Total Posts:126|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

What makes it right for God to kill?

GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/5/2011 10:51:53 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
John Piper gives a brilliant answer to this question. I would also recommend that you seek and watch his over videos where he answers similar questions.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/5/2011 11:06:05 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/5/2011 11:03:00 PM, FREEDO wrote:
What you worship is Satan.

Don't compare satan to god. Satan never killed anyone.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/5/2011 11:18:18 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/5/2011 11:06:05 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 4/5/2011 11:03:00 PM, FREEDO wrote:
What you worship is Satan.

Don't compare satan to god. Satan never killed anyone.

Satan never has the right to, God does because God owes you nothing, thus if you die, and God causes your death, He had every right to kill you.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/5/2011 11:20:17 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/5/2011 11:18:18 PM, GodSands wrote:
Satan never has the right to, God does because God owes you nothing

I owe you nothing.

does that mean I have the right to kill you?

Why does Satan owe you something?
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/5/2011 11:29:45 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/5/2011 11:14:28 PM, Johnicle wrote:


You literally justified 9/11. Way to go.

I also justified the billions perhaps that died in the flood of Noah. 3000 people died on September the 11/2001. But 10,000 people died last month in Japan. Why did you not mention Japan, more people died?
tornshoe92
Posts: 361
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/5/2011 11:36:48 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/5/2011 11:29:45 PM, GodSands wrote:
At 4/5/2011 11:14:28 PM, Johnicle wrote:


You literally justified 9/11. Way to go.

I also justified the billions perhaps that died in the flood of Noah. 3000 people died on September the 11/2001. But 10,000 people died last month in Japan. Why did you not mention Japan, more people died?

People were responsible for 9/11. Tectonic plates were responsible for Japan.
"Next time I see a little old lady going to church I am going kick her in the ovaries because she is personally responsible for this. Thanks Izbo." -C_N
Rob1_Billion
Posts: 1,300
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/5/2011 11:39:42 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/5/2011 11:36:48 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 4/5/2011 11:29:45 PM, GodSands wrote:
At 4/5/2011 11:14:28 PM, Johnicle wrote:


You literally justified 9/11. Way to go.

I also justified the billions perhaps that died in the flood of Noah. 3000 people died on September the 11/2001. But 10,000 people died last month in Japan. Why did you not mention Japan, more people died?

People were responsible for 9/11. Tectonic plates were responsible for Japan.

That only proves Godsands' point; tectonic plates owe you nothing.
kfc
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/5/2011 11:44:28 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/5/2011 11:36:48 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 4/5/2011 11:29:45 PM, GodSands wrote:
At 4/5/2011 11:14:28 PM, Johnicle wrote:


You literally justified 9/11. Way to go.

I also justified the billions perhaps that died in the flood of Noah. 3000 people died on September the 11/2001. But 10,000 people died last month in Japan. Why did you not mention Japan, more people died?

People were responsible for 9/11. Tectonic plates were responsible for Japan.

The first video of John Piper explains that, in a sense many people died due to the collapsing of the buildings. Not the plane hitting into the buildings, although there is connection. In Japan, not everyone died due to drowning, many died due to things falling on top of them or being pushed or pieced with chipped wood. But in the same breath, in saying all of that, God at the same time keeps our heart beating and the oxygen flowing. Even though He has no reason to do so. Life, death, they both belong to God, why then should He value one more than the other? Both are necessary.
tornshoe92
Posts: 361
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/5/2011 11:50:25 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/5/2011 11:44:28 PM, GodSands wrote:
At 4/5/2011 11:36:48 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 4/5/2011 11:29:45 PM, GodSands wrote:
At 4/5/2011 11:14:28 PM, Johnicle wrote:


You literally justified 9/11. Way to go.

I also justified the billions perhaps that died in the flood of Noah. 3000 people died on September the 11/2001. But 10,000 people died last month in Japan. Why did you not mention Japan, more people died?

People were responsible for 9/11. Tectonic plates were responsible for Japan.

The first video of John Piper explains that, in a sense many people died due to the collapsing of the buildings. Not the plane hitting into the buildings, although there is connection. In Japan, not everyone died due to drowning, many died due to things falling on top of them or being pushed or pieced with chipped wood. But in the same breath, in saying all of that, God at the same time keeps our heart beating and the oxygen flowing. Even though He has no reason to do so. Life, death, they both belong to God, why then should He value one more than the other? Both are necessary.

