Total Posts:105|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Bible story about God murdering innocent baby

Chloe8
Posts: 2,580
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/4/2016 9:43:43 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
In 2 Samuel 12:13-18, we read:

Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord."

Nathan replied, "The Lord has taken away your sin. You are not going to die. But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the Lord, the son born to you will die."

After Nathan had gone home, the Lord struck the child that Uriah"s wife had borne to David, and he became ill. David pleaded with God for the child. He fasted and spent the nights lying in sackcloth on the ground. The elders of his household stood beside him to get him up from the ground, but he refused, and he would not eat any food with them.

On the seventh day the child died.

This scripture says that the Lord sent Nathan to give this message to David. There simply can be no justification for what the "Lord" allegedly did- to kill an innocent baby while letting the guilty one go unscathed. If a Christian carries a Bible and holds it up as the paragon of virtue, he should be aware that this story is contained in that book. This goes beyond any measure of barbarity to an unspeakable and unfathomable atrocity. Every Christian must admit that they are worshiping the god who did this.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/4/2016 10:12:06 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/4/2016 9:43:43 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In 2 Samuel 12:13-18, we read:

Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord."

Nathan replied, "The Lord has taken away your sin. You are not going to die. But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the Lord, the son born to you will die."

After Nathan had gone home, the Lord struck the child that Uriah"s wife had borne to David, and he became ill. David pleaded with God for the child. He fasted and spent the nights lying in sackcloth on the ground. The elders of his household stood beside him to get him up from the ground, but he refused, and he would not eat any food with them.

On the seventh day the child died.

This scripture says that the Lord sent Nathan to give this message to David. There simply can be no justification for what the "Lord" allegedly did- to kill an innocent baby while letting the guilty one go unscathed. If a Christian carries a Bible and holds it up as the paragon of virtue, he should be aware that this story is contained in that book. This goes beyond any measure of barbarity to an unspeakable and unfathomable atrocity. Every Christian must admit that they are worshiping the god who did this.

Would you rather they were left in the desert to die of starvation. It was much more euthanasia than murder.

After all he had been forced to destroy all their mothers and fathers all that was left for them other than being given a rapid, if painful, death was a much slower even more painful one.

Which do you prefer?

Yet another example of you only seeing in teh account what you want to see, not what is truly there.
Chloe8
Posts: 2,580
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/4/2016 10:21:35 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/4/2016 10:12:06 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 4/4/2016 9:43:43 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In 2 Samuel 12:13-18, we read:

Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord."

Nathan replied, "The Lord has taken away your sin. You are not going to die. But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the Lord, the son born to you will die."

After Nathan had gone home, the Lord struck the child that Uriah"s wife had borne to David, and he became ill. David pleaded with God for the child. He fasted and spent the nights lying in sackcloth on the ground. The elders of his household stood beside him to get him up from the ground, but he refused, and he would not eat any food with them.

On the seventh day the child died.

This scripture says that the Lord sent Nathan to give this message to David. There simply can be no justification for what the "Lord" allegedly did- to kill an innocent baby while letting the guilty one go unscathed. If a Christian carries a Bible and holds it up as the paragon of virtue, he should be aware that this story is contained in that book. This goes beyond any measure of barbarity to an unspeakable and unfathomable atrocity. Every Christian must admit that they are worshiping the god who did this.

Would you rather they were left in the desert to die of starvation. It was much more euthanasia than murder.

God could have given them food.

After all he had been forced to destroy all their mothers and fathers all that was left for them other than being given a rapid, if painful, death was a much slower even more painful one.

Which do you prefer?

God is all powerful and could have implemented many different measures where no one needed to die.

Yet another example of you only seeing in teh account what you want to see, not what is truly there.

It's a direct quote from the bible. How can you say it's not truly there?
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/4/2016 10:54:11 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/4/2016 10:21:35 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 4/4/2016 10:12:06 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 4/4/2016 9:43:43 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In 2 Samuel 12:13-18, we read:

Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord."

Nathan replied, "The Lord has taken away your sin. You are not going to die. But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the Lord, the son born to you will die."

After Nathan had gone home, the Lord struck the child that Uriah"s wife had borne to David, and he became ill. David pleaded with God for the child. He fasted and spent the nights lying in sackcloth on the ground. The elders of his household stood beside him to get him up from the ground, but he refused, and he would not eat any food with them.

On the seventh day the child died.

This scripture says that the Lord sent Nathan to give this message to David. There simply can be no justification for what the "Lord" allegedly did- to kill an innocent baby while letting the guilty one go unscathed. If a Christian carries a Bible and holds it up as the paragon of virtue, he should be aware that this story is contained in that book. This goes beyond any measure of barbarity to an unspeakable and unfathomable atrocity. Every Christian must admit that they are worshiping the god who did this.

Would you rather they were left in the desert to die of starvation. It was much more euthanasia than murder.

God could have given them food.

For how long? Israel could not have taken them with them on their journeyings.


After all he had been forced to destroy all their mothers and fathers all that was left for them other than being given a rapid, if painful, death was a much slower even more painful one.

Which do you prefer?

God is all powerful and could have implemented many different measures where no one needed to die.

No he could not. He loves us too much to force anyone.

However, those who were killed have not missed a lot, and I doubt they will worry too much about it when they come back in the resurrection after Armageddon.

For the time being, the resurrection is our guarantee of justice.

Oh, and yes Jehovah is omnipotent, but that doesn't mean he has to do anything which is not for the benefit of all his creation.

You really don;t care how unreasonable you are being do you?


Yet another example of you only seeing in the account what you want to see, not what is truly there.

It's a direct quote from the bible. How can you say it's not truly there?

Yes it's a direct quote from the Bible, but what is behind it?

Why do you not want to see what Jehad's motivation was?

Why did it have to happen?

Who caused it to have to happen?

You don't care about the truth just so long as you don't have to do what you do not want to.

You complain about the results of Jehovah giving man free will, but how would you like it if your freedom to complain about it was removed?

Or your freedom to make your own decisions?

What if you couldn't choose whether to go out or stay in of an evening?

Or if you had no choice over what you ate or drank?

That s what free will is, and people who abuse it will one day have to face the consequences of that abuse, as Adam and Eve did.

Yes, you happily quote the event if you can turn it into an attack on the God of Love, but you never show any interest in why he was forced to act that way.
Why?

Because you don;t care about truth, only about how you want things to be.

Well tough, it is what it is, deal with it, or continue on your present road to destruction.
Chloe8
Posts: 2,580
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/5/2016 12:28:32 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/4/2016 10:54:11 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 4/4/2016 10:21:35 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 4/4/2016 10:12:06 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 4/4/2016 9:43:43 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In 2 Samuel 12:13-18, we read:

Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord."

Nathan replied, "The Lord has taken away your sin. You are not going to die. But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the Lord, the son born to you will die."

After Nathan had gone home, the Lord struck the child that Uriah"s wife had borne to David, and he became ill. David pleaded with God for the child. He fasted and spent the nights lying in sackcloth on the ground. The elders of his household stood beside him to get him up from the ground, but he refused, and he would not eat any food with them.

On the seventh day the child died.

