Believing Yahweh was a vicious vindictive tribal war God prone to excessive violence does not lead to the behaviors you claim.
Believing he is morally perfect DOES lead to extremism andc excusing moral atrocities, as we've demonstrated on this very thread with you saying "so what" to killing a man for picking up sticks. Or the guy who spent a few pages defending slavery.
To be clear, atheists have committed some horrible atrocities, as have theists, statists (especially statists), abortion rights opponents and self-hating gays.
But to claim that there's a causal relationship between recognizing you are more moral than Yahweh and "opening yourself up to all manner of atrocity in the name of reaction to extremism" is logically fallacious. You can cite coincidence, but you cannot cite causation.
You ARE more moral than Yahweh. That's not going to cause you, me or anyone else to kill Christians.
Believing Yahweh was a vicious vindictive tribal war God prone to excessive violence does not lead to the behaviors you claim.
Believing he is morally perfect DOES lead to extremism andc excusing moral atrocities, as we've demonstrated on this very thread with you saying "so what" to killing a man for picking up sticks. Or the guy who spent a few pages defending slavery.
To be clear, atheists have committed some horrible atrocities, as have theists, statists (especially statists), abortion rights opponents and self-hating gays.
But to claim that there's a causal relationship between recognizing you are more moral than Yahweh and "opening yourself up to all manner of atrocity in the name of reaction to extremism" is logically fallacious. You can cite coincidence, but you cannot cite causation.
You ARE more moral than Yahweh. That's not going to cause you, me or anyone else to kill Christians.
You've laid out two extremes and claimed one is superior to the other.
No. I've laid out a Biblical presentation of Yahweh and claimed we're better than that.
And we are.
And I've done so without advocating a single genocide. Or even murder. Or the wedding of a woman to her rapist. Or the killing of a man for picking up sticks on the wrong day of the week. Or the killing of a kid for considering another religion. or...
I never said anything about knowing God's intentions.
His attributes are another story.
Please explain.
According to the Christians God is looking out for our eternal well-being. So the apparent harshness of the temporary Law is not to be taken to hyperbole.
From the evolutionary perspective God represents the process goal. That star on the horizon one never reaches but continually aims and recommits to achieve.
"The apparent harshness of the temporary law is not to be taken to hyperbole"?
Where do you get this stuff?
Yahweh personally ordered the execution of a man for Sabbath breaking. He demanded executions for investigating other religions.
This isn't "apparent harshness," and it's an insult to the language to say it is. And that poor guy who got stoned to death would like to thank you for reminding the rock throwers that they weren't supposed to be doing what Yahweh explicitly ordered them to do!
Again with the "evolutionary perspective." Yahweh does not change.
It seems implausible, to be polite, to suggest that God (who, let's remind you, is "all-powerful") could not conceive of a way to "look out for our eternal well-being" without ordering capricious executions for minor wrongdoing, that He could not have done so without authorizing slavery, that He could not have done so without making marriage to the raped woman a penalty for the commission of rape.
There is no scripture that says God represents the process goal from an evolutionary perspective. You are not talking about Yahweh.
Exactly. And seeing as He does not change, He is also the God of the New Testament, and we can reason that He has not changed because He said He does not. Arguing that He has changed argues with the scriptural account, and thus is a different God.
P.S. I have not just been talking about the Law. I've been talking about the acts attributed to Him as well. The Law is just the easiest place to find His will recorded.
Exactly. And seeing as He does not change . . . and we can reason that He has not changed because He said He does not. Arguing that He has changed argues with the scriptural account, and thus is a different God.
. . .
A person should change with time. Their understanding of everything should change with time. Their view of God should thus change with time.
And the day I start a thread called "Are you more moral than their view of God," feel free to weigh in with these relentlessly irrelevant observations.
And the day I start a thread called "Are you more moral than their view of God," feel free to weigh in with these relentlessly irrelevant observations.
You've reasoned that if God is all-powerful he should have thought of a Law very different from what is written in the Old Testament. A better, perfect Law.
Essentially, you seek perfect systems. If there is not perfect systems, there is no God. Or he is not worth acknowledging.
That implies that free speech is an act of Yahweh. Because free speech is part of developing imperfect systems toward more perfect systems.
I think we can agree that everyone would disagree with it.
However, that does not mean we excuse whatever he does come up with.
