Total Posts:16|Showing Posts:1-16
Jump to topic:

Questions for Christians

kohai
Posts: 380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2011 12:12:52 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Do you believe your god is the ultimate source of morality?

If so, Consider First Samuel 15:3 in which the Lord commands his people:

Now go and strike Amalek and utterly destroy all that he has, and do not spare him: but put to death both man and woman, child and infant . ..

Now ask yourself three questions:

(i) Was "put to death both man and woman, child and infant" the very word of the Lord whom you worship?
(ii) Is it conceivable that your Lord could again issue the same command in our time?
(iii) If you did believe you were so commanded by your Lord, could you and would you obey?

If you answer "No" to question (i), you deny the authority of God's so-called word, the Bible. If you answer "No" to question (ii)--perhaps because you think your Lord might have mended his ways--you deny that God's commands have the kind of universal applicability which is a necessary condition of their being in accord with, let alone the source of, moral truths. If you answer "No" to question (iii), you must think that it is sometimes right, or even obligatory, to disobey God. You thereby admit that moral truths are independent of, and may even conflict with, God's dictates. You admit that ethics is, as most philosophers have long insisted, autonomous; and that we must, therefore, do our moral thinking for ourselves.

But if you answer "Yes" to each question, then I submit that your belief in the God of biblical theism is not just mistaken but morally abhorrent. For, in the words of my friend, John Patrick, who resigned from the Presbyterian ministry in New Zealand after he discovered how many of his parishioners also answered "Yes" to all three questions: "a doctrine of the Scriptures as containing the Word of God, the supreme ruler of faith and duty, has the power to turn otherwise gentle, thoughtful, and basically loving people into a group prepared to sanction genocide in the name of the Lord they worship."

From the secular web.

Thoughts?
1) Whatever has contradictory attributes does not exist.
2) The Biblical God has contradictory attributes.
3) Therefore, the Biblical God does not exist
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2011 2:55:10 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/17/2011 12:12:52 AM, kohai wrote:

Thoughts?

That you should probably read some stuff that's not from secweb on this subject before offering this as a serious argument. It's full of non-sequiturs and trades of the ambiguity of what authority even means in this context.

Authority:

Michael Rea, "Authority and Truth" : http://nd.edu...

Genocide:

The "conservatives":

Paul Copan, "Divinely-Mandated Genocide or Corporate Capital Punishment?": http://www.epsociety.org...
Paul Copan, "Is God a Moral Monster? Making Sense of the Old Testament God": http://www.amazon.com...

Assorted articles from Matt flannagan: http://www.mandm.org.nz...

William Lane Craig, "Slaughter of the Canaanites": http://www.reasonablefaith.org...
William Lane Craig, "The Slaughter of the Canaanites revisited": http://www.reasonablefaith.org...

The "liberals":

Wes Morriston, "Ethical Criticism of the Bible: The Case of Divinely Mandated Genocide": http://spot.colorado.edu...
Wes Morriston, "Did God Command Genocide? A Challenge to the Biblical Inerrantist": http://spot.colorado.edu...

Randal Rauser, "Let Nothing that Breathes Remain Alive: On the Problem of Divinely Commanded Genocide": http://randalrauser.com...

Thom Stark, "Is God a Moral Compromiser? A Critical Review of Paul Copan's
'Is God a Moral Monster?'": http://thomstark.net...

Have fun.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2011 5:27:57 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/17/2011 12:12:52 AM, kohai wrote:
Do you believe your god is the ultimate source of morality?

If so, Consider First Samuel 15:3 in which the Lord commands his people:

Now go and strike Amalek and utterly destroy all that he has, and do not spare him: but put to death both man and woman, child and infant . ..

Now ask yourself three questions:

(i) Was "put to death both man and woman, child and infant" the very word of the Lord whom you worship?
(ii) Is it conceivable that your Lord could again issue the same command in our time?
(iii) If you did believe you were so commanded by your Lord, could you and would you obey?

