- Jan 10, 2010
- 37,281
- 8,501
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Sure SurePersonally, I can´t handle analogies that aren´t analogous in the crucial aspect.
If I had a child that was not yet capable of fending for himself or making informed decisions, then I am a negligent parent if I allow them to crawl out the front door and take off on their own.
Basically, in your example you're making god out to be a negligent parent, and blaming the kids for that fact.
Normally, unbelievers, atheists change when they have a Near death experience and they experience life after death. Until then there is nothing we can do except to letting go their way sooner or later they will hit a wall. And then they will know even if it is mere seconds before they die. If not then the tunnel of darkness will wake them up.
dan
Adam chose to walk away from the fellowship of God. The result being that
Man was kicked out of the Garden and not allowed back in.
We no longer live in the Garden of Eden. We live in the place where
people crucified God's only son. We have it pretty good considering
the choices we've made. Think of it from a parental point of view now.
I agree it can appear as arrogance....and the gall is knowledge not belief. I have gone from the belief stage which is the Ego....to the knowledge stage. Mark ELLIS wrote an account of an Atheist NDE who actually went to hell. Needless to say he was a changed man when he came back. How I came across a writer by name of Mark Ellis is not a coincidence. He wrote about the NDE experience of Howard Storm.
dan
What a world you've created.My previous post still stands....
That's analogous to god being a negligent parent. In the story, Adam and Eve are still very naïve and don't understand much about the world. For example, they can't understand the difference between good and evil. That's akin to the maturity level of a very small child today.
So in essence, that's like punishing not only a small child to a life sentence of hard labour and potential torture for a minor mistake, the sentence also includes a possible sentence of eternal torture for all of the completely innocent future offspring of that child. That's heinously unjust. Any ethical system of justice would not include punishing people for a crime that they did not commit, yet that is what we find in gods perfect setup?
As for the crucifixion bit, I have two responses:
A) According to Christian mythology, god set the world up knowing what would happen, meaning he knew Jesus was going to have to be crucified even before Adam and Eve sinned. If not, then he is not omniscient. That is not only heinously immoral, however it is also not our fault. That's the way god set the world up.
B) Any god that would require torture and a human sacrifice to atone for sins, is a moral monster that is not worthy of worship.
Truth is from the Spirit of truth. If all men drink from that same well they will not err. The water that Christ said to the Samaritan women if she drunk is would never thirst again ....is the Spirit of God. Jesus sent us another comforter...The Holy Ghost,,,it testifies to the truth and also teaches. As in the Da Vinci professor demonstrates in the beginning of the movie how symbols over the centuries have been changed and mean sometimes the opposite in our time. Words are symbols also and Satan change their meaning. That is why interpretation by men no matter how smart they are will err. Their wisdom is of the world and God calls their wisdom foolishness. And they in turn call God's wisdom foolishness. Those of you who follow after the Jews for interpretation of the Scriptures are going to make their mistakes...and those of you who follow after the Greeks for interpretation of the scriptures are going to make the mistakes of the Greeks did. Those of us who choose to check with God for our truth will not be deceived in these last days, like those who follow the scriptures according to the wisdom of man. The Spirit of truth is what prevent the gates of hell to prevail against us. And any Church that has the Spirit of truth as it cornerstone will never fall prey to snares and deceptions of Satan.
dan
What a world you've created.
It seems you clipped the part where I noted that the definition I use is from the dictionary, i.e. common.
Government funds? That sounds like a humorously uninformed and privileged American waving the magic wand to make the pain go away.
Are you saying that a weak king is supposed to take food from Israelites who hate the Amalekites and give it to Amalekite children?
So let's apply this modern viewpoint to a modern problem. "Don't kill children for what their parents and grandparents do." So, if a woman has sex and pregnancy results, the unborn child shouldn't be killed because of what the mother did. Right?
I don't define God's track record in that way.
You've not established the credibility to speak for humanity.
