Total Posts:44|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Abraham and Isaac

Dan4reason
Posts: 1,168
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2012 6:52:43 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Atheists often consider this story as one of horror where Abraham was willing to do something so unethical as slaughtering his son just because God told him to do it. To them this is an example of a person mindlessly doing evil in the name of a deity.

They view it as vile that the moral of the story is to mindlessly obey even evil commandments as long as it is from God.

I am not Christian but I understand the Christian perspective.

Unfortunately, they are quite wrong. Abraham was doing what he did because he knew that God is omni-benevolent. Therefore the commandment that seemed evil to him had some good purpose in the end. Death does have a purpose because without it people could not leave this life for a better one.

While is wrong for humans to artificially shorten each of our lives on earth because this is against God's plan unless such an action is necessary, God can take a life if it is part of his plan.

So the moral of this story is that a limited being like us do not know everything so we might view good things as bad and visa versa. So when we are given a commandment that seems evil from our omni-benevolent creator, we must accept the judgement of that being above our own.
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2012 6:56:50 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
This begs the question of whether it was good to have been done: in any other circumstance, we would be revolted universally by the act, regardless of who does it. I apologise, but if this is what an omnibenevolent God would do, then I'd rather be evil.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
Dan4reason
Posts: 1,168
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2012 7:02:21 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/3/2012 6:56:50 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
This begs the question of whether it was good to have been done: in any other circumstance, we would be revolted universally by the act, regardless of who does it. I apologise, but if this is what an omnibenevolent God would do, then I'd rather be evil.

I am not saying that attempting to kill Isaac is right because it is right. I am saying it is right because God is omnibenevolent, and this omnibenevolent God is commanding it.

Some questions: Do you consider yourself to be a perfect authority on right and wrong? Do you accept the possibility that you might be wrong in your moral judgement at times?
ScottyDouglas
Posts: 2,350
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2012 7:02:42 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/3/2012 6:56:50 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
This begs the question of whether it was good to have been done: in any other circumstance, we would be revolted universally by the act, regardless of who does it. I apologise, but if this is what an omnibenevolent God would do, then I'd rather be evil.

We noticed that.
TheAsylum
ScottyDouglas
Posts: 2,350
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2012 7:04:54 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/3/2012 7:02:21 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 6/3/2012 6:56:50 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
This begs the question of whether it was good to have been done: in any other circumstance, we would be revolted universally by the act, regardless of who does it. I apologise, but if this is what an omnibenevolent God would do, then I'd rather be evil.

I am not saying that attempting to kill Isaac is right because it is right. I am saying it is right because God is omnibenevolent, and this omnibenevolent God is commanding it.

Some questions: Do you consider yourself to be a perfect authority on right and wrong? Do you accept the possibility that you might be wrong in your moral judgement at times?

All the time. I pray and study to become wiser in the field. But perfection is a impossibility.
TheAsylum
jat93
Posts: 1,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2012 7:04:56 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/3/2012 6:52:43 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
Atheists often consider this story as one of horror where Abraham was willing to do something so unethical as slaughtering his son just because God told him to do it. To them this is an example of a person mindlessly doing evil in the name of a deity.

They view it as vile that the moral of the story is to mindlessly obey even evil commandments as long as it is from God.

I am not Christian but I understand the Christian perspective.

Unfortunately, they are quite wrong. Abraham was doing what he did because he knew that God is omni-benevolent. Therefore the commandment that seemed evil to him had some good purpose in the end. Death does have a purpose because without it people could not leave this life for a better one.

While is wrong for humans to artificially shorten each of our lives on earth because this is against God's plan unless such an action is necessary, God can take a life if it is part of his plan.

So the moral of this story is that a limited being like us do not know everything so we might view good things as bad and visa versa. So when we are given a commandment that seems evil from our omni-benevolent creator, we must accept the judgement of that being above our own.