If you answer "No" to question (i), you deny the authority of God's so-called word, the Bible. If you answer "No" to question (ii)--perhaps because you think your Lord might have mended his ways--you deny that God's commands have the kind of universal applicability which is a necessary condition of their being in accord with, let alone the source of, moral truths. If you answer "No" to question (iii), you must think that it is sometimes right, or even obligatory, to disobey God. You thereby admit that moral truths are independent of, and may even conflict with, God's dictates. You admit that ethics is, as most philosophers have long insisted, autonomous; and that we must, therefore, do our moral thinking for ourselves.

But if you answer "Yes" to each question, then I submit that your belief in the God of biblical theism is not just mistaken but morally abhorrent. For, in the words of my friend, John Patrick, who resigned from the Presbyterian ministry in New Zealand after he discovered how many of his parishioners also answered "Yes" to all three questions: "a doctrine of the Scriptures as containing the Word of God, the supreme ruler of faith and duty, has the power to turn otherwise gentle, thoughtful, and basically loving people into a group prepared to sanction genocide in the name of the Lord they worship."

From the secular web.

Thoughts?

Firstly, let us acknowledge that you are arguing from an 'if the Bible is true and there is a God, then?' position, right?

Ok, well if there is a God and everything comes from Him then why would He give us the faculty of moral reasoning to Judge Him with IF He WERE evil?

The curse of man is to BELIEVE that we can judge, independently of God, right from wrong.. we cannot. We certainly cannot Judge God, He judges us!

In fact, it is our attitude towards God that we will be judged by:

Luke 19:22-25

"His master replied, ‘I will judge you by your own words, you wicked servant! You knew, did you, that I am a hard man, taking out what I did not put in, and reaping what I did not sow? 23 Why then didn't you put my money on deposit, so that when I came back, I could have collected it with interest?'

24 "Then he said to those standing by, ‘Take his mina away from him and give it to the one who has ten minas.'

25 "‘Sir,' they said, ‘he already has ten!'
The Cross.. the Cross.
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2011 3:26:52 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/17/2011 12:12:52 AM, kohai wrote:
Do you believe your god is the ultimate source of morality?

If so, Consider First Samuel 15:3 in which the Lord commands his people:

Now go and strike Amalek and utterly destroy all that he has, and do not spare him: but put to death both man and woman, child and infant . ..

Now ask yourself three questions:

(i) Was "put to death both man and woman, child and infant" the very word of the Lord whom you worship?
(ii) Is it conceivable that your Lord could again issue the same command in our time?
(iii) If you did believe you were so commanded by your Lord, could you and would you obey?

If you answer "No" to question (i), you deny the authority of God's so-called word, the Bible. If you answer "No" to question (ii)--perhaps because you think your Lord might have mended his ways--you deny that God's commands have the kind of universal applicability which is a necessary condition of their being in accord with, let alone the source of, moral truths. If you answer "No" to question (iii), you must think that it is sometimes right, or even obligatory, to disobey God. You thereby admit that moral truths are independent of, and may even conflict with, God's dictates. You admit that ethics is, as most philosophers have long insisted, autonomous; and that we must, therefore, do our moral thinking for ourselves.

But if you answer "Yes" to each question, then I submit that your belief in the God of biblical theism is not just mistaken but morally abhorrent. For, in the words of my friend, John Patrick, who resigned from the Presbyterian ministry in New Zealand after he discovered how many of his parishioners also answered "Yes" to all three questions: "a doctrine of the Scriptures as containing the Word of God, the supreme ruler of faith and duty, has the power to turn otherwise gentle, thoughtful, and basically loving people into a group prepared to sanction genocide in the name of the Lord they worship."

From the secular web.

Thoughts?

My thoughts go immediately to why atheists spend so many hours trying to disprove a God that they profess no belief in. Are they trying to convince themselves of something?? These complaints of genocide have been around for a long time, they're nothing new to us.

You say, "Your God ordered genocide".
I say, "So".

Any further discussion is nothing more than the atheist trying to convince me that I should pass judgement on a sovereign and omniscient being, using the moral standards of a being who does not possess those qualities. These arguments are wholely unconvincing to anyone who believes in God, and leaves me wondering which one of us they're really trying to convince.
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2011 3:32:21 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
You can be Christian without taking the Bible literally. After all, many of what is written there has influence of the morality of the time, and the imperfections of human beings. Simply citing biblical quotes and presenting them as a basis for argument does not actually refute or even touch on the essence of Christianity. For that, you would have to prove the nonexistence of a higher power, which I am almost convinced is impossible.