This scripture says that the Lord sent Nathan to give this message to David. There simply can be no justification for what the "Lord" allegedly did- to kill an innocent baby while letting the guilty one go unscathed. If a Christian carries a Bible and holds it up as the paragon of virtue, he should be aware that this story is contained in that book. This goes beyond any measure of barbarity to an unspeakable and unfathomable atrocity. Every Christian must admit that they are worshiping the god who did this.

Would you rather they were left in the desert to die of starvation. It was much more euthanasia than murder.

God could have given them food.

For how long? Israel could not have taken them with them on their journeyings.

God could have given them food for as long as necessary. He could have created meals out of thin air.


After all he had been forced to destroy all their mothers and fathers all that was left for them other than being given a rapid, if painful, death was a much slower even more painful one.

Which do you prefer?

God is all powerful and could have implemented many different measures where no one needed to die.

No he could not. He loves us too much to force anyone.

If it's for someone's benefit he should force them.

However, those who were killed have not missed a lot, and I doubt they will worry too much about it when they come back in the resurrection after Armageddon.

They missed out on the rest of their lives. That's a big thing to miss out on.

For the time being, the resurrection is our guarantee of justice.

Oh, and yes Jehovah is omnipotent, but that doesn't mean he has to do anything which is not for the benefit of all his creation.

He has done nothing for the last 1, 900 years apart from allow his creations to suffer on a flawed earth. He only revealed the truth in 1870 after centuries of everyone born on earth not having any access to God's true teaching. Even now only about 0. 1% of humans know the truth as it's very well hidden amongst lies. How stupid. Just destroy Satan and tell people he exists, straightforward logical stuff.

You really don;t care how unreasonable you are being do you?

I'm always reasonable.


Yet another example of you only seeing in the account what you want to see, not what is truly there.

It's a direct quote from the bible. How can you say it's not truly there?

Yes it's a direct quote from the Bible, but what is behind it?

A god murdering an innocent baby.

Why do you not want to see what Jehad's motivation was?

I'm showing the murderous nature of the Christian god. It's up to you to prove me wrong by explaining how it was justified.

Why did it have to happen?

Clearly it did not. But if the Christian god Is true he likes to murder thousands of unborn babies every day. He is responsible for the manslaughter of many millions of people daily.

Who caused it to have to happen?

In this case God.

You don't care about the truth just so long as you don't have to do what you do not want to.

I don't not want to do anything. I care about the truth.

You complain about the results of Jehovah giving man free will, but how would you like it if your freedom to complain about it was removed?

If I was born like that I would be used to it.

Or your freedom to make your own decisions?

A cow does not wish it was a human. If you didn't have an intelligent mind you would not desire one.

What if you couldn't choose whether to go out or stay in of an evening?

I would not know anything else.

Or if you had no choice over what you ate or drank?

I would not know anything else.

That s what free will is, and people who abuse it will one day have to face the consequences of that abuse, as Adam and Eve did.

God could have easily created free will without any negative elements. With his genius levels of intelligence and unlimited powers he could easily create perfect humans with free will.

Yes, you happily quote the event if you can turn it into an attack on the God of Love, but you never show any interest in why he was forced to act that way.
Why?

Because a god is not forced to do any of the cruel unjust things I point out. It could easily take a non violent approach. It's unlimited powers and intelligence mean it could do things much better then how the historic god of the bible allegedly acts.

Because you don;t care about truth, only about how you want things to be.

Well tough, it is what it is, deal with it, or continue on your present road to destruction.

It is what it is. Unfortunately death is inevitable. I understand people fearing it and believing fanciful myths promising afterlife but as I know with certainty Christianity is false, taking Pascals wager would be stupid.
AWSM0055
Posts: 751
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/5/2016 6:49:49 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/4/2016 10:54:11 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 4/4/2016 10:21:35 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 4/4/2016 10:12:06 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 4/4/2016 9:43:43 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In 2 Samuel 12:13-18, we read:

Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord."

Nathan replied, "The Lord has taken away your sin. You are not going to die. But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the Lord, the son born to you will die."

After Nathan had gone home, the Lord struck the child that Uriah"s wife had borne to David, and he became ill. David pleaded with God for the child. He fasted and spent the nights lying in sackcloth on the ground. The elders of his household stood beside him to get him up from the ground, but he refused, and he would not eat any food with them.

On the seventh day the child died.

This scripture says that the Lord sent Nathan to give this message to David. There simply can be no justification for what the "Lord" allegedly did- to kill an innocent baby while letting the guilty one go unscathed. If a Christian carries a Bible and holds it up as the paragon of virtue, he should be aware that this story is contained in that book. This goes beyond any measure of barbarity to an unspeakable and unfathomable atrocity. Every Christian must admit that they are worshiping the god who did this.

Would you rather they were left in the desert to die of starvation. It was much more euthanasia than murder.

God could have given them food.

For how long? Israel could not have taken them with them on their journeyings.


After all he had been forced to destroy all their mothers and fathers all that was left for them other than being given a rapid, if painful, death was a much slower even more painful one.

Which do you prefer?

God is all powerful and could have implemented many different measures where no one needed to die.

No he could not. He loves us too much to force anyone.

*spews into vomit bag*

However, those who were killed have not missed a lot, and I doubt they will worry too much about it when they come back in the resurrection after Armageddon.

For the time being, the resurrection is our guarantee of justice.

Oh, and yes Jehovah is omnipotent, but that doesn't mean he has to do anything which is not for the benefit of all his creation.

You really don;t care how unreasonable you are being do you?


Yet another example of you only seeing in the account what you want to see, not what is truly there.

It's a direct quote from the bible. How can you say it's not truly there?

Yes it's a direct quote from the Bible, but what is behind it?

Why do you not want to see what Jehad's motivation was?

Why did it have to happen?

Who caused it to have to happen?

You don't care about the truth just so long as you don't have to do what you do not want to.

You complain about the results of Jehovah giving man free will, but how would you like it if your freedom to complain about it was removed?

Or your freedom to make your own decisions?

What if you couldn't choose whether to go out or stay in of an evening?

Or if you had no choice over what you ate or drank?

That s what free will is, and people who abuse it will one day have to face the consequences of that abuse, as Adam and Eve did.

Yes, you happily quote the event if you can turn it into an attack on the God of Love, but you never show any interest in why he was forced to act that way.
Why?

Because you don;t care about truth, only about how you want things to be.

Well tough, it is what it is, deal with it, or continue on your present road to destruction.
"Evolution proves necessity is the mother of invention" - David Henson

"Calling my atheism a religion, is like calling my non-stamp-collecting a hobby" - MagicAintReal 2016

___________________________________________________________________________________________

Matt8800: "When warring men kidnap damsels of the enemy, what do they do?"

Jerry947: "They give them the option of marriage."

Matt8800: "Correct! You won idiot of the year award!"

http://explosm.net...
DPMartin
Posts: 1,096
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/5/2016 3:59:37 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/4/2016 9:43:43 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In 2 Samuel 12:13-18, we read:

Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord."

Nathan replied, "The Lord has taken away your sin. You are not going to die. But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the Lord, the son born to you will die."

After Nathan had gone home, the Lord struck the child that Uriah"s wife had borne to David, and he became ill. David pleaded with God for the child. He fasted and spent the nights lying in sackcloth on the ground. The elders of his household stood beside him to get him up from the ground, but he refused, and he would not eat any food with them.