Did Abraham know he was omni-benevolent? I'm not so sure. I'm not sure if the story of Sodom and Gomorrah takes place before or after the binding of Isaac... But when God tells Abraham of his intentions to destroy the cities because of their wickedness, Abraham argues with God, pleading with him to let him find righteous people there and spare the city. In this case, Abraham clearly does not trust God's benevolence. Yet he seems far more eager to offer his own son, who had waited for for a ridiculously long time (both Abraham and Sarah were older than 90 when they had Isaac according to the bible) without that argument.

Besides, we should question if a being who would command his most faithful and loyal adherent - perhaps even friend/acquaintance - to sacrifice the son that he had waited to have for so long and wanted to have so dearly is even consistent with omnibenevolence. Let's not use our "omnis" lightly here. To say something or someone is ALL loving is quite a claim.

Some orthodox Jews believe that Sarah died because Satan informed her of what Abraham planned to do with Isaac and she couldn't bear the knowledge. And even if you don't believe this - "You should totally go kill your son." As the knife is about to come down "WAIT JK!"

Seriously? This is an omnibenevolent being? Not just not evil, not just decent, but perfectly good? Seems kinda douch-y to me.
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2012 7:10:02 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Hmmm... that's an interesting interpretation.

The way the Bible puts it, God (Yaweh) was literally testing Abraham. He was like, "you must sacrifice your only and beloved son to me." Abraham seemed to follow this word implicitly, but when his son questioned him ("it appears we're going to go offer a burnt sacrifice, so why is there no lamb?"), Abraham replied that God Himself will provide it.

Nonetheless, he strung the boy up, laid him on an altar, and took out a knife to kill him. It was just then that not God, but instead, a "spirit of God" came down and stopped him. The spirit indicated that God now realizes that Abraham fears him, as he wouldn't even keep his son from him. Accordingly, his son was spared. Abraham then looked up and noticed a ram with its horns stuck in the bushes, and he sacrificed that, instead.

Abraham then called the place "Yaweh will provide."

So, I took it that the moral of the story is to follow God implicitly, and if it appears He's being outrageous, then he's just testing you.
EvanK
Posts: 599
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2012 7:10:36 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/3/2012 6:52:43 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
Atheists often consider this story as one of horror where Abraham was willing to do something so unethical as slaughtering his son just because God told him to do it. To them this is an example of a person mindlessly doing evil in the name of a deity.

They view it as vile that the moral of the story is to mindlessly obey even evil commandments as long as it is from God.

I am not Christian but I understand the Christian perspective.

Unfortunately, they are quite wrong. Abraham was doing what he did because he knew that God is omni-benevolent. Therefore the commandment that seemed evil to him had some good purpose in the end. Death does have a purpose because without it people could not leave this life for a better one.

While is wrong for humans to artificially shorten each of our lives on earth because this is against God's plan unless such an action is necessary, God can take a life if it is part of his plan.

So the moral of this story is that a limited being like us do not know everything so we might view good things as bad and visa versa. So when we are given a commandment that seems evil from our omni-benevolent creator, we must accept the judgement of that being above our own.

What good purpose exactly would be the death of Isaac I wonder? Obviously none of us know, or ever will, but I most certainly wouldn't sacrifice my children (if I have them) if God told me to do so. If he wants my (hypothetical) child do die, he can do the dirty deed himself.

I certainly think it's unfair of God to use Isaac to test Abraham's loyalty to him, don't you think? I certainly would have turned cold towards God if he really and truly created me only to be used as a human sacrifice to test the loyalty of my Father. And the same if I were Abraham, where my child was created, just to be sacrificed.

Furthermore, I don't believe any of us have any purpose but to live our lives. I don't think God planned out the lives of each and every human to ever walk the earth. I don't believe in any kind of plan. Why would an all loving God create humans to die horrible deaths like they do? All the evil that happens, it's hard to believe that both the criminals and the victims had their outcomes predetermined by an "all loving" God, at least for me it is.