You can cite the Bible all you want, but in the end you have not really changed anything or proved anything, apart from its errancy, which many of us are probably already in consensus about.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2011 3:45:30 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/17/2011 3:26:52 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 9/17/2011 12:12:52 AM, kohai wrote:
Do you believe your god is the ultimate source of morality?

If so, Consider First Samuel 15:3 in which the Lord commands his people:

Now go and strike Amalek and utterly destroy all that he has, and do not spare him: but put to death both man and woman, child and infant . ..

Now ask yourself three questions:

(i) Was "put to death both man and woman, child and infant" the very word of the Lord whom you worship?
(ii) Is it conceivable that your Lord could again issue the same command in our time?
(iii) If you did believe you were so commanded by your Lord, could you and would you obey?

If you answer "No" to question (i), you deny the authority of God's so-called word, the Bible. If you answer "No" to question (ii)--perhaps because you think your Lord might have mended his ways--you deny that God's commands have the kind of universal applicability which is a necessary condition of their being in accord with, let alone the source of, moral truths. If you answer "No" to question (iii), you must think that it is sometimes right, or even obligatory, to disobey God. You thereby admit that moral truths are independent of, and may even conflict with, God's dictates. You admit that ethics is, as most philosophers have long insisted, autonomous; and that we must, therefore, do our moral thinking for ourselves.

But if you answer "Yes" to each question, then I submit that your belief in the God of biblical theism is not just mistaken but morally abhorrent. For, in the words of my friend, John Patrick, who resigned from the Presbyterian ministry in New Zealand after he discovered how many of his parishioners also answered "Yes" to all three questions: "a doctrine of the Scriptures as containing the Word of God, the supreme ruler of faith and duty, has the power to turn otherwise gentle, thoughtful, and basically loving people into a group prepared to sanction genocide in the name of the Lord they worship."

From the secular web.

Thoughts?

My thoughts go immediately to why atheists spend so many hours trying to disprove a God that they profess no belief in. Are they trying to convince themselves of something?? These complaints of genocide have been around for a long time, they're nothing new to us.

You say, "Your God ordered genocide".
I say, "So".

Any further discussion is nothing more than the atheist trying to convince me that I should pass judgement on a sovereign and omniscient being, using the moral standards of a being who does not possess those qualities. These arguments are wholely unconvincing to anyone who believes in God, and leaves me wondering which one of us they're really trying to convince.

I say "Your God ordered you to rape this 13 year old girl"
You say, "So".

Any further discussion is nothing more than the atheist trying to convince you that you should pass judgement on a sovereign and omniscient being and his moral standards. Instead, you would rather just blindly obey and follow, ignoring your own moral compass in favor of following an authoritative figure.

If this is true, how do you tell the difference between Satan and God?
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2011 3:46:54 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/17/2011 3:32:21 PM, 000ike wrote:
You can be Christian without taking the Bible literally. After all, many of what is written there has influence of the morality of the time, and the imperfections of human beings. Simply citing biblical quotes and presenting them as a basis for argument does not actually refute or even touch on the essence of Christianity. For that, you would have to prove the nonexistence of a higher power, which I am almost convinced is impossible.

You can cite the Bible all you want, but in the end you have not really changed anything or proved anything, apart from its errancy, which many of us are probably already in consensus about.

So in other words, all the instances where the bible talks about genocide, rape, etc, were all wrong, never happened, or were not orders from God, and God just happened to let it slide with Moses and never mentioned to him, that what he was doing was wrong?

And you seriously expect us to believe this?
Tiel
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2011 3:49:13 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/17/2011 3:26:52 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 9/17/2011 12:12:52 AM, kohai wrote:
Do you believe your god is the ultimate source of morality?

If so, Consider First Samuel 15:3 in which the Lord commands his people:

Now go and strike Amalek and utterly destroy all that he has, and do not spare him: but put to death both man and woman, child and infant . ..