On the seventh day the child died.

This scripture says that the Lord sent Nathan to give this message to David. There simply can be no justification for what the "Lord" allegedly did- to kill an innocent baby while letting the guilty one go unscathed. If a Christian carries a Bible and holds it up as the paragon of virtue, he should be aware that this story is contained in that book. This goes beyond any measure of barbarity to an unspeakable and unfathomable atrocity. Every Christian must admit that they are worshiping the god who did this.

another posting by the uninformed, children dyeing soon after being born was a common as children surviving to adulthood, but in this case He who has given life to all things has the right to deny life to anything He pleases. it is His to given or deny, no one is entitled anything, not even justice.
12_13
Posts: 1,361
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/5/2016 10:00:07 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/4/2016 9:43:43 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
Bible story about God murdering innocent baby

God has given life, so He has every right to decide how long it lasts. It is not therefore murder, because He has right for that. And how can you know the child was really innocent?

And lastly, did you support abortion? If yes, then isn"t this all kind of hypocrite?
The-Holy-Macrel
Posts: 777
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/5/2016 10:14:57 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/4/2016 9:43:43 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In 2 Samuel 12:13-18, we read:

Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord."

Nathan replied, "The Lord has taken away your sin. You are not going to die. But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the Lord, the son born to you will die."

After Nathan had gone home, the Lord struck the child that Uriah"s wife had borne to David, and he became ill. David pleaded with God for the child. He fasted and spent the nights lying in sackcloth on the ground. The elders of his household stood beside him to get him up from the ground, but he refused, and he would not eat any food with them.

On the seventh day the child died.

This scripture says that the Lord sent Nathan to give this message to David. There simply can be no justification for what the "Lord" allegedly did- to kill an innocent baby while letting the guilty one go unscathed. If a Christian carries a Bible and holds it up as the paragon of virtue, he should be aware that this story is contained in that book. This goes beyond any measure of barbarity to an unspeakable and unfathomable atrocity. Every Christian must admit that they are worshiping the god who did this.

If god is just this act was right.

We cannot judge god because we don't know what perfect morality is.

Therefore god was just.
bulproof
Posts: 25,203
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/5/2016 10:24:22 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/5/2016 3:59:37 PM, DPMartin wrote:
At 4/4/2016 9:43:43 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In 2 Samuel 12:13-18, we read:

Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord."

Nathan replied, "The Lord has taken away your sin. You are not going to die. But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the Lord, the son born to you will die."

After Nathan had gone home, the Lord struck the child that Uriah"s wife had borne to David, and he became ill. David pleaded with God for the child. He fasted and spent the nights lying in sackcloth on the ground. The elders of his household stood beside him to get him up from the ground, but he refused, and he would not eat any food with them.

On the seventh day the child died.

This scripture says that the Lord sent Nathan to give this message to David. There simply can be no justification for what the "Lord" allegedly did- to kill an innocent baby while letting the guilty one go unscathed. If a Christian carries a Bible and holds it up as the paragon of virtue, he should be aware that this story is contained in that book. This goes beyond any measure of barbarity to an unspeakable and unfathomable atrocity. Every Christian must admit that they are worshiping the god who did this.

another posting by the uninformed, children dyeing soon after being born was a common as children surviving to adulthood, but in this case He who has given life to all things has the right to deny life to anything He pleases. it is His to given or deny, no one is entitled anything, not even justice.

Who gave him that right and why are your morals so subjective?
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
Quadrunner
Posts: 1,070
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/5/2016 11:22:03 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/4/2016 9:43:43 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In 2 Samuel 12:13-18, we read:

Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord."

Nathan replied, "The Lord has taken away your sin. You are not going to die. But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the Lord, the son born to you will die."

After Nathan had gone home, the Lord struck the child that Uriah"s wife had borne to David, and he became ill. David pleaded with God for the child. He fasted and spent the nights lying in sackcloth on the ground. The elders of his household stood beside him to get him up from the ground, but he refused, and he would not eat any food with them.

On the seventh day the child died.

This scripture says that the Lord sent Nathan to give this message to David. There simply can be no justification for what the "Lord" allegedly did- to kill an innocent baby while letting the guilty one go unscathed. If a Christian carries a Bible and holds it up as the paragon of virtue, he should be aware that this story is contained in that book. This goes beyond any measure of barbarity to an unspeakable and unfathomable atrocity. Every Christian must admit that they are worshiping the god who did this.

Why do you consider it immoral for God to kill an innocent baby?

This isn't a joking question. I'm curious to what your reasoning is, because of the way you worded it as the baby being the victim, and the father being unscathed.
Wisdom is found where the wise seek it.
Quadrunner
Posts: 1,070
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/5/2016 11:33:48 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/5/2016 5:19:08 AM, illegalcombat wrote:
http://memegenerator.net...

An I saw that it was good.
Wisdom is found where the wise seek it.
Chloe8
Posts: 2,580
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2016 3:03:05 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/5/2016 11:22:03 PM, Quadrunner wrote:
At 4/4/2016 9:43:43 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In 2 Samuel 12:13-18, we read:

Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord."

Nathan replied, "The Lord has taken away your sin. You are not going to die. But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the Lord, the son born to you will die."

After Nathan had gone home, the Lord struck the child that Uriah"s wife had borne to David, and he became ill. David pleaded with God for the child. He fasted and spent the nights lying in sackcloth on the ground. The elders of his household stood beside him to get him up from the ground, but he refused, and he would not eat any food with them.

On the seventh day the child died.

This scripture says that the Lord sent Nathan to give this message to David. There simply can be no justification for what the "Lord" allegedly did- to kill an innocent baby while letting the guilty one go unscathed. If a Christian carries a Bible and holds it up as the paragon of virtue, he should be aware that this story is contained in that book. This goes beyond any measure of barbarity to an unspeakable and unfathomable atrocity. Every Christian must admit that they are worshiping the god who did this.

Why do you consider it immoral for God to kill an innocent baby?

Because law in nearly every country in the world considers murder wrong. Also according to the bible it is wrong to kill people. In this case the person is a baby so is incapable of sin as described in the bible.

This isn't a joking question. I'm curious to what your reasoning is, because of the way you worded it as the baby being the victim, and the father being unscathed.

That's my reasoning. According to the bible it is the father who has sinned so it would appear logical to an extent if God punished him for his actions. However God chooses to kill his baby instead. Imagine a judge sentencing a baby to death because his/ her parent committed a crime. Would you consider that justice? That's how crazy and immoral this biblical story is.
Chloe8
Posts: 2,580
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2016 3:12:27 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/5/2016 10:14:57 PM, The-Holy-Macrel wrote:
At 4/4/2016 9:43:43 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In 2 Samuel 12:13-18, we read:

Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord."

Nathan replied, "The Lord has taken away your sin. You are not going to die. But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the Lord, the son born to you will die."

After Nathan had gone home, the Lord struck the child that Uriah"s wife had borne to David, and he became ill. David pleaded with God for the child. He fasted and spent the nights lying in sackcloth on the ground. The elders of his household stood beside him to get him up from the ground, but he refused, and he would not eat any food with them.

On the seventh day the child died.

