Do You Believe in God?

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
522

[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
nephorm wrote:
Schwarzfahrer wrote:
you stand naked and filthy among fashion designers

I think you may want to rephrase…

I guess I just wanted to point out how vulgar and bare his arguments stand out in this very forum (greek culture all the way), reeking of hypocrisy and blind devotion, contrasting with the speech of so many prudent and understanding speakers (pookie, Varq etc.).

Obviously, I’m not among those big man who’d phrase their anger far more aptly and eloquently.

[/quote]

I understood what you meant, and I was just poking fun at you, since I doubt any of those you indicated would particularly care to be compared to fashion designers.

523

You have to produce an absolute morality when criticizing someone else’s, or else you’re a relativist.

In this case, you need to produce a definition of “what benefits humanity” that is agreed upon by the rest of mankind and you have to provide evidence that certain values will lead to these benefits and an “oughtness” that provides the impetus to follow them.

Also, since we’re on the subject of “general vs. specific” cases, you’ve attempted to generalize here on a specific case. The context doesn’t allow it. Your saying that the example in this passage will lead people to infer that it’s right to execute children for disobedience to parents.

I don’t think that and I don’t think a lot of other people would either, therefore it’s not necessarily concrete that this textual example will lead to the general consequences for mankind that you say it will. Therefore, I don’t think that, under your definition of “good” and “bad”, this is an example of something “bad.”

524

[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
In this case, you need to produce a definition of “what benefits humanity” that is agreed upon by the rest of mankind and you have to provide evidence that certain values will lead to these benefits and an “oughtness” that provides the impetus to follow them. [/quote]

Don’t you think that “humanity not becoming extinct” would meet that criteria for all of mankind?

Says who?

You’re making rules up as you go along.

If God’s decision to kill children for mocking is “right” and “good”, then doing “right” and “good” by other mocking children entails killing them.

Pushing that reasoning to its logical conclusion - given that all children mock at some point in their lives - leaves you with all children dead.

You’re trying to argue that the verse in question describes a rare occasion when it was a “good” thing to slaughter mocking children, and that the occasion was unique.

You’re basically saying: God did wrong here, but because he’s God, wrong equals right for this occasion only.

It’s a neat trick if you can get people to buy it. Personally, I think it’s ridiculous to try and defend God in that verse.

I’m not saying that at all. I’m saying that if we didn’t know the definition of “good” and tried to infer it from the verse by assuming that God, by killing all the mocking children is doing “good,” then if every one similarly did “good” by his mocking children, we’d have no kids left, and the human race would go extinct.

You’re apparently unsure whether the extinction of man is good or bad.

I’m not saying that either. It’s a “thought experiment” where we apply God’s “unknown good/bad” action to the whole population and see if we can determine the “good” or “bad” of it by the result.

So, according to you, slaughtering kids until mankind is extinct is “good?”

525

[quote]rugbyhit wrote:
Your sense of humor is refreshing. You and I both know that this ends in a dead lock. Nobody is debated in to believing anything. [/quote]

I’m reminded of a great exchange in Star Trek the Next Generation when Q, the troublesome super-being, loses his immortality. He laments, “How can I prove to you people that I’m mortal?” To which Worf* the Klingon replies, “Die!”

None of this can be proven one way or another. We’ll all find out the truth or error of our beliefs soon enough. I’m in no hurry, myself.

*Edited to correct egregious and shameful spelling error unworthy of a true Trekkerhead like Pookie.

526

[quote]nephorm wrote:

I understood what you meant, and I was just poking fun at you, since I doubt any of those you indicated would particularly care to be compared to fashion designers.[/quote]

“I used to design for gods!”

527

The Mosaic Law applied to Israel alone. I’m not sure how many other ways I can repeat that. God made a covenant with Israel, and certain of those laws had a typological significance rather than moral significance. Indeed, all of the temple sacrifices and the Israelite monarchy had a typological significance. Therefore, you can’t extrapolate this to a more general moral statement that we must kill children for disobeying us. It really can’t be more clear from the text, if you’re willing to follow the narrative from the time Israel left Egypt, to Mt. Sinai, and through the rest of the story. 2 Kings doesn’t even say that Elisha himself killed the kids. It says, “And he turned around, and when he saw them, he cursed them in the name of the Lord. And two she-bears came out of the woods and tore forty-two of the boys.” (v. 24)

Now, you’re definition of “good” is whether or not this would be bad for all of mankind if extrapolated to the general case. I’m telling you you can’t make that extrapolation. I’m sure killing every child on earth would be bad for mankind. I’m sure we can agree on that. The text doesn’t indicate that Elisha did the killing. It wasn’t as if he went into the woods, trapped two she-bears, and then released them on the kids. They came out because God sent them out to kill those who had mocked his prophet.