Now ask yourself three questions:

(i) Was "put to death both man and woman, child and infant" the very word of the Lord whom you worship?
(ii) Is it conceivable that your Lord could again issue the same command in our time?
(iii) If you did believe you were so commanded by your Lord, could you and would you obey?

If you answer "No" to question (i), you deny the authority of God's so-called word, the Bible. If you answer "No" to question (ii)--perhaps because you think your Lord might have mended his ways--you deny that God's commands have the kind of universal applicability which is a necessary condition of their being in accord with, let alone the source of, moral truths. If you answer "No" to question (iii), you must think that it is sometimes right, or even obligatory, to disobey God. You thereby admit that moral truths are independent of, and may even conflict with, God's dictates. You admit that ethics is, as most philosophers have long insisted, autonomous; and that we must, therefore, do our moral thinking for ourselves.

But if you answer "Yes" to each question, then I submit that your belief in the God of biblical theism is not just mistaken but morally abhorrent. For, in the words of my friend, John Patrick, who resigned from the Presbyterian ministry in New Zealand after he discovered how many of his parishioners also answered "Yes" to all three questions: "a doctrine of the Scriptures as containing the Word of God, the supreme ruler of faith and duty, has the power to turn otherwise gentle, thoughtful, and basically loving people into a group prepared to sanction genocide in the name of the Lord they worship."

From the secular web.

Thoughts?

My thoughts go immediately to why atheists spend so many hours trying to disprove a God that they profess no belief in. Are they trying to convince themselves of something?? These complaints of genocide have been around for a long time, they're nothing new to us.

You say, "Your God ordered genocide".
I say, "So".

Any further discussion is nothing more than the atheist trying to convince me that I should pass judgement on a sovereign and omniscient being, using the moral standards of a being who does not possess those qualities. These arguments are wholely unconvincing to anyone who believes in God, and leaves me wondering which one of us they're really trying to convince.

His motivation is not to show that there is or isn't a God, but more over to show that your beliefs reflect immoral mentality.
"Only the inner force of curiosity and wonder about the unknown, or an outer force upon your free will, can brake the shackles of your current perception."
Tiel
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2011 3:53:49 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/17/2011 3:32:21 PM, 000ike wrote:
You can be Christian without taking the Bible literally. After all, many of what is written there has influence of the morality of the time, and the imperfections of human beings. Simply citing biblical quotes and presenting them as a basis for argument does not actually refute or even touch on the essence of Christianity. For that, you would have to prove the nonexistence of a higher power, which I am almost convinced is impossible.

You can cite the Bible all you want, but in the end you have not really changed anything or proved anything, apart from its errancy, which many of us are probably already in consensus about.

False. It shows that the teachings and actions of the bible or both filled with immorality and contradiction. This is important to people because 76% of America is Christian of some denomination or another. People ask why would we want to show how immoral and contradictory the teachings are? It's because you people make up 3/4 of our country! You people need to understand the difference between negative and positive! Right and wrong! Good and Evil! How do you believe in a book that teaches such immorality and contradiction yet call yourself a moral intelligent person?
"Only the inner force of curiosity and wonder about the unknown, or an outer force upon your free will, can brake the shackles of your current perception."
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2011 4:10:25 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/17/2011 3:53:49 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 9/17/2011 3:32:21 PM, 000ike wrote:
You can be Christian without taking the Bible literally. After all, many of what is written there has influence of the morality of the time, and the imperfections of human beings. Simply citing biblical quotes and presenting them as a basis for argument does not actually refute or even touch on the essence of Christianity. For that, you would have to prove the nonexistence of a higher power, which I am almost convinced is impossible.

You can cite the Bible all you want, but in the end you have not really changed anything or proved anything, apart from its errancy, which many of us are probably already in consensus about.

False. It shows that the teachings and actions of the bible or both filled with immorality and contradiction.

Isn't that what I just said? Did you even read my post?
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2011 4:18:38 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/17/2011 3:45:30 PM, tkubok wrote:
At 9/17/2011 3:26:52 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 9/17/2011 12:12:52 AM, kohai wrote:
Do you believe your god is the ultimate source of morality?