This scripture says that the Lord sent Nathan to give this message to David. There simply can be no justification for what the "Lord" allegedly did- to kill an innocent baby while letting the guilty one go unscathed. If a Christian carries a Bible and holds it up as the paragon of virtue, he should be aware that this story is contained in that book. This goes beyond any measure of barbarity to an unspeakable and unfathomable atrocity. Every Christian must admit that they are worshiping the god who did this.

If god is just this act was right.

The god of the bible is clearly not just.

We cannot judge god because we don't know what perfect morality is.

We may not know what perfect morality is but it's easy to identify immorality such as stoning to death non believers or people who work on the Sabbath.

Therefore god was just.

http://www.debate.org...

How do you reach that conclusion?
The-Holy-Macrel
Posts: 777
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2016 3:22:08 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/6/2016 3:12:27 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 4/5/2016 10:14:57 PM, The-Holy-Macrel wrote:
At 4/4/2016 9:43:43 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In 2 Samuel 12:13-18, we read:

Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord."

Nathan replied, "The Lord has taken away your sin. You are not going to die. But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the Lord, the son born to you will die."

After Nathan had gone home, the Lord struck the child that Uriah"s wife had borne to David, and he became ill. David pleaded with God for the child. He fasted and spent the nights lying in sackcloth on the ground. The elders of his household stood beside him to get him up from the ground, but he refused, and he would not eat any food with them.

On the seventh day the child died.

This scripture says that the Lord sent Nathan to give this message to David. There simply can be no justification for what the "Lord" allegedly did- to kill an innocent baby while letting the guilty one go unscathed. If a Christian carries a Bible and holds it up as the paragon of virtue, he should be aware that this story is contained in that book. This goes beyond any measure of barbarity to an unspeakable and unfathomable atrocity. Every Christian must admit that they are worshiping the god who did this.

If god is just this act was right.

The god of the bible is clearly not just.

We cannot judge god because we don't know what perfect morality is.

We may not know what perfect morality is but it's easy to identify immorality such as stoning to death non believers or people who work on the Sabbath.

Therefore god was just.

http://www.debate.org...

How do you reach that conclusion?

You forgot about my hammer...

Time for the hammer on this and
attacks on the character of god.

If a perfect entity exists we cannot in
any way judge it's character because
it is infinitely one way or another.

We are like finite numbers.

You cannot describe infinity in any
way with finite numbers except for
that infinity is infinitely larger or better
(blah blah you know what i mean) than them.

Ok so, you being up there.

You allow people to die.

You are evil.

No, it is not.

There is a reason, we cannot
understand such an entity's logic and
reasoning because we are imperfect
and biased.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2016 3:23:24 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/6/2016 3:03:05 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 4/5/2016 11:22:03 PM, Quadrunner wrote:
At 4/4/2016 9:43:43 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In 2 Samuel 12:13-18, we read:

Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord."

Nathan replied, "The Lord has taken away your sin. You are not going to die. But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the Lord, the son born to you will die."

After Nathan had gone home, the Lord struck the child that Uriah"s wife had borne to David, and he became ill. David pleaded with God for the child. He fasted and spent the nights lying in sackcloth on the ground. The elders of his household stood beside him to get him up from the ground, but he refused, and he would not eat any food with them.

On the seventh day the child died.

This scripture says that the Lord sent Nathan to give this message to David. There simply can be no justification for what the "Lord" allegedly did- to kill an innocent baby while letting the guilty one go unscathed. If a Christian carries a Bible and holds it up as the paragon of virtue, he should be aware that this story is contained in that book. This goes beyond any measure of barbarity to an unspeakable and unfathomable atrocity. Every Christian must admit that they are worshiping the god who did this.

Why do you consider it immoral for God to kill an innocent baby?

Because law in nearly every country in the world considers murder wrong. Also according to the bible it is wrong to kill people. In this case the person is a baby so is incapable of sin as described in the bible.

Murder is wrong for humans because they cannot reverse it

Jehovah can and so is in effect merely putting them into a long dream free sleep to be awoken in the resurrection. Therefore he has't permanently killed them.

Jesus and the Apostles all spoke of the death we know at present as nothing more than that.

The Second death is something else, it is permanent destruction from which there is no return. Very few of those who have died so far will have been evil enough to be put straight into that.

Adam and Eve, those who were destroyed at the flood, all who ignored or worked against Christ in the first century, and all who perish at Armageddon having refused to listen to Jehovah's messengers. Other than that no-one knows for sure.


This isn't a joking question. I'm curious to what your reasoning is, because of the way you worded it as the baby being the victim, and the father being unscathed.

That's my reasoning. According to the bible it is the father who has sinned so it would appear logical to an extent if God punished him for his actions. However God chooses to kill his baby instead. Imagine a judge sentencing a baby to death because his/ her parent committed a crime. Would you consider that justice? That's how crazy and immoral this biblical story is.

No, not instead, except in the case of the Egyptians.

However you have to remember that children of the enemies of Israel would doubtless have grown up to be enemies of Israel also.

One thing you can guarantee is that if Jehovah put anyone to death he had extremely good reasons for doing so. Maybe you should try learning why it happened.

Also one has to remember that since we all inherit our sinful nature from Adam there is no such thing ans an innocent human in Jehovah's eyes, however young they may be. Even babies are inevitably sinners, who just haven't had time to act yet.

Like I said before, you problem is your ignorance and lack of ability to understand at present.
Chloe8
Posts: 2,580
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2016 3:24:42 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/5/2016 10:00:07 PM, 12_13 wrote:
At 4/4/2016 9:43:43 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
Bible story about God murdering innocent baby

God has given life, so He has every right to decide how long it lasts. It is not therefore murder, because He has right for that. And how can you know the child was really innocent?

Because a baby cannot commit any so called sins as the bible describes them. unless you have some ideas about how babies can sin? I'd be interested to hear these ideas! It's clear in this story it is the father who did wrong. God is killing this man's child as a way of punishing him. This is like punishing a murderer by executing his child. Yes it causes pain to the person who did wrong but the punishment is totally unfair as the child did nothing wrong.

And lastly, did you support abortion? If yes, then isn"t this all kind of hypocrite?

Yes I support abortion. You can justifiably call me a hypocrite. However you are also a hypocrite as you condone a god murdering children (which if he exists he does every second) but condemn a woman for aborting a less developed form of life when it is unwanted and would have a detrimental effect on her life.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2016 3:25:57 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/6/2016 3:12:27 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 4/5/2016 10:14:57 PM, The-Holy-Macrel wrote:
At 4/4/2016 9:43:43 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In 2 Samuel 12:13-18, we read:

Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord."

Nathan replied, "The Lord has taken away your sin. You are not going to die. But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the Lord, the son born to you will die."

After Nathan had gone home, the Lord struck the child that Uriah"s wife had borne to David, and he became ill. David pleaded with God for the child. He fasted and spent the nights lying in sackcloth on the ground. The elders of his household stood beside him to get him up from the ground, but he refused, and he would not eat any food with them.

On the seventh day the child died.

This scripture says that the Lord sent Nathan to give this message to David. There simply can be no justification for what the "Lord" allegedly did- to kill an innocent baby while letting the guilty one go unscathed. If a Christian carries a Bible and holds it up as the paragon of virtue, he should be aware that this story is contained in that book. This goes beyond any measure of barbarity to an unspeakable and unfathomable atrocity. Every Christian must admit that they are worshiping the god who did this.