Well, shoot, executing someone for sabbath breaking is a problem now? Next you'll have a problem with stoning homosexuals and slaughtering all the Midianite men women and babies. You just can't please some people!
I don't know for sure what a perfect law would look like, but anyone who thinks killing sabbath breakers is not a deal-breaker is probably a sociopath.
You've reasoned that if God is all-powerful he should have thought of a Law very different from what is written in the Old Testament. A better, perfect Law.
Essentially, you seek perfect systems. If there is not perfect systems, there is no God. Or he is not worth acknowledging.
That implies that free speech is an act of Yahweh. Because free speech is part of developing imperfect systems toward more perfect systems.
Each of our views is very different. Have to assume everyone has a spark of divine. Speech is an act of creation to bring out a better world etc etc. Part of the foundations of our current system is Yahweh among other things etc etc
You don't like Yahweh because someone died for picking up sticks. Mother Nature and human activity today is just as bad if not worse. Is not Yahweh a reflection of reality that will never change?
Subject vehemently refuses to show practical relevance of topic in real world applications . . . Also continued superiority complex toward invisible being that he denies exist . . . is it an anger toward VPW's betrayal? Something to fill the void of a lost Adversary? A shift to direct former Waybrain energy? . . . *looks for roaches* . . . Perhaps Waybrain is but a single manifestation of deeper societal issue . . . perhaps there are more out there than we realized . . . debils spurts . . . different only in name . . . the journey for answers continues . . .
Subject repeatedly refuses to acknowledge that his fantasy of a made up God does not resemble the character of Yahweh which is the subject of this discussion. Engages in amateur psychoanaltsis that is insulting to the core while hypocritically accusing his "debate" opponent of being hateful. Prescription: Grade school education.
Pretty sure the only waybrain here is the one who moves the goalposts, changes definitions of commonly accepted words while expecting everyone else tl adopt his definitions despite their inaccuracy.
You want to talk about a hateful insult?
Your hypocrisy has now joined your incapacity to comprehend what you read on the list of things that should embarrass you but for some reason don't.
You have to be delusional to think you're more moral than Yahweh. It completely ignores your own human nature. You believe you're not capable of genocide? You think because you haven't done it indicates a measure of morality? Because you fail to imagine scenarios in which you'd do horrible things, that's an indication of morality?
You haven't cited a verse showing Yahweh worse than what happens in the modern world, anyway. Did Yahweh torture before killing? Just curious.
I'm just putting the goal posts back where they belong. Look with your eyes, Bud.
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
I don't?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
No. it's a non sequitur.
Believing Yahweh was a vicious vindictive tribal war God prone to excessive violence does not lead to the behaviors you claim.
Believing he is morally perfect DOES lead to extremism andc excusing moral atrocities, as we've demonstrated on this very thread with you saying "so what" to killing a man for picking up sticks. Or the guy who spent a few pages defending slavery.
To be clear, atheists have committed some horrible atrocities, as have theists, statists (especially statists), abortion rights opponents and self-hating gays.
But to claim that there's a causal relationship between recognizing you are more moral than Yahweh and "opening yourself up to all manner of atrocity in the name of reaction to extremism" is logically fallacious. You can cite coincidence, but you cannot cite causation.
You ARE more moral than Yahweh. That's not going to cause you, me or anyone else to kill Christians.
Edited by RafLink to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
You've laid out two extremes and claimed one is superior to the other.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
No. I've laid out a Biblical presentation of Yahweh and claimed we're better than that.
And we are.
And I've done so without advocating a single genocide. Or even murder. Or the wedding of a woman to her rapist. Or the killing of a man for picking up sticks on the wrong day of the week. Or the killing of a kid for considering another religion. or...
Edited by RafLink to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
You've claimed to understand the intentions of a god.
Which is akin to thinking the outcome of free speech can be predicted.
If we're moving toward something better, are you saying it can be down without sacrifices?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
I've made no such claim.
Be honest.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
I never said anything about knowing God's intentions.
His attributes are another story.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Please explain.
According to the Christians God is looking out for our eternal well-being. So the apparent harshness of the temporary Law is not to be taken to hyperbole.
From the evolutionary perspective God represents the process goal. That star on the horizon one never reaches but continually aims and recommits to achieve.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
"The apparent harshness of the temporary law is not to be taken to hyperbole"?
Where do you get this stuff?
Yahweh personally ordered the execution of a man for Sabbath breaking. He demanded executions for investigating other religions.