If so, Consider First Samuel 15:3 in which the Lord commands his people:

Now go and strike Amalek and utterly destroy all that he has, and do not spare him: but put to death both man and woman, child and infant . ..

Now ask yourself three questions:

(i) Was "put to death both man and woman, child and infant" the very word of the Lord whom you worship?
(ii) Is it conceivable that your Lord could again issue the same command in our time?
(iii) If you did believe you were so commanded by your Lord, could you and would you obey?

If you answer "No" to question (i), you deny the authority of God's so-called word, the Bible. If you answer "No" to question (ii)--perhaps because you think your Lord might have mended his ways--you deny that God's commands have the kind of universal applicability which is a necessary condition of their being in accord with, let alone the source of, moral truths. If you answer "No" to question (iii), you must think that it is sometimes right, or even obligatory, to disobey God. You thereby admit that moral truths are independent of, and may even conflict with, God's dictates. You admit that ethics is, as most philosophers have long insisted, autonomous; and that we must, therefore, do our moral thinking for ourselves.

But if you answer "Yes" to each question, then I submit that your belief in the God of biblical theism is not just mistaken but morally abhorrent. For, in the words of my friend, John Patrick, who resigned from the Presbyterian ministry in New Zealand after he discovered how many of his parishioners also answered "Yes" to all three questions: "a doctrine of the Scriptures as containing the Word of God, the supreme ruler of faith and duty, has the power to turn otherwise gentle, thoughtful, and basically loving people into a group prepared to sanction genocide in the name of the Lord they worship."

From the secular web.

Thoughts?

My thoughts go immediately to why atheists spend so many hours trying to disprove a God that they profess no belief in. Are they trying to convince themselves of something?? These complaints of genocide have been around for a long time, they're nothing new to us.

You say, "Your God ordered genocide".
I say, "So".

Any further discussion is nothing more than the atheist trying to convince me that I should pass judgement on a sovereign and omniscient being, using the moral standards of a being who does not possess those qualities. These arguments are wholely unconvincing to anyone who believes in God, and leaves me wondering which one of us they're really trying to convince.

I say "Your God ordered you to rape this 13 year old girl"
You say, "So".

Any further discussion is nothing more than the atheist trying to convince you that you should pass judgement on a sovereign and omniscient being and his moral standards. Instead, you would rather just blindly obey and follow, ignoring your own moral compass in favor of following an authoritative figure.

Wow, really?? You and Izbo really like this rape thing, don't you??

I start from the position of love thy neighbor and do unto others as I would have them do unto me, God's law. If I were to sense, or be given a conflicting message, such as rape, I know it isn't coming from God. It's not that difficult to understand.

If this is true, how do you tell the difference between Satan and God?

If what is true, your rewording of what I said, using your understanding of my beliefs?? Do you have some kind of special power that gives you insight into what I believe and why I believe it?? If not then there is no reason to believe it's true other than the fact that you think it is.
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2011 4:22:22 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/17/2011 4:18:38 PM, medic0506 wrote:
Wow, really?? You and Izbo really like this rape thing, don't you??
Especially since its mentioned in the bible, yes.
I start from the position of love thy neighbor and do unto others as I would have them do unto me, God's law. If I were to sense, or be given a conflicting message, such as rape, I know it isn't coming from God. It's not that difficult to understand.

So if you received a message, telling you to rape or murder someone, your answer would be "My God would never ask me to do something like that"?

If what is true, your rewording of what I said, using your understanding of my beliefs?? Do you have some kind of special power that gives you insight into what I believe and why I believe it?? If not then there is no reason to believe it's true other than the fact that you think it is.

If God truly did order Moses to slaughter and rape people. If that was true, if it really did occur, then how would you tell the difference?
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2011 4:37:31 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/17/2011 3:49:13 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 9/17/2011 3:26:52 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 9/17/2011 12:12:52 AM, kohai wrote:
Do you believe your god is the ultimate source of morality?

If so, Consider First Samuel 15:3 in which the Lord commands his people:

Now go and strike Amalek and utterly destroy all that he has, and do not spare him: but put to death both man and woman, child and infant . ..

