The Logical Premise?

[lesliedellow]

So are you saying that the 10 Commandments are provisional? What about the example I gave of 1 Sam15:3?

I can understand if God were like a regular person and could do bad and good, but it seems like the God of the Bible actually espouses two opposing positions from time to time. Is God simply a "super human"? A la the Greek gods? Flawed and contingent on moods?

That is, indeed, a very confusing God.

I understand that in your conception of God "Good is whatever God decrees", but it sounds like you might be edging over to "Good is whatever God decrees at some specific time which can change in a couple days". Which is a very, very confusing and disturbing conception of God.

If the 6th Commandment is an indicator that murder of the innocent is wrong, is it simply wrong until God has need of his human creation to murder at some later date (as appears to be the case in 1 Sam15:3)?



Apparently not, if your theology is correct.



You see, I think that is exactly what people of faith always do. The God of the BIble is, as you point out, the highest and the arbiter of all things, yet the faithful also tell us God stands for right over wrong, yet clearly the God of the Bible holds contrary positions on what is right and wrong depending on the day.

The faithful want a God who loves them but sometimes it seems that same God is more than happy to allow his followers to consign "the other" to the flames. And yet that same God, through his only begotten son (who was homoiosious with him) tells us to love our neighbor.

That indeed we are told to resist not evil but turn the other cheek, while earlier God's chosen people were encouraged to pillage and kill with all due alacrity because He had promised them some land.

So when you tell me you wish to use only the God described in the bible, I'm still wondering: which God? On which day?

The short answer to most of that long post is that, when God legislates for his creatures, he is not legislating for himself as well.

Do I like 1. Sam 15.3? No. Does that mean that I am entitled to sit in judgment on my Creator? No.

Before another two hundred years have passed, everybody alive today is going to be dead. I guess that must make God the biggest mass murderer of all time.

 

[Obliquinaut]

The short answer to most of that long post is that, when God legislates for his creatures, he is not legislating for himself as well.

But the very precise reason I chose 1Sam15:3 was that it requires PEOPLE to murder. Meaning God (through his prophet) is asking PEOPLE to violate the laws previously laid out for PEOPLE.

Do I like 1. Sam 15.3? No. Does that mean that I am entitled to sit in judgment on my Creator? No.

Yet another inconvenient point that must be ignored I suppose.

 

[lesliedellow]

But the very precise reason I chose 1Sam15:3 was that it requires PEOPLE to murder. Meaning God (through his prophet) is asking PEOPLE to violate the laws previously laid out for PEOPLE.

Secular governments legislate against murder, until a war breaks out, and then killing somebody might win you a medal.

Yet another inconvenient point that must be ignored I suppose.

Who is ignoring it?

 

[Obliquinaut]

Secular governments legislate against murder, until a war breaks out, and then killing somebody might win you a medal.

So you are doubling down on comparing God to mere human creations?

Who is ignoring it?

You do not wish to sit in judgement of the God you require to be defined solely by what is in the Bible yet you do not like actions attributable to Him or his prophets?

Sounds like passing the buck to me.

 

[lesliedellow]

So you are doubling down on comparing God to mere human creations?

I am saying that analogously with national legislatures, and their limited sovereignty, God is absolutely sovereign.

You do not wish to sit in judgement of the God you require to be defined solely by what is in the Bible yet you do not like actions attributable to Him or his prophets?

Sounds like passing the buck to me.

Don't follow the logic there.

 

[Obliquinaut]

I am saying that analogously with national legislatures, and their limited sovereignty, God is absolutely sovereign.

Again: God is just like a human organization. (Kind of makes my earlier point, but...)

There is no absolute prohibition against any evil, there is only a relativistic view of right and wrong. It is right today but wrong tomorrow. It is right in this instance but wrong over here.

That is somewhat worrisome from a theological point of view, certainly from a moral standpoint.

(As for your earlier point about giving people medals in times of war, how many medals are awarded for the wholesale slaughter of women and infants in war? Just curious which medal that is.)

Don't follow the logic there.

I am saying that you are ignoring the disjoint. You earlier claimed you wish to limit your description of God to that which is in the Bible. AND you claim you not particularly happy with 1Sam15:3, yet you don't want to sit in judgement of God. You aren't even offering some exegesis. You are effectively tossing your hands up and saying "Well, God works in mysterious ways, who am I to question it?"

That sounds like ignoring the issue or at least hoping it goes away.

 

[AV1611VET]

But the very precise reason I chose 1Sam15:3 was that it requires PEOPLE to murder. Meaning God (through his prophet) is asking PEOPLE to violate the laws previously laid out for PEOPLE.

1 Samuel 15:2 Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt.

The Amalekites were a people of Arabia Petraea, who had occupied a tract of country on the frontiers of Egypt and Palestine. They had acted with great cruelty towards the Israelites on their coming out of Egypt. (See Ex 17:8.) They came upon them when they were faint and weary, and smote the hindermost of the people-those who were too weak to keep up with the rest. (See De 25:18.) And God then purposed that Amalek, as a nation, should be blotted out from under heaven; which purpose was now fulfilled by Saul upwards of four hundred years afterwards.

1 Samuel 15:3 Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.

Nothing could justify such an exterminating decree but the absolute authority of God. This was given: all the reasons of it we do not know; but this we know well, The Judge of all the earth doth right. This war was not for plunder, for God commanded that all the property as well as all the people should be destroyed.

 

[lesliedellow]

Again: God is just like a human organization. (Kind of makes my earlier point, but...)

There is no absolute prohibition against any evil, there is only a relativistic view of right and wrong. It is right today but wrong tomorrow. It is right in this instance but wrong over here.