I don't know what really happened with Abraham and Isaac, whether it really happened or whether it really was a biblical myth, but either way, I highly doubt God came to Isaac and told him to sacrifice his son. Doesn't seem like an all loving God to me...
The problem with socialism is that, sooner or later, you run out of people's money."_Margaret Thatcher

"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."_Thomas Jefferson

"The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it."_Thomas Jefferson

"It is easier to fool someone than to convince them that they have been fooled."-Mark Twain
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2012 7:14:05 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
On the other hand, the story is a little strange, as Isaac was not his only son. He also had a son Ishmael with the Egyptian Hagar, who was his wife Sarah's servant. When Sarah conceived Isaac, she became jealous of Hagar. This all came to a head when she noticed Ishmael and Isaac playing, and she demanded that Hagar and Ishmael were sent away. Abraham was resistant, because that's essentially sending them out into the desert to die, but Yahweh told him to go ahead and do it, and not to worry, because Ishmael essentially doesn't count as a son, and moreover, he will eventually be successful as well.
Gileandos
Posts: 2,394
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2012 7:19:32 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/3/2012 7:04:56 PM, jat93 wrote:

Abraham already had a past promise from God that nations would come from Isaac's line. As Hebrews points out, Abraham knew God would do something, even if it was to resurrect Isaac.

Hebrews 11:
17 By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises was in the act of offering up his only son, 18 of whom it was said, "Through Isaac shall your offspring be named." 19 He considered that God was able even to raise him from the dead, from which, figuratively speaking, he did receive him back.
tyler90az
Posts: 971
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2012 7:39:19 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
As a Christian death is nothing, rather it should be nothing. Mortality is merely a speck in the grad scheme of things. That is why to say God is bad because he ordered killings, is a weak argument. For the righteous, dieing early is a blessing. Even for the wicked it is a blessing, stops them from sinking deeper in sin.
Today we begin in earnest the work of making sure that the world we leave our children is just a little bit better than the one we inhabit today. - President Obama
EvanK
Posts: 599
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2012 7:47:22 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/3/2012 7:39:19 PM, tyler90az wrote:
As a Christian death is nothing, rather it should be nothing. Mortality is merely a speck in the grad scheme of things. That is why to say God is bad because he ordered killings, is a weak argument. For the righteous, dieing early is a blessing. Even for the wicked it is a blessing, stops them from sinking deeper in sin.

Don't see how early death is a blessing for anyone...Technically speaking, everyone is wicked. No one is perfect, and everyone, even the saints, committed wicked acts. St Paul, for example, persecuted Christians at one point in his life. St Peter had quite a temper, as legend goes. Point is, death isn't a blessing per se. It's going to happen, it is unavoidable, whether you're "righteous" or "wicked". Make the best out of your life while you have it. I will try to avoid death as long as I can.
The problem with socialism is that, sooner or later, you run out of people's money."_Margaret Thatcher

"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."_Thomas Jefferson

"The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it."_Thomas Jefferson

"It is easier to fool someone than to convince them that they have been fooled."-Mark Twain
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2012 8:23:38 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/3/2012 7:39:19 PM, tyler90az wrote:
As a Christian death is nothing, rather it should be nothing. Mortality is merely a speck in the grad scheme of things. That is why to say God is bad because he ordered killings, is a weak argument. For the righteous, dieing early is a blessing. Even for the wicked it is a blessing, stops them from sinking deeper in sin.

So it doesnt matter if a christian goes and kills a bunch of people, randomly?
EvanK
Posts: 599
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2012 8:25:17 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/3/2012 8:23:38 PM, tkubok wrote:
At 6/3/2012 7:39:19 PM, tyler90az wrote:
As a Christian death is nothing, rather it should be nothing. Mortality is merely a speck in the grad scheme of things. That is why to say God is bad because he ordered killings, is a weak argument. For the righteous, dieing early is a blessing. Even for the wicked it is a blessing, stops them from sinking deeper in sin.