Now ask yourself three questions:

(i) Was "put to death both man and woman, child and infant" the very word of the Lord whom you worship?
(ii) Is it conceivable that your Lord could again issue the same command in our time?
(iii) If you did believe you were so commanded by your Lord, could you and would you obey?

If you answer "No" to question (i), you deny the authority of God's so-called word, the Bible. If you answer "No" to question (ii)--perhaps because you think your Lord might have mended his ways--you deny that God's commands have the kind of universal applicability which is a necessary condition of their being in accord with, let alone the source of, moral truths. If you answer "No" to question (iii), you must think that it is sometimes right, or even obligatory, to disobey God. You thereby admit that moral truths are independent of, and may even conflict with, God's dictates. You admit that ethics is, as most philosophers have long insisted, autonomous; and that we must, therefore, do our moral thinking for ourselves.

But if you answer "Yes" to each question, then I submit that your belief in the God of biblical theism is not just mistaken but morally abhorrent. For, in the words of my friend, John Patrick, who resigned from the Presbyterian ministry in New Zealand after he discovered how many of his parishioners also answered "Yes" to all three questions: "a doctrine of the Scriptures as containing the Word of God, the supreme ruler of faith and duty, has the power to turn otherwise gentle, thoughtful, and basically loving people into a group prepared to sanction genocide in the name of the Lord they worship."

From the secular web.

Thoughts?

My thoughts go immediately to why atheists spend so many hours trying to disprove a God that they profess no belief in. Are they trying to convince themselves of something?? These complaints of genocide have been around for a long time, they're nothing new to us.

You say, "Your God ordered genocide".
I say, "So".

Any further discussion is nothing more than the atheist trying to convince me that I should pass judgement on a sovereign and omniscient being, using the moral standards of a being who does not possess those qualities. These arguments are wholely unconvincing to anyone who believes in God, and leaves me wondering which one of us they're really trying to convince.

His motivation is not to show that there is or isn't a God, but more over to show that your beliefs reflect immoral mentality.

That was my point, that it's an attempt to show why his morals should be used to judge God. If he's calling my mentality immoral, he's using his own standards to judge someone that he doesn't even know based solely on what I think about a passage in the Bible that doesn't even apply to me. Is that a moral standard that I should respect??
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2011 4:53:45 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/17/2011 4:37:31 PM, medic0506 wrote:
That was my point, that it's an attempt to show why his morals should be used to judge God. If he's calling my mentality immoral, he's using his own standards to judge someone that he doesn't even know based solely on what I think about a passage in the Bible that doesn't even apply to me. Is that a moral standard that I should respect??

The only way you can know someone is by their actions. If the bible is an accurate representation of what God ordered and did, then yes, we can know many things about God.

Furthermore, are you saying that the bible doesnt apply to you? I thought you were a christian.
Calvincambridge
Posts: 1,141
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2011 5:11:59 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/17/2011 12:12:52 AM, kohai wrote:
Do you believe your god is the ultimate source of morality?

If so, Consider First Samuel 15:3 in which the Lord commands his people:

Now go and strike Amalek and utterly destroy all that he has, and do not spare him: but put to death both man and woman, child and infant . ..

Now ask yourself three questions:

(i) Was "put to death both man and woman, child and infant" the very word of the Lord whom you worship?
(ii) Is it conceivable that your Lord could again issue the same command in our time?
(iii) If you did believe you were so commanded by your Lord, could you and would you obey?

If you answer "No" to question (i), you deny the authority of God's so-called word, the Bible. If you answer "No" to question (ii)--perhaps because you think your Lord might have mended his ways--you deny that God's commands have the kind of universal applicability which is a necessary condition of their being in accord with, let alone the source of, moral truths. If you answer "No" to question (iii), you must think that it is sometimes right, or even obligatory, to disobey God. You thereby admit that moral truths are independent of, and may even conflict with, God's dictates. You admit that ethics is, as most philosophers have long insisted, autonomous; and that we must, therefore, do our moral thinking for ourselves.