You mean like there's a connection between a person firing a gun, but the bullet actually killed them? Well now I feel like it was much less the person with the gun's own fault. Real talk though, if I give you a puppy as a present, I had no reason to do so. I don't owe you anything, so if I decide that the puppy's got to go, you have no real reason to complain to me. I bought the puppy so I can do what I want, right?
"Next time I see a little old lady going to church I am going kick her in the ovaries because she is personally responsible for this. Thanks Izbo." -C_N
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2011 12:08:28 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/5/2011 11:50:25 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 4/5/2011 11:44:28 PM, GodSands wrote:
At 4/5/2011 11:36:48 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 4/5/2011 11:29:45 PM, GodSands wrote:
At 4/5/2011 11:14:28 PM, Johnicle wrote:


You literally justified 9/11. Way to go.

I also justified the billions perhaps that died in the flood of Noah. 3000 people died on September the 11/2001. But 10,000 people died last month in Japan. Why did you not mention Japan, more people died?

People were responsible for 9/11. Tectonic plates were responsible for Japan.

The first video of John Piper explains that, in a sense many people died due to the collapsing of the buildings. Not the plane hitting into the buildings, although there is connection. In Japan, not everyone died due to drowning, many died due to things falling on top of them or being pushed or pieced with chipped wood. But in the same breath, in saying all of that, God at the same time keeps our heart beating and the oxygen flowing. Even though He has no reason to do so. Life, death, they both belong to God, why then should He value one more than the other? Both are necessary.

You mean like there's a connection between a person firing a gun, but the bullet actually killed them? Well now I feel like it was much less the person with the gun's own fault. Real talk though, if I give you a puppy as a present, I had no reason to do so. I don't owe you anything, so if I decide that the puppy's got to go, you have no real reason to complain to me. I bought the puppy so I can do what I want, right?

No, that is a wrong use of analogy. Our free gift of grace is like me getting a puppy and then you then cannot take it away because if you did, it was never the gift you said it was to begin with and thus, it was more of a punishment than a gift. With a gun, to shoot someone, the time to avoid the bullet is almost impossible in most cases. With the collapsing of a building, time is a factor that can be used in sufficiency, in that, there was time to get out. Of course no everyone could get out, but those who could but didn't died therefore due to their own inability to get out. In that they ought to have got out, thus they could have got out, but failed in doing so. So therefore the collapsing of the building created the illusion that it was the buildings responsibility of the deaths. However, when really it was their responsibility. It's like saying to a student, "Why haven't you done your homework?" And the student replies, "Because I was on holiday." And thus, because the student was out of his normal cycle of doing things, that becomes an excuse for not doing something that he or she should have done. But if God is to kill someone, then it is fate that a person will die in that way. And thus God kills them in the end anyway, either way God kills them. If it be through a terrorist or through a disaster.
tornshoe92
Posts: 361
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2011 12:36:13 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/6/2011 12:08:28 AM, GodSands wrote:
At 4/5/2011 11:50:25 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 4/5/2011 11:44:28 PM, GodSands wrote:
At 4/5/2011 11:36:48 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 4/5/2011 11:29:45 PM, GodSands wrote:
At 4/5/2011 11:14:28 PM, Johnicle wrote:


You literally justified 9/11. Way to go.

I also justified the billions perhaps that died in the flood of Noah. 3000 people died on September the 11/2001. But 10,000 people died last month in Japan. Why did you not mention Japan, more people died?

People were responsible for 9/11. Tectonic plates were responsible for Japan.

The first video of John Piper explains that, in a sense many people died due to the collapsing of the buildings. Not the plane hitting into the buildings, although there is connection. In Japan, not everyone died due to drowning, many died due to things falling on top of them or being pushed or pieced with chipped wood. But in the same breath, in saying all of that, God at the same time keeps our heart beating and the oxygen flowing. Even though He has no reason to do so. Life, death, they both belong to God, why then should He value one more than the other? Both are necessary.

You mean like there's a connection between a person firing a gun, but the bullet actually killed them? Well now I feel like it was much less the person with the gun's own fault. Real talk though, if I give you a puppy as a present, I had no reason to do so. I don't owe you anything, so if I decide that the puppy's got to go, you have no real reason to complain to me. I bought the puppy so I can do what I want, right?

