts that were killing others and affecting many. It also says God warned them and gave them every chance to repent. It also says that He killed no innocence. In Genocide none of this happens. The innocents are killed by the evil doers so its the other way around. So you are really being deceitful here by twisting something to accuse God of. This is exactly what they did to Jesus. When the allied forces take action against evil doers like those who commit genocide we are all for it. We say it must be done to stop the horrible things that are happening. Yet when God who is even more in a position to do this because He is the only worthy judge that knows and sees all things. He can see all the consequences of where it leads and what will happen. In some ways He would be accused of being cruel if He didn't do something. So many damn Him if He does and damn Him if he doesn't.

 

[Eudaimonist]

I believe God has all the authority to give or take life as he sees fit. Assuming God exists, would you agree or disagree with that?

I might, but it would be completely impossible for me to consider such a being as morally "good". He would live by his own rules, and his "goodness" would bear no close relation to human goodness.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Archaeopteryx]

But what your not doing is even acknowledging that God had any justification. If you want to use the bible against God then use it properly. Don't take something written and turn it into something else by picking parts out of it. The bible clearly states that the people who were punished were sinful and evil to the point where they were doing acts that were killing others and affecting many. It also says God warned them and gave them every chance to repent. It also says that He killed no innocence. In Genocide none of this happens. The innocents are killed by the evil doers so its the other way around. So you are really being deceitful here by twisting something to accuse God of. This is exactly what they did to Jesus. When the allied forces take action against evil doers like those who commit genocide we are all for it. We say it must be done to stop the horrible things that are happening. Yet when God who is even more in a position to do this because He is the only worthy judge that knows and sees all things. He can see all the consequences of where it leads and what will happen. In some ways He would be accused of being cruel if He didn't do something. So many damn Him if He does and damn Him if he doesn't.

I'm sorry steve, but that's nothing more than a pathetic excuse. You are proposing that an all-powerful, omnibenevolent God who can foresee the outcome of every conceivable course of action was unable to prevent alleged evils by any other means except genocide. What's worse is that you don't even have the gumption to use the word.

 

[Sammy-San]

In the US we swear on Bibles in the court rooms, our money says "In God We Trust.", and the public and politicians alike say God Bless America every chance we get.

President Obama's Greatest Speech - YouTube

That being the case, should atheists be allowed to serve in the US military or might their presence there offend God with their disbelief in His Divine Providence?

No. By your logic, only Christians should serve in the military.

 

[stevevw]

I always find it sad when people so readily abandon their moral compasses without any good argument to do so.

I know that, at some point, we have to say our moral intuitions are wrong. Genocide by a being who literally has the power to do anything and apparently loves us infinitely is not one intuition I'm willing to abandon.

The trouble is you are trying to bring up some religious nutters who believe they are acting in the name of God to do evil and act in hate. But how many examples can we find that are of humans that are acting without any moral compass at all that are committing all sorts of evil in this world. All believing they have a right and that what they are doing is good in some ways just the same as those religious nutters. Religion is a man made institution that is used to do evil. It just has a better camouflager. Hitlet thought he was doing the right thing, so did poll pot, Saddam Hussein, Gidarffi, Edi Armin, The mafia, the sex industry, The Colombian drug Lords, Pedophiles, prostitutes,drug takers, robbers, scammers, multi nationals who use slave labor, communists and every political system in the world. No one thinks they are wrong and they all believe that they have a right to do what they do. In their own minds they think its justified.

 

[Chany]

woah, woah, woah, how'd we get from atheists serving in the military to genocide? If you're talking about the Canaanites, calling it "genocide" is a bit of a misrepresentation. It was an act of judgement of God due the the sinful practices of that group, not because they belong genetically to that group. I believe God has all the authority to give or take life as he sees fit. Assuming God exists, would you agree or disagree with that?

No.

I don't have the authority to raise my children to worship me and kill them all because I have the power to do so.

 

[JGG]

It wasn't about them having a different religion. They were corrupted and lived in sin. But part of that was that they worshiped idol gods who demanded sacrifices of blood from humans and other strange rituals. Back in those times there were many pagan gods. But they had rejected God and God had warned them many times to repent. They had corrupted things and their sin was spreading like cancer. From generation to generation and parent to child.