I already explained this. Just because clouds are mentioned in the Bible does not make clouds biblical.
A moral king would.
That isn't a child.
All you have is a circular argument. You simply believe that no matter what God does it is moral. I don't know why you try to claim that you base it on a track record when there is nothing God could do that you would consider immoral. When we point out immoral acts in God's track record you claim they really aren't immoral because of God's track record. Do you see the problem here?
And yet you feel qualified to speak for a God?
So you're claiming that even though the definition I use is listed as the #1 definition at dictionary.com, it's still illegitimate?
Be aware I interpret this as, "I think a moral king should". Establishing any more than that is the whole point of this discussion. So, you think it is moral for a king who knows he will trigger civil war because he's too weak to control the anger leveled against the Amalekites should go ahead and do so? And in the end the Amalekite children would probably die anyway. So, the end result of your plan is a death toll that is higher. How does that eliminate the pain?
They feel pain.
Further, in your morality they share the same status with born children that they aren't moral agents.
Why have the animals not come up in this discussion? Saul was to destroy all the animals as well, and they feel pain. Your system seems to lead to a situation where even life/death decisions can be made for what is not a moral agent.
If your willingness to kill animals and the unborn despite their pain is not based on the fact that you don't consider them "moral agents", then you need to explain.
There is one unbeliever at CF who advocates that it should be permissible to kill even born children until they reach the age of accountability.
Had I been in Saul's shoes I would definitely have questioned God's command. And there is precedent for God entertaining such questions (Gen 18:22-33), even in Saul's lifetime (1 Samuel 8). God's command was the best option given the situation. You keep asking, "Couldn't God change the situation?" Don't you see? Saul never asked that question. Yes, God could have changed the situation.
I don't just accept the pain in my life. And if that pain is occurring because I'm trying to follow what I think God has commanded me to do, I definitely question it. Yet I can look back over my life and observe the track record. When I ignored God's commands and did what I wanted, the score is pretty poor. When I accepted God's command and moved forward despite the immediate pain, the score is pretty good. I've learned to accept that I can't foresee all the consequences - that no human can, and that we need God's guidance.
No, I don't. When I speak with certainty, it is because of what I can support with citations. If I mention something God has said, I can point to the Bible. If I am speaking of history, I can cite my sources. If I am speaking of science, I can cite my sources. If I have none of that, I freely admit I am only speculating.
How do you do it?
Sorry, but all you are doing is making stuff up. There is absolutely no reason why the Hebrew people could not have taken the Amalekite children into their homes. There is no reason why God couldn't have fed them with manna from heaven, just as he did for the Hebrew people all those years in the desert.
It's easy to ignore a god's omnipotence when necessary to maintain a non-troubling position about how good or evil that god is...
It's also arrogant to claim knowledge when you have no evidence to support your claim.
Writing an account of something is not evidence of anything, much less proof. How does he know the person in question actually went to hell? How does he know hell is even a real place?
* Raises Hand *I can see it from you point of view. That is not my point of view ....the best point of view is that of God. I have spiritual evidence and so do you. You will not be able to deny the Spiritual side of you forever.
bert10
I can see it from you point of view. That is not my point of view ....the best point of view is that of God. I have spiritual evidence and so do you. You will not be able to deny the Spiritual side of you forever.
bert10
Likewise, I've seen a few believers at deathbeds experience a sudden realisation that death is probably permanent. Reality bites, when it arrives all at once.
* Raises Hand *
I don't have spiritual evidence of anything. That's why I'm an atheist...
You don't have KNOWLEDGE, no one does.
The Spirit of knowledge and the Spirit of understanding and the Spirit of wisdom are no respecter of person. They are there for everyone...who fulfill the condition to have their help. I have knowledge because, I ask, I seek and I knock for those things. Being a spiritual seeker has it benefits and drawbacks. The Drawbacks is that the game of life becomes less interesting in one sense.
dan
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?