No, that is a wrong use of analogy. Our free gift of grace is like me getting a puppy and then you then cannot take it away because if you did, it was never the gift you said it was to begin with and thus, it was more of a punishment than a gift. With a gun, to shoot someone, the time to avoid the bullet is almost impossible in most cases. With the collapsing of a building, time is a factor that can be used in sufficiency, in that, there was time to get out. Of course no everyone could get out, but those who could but didn't died therefore due to their own inability to get out. In that they ought to have got out, thus they could have got out, but failed in doing so. So therefore the collapsing of the building created the illusion that it was the buildings responsibility of the deaths. However, when really it was their responsibility. It's like saying to a student, "Why haven't you done your homework?" And the student replies, "Because I was on holiday." And thus, because the student was out of his normal cycle of doing things, that becomes an excuse for not doing something that he or she should have done. But if God is to kill someone, then it is fate that a person will die in that way. And thus God kills them in the end anyway, either way God kills them. If it be through a terrorist or through a disaster.

lolwut?

Also, basically what you are saying is that God was always going to kill the person because it was their "fate". However, if God was destined to kill them, then does he actually have the power to make the decision when it comes to who lives and who dies?
"Next time I see a little old lady going to church I am going kick her in the ovaries because she is personally responsible for this. Thanks Izbo." -C_N
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2011 1:17:19 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Godsands. You have a mental illness. I am not insulting you. I am serious. You are a danger to yourself and other people; seek help.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
Johnicle
Posts: 888
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2011 1:38:06 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
It seems that the logic behind your claim is that God made you, so he can do whatever he wants to you (because he doesn't owe us anything).

But is it right to create something only to cause it suffering?

Does this not completely destroy the meaning of Jesus? I mean he was a great moral teacher in his time (I'll give him that), but if he was God, then he does not follow his own rules.

If I buy a slave, is it okay to torture or kill him? I don't owe him anything.

If Zeus tells someone to kill their wife, and (your) God tells another person to kill their wife, and they both do it... Why is one wrong and the other absurd?

If God creates us to kill us... did we ever have free will?
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2011 2:02:54 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/5/2011 10:51:53 PM, GodSands wrote:


John Piper gives a brilliant answer to this question. I would also recommend that you seek and watch his over videos where he answers similar questions.

What the hell is wrong with you. Do you question at all ?

When some one dies, that is God. "God did it"
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12
TUF
Posts: 21,309
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2011 2:48:43 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/6/2011 12:08:28 AM, GodSands wrote:
Our free gift of grace is like me getting a puppy and then you then cannot take it away because if you did, it was never the gift you said it was to begin with and thus, it was more of a punishment than a gift.

I fail to see the logic in this. Given your logic Lets hypothetically say I am god (thus I am acting as the puppy giver). I decide to give you life, thus you are the puppy reciever. You just said that God cannot take away the life (puppy) because it never really was a gift to begin with. You have contradicted yourself. So really, how does this justify god in killing? First you say he has the right to kill because he is the one who gave us the gift of life in the first place, but next you say he can't take away the gift because it would basically its just punishment. Which one is it?
"I've got to go and grab a shirt" ~ Airmax1227
mcc1789
Posts: 43
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2011 5:34:28 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
This video is disgusting and horrifying. On the other hand, I appreciate people actually being honest about what they believe, even when it's appalling. In that case at least we know they're out there. So...God does not owe us anything, is perfectly right to kill us whenever and however he pleases, we're all sinners thus deserve it, He can do no wrong, etc.

Now that's kind and loving, all right. Really makes you want to worship. Apparently now God is feeling merciful. Tomorrow, maybe it's genocide time again. We are convicted in the womb, and sinful for being born. Then, if we fail at worshipping him well enough in life, punished forever.

Allow me to compare: the Fuhrer has absolute power in his realm. Everyone lives at his will. He owes us nothing, anyone who defies him will be killed. Therefore, we should obey him? Bakunin was right-if God really existed, it would be necessary to abolish him.
Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.-Philip K. Dick
Johnicle
Posts: 888
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2011 2:27:36 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I'm starting to think Godsands is a troll. There is no way that this video, which makes me sick to my stomach, makes him want to raise his hands even higher in the air.
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2011 3:56:21 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/6/2011 2:27:36 PM, Johnicle wrote:
I'm starting to think Godsands is a troll. There is no way that this video, which makes me sick to my stomach, makes him want to raise his hands even higher in the air.

Could you explain my point of view? Or would you rather just believe my God is a monster just because there is death involved?
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2011 4:20:27 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/6/2011 3:56:21 PM, GodSands wrote:
Could you explain my point of view? Or would you rather just believe my God is a monster just because there is death involved?

