Because Yahweh is a God who says of Himself that He does not change.
Therefore, we would expect His morals to not change.
Once you start talking about Yahweh changing with the times, you're basically conceding my point.
The thread was "monotonous" because the point can be driven home repeatedly using tons of examples all leading to the same conclusion:
You ARE more moral than Yahweh.
Oh, dear, I don't think I said Yahweh, God, "changes with the times" in that sense.
To say I'm more moral than Yahweh is to also say I am more moral than EVERYONE. . . . . All hail ME!
We have these understandings built into our DNA. One lifetime of a person can't fully articulate that. I would say, in that sense, God does not change. That's interesting.
1. For how many crimes do you feel it is appropriate to kill the perpetrator by having everyone in town surround him and throw heavy rocks at him until he dies?
1.a. Did a child being disobedient to his parents make the list?
1.b. Did picking up sticks after sunset on a Friday make the list?
2. If you were to start a society from scratch, how many laws regulating slavery would you require?
2.a. Would any of those laws crack your Top Ten list?
2.a.i. Why the hell not?
3. What difference should the marital status of a raped woman make in determining the punishment meted out to the rapist?
3a. Who is the victim in a rape case, and how much restitution is he due?
To be continued...
I saw this on a Marilyn Manson video.
They stoned, or where about too, just because he lost spin the bottle.
Why could an omniscient God not make "Thou shalt not OWN PEOPLE" a commandment?
He found plenty of time to ban lobster and shrimp.
Different laws for a different culture? A morally just God was creating a society from scratch. He answered to NO ONE. All he had to do was say the word, and thousands of years of human suffering at the hands of our fellow man would have been averted.
When was it EVER moral on ANY culture for a rapist to be "sentenced" to marry the woman he raped?
Please.
Problem here is Utopian thinking.
Nothings perfect. You can't do it. You can't imagine it.
When you have a God who embodies morality, his law should embody morality. The Law does not. Either it is not God's law, in which case, oopsie, or Yahweh is not moral.
The only other alternative is, slavery IS moral, stoning is a moral punishment for a petty misdemeanor, and marrying the person you raped is a fitting punishment for a rapist.
Complex systems aren't build overnight. That's why communism failed.
What you're proposing, since you know better, is that the best system should have materialized immediately.
What I am proposing is that an omniscient God who is the source of all objective morality could have and should have gotten this right the first time.
You are not arguing for the existence of that God. Therefore your barrage of posts on this thread is irrelevant, because you are not talking about the God of the Bible. You're talking about a God whose morality is subject to the people who created him, not the other way around.
And that's FINE. But it's also irrelevant. You may as well be talking about Zeus. Whichever God you're talking about, it's not the Yahweh of the Bible.
You have moved the goalposts so many times in two conversations that it's become fruitless to discuss anything with you.
Nation wouldn't have formed. Too much argument. Some needed leaders would not have agreed. It sucks but it's the truth.
The nation was begun, slavery was ended later. It needed to go.
And it did. But you don't start out with perfection.
No one is claiming that you cannot have objective morality without the founding fathers of the USA.
That they were morally imperfect is a surprise to no one.
God is supposed to be THE source of objective morality. How could He not get it right the first time?
(Answer: God's morality is derived from the people who created Him, not the other way around. God gets his morality from us. That's why He evolves and gets kinder and gentler as history progresses. A God who really existed and was the source of objective morality would not evolve).
What I am proposing is that an omniscient God who is the source of all objective morality could have and should have gotten this right the first time.
You are not arguing for the existence of that God. Therefore your barrage of posts on this thread is irrelevant, because you are not talking about the God of the Bible. You're talking about a God whose morality is subject to the people who created him, not the other way around.
And that's FINE. But it's also irrelevant. You may as well be talking about Zeus. Whichever God you're talking about, it's not the Yahweh of the Bible.
You have moved the goalposts so many times in two conversations that it's become fruitless to discuss anything with you.
This perfect God should have got US right the first time?
The God of The Bible helped give rise to the Western World. So I am talking about him. You are mocking Western Civilization.
I could use the same arguments for Zeus, yes, we can talk about him too?
I have not moved goalposts. I've actually remained quite consistent.
No one is claiming that you cannot have objective morality without the founding fathers of the USA.
That they were morally imperfect is a surprise to no one.
God is supposed to be THE source of objective morality. How could He not get it right the first time?
You were complaining about a God who didn't have a perfect system in place.
If he were all-knowing. What's his plan?
(Answer: God's morality is derived from the people who created Him, not the other way around. God gets his morality from us. That's why He evolves and gets kinder and gentler as history progresses. A God who really existed and was the source of objective morality would not evolve).
What I am proposing is that an omniscient God who is the source of all objective morality could have and should have gotten this right the first time.