So it doesnt matter if a christian goes and kills a bunch of people, randomly?
The problem with socialism is that, sooner or later, you run out of people's money."_Margaret Thatcher

"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."_Thomas Jefferson

"The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it."_Thomas Jefferson

"It is easier to fool someone than to convince them that they have been fooled."-Mark Twain
tyler90az
Posts: 971
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2012 8:50:27 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/3/2012 8:23:38 PM, tkubok wrote:
At 6/3/2012 7:39:19 PM, tyler90az wrote:
As a Christian death is nothing, rather it should be nothing. Mortality is merely a speck in the grad scheme of things. That is why to say God is bad because he ordered killings, is a weak argument. For the righteous, dieing early is a blessing. Even for the wicked it is a blessing, stops them from sinking deeper in sin.

So it doesnt matter if a christian goes and kills a bunch of people, randomly?

What does that have anything to do with what we are talking about?
Today we begin in earnest the work of making sure that the world we leave our children is just a little bit better than the one we inhabit today. - President Obama
Dan4reason
Posts: 1,168
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2012 9:53:56 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
First let me point out that God's commandment to Abraham did turn out good. There was actually a reason for God telling Abraham to kill his son. God was doing this to test Abraham. So it turns out that God was not evil after all. So it was right for Abraham to trust God.

At 6/3/2012 7:04:56 PM, jat93 wrote:

Did Abraham know he was omni-benevolent? I'm not so sure.

You are not so sure because you are not Abraham and did not experience the things that made Abraham sure.

I'm not sure if the story of Sodom and Gomorrah takes place before or after the binding of Isaac... But when God tells Abraham of his intentions to destroy the cities because of their wickedness, Abraham argues with God, pleading with him to let him find righteous people there and spare the city. In this case, Abraham clearly does not trust God's benevolence. Yet he seems far more eager to offer his own son, who had waited for for a ridiculously long time (both Abraham and Sarah were older than 90 when they had Isaac according to the bible) without that argument.

What biblical evidence is there that Abraham did not plead with God in the case of killing Isaac? God might have made the commandment without sticking around long enough to discuss the issue thoroughly with Abraham.

Abraham did not trust God's omnipotence as a child sometimes does not trust an adult when he should. However, there is no evidence that Abraham would have gone beyond pleading with God and actually started resisting him outright.

It is interesting how God deals with Abraham. He lets Abraham bring the number of good people these cities have for him to spare them bringing it down from 50 to ten. For all we know God already planned to spare the city if it had only ten people already. But even so, the city still did not have enough and so it was destroyed.

However God was nice enough to spare Lot's family so he did what Abraham was trying to get him it do even without Abraham's influence.

Besides, we should question if a being who would command his most faithful and loyal adherent - perhaps even friend/acquaintance - to sacrifice the son that he had waited to have for so long and wanted to have so dearly is even consistent with omnibenevolence. Let's not use our "omnis" lightly here. To say something or someone is ALL loving is quite a claim.

Well it is good that Abraham did not follow your reasoning because this did turn out to be a test so there really was a reason for Abraham doing this. Death is a necessary part of existence that God makes sure happens so I don't think it unethical for God to command that someone die. There is life after death after all.

Seriously? This is an omnibenevolent being? Not just not evil, not just decent, but perfectly good? Seems kinda douch-y to me.

That's probably because you are not omnibenevolent.
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2012 10:07:52 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/3/2012 8:50:27 PM, tyler90az wrote:
At 6/3/2012 8:23:38 PM, tkubok wrote:
At 6/3/2012 7:39:19 PM, tyler90az wrote:
As a Christian death is nothing, rather it should be nothing. Mortality is merely a speck in the grad scheme of things. That is why to say God is bad because he ordered killings, is a weak argument. For the righteous, dieing early is a blessing. Even for the wicked it is a blessing, stops them from sinking deeper in sin.

So it doesnt matter if a christian goes and kills a bunch of people, randomly?

What does that have anything to do with what we are talking about?

Youre the one who said that death is nothing to christians, and that morality is merely a speck in the grand scheme of things.
tyler90az
Posts: 971
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2012 10:31:31 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Youre the one who said that death is nothing to christians, and that morality is merely a speck in the grand scheme of things.