Well tecnically it is impossible for there to exist a monster who is itself non-existant. Your god is not a monster but it's followers sure can be.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2011 4:38:56 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/6/2011 4:20:27 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 4/6/2011 3:56:21 PM, GodSands wrote:
Could you explain my point of view? Or would you rather just believe my God is a monster just because there is death involved?

Well tecnically it is impossible for there to exist a monster who is itself non-existant. Your god is not a monster but it's followers sure can be.

When we die, you lose nothing because we owe God everything, and God owes us nothing, thus if God kills us, so what? We die, take away God and swap it with nature or other causes, then nothing is wrong, but just annoying.
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2011 4:50:20 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/6/2011 4:38:56 PM, GodSands wrote:
At 4/6/2011 4:20:27 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 4/6/2011 3:56:21 PM, GodSands wrote:
Could you explain my point of view? Or would you rather just believe my God is a monster just because there is death involved?

Well tecnically it is impossible for there to exist a monster who is itself non-existant. Your god is not a monster but it's followers sure can be.

When we die, you lose nothing because we owe God everything, and God owes us nothing, thus if God kills us, so what? We die, take away God and swap it with nature or other causes, then nothing is wrong, but just annoying.

The same could be said of unicorns or the color green. Obviously they owe us nothing so if we die it's not their fault. God should share none of the blame in death as god is a fictitious concept and therefore has no stake in one's death. I completely agree with Godsands here, albeit for different reasons I suppose.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
mcc1789
Posts: 43
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2011 4:54:09 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/6/2011 4:50:20 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 4/6/2011 4:38:56 PM, GodSands wrote:
At 4/6/2011 4:20:27 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 4/6/2011 3:56:21 PM, GodSands wrote:
Could you explain my point of view? Or would you rather just believe my God is a monster just because there is death involved?

Well tecnically it is impossible for there to exist a monster who is itself non-existant. Your god is not a monster but it's followers sure can be.

When we die, you lose nothing because we owe God everything, and God owes us nothing, thus if God kills us, so what? We die, take away God and swap it with nature or other causes, then nothing is wrong, but just annoying.


The same could be said of unicorns or the color green. Obviously they owe us nothing so if we die it's not their fault. God should share none of the blame in death as god is a fictitious concept and therefore has no stake in one's death. I completely agree with Godsands here, albeit for different reasons I suppose.

Except his reasoning is more on the lines of "the king owes you nothing, peasant, now shut up and obey him or be tortured to death."
Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.-Philip K. Dick
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2011 4:59:34 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/6/2011 4:54:09 PM, mcc1789 wrote:
At 4/6/2011 4:50:20 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 4/6/2011 4:38:56 PM, GodSands wrote:
At 4/6/2011 4:20:27 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 4/6/2011 3:56:21 PM, GodSands wrote:
Could you explain my point of view? Or would you rather just believe my God is a monster just because there is death involved?

Well tecnically it is impossible for there to exist a monster who is itself non-existant. Your god is not a monster but it's followers sure can be.

When we die, you lose nothing because we owe God everything, and God owes us nothing, thus if God kills us, so what? We die, take away God and swap it with nature or other causes, then nothing is wrong, but just annoying.


The same could be said of unicorns or the color green. Obviously they owe us nothing so if we die it's not their fault. God should share none of the blame in death as god is a fictitious concept and therefore has no stake in one's death. I completely agree with Godsands here, albeit for different reasons I suppose.

Except his reasoning is more on the lines of "the king owes you nothing, peasant, now shut up and obey him or be tortured to death."

That's different, you used a straw man analogy. A king is also sinful like you, the king is from God to make peace or to bring judgement. Your life is never at the debt of a kind or ruler, but always at the debt or mercy of God. It is surprising that God has given us mercy, for even if God didn't God would still be love.
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2011 5:04:01 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/6/2011 4:59:34 PM, GodSands wrote:
At 4/6/2011 4:54:09 PM, mcc1789 wrote:
At 4/6/2011 4:50:20 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 4/6/2011 4:38:56 PM, GodSands wrote:
At 4/6/2011 4:20:27 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 4/6/2011 3:56:21 PM, GodSands wrote:
Could you explain my point of view? Or would you rather just believe my God is a monster just because there is death involved?

Well tecnically it is impossible for there to exist a monster who is itself non-existant. Your god is not a monster but it's followers sure can be.

When we die, you lose nothing because we owe God everything, and God owes us nothing, thus if God kills us, so what? We die, take away God and swap it with nature or other causes, then nothing is wrong, but just annoying.