[FONT=&quot]Deuteronomy [/FONT][FONT=&quot]20:18[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
18so that they may not teach you to do according to all their detestable things which they have done for their gods, so that you would sin against the LORD your God.…
[/FONT]

If it was just that they did "detestable things" would the passage end before it specifies that they are done for their gods, or that they may corrupt the Israelites?

Yes it seems there was a time when the Hittites were the friends of The Israelites. They took on some of the beliefs of the Hebrews and for a time they shared in the truth. In fact this is where some of the great men were buried in the lands with the Hittites such as Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. But they eventually took on the idolatrous gods of the Canaanites and began to join forces with them[/FONT]

The Israelites taught them about passover during the age of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob? How did that work?

Because we are trying to wipe out ISIS doesn't mean we are representing God. I believe we are justifying our actions in the way this world would see what is right. We will always see that killing is wrong but it is the motives that are mixed with our deceitful intentions that I don’t really justify our actions. Yes we should be taking action against evil acts. But I don’t think we have the right as the west are doing more or less the same thing. Its like a tit for tat thing.

But suppose we represent the Canaanites, and radical Islam represents the Israelites, and God has commanded them to wipe out all of the sinners? That's certainly how they see it. How can you say that "judgment and punishment" is wrong?

God is the only worthy judge who can punish those who have sinned and corrupted themselves and others. When we act on our deceiving motives it only makes matters worse and that’s exactly what is happening. It will end up in a massive confrontation of two opposing forces who are more or less doing the same thing but in different ways.

How do we know God isn't on their side?

All can be saved but you have to want to be saved. Also back then it was different. Jesus was not there as the savior so things had to be dealt with differently. I don’t know all of Gods ways and can only try to learn what happened in those times. But all these times were leading to Jesus coming. There may have been a different approach to how sin and judgment was done. It seems like it was the time when things were being established. But I am not the one to judge these things. Beyond redemption was like with [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Sodom[/FONT][FONT=&quot] and [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Gomorrah[/FONT][FONT=&quot]. They were committing all kinds of depraved sins. It was spreading like a cancer. God knew they were never going to repent so there was no hope for them. If left they would corrupt all again like in the time before the flood. God knew that He had to setup the way for Christ to come and not allow things to go the way they did before the flood. So maybe there were good people and bad people who were like those before the flood. God had to try and keep the balance so there was a chance without interfering to much with mankind.

What?

I am not sure about Allah and his ways. But just because he says this or they claim this doesn't mean its true like God was doing it. Nothing what Islam or at least what ISIS is doing is like what happened with God and the Israelites.

So when Muslims say God commanded genocide we should question it. When the Israelites say it there can be no doubt?

ISIS are killing innocents and it is based on hate and anger. Have a look at what is going on in some of the Muslims countries.

When the Israelites first slaughtered the first tribe of Canaanites, do you think the other tribes saw the Israelites as carrying out God's justice, or killing innocent people out of hatred and anger?

Of all the Muslims killed 90% have been killed by their own Muslims. This is how crazy they are. There is no divine judgment it is based on hate and anger and fear.

I'd venture a guess that they were not "True Muslims (tm)". Christians rarely acknowledge that Christians outside their denomination are really Christians, and then condemn their beliefs as heresy. This is especially true among fundamentalist groups. Why do you think Islam would be different. They aren't killing Muslims they're killing heretics. It's not as thought Christians haven't done the same.

There are innocents in France. God did not kill one innocent and allowed them to repent. We cannot be the judge as our worldly version is corrupted. We allow corruption of the truth and revenge and other things to take the truth away. That’s why we never have peace as it’s always corrupted and has hidden agendas and motives.

I thought we agreed that there were innocent children in all of these places.

No because they only killed certain ones. They were the evil and corrupted ones who had a history of evil actions. This was seen by the way they sinned and worshiped their idol gods. They had a track record of evil deeds. They also had a track record of killing innocents in war attacks. They had evil tactics and were wanting to attack others for bad reasons to do with greed and hatred. They had a history of continually attacking the Israelites for no good reason. They were not going to live in peace and were always up to something. They were seen as the evil empires who wanted to rule the world according to mans sinful ways as was the case in the times before the flood.