If god is just this act was right.

The god of the bible is clearly not just.

We cannot judge god because we don't know what perfect morality is.

We may not know what perfect morality is but it's easy to identify immorality such as stoning to death non believers or people who work on the Sabbath.

Therefore god was just.

http://www.debate.org...

How do you reach that conclusion?

in Jehovah's eyes, protection his followers from those will will inevitably be a threat to them is highly moral.

After all, human governments go to war over less. Much less. They go to war for purely selfish reasons.
DPMartin
Posts: 1,096
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2016 3:27:26 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/5/2016 10:24:22 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 4/5/2016 3:59:37 PM, DPMartin wrote:
At 4/4/2016 9:43:43 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In 2 Samuel 12:13-18, we read:

Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord."

Nathan replied, "The Lord has taken away your sin. You are not going to die. But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the Lord, the son born to you will die."

After Nathan had gone home, the Lord struck the child that Uriah"s wife had borne to David, and he became ill. David pleaded with God for the child. He fasted and spent the nights lying in sackcloth on the ground. The elders of his household stood beside him to get him up from the ground, but he refused, and he would not eat any food with them.

On the seventh day the child died.

This scripture says that the Lord sent Nathan to give this message to David. There simply can be no justification for what the "Lord" allegedly did- to kill an innocent baby while letting the guilty one go unscathed. If a Christian carries a Bible and holds it up as the paragon of virtue, he should be aware that this story is contained in that book. This goes beyond any measure of barbarity to an unspeakable and unfathomable atrocity. Every Christian must admit that they are worshiping the god who did this.

another posting by the uninformed, children dyeing soon after being born was a common as children surviving to adulthood, but in this case He who has given life to all things has the right to deny life to anything He pleases. it is His to given or deny, no one is entitled anything, not even justice.

Who gave him that right

No one, but what are you going to do about it? you can't can you? you whine like an entitled little girl but there is nothing any one can do, because the Creator and Judge doesn't need man's permission or approval to give anything or take away anything.

and why are your morals so subjective?

it's mankind's job to walk up-right to execute justice, and most of all love mercy, but that would be according to the Lord God of Israel. therefore not subjective, relative to God, and again in the agreement between God and His People therefore relative to them, not those outside of that. all this time you spend here and you still don't know anything do you bullproof?
Chloe8
Posts: 2,580
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2016 3:28:48 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/5/2016 3:59:37 PM, DPMartin wrote:
At 4/4/2016 9:43:43 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In 2 Samuel 12:13-18, we read:

Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord."

Nathan replied, "The Lord has taken away your sin. You are not going to die. But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the Lord, the son born to you will die."

After Nathan had gone home, the Lord struck the child that Uriah"s wife had borne to David, and he became ill. David pleaded with God for the child. He fasted and spent the nights lying in sackcloth on the ground. The elders of his household stood beside him to get him up from the ground, but he refused, and he would not eat any food with them.

On the seventh day the child died.

This scripture says that the Lord sent Nathan to give this message to David. There simply can be no justification for what the "Lord" allegedly did- to kill an innocent baby while letting the guilty one go unscathed. If a Christian carries a Bible and holds it up as the paragon of virtue, he should be aware that this story is contained in that book. This goes beyond any measure of barbarity to an unspeakable and unfathomable atrocity. Every Christian must admit that they are worshiping the god who did this.

another posting by the uninformed, children dyeing soon after being born was a common as children surviving to adulthood,

That is still the case today in many parts of the world.

but in this case He who has given life to all things has the right to deny life to anything He pleases.

Why? Does a parent have the right to murder their child because they created it?

it is His to given or deny, no one is entitled anything, not even justice.

According to the bible yes, your God can do what he chooses and kill whoever he wants even without reason. What an evil god you worship.

http://www.debate.org...
Chloe8
Posts: 2,580
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2016 3:32:47 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/6/2016 3:22:08 PM, The-Holy-Macrel wrote:
At 4/6/2016 3:12:27 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 4/5/2016 10:14:57 PM, The-Holy-Macrel wrote:
At 4/4/2016 9:43:43 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In 2 Samuel 12:13-18, we read:

Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord."

Nathan replied, "The Lord has taken away your sin. You are not going to die. But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the Lord, the son born to you will die."

After Nathan had gone home, the Lord struck the child that Uriah"s wife had borne to David, and he became ill. David pleaded with God for the child. He fasted and spent the nights lying in sackcloth on the ground. The elders of his household stood beside him to get him up from the ground, but he refused, and he would not eat any food with them.

On the seventh day the child died.

This scripture says that the Lord sent Nathan to give this message to David. There simply can be no justification for what the "Lord" allegedly did- to kill an innocent baby while letting the guilty one go unscathed. If a Christian carries a Bible and holds it up as the paragon of virtue, he should be aware that this story is contained in that book. This goes beyond any measure of barbarity to an unspeakable and unfathomable atrocity. Every Christian must admit that they are worshiping the god who did this.

If god is just this act was right.

The god of the bible is clearly not just.

We cannot judge god because we don't know what perfect morality is.

We may not know what perfect morality is but it's easy to identify immorality such as stoning to death non believers or people who work on the Sabbath.

Therefore god was just.

http://www.debate.org...

How do you reach that conclusion?

You forgot about my hammer...

Time for the hammer on this and
attacks on the character of god.

If a perfect entity exists we cannot in
any way judge it's character because
it is infinitely one way or another.

We are like finite numbers.

You cannot describe infinity in any
way with finite numbers except for
that infinity is infinitely larger or better
(blah blah you know what i mean) than them.

Ok so, you being up there.

You allow people to die.

You are evil.

No, it is not.

There is a reason, we cannot
understand such an entity's logic and
reasoning because we are imperfect
and biased.

If it existed it would explain the justification for the clearly immoral events in the bible.
Chloe8
Posts: 2,580
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2016 3:51:40 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/6/2016 3:23:24 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 4/6/2016 3:03:05 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 4/5/2016 11:22:03 PM, Quadrunner wrote:
At 4/4/2016 9:43:43 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In 2 Samuel 12:13-18, we read:

Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord."

Nathan replied, "The Lord has taken away your sin. You are not going to die. But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the Lord, the son born to you will die."

After Nathan had gone home, the Lord struck the child that Uriah"s wife had borne to David, and he became ill. David pleaded with God for the child. He fasted and spent the nights lying in sackcloth on the ground. The elders of his household stood beside him to get him up from the ground, but he refused, and he would not eat any food with them.

On the seventh day the child died.

This scripture says that the Lord sent Nathan to give this message to David. There simply can be no justification for what the "Lord" allegedly did- to kill an innocent baby while letting the guilty one go unscathed. If a Christian carries a Bible and holds it up as the paragon of virtue, he should be aware that this story is contained in that book. This goes beyond any measure of barbarity to an unspeakable and unfathomable atrocity. Every Christian must admit that they are worshiping the god who did this.

Why do you consider it immoral for God to kill an innocent baby?

Because law in nearly every country in the world considers murder wrong. Also according to the bible it is wrong to kill people. In this case the person is a baby so is incapable of sin as described in the bible.