Still does not make sense...
Today we begin in earnest the work of making sure that the world we leave our children is just a little bit better than the one we inhabit today. - President Obama
Dan4reason
Posts: 1,168
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2012 11:43:32 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/3/2012 7:10:36 PM, EvanK wrote:
At 6/3/2012 6:52:43 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
Atheists often consider this story as one of horror where Abraham was willing to do something so unethical as slaughtering his son just because God told him to do it. To them this is an example of a person mindlessly doing evil in the name of a deity.

They view it as vile that the moral of the story is to mindlessly obey even evil commandments as long as it is from God.

I am not Christian but I understand the Christian perspective.

Unfortunately, they are quite wrong. Abraham was doing what he did because he knew that God is omni-benevolent. Therefore the commandment that seemed evil to him had some good purpose in the end. Death does have a purpose because without it people could not leave this life for a better one.

While is wrong for humans to artificially shorten each of our lives on earth because this is against God's plan unless such an action is necessary, God can take a life if it is part of his plan.

So the moral of this story is that a limited being like us do not know everything so we might view good things as bad and visa versa. So when we are given a commandment that seems evil from our omni-benevolent creator, we must accept the judgement of that being above our own.

What good purpose exactly would be the death of Isaac I wonder? Obviously none of us know, or ever will, but I most certainly wouldn't sacrifice my children (if I have them) if God told me to do so. If he wants my (hypothetical) child do die, he can do the dirty deed himself.

Then you are doing the wrong thing because God is omni-benevolent. And Abraham deciding to obey turned out to be the right thing. It was a test.

Since God is omnibenevolent and omiscient you would be making a wrong choice by refusing.

I certainly think it's unfair of God to use Isaac to test Abraham's loyalty to him, don't you think? I certainly would have turned cold towards God if he really and truly created me only to be used as a human sacrifice to test the loyalty of my Father. And the same if I were Abraham, where my child was created, just to be sacrificed.

Just because Isaac was used as a human sacrifice does not mean this was the only reason God made him.

Also, it is not morally wrong to test someone.
Dan4reason
Posts: 1,168
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2012 11:45:31 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/3/2012 7:14:05 PM, Ren wrote:
On the other hand, the story is a little strange, as Isaac was not his only son. He also had a son Ishmael with the Egyptian Hagar, who was his wife Sarah's servant. When Sarah conceived Isaac, she became jealous of Hagar. This all came to a head when she noticed Ishmael and Isaac playing, and she demanded that Hagar and Ishmael were sent away. Abraham was resistant, because that's essentially sending them out into the desert to die, but Yahweh told him to go ahead and do it, and not to worry, because Ishmael essentially doesn't count as a son, and moreover, he will eventually be successful as well.

Well, there was tension between Isaac and his mother and Ishmael and his mother. Also, God took care of Ishmael in the desert so what exactly went wrong?

And what does this have to do with the Sacrifice of Isaac?
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2012 11:46:08 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
In terms of omnibenevolence, what about:

At 6/3/2012 7:14:05 PM, Ren wrote:
On the other hand, the story is a little strange, as Isaac was not his only son. He also had a son Ishmael with the Egyptian Hagar, who was his wife Sarah's servant. When Sarah conceived Isaac, she became jealous of Hagar. This all came to a head when she noticed Ishmael and Isaac playing, and she demanded that Hagar and Ishmael were sent away. Abraham was resistant, because that's essentially sending them out into the desert to die, but Yahweh told him to go ahead and do it, and not to worry, because Ishmael essentially doesn't count as a son, and moreover, he will eventually be successful as well.
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2012 12:34:44 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/3/2012 10:31:31 PM, tyler90az wrote:
Youre the one who said that death is nothing to christians, and that morality is merely a speck in the grand scheme of things.

Still does not make sense...

If death and morality are both nothing and insignificant to christians, then why should a christian prevent himself from going around killing people, sending them to heaven to meet their maker?