You don't think ISIS sees us as the Evil Empire who wants to rule the world? Has the west not killed innocents in war attacks?

The bible says that babies or very young children who do not know the difference of sin will be spared and go to heaven. Even though we are all born in sin there is a special place for these as they have no chance of being able to be saved in save themselves. I would imagine that any that were sacrificed in this way would have gone to heaven as they would know what the adults were doing.

Killing babies is righteous. Got it.

It wasn't genocide to God. It was judging and punishing evil sinful people who were not going to change.

Okay, so killing populations of people is okay if God says to. You don't see a moral loophole begging to be exploited?

If they were not dealt with it would be worse and many more would suffer and die and lose their souls. We do the same thing when there are evil people except we don’t have the right like God does.

But in the case we are talking about, God didn't do it, the Israelites did
Do you think anybody sets out to commit genocide? I doubt it. They always have righteous intentions. It's easy to say "they're just evil". But do you honestly think they don't believe themselves righteous followers of God? Of course they're full of hate and anger. Our gods always hate the people we hate. We all need to fear our gods' wrath. We make excuses for genocide because religion says we are special and righteous and they are not. That's why the judgment and punishment loophole has to go.

 

[poolerboy0077]

Next thread: Should atheists be allowed to share our oxygen?

 

[godenver1]

Next thread: Should atheists be allowed to share our oxygen?

Yes! (Although, I guess you know that oxygen isn't owned by Christians)

And to the thread title question: yes!

 

[stevevw]

I'm sorry steve, but that's nothing more than a pathetic excuse. You are proposing that an all-powerful, omnibenevolent God who can foresee the outcome of every conceivable course of action was unable to prevent alleged evils by any other means except genocide. What's worse is that you don't even have the gumption to use the word.

Umm so I'm a coward now. It just gets better all the time. See this is the kind of stuff that gets things way out of whack. I have no problem using the word genocide and have already used it if you look at my post. But that shouldn't be a measure of whether of who I am as a person. It shows that you are using poor judgement in the first place and maybe one of the reasons why you are not seeing the truth here.

Why would I use the word genocide when there is no genocide. Genocide as practiced by Sadam husain and the Srebrenica genocidein the 90s of bosiand by General Ratko Mladić of the Serbian army. Or even worse still was the genocide Germans in WW2 by Hitler of the Jews. These acts are a killing of innocent people who have done no wrong. It is purely based on race or religion. What happened in the bible where God took judgement on certain people was because those people had lowered themselves to such a depraved level that they were destroying the fabric of all the people in the area. It was like a cancer that was spreading and their evil deeds were affecting many. They were killing their own children and doing all sorts of acts with each other. They were either killing and robbing others who lived in the area or were specifically trying to wipe out the Jews themselves. They were the ones who were doing the genocide and evil acts on innocent people who had done nothing wrong.

What God had done was the same as when He took action on Sodom and Gomorrah and during the flood. It was a judgement of an evil people. If it hadn't have been stopped it would have spread again throughout mankind like a cancer. When the US and the allies acted against the Germans and the Japanese it was exactly the same. They killed millions of Japanese by incinerating women and children to a crisp. They bombed the towns of Germany and killed many women and children, They killed many in Iraq and Afghanistan. This is to stop the horrible acts of evil people. But you fail to mention that and try to twist it so that God is the bad guy.

 

[Euler]

Unbelievable.

Were those babies incinerated in the raids on Germany and Japan "evil people"? No, they weren't, and I'm sure you would use the argument of 'collateral damage', or something like the 'lesser of two evils'. After all, the decisions taken to bomb were those of fallible humans with limited abilities.

Now, were the babies of the Hittites "evil people"? I'm guessing the answer again should be in the negative. But the huge, enormous, insurmountable difference here is that the decision to slaughter those babies mercilessly wasn't taken by limited, fallible humans. No, if we are to believe your scriptures, it was stage managed by a god with limitless powers - a god that could have chosen literally thousands of other 'solutions' in dealing with sinners, but who chose the brutal, barbaric and bloodthirsty option that would have been the same option that those ancient people would have chosen!

Funny that!