The same could be said of unicorns or the color green. Obviously they owe us nothing so if we die it's not their fault. God should share none of the blame in death as god is a fictitious concept and therefore has no stake in one's death. I completely agree with Godsands here, albeit for different reasons I suppose.

Except his reasoning is more on the lines of "the king owes you nothing, peasant, now shut up and obey him or be tortured to death."

That's different, you used a straw man analogy. A king is also sinful like you, the king is from God to make peace or to bring judgement. Your life is never at the debt of a kind or ruler, but always at the debt or mercy of God. It is surprising that God has given us mercy, for even if God didn't God would still be love.

The way you describe it god kind of sounds like a d!ck. I mean why take the time and trouble to create all these people and society and then when they don't do what you want you simply kill them or send them to a burning lake of fire for eternity. Why should we love this guy if we're so expendable to him?
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
mcc1789
Posts: 43
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2011 5:07:22 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/6/2011 4:59:34 PM, GodSands wrote:
At 4/6/2011 4:54:09 PM, mcc1789 wrote:
At 4/6/2011 4:50:20 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 4/6/2011 4:38:56 PM, GodSands wrote:
At 4/6/2011 4:20:27 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 4/6/2011 3:56:21 PM, GodSands wrote:
Could you explain my point of view? Or would you rather just believe my God is a monster just because there is death involved?

Well tecnically it is impossible for there to exist a monster who is itself non-existant. Your god is not a monster but it's followers sure can be.

When we die, you lose nothing because we owe God everything, and God owes us nothing, thus if God kills us, so what? We die, take away God and swap it with nature or other causes, then nothing is wrong, but just annoying.


The same could be said of unicorns or the color green. Obviously they owe us nothing so if we die it's not their fault. God should share none of the blame in death as god is a fictitious concept and therefore has no stake in one's death. I completely agree with Godsands here, albeit for different reasons I suppose.

Except his reasoning is more on the lines of "the king owes you nothing, peasant, now shut up and obey him or be tortured to death."

That's different, you used a straw man analogy. A king is also sinful like you, the king is from God to make peace or to bring judgement. Your life is never at the debt of a kind or ruler, but always at the debt or mercy of God. It is surprising that God has given us mercy, for even if God didn't God would still be love.

We are sinful because your theology says God punished all humans for the sins of their forebears, hardly our fault. Collective punishment, now why does that seem familiar to Medieval rules (not to mention some current ones)? Also, how exactly will he still be "love" if there is not even a chance of salvation offered?
Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.-Philip K. Dick
Grape
Posts: 989
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2011 5:09:25 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
That is religion in a nutshell. Hateful of humanity and always eager to place the lives and well being of real human beings below the arbitrary will of imaginary deities. If that video doesn't disgust you than you are totally immune to reason, morality, and even basic compassion for other humans.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2011 5:19:28 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/6/2011 5:09:25 PM, Grape wrote:
That is religion in a nutshell. Hateful of humanity and always eager to place the lives and well being of real human beings below the arbitrary will of imaginary deities. If that video doesn't disgust you than you are totally immune to reason, morality, and even basic compassion for other humans.

Aren't you a moral nihilist?
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
Grape
Posts: 989
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2011 5:49:02 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/6/2011 5:19:28 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
Aren't you a moral nihilist?

I don't believe that any morals are part of the inherent nature of reality, but I believe that there are ways for humans (and conscious beings in general) to act that are more logically consistent and conducive to any basic notion of good. We have to be willing to make certain subjective or emotive assumptions to begin talking about morality, and however basic or necessary these assumptions seem I do not hold them to be objective. I claim no objective basis for disagreeing with someone who cares absolutely nothing for rationality, the suffering of other humans, basic respect for dignity of conscious beings, etc. That is outside the realm of the assumptions we have to make to even consider morality. How someone would believes in an all-good ruler of the universe could make the jump to totally dismissing morality and asserting its right to torture and destroy us like toys is utterly beyond me, but it is detestable and most of all dangerous. That video is a display of complete contempt for everything good that is actually known to exist in this world.

I realize that I made a mistake in branding all religious beliefs with that video. I responded emotionally precisely because of how thoroughly everything on which moral discourse is based was dismissed. Regardless of what a small number of more educated or socially aware Christians may believe, that video demonstrates what is so dangerous about religion. Nothing is too irrational or too depraved that the name of God cannot lead the sufficiently indoctrinated to accept it. If God exists, the divine theories of morality that spit on humanity are still utterly wrong and utterly reprehensible.