If you insist that this would lead to the impression that parents must kill disobedient children, and that is bad because it would lead to the extermination of mankind in general (which would be good for the environment and the other flora and fauna), then might I suggest you find another text to support this?

Now, I don’t think you’ve provided an objective set of rules by which we can make a priori moral decisions here. If I’m not to kill because, if applied on a wide scale, would lead to the death of all humans and that would be bad, what about if the individual I’m going to kill is about to unleash some biological agent on a city? I have know way of knowing that he is going to do that until he does it, and it would have definitely benefited mankind in general if I knocked the guy off beforehand, especially if he’s unleashing some particularly virulent plague. It still doesn’t help me to decide whether or not the guy should be killed if I don’t know beforehand. If I kill, then if everyone kills, all mankind would be dead. Granted. But what if this terrorist doesn’t care whether or not all of mankind dies? Should I still kill him? What if i don’t know he’s a terrorist?

Your criteria are no help in making moral decisions at all, especially when it comes to other decisions like lying, cheating, stealing and that sort. I ought not to do those things simply because it’s wrong to do them. At the end of the day, most people don’t care about the rest of humanity any way - they care about themselves.

528

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
I’m reminded f a great exchange in Star Trek the Next Generation when Q, the troublesome super-being, loses his immortality. He laments, “How can I prove to you people that I’m mortal?” To which Warf the Klingon replies, “Die!”[/quote]

Warf?

Warf!?!

It’s Worf. With an “O”.

Please see your nearest Geek Retraining Bureau for some much needed RNA pattern reprogramming.

Sheesh.

529

[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
I’m sure killing every child on earth would be bad for mankind. I’m sure we can agree on that. The text doesn’t indicate that Elisha did the killing. It wasn’t as if he went into the woods, trapped two she-bears, and then released them on the kids. They came out because God sent them out to kill those who had mocked his prophet.[/quote]

So God slaughtering 42 children for mocking Elisha is an example of Him being benevolent?

What does He do when he’s pissed?

530

[quote]pookie wrote:
Varqanir wrote:
I’m reminded f a great exchange in Star Trek the Next Generation when Q, the troublesome super-being, loses his immortality. He laments, “How can I prove to you people that I’m mortal?” To which Warf the Klingon replies, “Die!”

Warf?

Warf!?!

It’s Worf. With an “O”.

Please see your nearest Geek Retraining Bureau for some much needed RNA pattern reprogramming.

Sheesh.
[/quote]

I can’t tell you how appalled I am with myself on the one hand for misspelling the name of one of my favorite characters from the Star Trek universe, while on the other hand gratified that you turned out to be an even bigger nerd than I am.

Not that I hadn’t already suspected it.

531

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
pookie wrote:
Varqanir wrote:
I’m reminded f a great exchange in Star Trek the Next Generation when Q, the troublesome super-being, loses his immortality. He laments, “How can I prove to you people that I’m mortal?” To which Warf the Klingon replies, “Die!”

Warf?

Warf!?!

It’s Worf. With an “O”.

Please see your nearest Geek Retraining Bureau for some much needed RNA pattern reprogramming.

Sheesh.

I can’t tell you how appalled I am with myself on the one hand for misspelling the name of one of my favorite characters from the Star Trek universe, while on the other hand gratified that you turned out to be an even bigger nerd than I am.

Not that I hadn’t already suspected it.[/quote]

Your a bunch of loosers. :stuck_out_tongue:

532

[quote]pookie wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
I’m sure killing every child on earth would be bad for mankind. I’m sure we can agree on that. The text doesn’t indicate that Elisha did the killing. It wasn’t as if he went into the woods, trapped two she-bears, and then released them on the kids. They came out because God sent them out to kill those who had mocked his prophet.

So God slaughtering 42 children for mocking Elisha is an example of Him being benevolent?

What does He do when he’s pissed?
[/quote]

I think we can assume he’d like Roland Emmerich, as he’s obviously into special effects.

533

[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
pookie wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
I’m sure killing every child on earth would be bad for mankind. I’m sure we can agree on that. The text doesn’t indicate that Elisha did the killing. It wasn’t as if he went into the woods, trapped two she-bears, and then released them on the kids. They came out because God sent them out to kill those who had mocked his prophet.

So God slaughtering 42 children for mocking Elisha is an example of Him being benevolent?

What does He do when he’s pissed?

I think we can assume he’d like Roland Emmerich, as he’s obviously into special effects.[/quote]

This plagues are interesting insofar as every plague seems to mock a certain Egypt god or goddess.

http://www.sschotsprings.com/plagues_egypt_miller.html

534

Even the bible doesn’t really claim there were no other gods, Jehova was just stronger.