This isn't "apparent harshness," and it's an insult to the language to say it is. And that poor guy who got stoned to death would like to thank you for reminding the rock throwers that they weren't supposed to be doing what Yahweh explicitly ordered them to do!
Again with the "evolutionary perspective." Yahweh does not change.
It seems implausible, to be polite, to suggest that God (who, let's remind you, is "all-powerful") could not conceive of a way to "look out for our eternal well-being" without ordering capricious executions for minor wrongdoing, that He could not have done so without authorizing slavery, that He could not have done so without making marriage to the raped woman a penalty for the commission of rape.
There is no scripture that says God represents the process goal from an evolutionary perspective. You are not talking about Yahweh.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
On this thread, Yahweh is the name used for the God of the Old Testmanent, specifically the one under which The Law was given.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Exactly. And seeing as He does not change, He is also the God of the New Testament, and we can reason that He has not changed because He said He does not. Arguing that He has changed argues with the scriptural account, and thus is a different God.
P.S. I have not just been talking about the Law. I've been talking about the acts attributed to Him as well. The Law is just the easiest place to find His will recorded.
(Allegedly).
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
A person should change with time. Their understanding of everything should change with time. Their view of God should thus change with time.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
And the day I start a thread called "Are you more moral than their view of God," feel free to weigh in with these relentlessly irrelevant observations.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
No, I wouldn't think that's true either.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
You've reasoned that if God is all-powerful he should have thought of a Law very different from what is written in the Old Testament. A better, perfect Law.
Essentially, you seek perfect systems. If there is not perfect systems, there is no God. Or he is not worth acknowledging.
That implies that free speech is an act of Yahweh. Because free speech is part of developing imperfect systems toward more perfect systems.
Edited by BolshevikLink to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Because what wold a perfect Law look like?
Every person on Earth would disagree with it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
I think we can agree that everyone would disagree with it.
However, that does not mean we excuse whatever he does come up with.
Well, shoot, executing someone for sabbath breaking is a problem now? Next you'll have a problem with stoning homosexuals and slaughtering all the Midianite men women and babies. You just can't please some people!
I don't know for sure what a perfect law would look like, but anyone who thinks killing sabbath breakers is not a deal-breaker is probably a sociopath.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Are
You
stoned?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
No. Typing with my thumbs.
Each of our views is very different. Have to assume everyone has a spark of divine. Speech is an act of creation to bring out a better world etc etc. Part of the foundations of our current system is Yahweh among other things etc etc
You don't like Yahweh because someone died for picking up sticks. Mother Nature and human activity today is just as bad if not worse. Is not Yahweh a reflection of reality that will never change?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
No. You're not talking about Yahweh. Thanks for playing. NEXT!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Subject vehemently refuses to show practical relevance of topic in real world applications . . . Also continued superiority complex toward invisible being that he denies exist . . . is it an anger toward VPW's betrayal? Something to fill the void of a lost Adversary? A shift to direct former Waybrain energy? . . . *looks for roaches* . . . Perhaps Waybrain is but a single manifestation of deeper societal issue . . . perhaps there are more out there than we realized . . . debils spurts . . . different only in name . . . the journey for answers continues . . .
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Subject repeatedly refuses to acknowledge that his fantasy of a made up God does not resemble the character of Yahweh which is the subject of this discussion. Engages in amateur psychoanaltsis that is insulting to the core while hypocritically accusing his "debate" opponent of being hateful. Prescription: Grade school education.
Edited by RafLink to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Pretty sure the only waybrain here is the one who moves the goalposts, changes definitions of commonly accepted words while expecting everyone else tl adopt his definitions despite their inaccuracy.
You want to talk about a hateful insult?
Your hypocrisy has now joined your incapacity to comprehend what you read on the list of things that should embarrass you but for some reason don't.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
You have to be delusional to think you're more moral than Yahweh. It completely ignores your own human nature. You believe you're not capable of genocide? You think because you haven't done it indicates a measure of morality? Because you fail to imagine scenarios in which you'd do horrible things, that's an indication of morality?
You haven't cited a verse showing Yahweh worse than what happens in the modern world, anyway. Did Yahweh torture before killing? Just curious.
I'm just putting the goal posts back where they belong. Look with your eyes, Bud.
Shall we start with genocide, sticks, or rape?
Edited by Bolshevikimmoral spelling
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.