But if you answer "Yes" to each question, then I submit that your belief in the God of biblical theism is not just mistaken but morally abhorrent. For, in the words of my friend, John Patrick, who resigned from the Presbyterian ministry in New Zealand after he discovered how many of his parishioners also answered "Yes" to all three questions: "a doctrine of the Scriptures as containing the Word of God, the supreme ruler of faith and duty, has the power to turn otherwise gentle, thoughtful, and basically loving people into a group prepared to sanction genocide in the name of the Lord they worship."

From the secular web.

Thoughts?

I. No this is what he said " עַתָּה לֵךְ וְהִכִּיתָה אֶת־עֲמָלֵק וְהַחֲרַמְתֶּם אֶת־כָּל־אֲשֶׁר־לֹו וְלֹא תַחְמֹל עָלָיו וְהֵמַתָּה מֵאִישׁ עַד־אִשָּׁה מֵעֹלֵל וְעַד־יֹונֵק מִשֹּׁור וְעַד־שֶׂה מִגָּמָל וְעַד־חֲמֹור׃ ס

II. No not yet at the end of days though

III. Absolutely
Trying to figure out women is like trying to solve a Rubik's cube with missing pieces. While blind. And on fire. And being shot.-Agent_Orange
Dude. Shades
That is all.- Thaddeus Rivers
One thing that isn't a joke though is the fact that woman are computers.Some buttons you can press and it'l work fine, but if you push the wrong one you'll get the blue screen of death.
silly, thett. girls are only good for sex. being friends with a female is of no value.-darkkermit
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2011 5:26:03 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/17/2011 5:27:57 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:
At 9/17/2011 12:12:52 AM, kohai wrote:
Do you believe your god is the ultimate source of morality?

If so, Consider First Samuel 15:3 in which the Lord commands his people:

Now go and strike Amalek and utterly destroy all that he has, and do not spare him: but put to death both man and woman, child and infant . ..

Now ask yourself three questions:

(i) Was "put to death both man and woman, child and infant" the very word of the Lord whom you worship?
(ii) Is it conceivable that your Lord could again issue the same command in our time?
(iii) If you did believe you were so commanded by your Lord, could you and would you obey?

If you answer "No" to question (i), you deny the authority of God's so-called word, the Bible. If you answer "No" to question (ii)--perhaps because you think your Lord might have mended his ways--you deny that God's commands have the kind of universal applicability which is a necessary condition of their being in accord with, let alone the source of, moral truths. If you answer "No" to question (iii), you must think that it is sometimes right, or even obligatory, to disobey God. You thereby admit that moral truths are independent of, and may even conflict with, God's dictates. You admit that ethics is, as most philosophers have long insisted, autonomous; and that we must, therefore, do our moral thinking for ourselves.

But if you answer "Yes" to each question, then I submit that your belief in the God of biblical theism is not just mistaken but morally abhorrent. For, in the words of my friend, John Patrick, who resigned from the Presbyterian ministry in New Zealand after he discovered how many of his parishioners also answered "Yes" to all three questions: "a doctrine of the Scriptures as containing the Word of God, the supreme ruler of faith and duty, has the power to turn otherwise gentle, thoughtful, and basically loving people into a group prepared to sanction genocide in the name of the Lord they worship."

From the secular web.

Thoughts?

Firstly, let us acknowledge that you are arguing from an 'if the Bible is true and there is a God, then?' position, right?

Ok, well if there is a God and everything comes from Him then why would He give us the faculty of moral reasoning to Judge Him with IF He WERE evil?

The curse of man is to BELIEVE that we can judge, independently of God, right from wrong.. we cannot. We certainly cannot Judge God, He judges us!

In fact, it is our attitude towards God that we will be judged by:

Luke 19:22-25

"His master replied, ‘I will judge you by your own words, you wicked servant! You knew, did you, that I am a hard man, taking out what I did not put in, and reaping what I did not sow? 23 Why then didn't you put my money on deposit, so that when I came back, I could have collected it with interest?'

24 "Then he said to those standing by, ‘Take his mina away from him and give it to the one who has ten minas.'

25 "‘Sir,' they said, ‘he already has ten!'


Kohai, a response please?
The Cross.. the Cross.