For example:

What we see here is a divine proxy competition, perhaps even some sort of phallic contest.
It’s the gods who actually fight here, because the “wise men and sorcerers” were priests, of course, just like Moses and Aaron.

Ergo, god wasn’t the only god at least back then.

535

[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Ergo, god wasn’t the only god at least back then.[/quote]

Wasn’t quite omnipotent either:

“And the LORD was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron.”
[center]- Judges 1:19 [/center]

536

[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Even the bible doesn’t really claim there were no other gods, Jehova was just stronger.

For example:

(Exodus )
8And the LORD spake unto Moses and unto Aaron, saying,

9When Pharaoh shall speak unto you, saying, Shew a miracle for you: then thou shalt say unto Aaron, Take thy rod, and cast it before Pharaoh, and it shall become a serpent.

10And Moses and Aaron went in unto Pharaoh, and they did so as the LORD had commanded: and Aaron cast down his rod before Pharaoh, and before his servants, and it became a serpent.

11Then Pharaoh also called the wise men and the sorcerers: now the magicians of Egypt, they also did in like manner with their enchantments.

12For they cast down every man his rod, and they became serpents: but Aaron’s rod
swallowed up their rods.

What we see here is a divine proxy competition, perhaps even some sort of phallic contest.
It’s the gods who actually fight here, because the “wise men and sorcerers” were priests, of course, just like Moses and Aaron.

Ergo, god wasn’t the only god at least back then.[/quote]

I think you are being a tad bit one sided with this view point. Up until the egyptian era The Bible treated things as there is only one God. All though in the text there are a few small references of people worshiping many gods (ie, tower of babel).

It is also important to point out that shortly after the Exodus it treated the golden calf as a man made invention and therefore not a God at all. So even this early in the text it starts dealing with false gods. I don�??t think that God would have a battle with a false God in the sense that the Titans battled. This was more a battle for the hearts and minds of people. What was considered a false god in the Bible was anything outside of the actual Hebrew deity defined as God.

With that in mind�?�

You don�??t have to look much further to see the mocking of other gods in the Bible. Elijah and the prophets of Baal is the first example that comes to mind.
Surely you don�??t think Elijah saying �??maybe Baal is sleeping�?? is an acknowledgement on his part do you?

537

[quote]pookie wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
I’m sure killing every child on earth would be bad for mankind. I’m sure we can agree on that. The text doesn’t indicate that Elisha did the killing. It wasn’t as if he went into the woods, trapped two she-bears, and then released them on the kids. They came out because God sent them out to kill those who had mocked his prophet.

So God slaughtering 42 children for mocking Elisha is an example of Him being benevolent?

What does He do when he’s pissed?
[/quote]

I’m still waiting to see the Atheists Moral Code that the rest of the theists around here can compare ours to. What objective standards are you using to evaluate ours? Why do you adhere to them?

You keep using “argument by outrage,” but on the other thread you complained when Christians did the same, namely by pointing out all of the atheistic worldviews (Communism, etc) that led to millions being slaughtered. We both agreed that it proves nothing, remember?

538

[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
I’m still waiting to see the Atheists Moral Code[/quote]

You’re going to wait for a long time because there is no such thing.

Atheism is the lack of belief in a deity. It entails nothing more.

539

[quote]pookie wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
I’m still waiting to see the Atheists Moral Code

You’re going to wait for a long time because there is no such thing.

Atheism is the lack of belief in a deity. It entails nothing more.

[/quote]

I’m well aware of what atheism is. You are making moral judgments here. I would like to know what standard you are using that provides the basis for these judgments. I would also like to know what authority they have, otherwise we’re just sitting here saying, “Well, the Christian God did this morally repugnant act,” while the Christians say, “Well, the atheists did this morally repugnant act.” We’re not making any philosophical headway with such arguments.

540

[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
I’m well aware of what atheism is. You are making moral judgments here. I would like to know what standard you are using that provides the basis for these judgments. I would also like to know what authority they have, otherwise we’re just sitting here saying, “Well, the Christian God did this morally repugnant act,” while the Christians say, “Well, the atheists did this morally repugnant act.” We’re not making any philosophical headway with such arguments.[/quote]

Do you think all humans share a common experience of being human that we could call “Human nature?”

541

Wow guys!

I am still following, but its all going a bit above my head now.

Can someone please explain the corraltion between communism and atheism please? I do not understand this?

Also where abouts in the bible does it say about god killing 42 children? Thats some amazing atheiest ammo righ there!

Cheers guys

And Pookie, you da man!