Wouldnt a christian who killed babies, be sending them to heaven because they didnt sin? Wouldnt that be the greatest sacrifice a christian can make, to spend a couple dozen years in jail, but sending a bunch of people to heaven?
Dan4reason
Posts: 1,168
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2012 12:47:45 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/4/2012 12:34:44 AM, tkubok wrote:
At 6/3/2012 10:31:31 PM, tyler90az wrote:
Youre the one who said that death is nothing to christians, and that morality is merely a speck in the grand scheme of things.

Still does not make sense...

If death and morality are both nothing and insignificant to christians, then why should a christian prevent himself from going around killing people, sending them to heaven to meet their maker?

Wouldnt a christian who killed babies, be sending them to heaven because they didnt sin? Wouldnt that be the greatest sacrifice a christian can make, to spend a couple dozen years in jail, but sending a bunch of people to heaven?

Because God has a plan for those people and killing them is a violation of his plan, plus, those people do not necessarily go to heaven.
ScottyDouglas
Posts: 2,350
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2012 3:01:10 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Did Abraham know he was omni-benevolent? I'm not so sure. I'm not sure if the story of Sodom and Gomorrah takes place before or after the binding of Isaac... But when God tells Abraham of his intentions to destroy the cities because of their wickedness, Abraham argues with God, pleading with him to let him find righteous people there and spare the city. In this case, Abraham clearly does not trust God's benevolence. Yet he seems far more eager to offer his own son, who had waited for for a ridiculously long time (both Abraham and Sarah were older than 90 when they had Isaac according to the bible) without that argument.

Besides, we should question if a being who would command his most faithful and loyal adherent - perhaps even friend/acquaintance - to sacrifice the son that he had waited to have for so long and wanted to have so dearly is even consistent with omnibenevolence. Let's not use our "omnis" lightly here. To say something or someone is ALL loving is quite a claim.

Some orthodox Jews believe that Sarah died because Satan informed her of what Abraham planned to do with Isaac and she couldn't bear the knowledge. And even if you don't believe this - "You should totally go kill your son." As the knife is about to come down "WAIT JK!"

Seriously? This is an omnibenevolent being? Not just not evil, not just decent, but perfectly good? Seems kinda douch-y to me.

You need to read your Bible and find a acyual study group instead of assuming what the Bible says and means.
TheAsylum
ScottyDouglas
Posts: 2,350
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2012 3:04:36 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
If death and morality are both nothing and insignificant to christians, then why should a christian prevent himself from going around killing people, sending them to heaven to meet their maker?

Wouldnt a christian who killed babies, be sending them to heaven because they didnt sin? Wouldnt that be the greatest sacrifice a christian can make, to spend a couple dozen years in jail, but sending a bunch of people to heaven?

I seriously question not only your virtue, morality, and your logic. But also your common sence as well.
TheAsylum
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2012 5:24:41 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/3/2012 6:52:43 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
Atheists often consider this story as one of horror where Abraham was willing to do something so unethical as slaughtering his son just because God told him to do it. To them this is an example of a person mindlessly doing evil in the name of a deity.

They view it as vile that the moral of the story is to mindlessly obey even evil commandments as long as it is from God.

I am not Christian but I understand the Christian perspective.

Unfortunately, they are quite wrong. Abraham was doing what he did because he knew that God is omni-benevolent. Therefore the commandment that seemed evil to him had some good purpose in the end. Death does have a purpose because without it people could not leave this life for a better one.

While is wrong for humans to artificially shorten each of our lives on earth because this is against God's plan unless such an action is necessary, God can take a life if it is part of his plan.

So the moral of this story is that a limited being like us do not know everything so we might view good things as bad and visa versa. So when we are given a commandment that seems evil from our omni-benevolent creator, we must accept the judgement of that being above our own.

There are many issues here, but let's deal with what I suspect is the main practical problem, the problem of what won't people do if they believe that its Gods will ?