I'm of the persuasion that God did (get it right), as evidenced in (or by) man's freedom of choice (or freewill, if you prefer to call it that.) However, I also think that man has a very limited perspective, and thus, falls short in whatever objectivity you are (or seem to be) referring to. Perhaps the morality you're talking about is too easily tainted (or confused) with mortality. Hence, causing one to only see and focus on whatever affects this life (in the flesh), and not on the (spiritual) life that God ultimately intended and planned for man.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
266
38
32
188
Popular Days
Aug 7
50
Aug 8
46
Aug 2
42
Aug 1
33
Top Posters In This Topic
Raf 266 posts
waysider 38 posts
TrustAndObey 32 posts
Bolshevik 188 posts
Popular Days
Aug 7 2017
50 posts
Aug 8 2017
46 posts
Aug 2 2017
42 posts
Aug 1 2017
33 posts
Popular Posts
DontWorryBeHappy
Raf.......YES! And so are you! TY!
TrustAndObey
I can understand where you are coming from Raf. However, if you honestly are inviting a discussion on these topics, could you be clear on what you consider is dodging. Because, to myself, you make it
TLC
It's not just people that say it. Scripture itself says that God is good. But simply equating morality to that which is "good" and attributing the cause (or source) of it to the law (and then equati
Posted Images
Bolshevik
Oh, dear, I don't think I said Yahweh, God, "changes with the times" in that sense.
To say I'm more moral than Yahweh is to also say I am more moral than EVERYONE. . . . . All hail ME!
We have these understandings built into our DNA. One lifetime of a person can't fully articulate that. I would say, in that sense, God does not change. That's interesting.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
I think you could argue luckier, more fortunate, not in as desperate a situation. Not faced with the choices the ancients faced.
Fundamentally better?
Pfft.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Remember, corporations are people too.
God comes from a collection of people. So do businesses.
Can someone own stock and still be more moral than Ronald McDonald?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Has anyone done anything today related to the global economy? Turn on a light switch?
Is slowly destroying the Earth more moral than Yahweh?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
“Natural factors cause crop failures, but humans cause famines”. Source (Google more)
Humans more moral than Yahweh?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Did you know a lot of flood disasters are completely preventable?
Yep, man-made problems. Example
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
I saw this on a Marilyn Manson video.
They stoned, or where about too, just because he lost spin the bottle.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Problem here is Utopian thinking.
Nothings perfect. You can't do it. You can't imagine it.
Prior to Law, you have, no Law.
Isn't some Law better than NONE?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
"To say I'm more moral than Yahweh is to also say I am more moral than EVERYONE. . . . . All hail ME!"
This is the same guy who in another thread accused me of using a straw man argument.
This is absurdity and not worthy of a serious reply.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
God can't?
You have to be Utopian to denounce slavery? If you're GOD?
This is nonsense. You're not engaging in a serious discussion.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
See. Stalinist Thinking.
Impose your system on a people IMMEDIATELY.
God didn't work that way. hhhhmmmmm
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
God DID work that way.
What you call "Stalinist thinking" is His way, not mine.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Not nonsense.
You have to pick a starting point. You can't do it all at once.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Complex systems aren't build overnight. That's why communism failed.
What you're proposing, since you know better, is that the best system should have materialized immediately.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
It's not absurd.
Nobody has a personal God. Those concepts arise from groups.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Even the United States started out with slavery.
Why?
Nation wouldn't have formed. Too much argument. Some needed leaders would not have agreed. It sucks but it's the truth.
The nation was begun, slavery was ended later. It needed to go.
And it did. But you don't start out with perfection.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
What I am proposing is that an omniscient God who is the source of all objective morality could have and should have gotten this right the first time.
You are not arguing for the existence of that God. Therefore your barrage of posts on this thread is irrelevant, because you are not talking about the God of the Bible. You're talking about a God whose morality is subject to the people who created him, not the other way around.
And that's FINE. But it's also irrelevant. You may as well be talking about Zeus. Whichever God you're talking about, it's not the Yahweh of the Bible.
You have moved the goalposts so many times in two conversations that it's become fruitless to discuss anything with you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
No one is claiming that you cannot have objective morality without the founding fathers of the USA.
That they were morally imperfect is a surprise to no one.
God is supposed to be THE source of objective morality. How could He not get it right the first time?
(Answer: God's morality is derived from the people who created Him, not the other way around. God gets his morality from us. That's why He evolves and gets kinder and gentler as history progresses. A God who really existed and was the source of objective morality would not evolve).
Edited by RafLink to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
This perfect God should have got US right the first time?
The God of The Bible helped give rise to the Western World. So I am talking about him. You are mocking Western Civilization.
I could use the same arguments for Zeus, yes, we can talk about him too?
I have not moved goalposts. I've actually remained quite consistent.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
You were complaining about a God who didn't have a perfect system in place.
If he were all-knowing. What's his plan?
(Answer: God's morality is derived from the people who created Him, not the other way around. God gets his morality from us. That's why He evolves and gets kinder and gentler as history progresses. A God who really existed and was the source of objective morality would not evolve).
And where does our morality come from?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
I think the base of your argument is a case against Free Speech.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TLC
I'm of the persuasion that God did (get it right), as evidenced in (or by) man's freedom of choice (or freewill, if you prefer to call it that.) However, I also think that man has a very limited perspective, and thus, falls short in whatever objectivity you are (or seem to be) referring to. Perhaps the morality you're talking about is too easily tainted (or confused) with mortality. Hence, causing one to only see and focus on whatever affects this life (in the flesh), and not on the (spiritual) life that God ultimately intended and planned for man.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TLC
He doesn't change, merely how He deals with man
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.