Murder is wrong for humans because they cannot reverse it

Jehovah can and so is in effect merely putting them into a long dream free sleep to be awoken in the resurrection. Therefore he has't permanently killed them.

If a person kills someone and the jw God exists then their death would not neccessary be permanent anyway. Does that mean that murdering jws is fine because Jehovah will bring them back to life?

Jesus and the Apostles all spoke of the death we know at present as nothing more than that.

According to scripture that's correct. However the bible is a very unreliable source of information.

The Second death is something else, it is permanent destruction from which there is no return. Very few of those who have died so far will have been evil enough to be put straight into that.

No one has died twice. It's not possible.

Adam and Eve, those who were destroyed at the flood, all who ignored or worked against Christ in the first century, and all who perish at Armageddon having refused to listen to Jehovah's messengers. Other than that no-one knows for sure.

So the poor people in the Amazon rainforest who have never been contacted by the outside world get this treatment. That sounds the idea a just and good god would come up with!


This isn't a joking question. I'm curious to what your reasoning is, because of the way you worded it as the baby being the victim, and the father being unscathed.

That's my reasoning. According to the bible it is the father who has sinned so it would appear logical to an extent if God punished him for his actions. However God chooses to kill his baby instead. Imagine a judge sentencing a baby to death because his/ her parent committed a crime. Would you consider that justice? That's how crazy and immoral this biblical story is.

No, not instead, except in the case of the Egyptians.

However you have to remember that children of the enemies of Israel would doubtless have grown up to be enemies of Israel also.

Why is that? Someone will likely be shaped by the culture they live in. If you had taken that baby and given it to an Israelite family of that time it would have grown up as an Israeli. Are you claiming God's excuse for the murder was due to his ability to see into the future and know this child would go on to commit atrocities and crimes? If this is true why did he not give Adolf Hitler a heart attack while he was a baby?

One thing you can guarantee is that if Jehovah put anyone to death he had extremely good reasons for doing so. Maybe you should try learning why it happened.

In this case no reason exists. Imagine if another verse was added explaining why God took this decision to kill the baby, explaining why it deserved death. That would be a more logical approach.

Also one has to remember that since we all inherit our sinful nature from Adam there is no such thing ans an innocent human in Jehovah's eyes, however young they may be. Even babies are inevitably sinners, who just haven't had time to act yet.

Why did God not kill Josef Stalin when he was a baby? Or Mao Zedong? I doubt this babies future crimes were worse than these two!

Like I said before, you problem is your ignorance and lack of ability to understand at present.
The-Holy-Macrel
Posts: 777
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2016 3:55:43 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/6/2016 3:32:47 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 4/6/2016 3:22:08 PM, The-Holy-Macrel wrote:
At 4/6/2016 3:12:27 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 4/5/2016 10:14:57 PM, The-Holy-Macrel wrote:
At 4/4/2016 9:43:43 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In 2 Samuel 12:13-18, we read:

Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord."

Nathan replied, "The Lord has taken away your sin. You are not going to die. But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the Lord, the son born to you will die."

After Nathan had gone home, the Lord struck the child that Uriah"s wife had borne to David, and he became ill. David pleaded with God for the child. He fasted and spent the nights lying in sackcloth on the ground. The elders of his household stood beside him to get him up from the ground, but he refused, and he would not eat any food with them.

On the seventh day the child died.

This scripture says that the Lord sent Nathan to give this message to David. There simply can be no justification for what the "Lord" allegedly did- to kill an innocent baby while letting the guilty one go unscathed. If a Christian carries a Bible and holds it up as the paragon of virtue, he should be aware that this story is contained in that book. This goes beyond any measure of barbarity to an unspeakable and unfathomable atrocity. Every Christian must admit that they are worshiping the god who did this.

If god is just this act was right.

The god of the bible is clearly not just.

We cannot judge god because we don't know what perfect morality is.

We may not know what perfect morality is but it's easy to identify immorality such as stoning to death non believers or people who work on the Sabbath.

Therefore god was just.

http://www.debate.org...

How do you reach that conclusion?

You forgot about my hammer...

Time for the hammer on this and
attacks on the character of god.

If a perfect entity exists we cannot in
any way judge it's character because
it is infinitely one way or another.

We are like finite numbers.

You cannot describe infinity in any
way with finite numbers except for
that infinity is infinitely larger or better
(blah blah you know what i mean) than them.

Ok so, you being up there.

You allow people to die.

You are evil.

No, it is not.

There is a reason, we cannot
understand such an entity's logic and
reasoning because we are imperfect
and biased.

If it existed it would explain the justification for the clearly immoral events in the bible.

If it existed it wouldn't to
make shure we have free will.
DPMartin
Posts: 1,096
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2016 4:03:17 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/6/2016 3:28:48 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 4/5/2016 3:59:37 PM, DPMartin wrote:
At 4/4/2016 9:43:43 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In 2 Samuel 12:13-18, we read:

Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord."

Nathan replied, "The Lord has taken away your sin. You are not going to die. But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the Lord, the son born to you will die."

After Nathan had gone home, the Lord struck the child that Uriah"s wife had borne to David, and he became ill. David pleaded with God for the child. He fasted and spent the nights lying in sackcloth on the ground. The elders of his household stood beside him to get him up from the ground, but he refused, and he would not eat any food with them.

On the seventh day the child died.

This scripture says that the Lord sent Nathan to give this message to David. There simply can be no justification for what the "Lord" allegedly did- to kill an innocent baby while letting the guilty one go unscathed. If a Christian carries a Bible and holds it up as the paragon of virtue, he should be aware that this story is contained in that book. This goes beyond any measure of barbarity to an unspeakable and unfathomable atrocity. Every Christian must admit that they are worshiping the god who did this.

another posting by the uninformed, children dyeing soon after being born was a common as children surviving to adulthood,

That is still the case today in many parts of the world.

but in this case He who has given life to all things has the right to deny life to anything He pleases.

Why? Does a parent have the right to murder their child because they created it?

it is His to given or deny, no one is entitled anything, not even justice.

According to the bible yes, your God can do what he chooses and kill whoever he wants even without reason. What an evil god you worship.

http://www.debate.org...

what the Creator can do, and what the created should do is two different things. what a authorities power has the right to do is hang the proven guilty, what the accuser has the right to do insist on justice be done. the accuser doesn't have the same rights and privileges as the ruling government, does it?

God gives living things the ability to give the life they have received. (note a life they have received) doesn't mean they have to right to deny the life that was already received from them. but God being the Creator and Judge of all things has that right.
Chloe8
Posts: 2,580
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2016 4:12:53 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/6/2016 3:55:43 PM, The-Holy-Macrel wrote:
At 4/6/2016 3:32:47 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 4/6/2016 3:22:08 PM, The-Holy-Macrel wrote:
At 4/6/2016 3:12:27 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 4/5/2016 10:14:57 PM, The-Holy-Macrel wrote:
At 4/4/2016 9:43:43 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In 2 Samuel 12:13-18, we read:

Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord."

Nathan replied, "The Lord has taken away your sin. You are not going to die. But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the Lord, the son born to you will die."