That is somewhat worrisome from a theological point of view, certainly from a moral standpoint.

(As for your earlier point about giving people medals in times of war, how many medals are awarded for the wholesale slaughter of women and infants in war? Just curious which medal that is.)

If you have problems with God's absolute sovereignty, there is nothing I can do about that.

You are effectively tossing your hands up and saying "Well, God works in mysterious ways, who am I to question it?"

I can't read anybody's mind, least of all God's. Even if I could, he is not answerable to me.

 

[Obliquinaut]

If you have problems with God's absolute sovereignty, there is nothing I can do about that.

So, can you let us know if murder and theft are going to be OK at some point in the future? I will make sure to steer clear of Christians at such time as God gives the go-ahead for these things.

I can't read anybody's mind, least of all God's. Even if I could, he is not answerable to me.

Does God wish you to love and worship Him? If so, wouldn't it be great if He was understandable?

 

[Obliquinaut]

1 Samuel 15:2 Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt.

1 Samuel 15:3 Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.

God commanded PEOPLE to kill innocent non-combatants (ie Amalekites who had NOT in any way ever been cruel to Israelites...unless you can imagine a way for an infant to have been cruel to Israel).

God previously commanded PEOPLE THAT THEY SHOULD NOT MURDER (ie not kill innocents).

If God wanted the Amalekites to be wiped out He surely could have done so by Himself. Instead He (through Samuel) commanded the murder to be undertaken.

God commanded people to sin.

There's no reason God can be held guilty for anything if whatever God does is ipso facto "good" (and God reserves the right to hold guilty the offspring of offenders)...but the real problem is that PEOPLE WERE ASKED TO DO THE MURDER, and PEOPLE DO NOT have those rights. God commanded sin.

Unless you are going to say that the 10 Commandments are not continuously true but only true occasionally.

 

[lesliedellow]

So, can you let us know if murder and theft are going to be OK at some point in the future? I will make sure to steer clear of Christians at such time as God gives the go-ahead for these things.

The Ten Commandments are normative, but only normative. God cannot bind his own hands. Is it possible that a psychopath could read the Bible, and then claim that he had a divine commission for genocide? Yes, but we live in a dangerous world.

Does God wish you to love and worship Him? If so, wouldn't it be great if He was understandable?

The basis of worship is God's status as Creator, and therefore Lord, of all things.

 

[AV1611VET]

PEOPLE WERE ASKED TO DO THE MURDER, and PEOPLE DO NOT have those rights.

As long as you keep calling it murder, you're not going to understand.

Ecclesiastes 3:3 A time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up;

Genesis 18:25 That be far from thee to do after this manner, to slay the righteous with the wicked: and that the righteous should be as the wicked, that be far from thee: Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?

I have a good question for you though.

Aren't we animals? don't we kill lower life forms for sport?

If so, why are you scratching your head if God kills lower animals too? (Only He does it for [military] reasons, not sport.)

You want to harp about logic ... harp on that.

 

[Obliquinaut]

The Ten Commandments are normative, but only normative. God cannot bind his own hands. Is it possible that a psychopath could read the Bible, and then claim that he had a divine commission for genocide? Yes, but we live in a dangerous world.

How do you tell the psychopath that God would never command them to genocide?

 

[Obliquinaut]

As long as you keep calling it murder, you're not going to understand.

You are not going to get me with this. You see, I have been told by many Christians that the definition of "killing" in "Thou shalt not kill" is the killing of innocents (murder).

What would you call it when an infant is killed? Did the infant deserve to be killed? Was the infant a threat?

 

[AV1611VET]

I have been told by many Christians that the definition of "killing" in "Thou shalt not kill" is the killing of innocents (murder).

Judge for yourself.

Exodus 20:13 Thou shalt not kill.

Matthew 19:18 He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness,

What would you call it when an infant is killed?

It depends on the context.

Did the infant deserve to be killed? Was the infant a threat?

In the case of first Samuel, let me repeat Adam Clarke:

Nothing could justify such an exterminating decree but the absolute authority of God. This was given: all the reasons of it we do not know; but this we know well, The Judge of all the earth doth right. This war was not for plunder, for God commanded that all the property as well as all the people should be destroyed.

 

[Obliquinaut]

It depends on the context.

Hmmmm, didn't see that in the Ten Commandments. Just goes to show...we atheists can't get any of this stuff right!

 

[AV1611VET]

Hmmmm, didn't see that in the Ten Commandments. Just goes to show...we atheists can't get any of this stuff right!

As I predicted.

As long as you think it's murder, you're not going to understand.

 

[Kylie]

To describe something as random is only to say that there is no cause we can ascribe to it. That doesn't necessarily mean there is no cause which can be ascribed, when seen from a Gods-eye-view.

But until you can show that there is some agent out there who is capable of seeing the difference, then your argument is meaningless.

 

[Kylie]

The former. As I keep saying, there is no authority superior to God, and God is the creator of all things, other than himself.

So if God came to you and told you that you had a free pass, what would you do? God says you can do whatever you want - you can kill, steal, maim, anything at all, and you would never be caught by any Human authorities, and you would not be sent to Hell, but guaranteed a place in Heaven no matter what. Would you become a killer?

And before you start saying that it wouldn't really be God, yes it is. It's definitely not the devil or something. For the purposes of this example, proceed under the assumption that it really is God.

 

[lesliedellow]

But until you can show that there is some agent out there who is capable of seeing the difference, then your argument is meaningless.

As I said, debating the existence of God is pointless. I can't prove that he does exist, and you can't prove that he doesn't.