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.
Button A assumes a world so outrageously different from ours that I cant make heads or tails of it. A button/machine/mind that knows the future? The implications are so mysterious as to make moral reasoning almost impossible.Me too. Although I can see a justification to push A.....
Why does that make it good for God to kill them?
The text says that God ordered Saul to kill the infants. I am not making an argument. My question is why is it good for God to kill infants? That is not an appeal to emotion.
No its not a fallacy. Its the topic: how to think about God doing a "very wrong thing". Sometime very wrong things also have emotional content. That doesnt make it a fallacy to discuss them.
So topics that might be distressing are just off limits?It is "the topic" that you people are leveraging as an argumentative accusation.
The fact is, that this side of the rapture, God kills pretty much everyone including women and children.
That is a brute fact of nature.
Atheists cannot derive a value from a fact (see: "Is-Ought"). Atheists are appealing to someone's general god-given prejudice against killing babies. Because it is God alone, including those God-granted lawful institutions, who get to decide the grim reality of who lives and who dies.
And trying to conceal it all as a faux-discussion isn't fooling anyone here.
So topics that might be distressing are just off limits?
Plus in the face of it all youve made a perfectly good faith-based defense of the incident in question. So whats the problem?
Brutality (real or apparent) is naturally emotionally charged. There's is no emotionally neutral example to draw from.No. Don't attempt to strawman my position. Go back and actually read my post.
It is not for me to destroy. And yes, I have reconciled God's perogative to eliminate wickedness.Why do you say nothing? This is in your Bible. How have you reconciled this with your belief that God is good?
Brutality (real or apparent) is naturally emotionally charged. There's is no emotionally neutral example to draw from.
If only.doing nothing kills no one.
Ok, that there is just your screed against those two faced bad-faith atheist arguers."Naturally emotionally charged" is easy cover for a deliberate appeal to emotion fallacy. If it wasn't "naturally emotionally charged," then it wouldn't be the "go-to" atheist argument. Atheists need "naturally emotionally charged" examples in-order to leverage their emotional arguments.
If you don't push button A and you don't push button B, then for this hypothetical you've killed no one. It's really not hard to understand.If only.
Ok, that there is just your screed against those two faced bad-faith atheist arguers.
But a good-faith atheist arguer might pick the exact same example when questioning how God could apparently contradict what we think of as goodness.
Either way about typical notions of morality, my point stands about this particular example not necessarily indicating bad faith argumentation....."We?" Speak for yourself. Again, you have zero objective evidence of any universal standard of "good." Morality is a universal claim. At best, all atheists can do in-general is conflate morality with ethics, which are societal. I've never claimed the existence of some comic-book form of dualism. That's a westernized TV/film cultural morality, which there is no proof or evidence to support.
Either way about typical notions of morality, my point stands about this particular example not necessarily indicating bad faith argumentation.
Thats very nice of you. Now I'm appealing to emotion by calling you nice.Okay, I'll ease up on you.
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?