After Nathan had gone home, the Lord struck the child that Uriah"s wife had borne to David, and he became ill. David pleaded with God for the child. He fasted and spent the nights lying in sackcloth on the ground. The elders of his household stood beside him to get him up from the ground, but he refused, and he would not eat any food with them.

On the seventh day the child died.

This scripture says that the Lord sent Nathan to give this message to David. There simply can be no justification for what the "Lord" allegedly did- to kill an innocent baby while letting the guilty one go unscathed. If a Christian carries a Bible and holds it up as the paragon of virtue, he should be aware that this story is contained in that book. This goes beyond any measure of barbarity to an unspeakable and unfathomable atrocity. Every Christian must admit that they are worshiping the god who did this.

If god is just this act was right.

The god of the bible is clearly not just.

We cannot judge god because we don't know what perfect morality is.

We may not know what perfect morality is but it's easy to identify immorality such as stoning to death non believers or people who work on the Sabbath.

Therefore god was just.

http://www.debate.org...

How do you reach that conclusion?

You forgot about my hammer...

Time for the hammer on this and
attacks on the character of god.

If a perfect entity exists we cannot in
any way judge it's character because
it is infinitely one way or another.

We are like finite numbers.

You cannot describe infinity in any
way with finite numbers except for
that infinity is infinitely larger or better
(blah blah you know what i mean) than them.

Ok so, you being up there.

You allow people to die.

You are evil.

No, it is not.

There is a reason, we cannot
understand such an entity's logic and
reasoning because we are imperfect
and biased.

If it existed it would explain the justification for the clearly immoral events in the bible.

If it existed it wouldn't to
make shure we have free will.

Why? It wants to trick us? How stupid. Do you notice how illogical that claim is? A god demanding worship placing the truth amongst more credible lies and then punishing people for eternity in the most horrific place imaginable! A god would show it exists and explain the truth. It would not have any motivation for torturing people for eternity.
Chloe8
Posts: 2,580
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2016 4:16:06 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/6/2016 4:03:17 PM, DPMartin wrote:
At 4/6/2016 3:28:48 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 4/5/2016 3:59:37 PM, DPMartin wrote:
At 4/4/2016 9:43:43 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In 2 Samuel 12:13-18, we read:

Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord."

Nathan replied, "The Lord has taken away your sin. You are not going to die. But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the Lord, the son born to you will die."

After Nathan had gone home, the Lord struck the child that Uriah"s wife had borne to David, and he became ill. David pleaded with God for the child. He fasted and spent the nights lying in sackcloth on the ground. The elders of his household stood beside him to get him up from the ground, but he refused, and he would not eat any food with them.

On the seventh day the child died.

This scripture says that the Lord sent Nathan to give this message to David. There simply can be no justification for what the "Lord" allegedly did- to kill an innocent baby while letting the guilty one go unscathed. If a Christian carries a Bible and holds it up as the paragon of virtue, he should be aware that this story is contained in that book. This goes beyond any measure of barbarity to an unspeakable and unfathomable atrocity. Every Christian must admit that they are worshiping the god who did this.

another posting by the uninformed, children dyeing soon after being born was a common as children surviving to adulthood,

That is still the case today in many parts of the world.

but in this case He who has given life to all things has the right to deny life to anything He pleases.

Why? Does a parent have the right to murder their child because they created it?

it is His to given or deny, no one is entitled anything, not even justice.

According to the bible yes, your God can do what he chooses and kill whoever he wants even without reason. What an evil god you worship.

http://www.debate.org...

what the Creator can do, and what the created should do is two different things. what a authorities power has the right to do is hang the proven guilty, what the accuser has the right to do insist on justice be done. the accuser doesn't have the same rights and privileges as the ruling government, does it?

God gives living things the ability to give the life they have received. (note a life they have received) doesn't mean they have to right to deny the life that was already received from them. but God being the Creator and Judge of all things has that right.

It's the same as saying a dictator is free to kill who he wants. Just because someone is in charge their actions are not neccessarily justified.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2016 4:24:31 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/6/2016 3:51:40 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 4/6/2016 3:23:24 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:

Jesus and the Apostles all spoke of the death we know at present as nothing more than that.

According to scripture that's correct. However the bible is a very unreliable source of information.

On the contrary it is 100% reliable, as you would know if you knew it well enough.

It is God's word, and God himself is 100% reliable.


The Second death is something else, it is permanent destruction from which there is no return. Very few of those who have died so far will have been evil enough to be put straight into that.

No one has died twice. It's not possible.

No you are right, up to the present time.

However some few will have bypassed the first death and gone straight to the second because of their wickedness.

The only difference between the first and second deaths is that there is no return from the second.

However there is a reason it is called the second death.

Those who are resurrected are taught Jehovah's ways, given probably hundreds of years to practice them, since they will have been resurrected into Adam and Eve like bodies with all the prospects of eternal life that Adam and Eve would have enjoyed.

Since all who have been faithful and survived Armageddon have already been tested, it is only fair that the resurrected ones are tested also, and thus, at the end of Christ's reign as King, Satan is let out from his restraint once again, for a short time, to test everyone.

Those who fail that test, whether from the Armageddon survivors or the resurrected ones they will go straight into the second death, which for the resurrected ones will indeed be the second time they have died. Hence it's name.


Adam and Eve, those who were destroyed at the flood, all who ignored or worked against Christ in the first century, and all who perish at Armageddon having refused to listen to Jehovah's messengers. Other than that no-one knows for sure.

So the poor people in the Amazon rainforest who have never been contacted by the outside world get this treatment. That sounds the idea a just and good god would come up with!

No, they will have been contacted, and if they haven't they will get a resurrection so that they too have the opportunity to learn.

Yours is an assumption which only one who really does not know God could possibly make. However he manages it, any few who have not been contacted by Armageddon will still get their chance.

Of course there can be very few who have not been contacted y Jehovah's Witnesses now. They take the phrase "in all the inhabited earth" absolutely literally, and are still working hard to ensure none get missed.

If they haven't got there yet, they soon will. Those who have volunteered to be Missionaries are very determined to reach everyone.


However you have to remember that children of the enemies of Israel would doubtless have grown up to be enemies of Israel also.

Why is that? Someone will likely be shaped by the culture they live in. If you had taken that baby and given it to an Israelite family of that time it would have grown up as an Israeli. Are you claiming God's excuse for the murder was due to his ability to see into the future and know this child would go on to commit atrocities and crimes? If this is true why did he not give Adolf Hitler a heart attack while he was a baby?

Which is precisely why they would have ended up as enemies of God's people, because of the influence of their culture. No doubt also they would have resented the fact that their parents were killed also.

Protecting Israel was simply a case of protecting the line of the Messiah. He has come and finished his task successfully, so there is no line to protect.

Since Christ's sacrifice the pattern has been well and truly set. God's people, like his only begotten son, have to be prepared to suffer and remain faithful through it. To the death if need be.

If God could allow his only begotten son to suffer and die as a human, would should he not expect us to suffer also if need be? It would hardly be fair.


One thing you can guarantee is that if Jehovah put anyone to death he had extremely good reasons for doing so. Maybe you should try learning why it happened.

In this case no reason exists. Imagine if another verse was added explaining why God took this decision to kill the baby, explaining why it deserved death. That would be a more logical approach.