The answer is of course nothing, if some one is willing to kill their own son cause its Gods will, they aren't going to have any problems burning heretics, bombing abortion clinics, flying planes into buildings or killing every man, woman and child of a neighboring tribe etc as long as they believe its the will of God.
"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
dirkson
Posts: 10
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2012 5:48:57 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
*thinks about the original poster's comment*

No, I'm sorry, that doesn't help the situation.

The god of Christianity is both omnibenevolent, omniscient, AND omnipotent. Therefore, it would have been trivial for him to come up with an act that accomplished his purposes that DIDN'T involve the evil of a father killing his own child.

I mean, even if Issac was going to, say, sleep his way through Asia minor, creating a million Hitler-babies, an omnscient, omnipotent god could have just had a goat kick him in the privates.

Cheers,
-Dirk
EvanK
Posts: 599
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2012 6:33:13 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/3/2012 11:43:32 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 6/3/2012 7:10:36 PM, EvanK wrote:
At 6/3/2012 6:52:43 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
Atheists often consider this story as one of horror where Abraham was willing to do something so unethical as slaughtering his son just because God told him to do it. To them this is an example of a person mindlessly doing evil in the name of a deity.

They view it as vile that the moral of the story is to mindlessly obey even evil commandments as long as it is from God.

I am not Christian but I understand the Christian perspective.

Unfortunately, they are quite wrong. Abraham was doing what he did because he knew that God is omni-benevolent. Therefore the commandment that seemed evil to him had some good purpose in the end. Death does have a purpose because without it people could not leave this life for a better one.

While is wrong for humans to artificially shorten each of our lives on earth because this is against God's plan unless such an action is necessary, God can take a life if it is part of his plan.

So the moral of this story is that a limited being like us do not know everything so we might view good things as bad and visa versa. So when we are given a commandment that seems evil from our omni-benevolent creator, we must accept the judgement of that being above our own.

What good purpose exactly would be the death of Isaac I wonder? Obviously none of us know, or ever will, but I most certainly wouldn't sacrifice my children (if I have them) if God told me to do so. If he wants my (hypothetical) child do die, he can do the dirty deed himself.

Then you are doing the wrong thing because God is omni-benevolent. And Abraham deciding to obey turned out to be the right thing. It was a test.

Since God is omnibenevolent and omiscient you would be making a wrong choice by refusing.

I certainly think it's unfair of God to use Isaac to test Abraham's loyalty to him, don't you think? I certainly would have turned cold towards God if he really and truly created me only to be used as a human sacrifice to test the loyalty of my Father. And the same if I were Abraham, where my child was created, just to be sacrificed.

Just because Isaac was used as a human sacrifice does not mean this was the only reason God made him.

Also, it is not morally wrong to test someone.

Again, if God really and truly wanted my son dead, he can kill him. I'm not taking part in the killing of my son. I don't believe an "omnibenevolent" God would play a sick trick on a 90 year old man and his son by saying the son had to be sacrificed, for no reason other than it was the will of God. There are other ways you can test a person's loyalty, than to ask him to slaughter his son.
The problem with socialism is that, sooner or later, you run out of people's money."_Margaret Thatcher

"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."_Thomas Jefferson

"The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it."_Thomas Jefferson

"It is easier to fool someone than to convince them that they have been fooled."-Mark Twain
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2012 6:55:33 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/3/2012 7:02:21 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 6/3/2012 6:56:50 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
This begs the question of whether it was good to have been done: in any other circumstance, we would be revolted universally by the act, regardless of who does it. I apologise, but if this is what an omnibenevolent God would do, then I'd rather be evil.

The God of the Old Testament is NOT omni-benevolent. Tell me, what did the Caananites do that caused them to deserve genocide and rape?
I am not saying that attempting to kill Isaac is right because it is right. I am saying it is right because God is omnibenevolent, and this omnibenevolent God is commanding it.

Some questions: Do you consider yourself to be a perfect authority on right and wrong? Do you accept the possibility that you might be wrong in your moral judgement at times?