That is where getting to know the whole of scripture comes in.

As you get to know scripture properly, you also get to know God. The combination of the two, plus holy spirit allows you to understand as I do.

Knowing someone's motivation helps no end, and as Jesus said our eternal life depends on us taking the trouble to get to know his father, as well as himself. I hope you are beginning to understand why.


Also one has to remember that since we all inherit our sinful nature from Adam there is no such thing ans an innocent human in Jehovah's eyes, however young they may be. Even babies are inevitably sinners, who just haven't had time to act yet.

Why did God not kill Josef Stalin when he was a baby? Or Mao Zedong? I doubt this babies future crimes were worse than these two!

See my answer above. It is the same reason.

I often wonder if they will get a resurrection, and if they do how they will handle it.


Like I said before, you problem is your ignorance and lack of ability to understand at present.

Again you show you have not taken the trouble to learn. It cannot be done overnight. JWs study the Bible daily. They have 4 meetings a week, under the new arrangement, plus they do their own study and research, including comparing translations, plus if they are parents they attempt to teach their children.

Every JW is encouraged to own at least two other translations of their choice, as well as the NWT.

All are encouraged to read the Bible from cover to cover over and again as well.

That, combined with Jehovah's help through his ons and holy spirit, is why they understand the Bible so well.
The-Holy-Macrel
Posts: 777
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2016 4:27:14 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/6/2016 4:12:53 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 4/6/2016 3:55:43 PM, The-Holy-Macrel wrote:
At 4/6/2016 3:32:47 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 4/6/2016 3:22:08 PM, The-Holy-Macrel wrote:
At 4/6/2016 3:12:27 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 4/5/2016 10:14:57 PM, The-Holy-Macrel wrote:
At 4/4/2016 9:43:43 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In 2 Samuel 12:13-18, we read:

Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord."

Nathan replied, "The Lord has taken away your sin. You are not going to die. But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the Lord, the son born to you will die."

After Nathan had gone home, the Lord struck the child that Uriah"s wife had borne to David, and he became ill. David pleaded with God for the child. He fasted and spent the nights lying in sackcloth on the ground. The elders of his household stood beside him to get him up from the ground, but he refused, and he would not eat any food with them.

On the seventh day the child died.

This scripture says that the Lord sent Nathan to give this message to David. There simply can be no justification for what the "Lord" allegedly did- to kill an innocent baby while letting the guilty one go unscathed. If a Christian carries a Bible and holds it up as the paragon of virtue, he should be aware that this story is contained in that book. This goes beyond any measure of barbarity to an unspeakable and unfathomable atrocity. Every Christian must admit that they are worshiping the god who did this.

If god is just this act was right.

The god of the bible is clearly not just.

We cannot judge god because we don't know what perfect morality is.

We may not know what perfect morality is but it's easy to identify immorality such as stoning to death non believers or people who work on the Sabbath.

Therefore god was just.

http://www.debate.org...

How do you reach that conclusion?

You forgot about my hammer...

Time for the hammer on this and
attacks on the character of god.

If a perfect entity exists we cannot in
any way judge it's character because
it is infinitely one way or another.

We are like finite numbers.

You cannot describe infinity in any
way with finite numbers except for
that infinity is infinitely larger or better
(blah blah you know what i mean) than them.

Ok so, you being up there.

You allow people to die.

You are evil.

No, it is not.

There is a reason, we cannot
understand such an entity's logic and
reasoning because we are imperfect
and biased.

If it existed it would explain the justification for the clearly immoral events in the bible.

If it existed it wouldn't to
make shure we have free will.

Why? It wants to trick us? How stupid. Do you notice how illogical that claim is? A god demanding worship placing the truth amongst more credible lies and then punishing people for eternity in the most horrific place imaginable! A god would show it exists and explain the truth. It would not have any motivation for torturing people for eternity.

That is opinionated.

Our judgment on morality is flawed.

Only a perfect entity would
know what perfect morality is.

Us mortals have no chance of understanding this.
Chloe8
Posts: 2,580
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2016 4:38:01 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/6/2016 4:27:14 PM, The-Holy-Macrel wrote:
At 4/6/2016 4:12:53 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 4/6/2016 3:55:43 PM, The-Holy-Macrel wrote:
At 4/6/2016 3:32:47 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 4/6/2016 3:22:08 PM, The-Holy-Macrel wrote:
At 4/6/2016 3:12:27 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 4/5/2016 10:14:57 PM, The-Holy-Macrel wrote:
At 4/4/2016 9:43:43 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In 2 Samuel 12:13-18, we read:

Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord."

Nathan replied, "The Lord has taken away your sin. You are not going to die. But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the Lord, the son born to you will die."

After Nathan had gone home, the Lord struck the child that Uriah"s wife had borne to David, and he became ill. David pleaded with God for the child. He fasted and spent the nights lying in sackcloth on the ground. The elders of his household stood beside him to get him up from the ground, but he refused, and he would not eat any food with them.

On the seventh day the child died.

This scripture says that the Lord sent Nathan to give this message to David. There simply can be no justification for what the "Lord" allegedly did- to kill an innocent baby while letting the guilty one go unscathed. If a Christian carries a Bible and holds it up as the paragon of virtue, he should be aware that this story is contained in that book. This goes beyond any measure of barbarity to an unspeakable and unfathomable atrocity. Every Christian must admit that they are worshiping the god who did this.

If god is just this act was right.

The god of the bible is clearly not just.

We cannot judge god because we don't know what perfect morality is.

We may not know what perfect morality is but it's easy to identify immorality such as stoning to death non believers or people who work on the Sabbath.

Therefore god was just.

http://www.debate.org...

How do you reach that conclusion?

You forgot about my hammer...

Time for the hammer on this and
attacks on the character of god.

If a perfect entity exists we cannot in
any way judge it's character because
it is infinitely one way or another.

We are like finite numbers.

You cannot describe infinity in any
way with finite numbers except for
that infinity is infinitely larger or better
(blah blah you know what i mean) than them.

Ok so, you being up there.

You allow people to die.

You are evil.

No, it is not.

There is a reason, we cannot
understand such an entity's logic and
reasoning because we are imperfect
and biased.

If it existed it would explain the justification for the clearly immoral events in the bible.

If it existed it wouldn't to
make shure we have free will.

Why? It wants to trick us? How stupid. Do you notice how illogical that claim is? A god demanding worship placing the truth amongst more credible lies and then punishing people for eternity in the most horrific place imaginable! A god would show it exists and explain the truth. It would not have any motivation for torturing people for eternity.

That is opinionated.

Our judgment on morality is flawed.

Why?

Only a perfect entity would
know what perfect morality is.

Maybe your right. But it's clear the Christian god is not perfect and does not have perfect morals. If it exists it is the most evil creature imaginable and is more immoral than any human ever to exist. It may think it has perfect morals but it clearly does not. deep down im sure you agree but quickly fight such thoughts due to immense fear of being sent to hell by this horrible creature for questioning it. It's comparable to a Russian being scared to speak out against the ussr government. Pretend it's good to avoid punishment. Arguably it's a logical approach but fortunately the Christian god is a myth and there is no need to fear it unlike Josef Stalin or nikita Khrushchev

Us mortals have no chance of understanding this.