Varq typed: “I would save the baby because it is a member of my own species.”
Sans the Coyote situation, if the baby is the size of a Pea in the womb
would you still try to save it from being aborted because it’s still a member
of your ‘own species’?
[quote]smh_23 wrote:
Anyway, this is not really meant as an attack on the god of the Deist, which is the god you’ve more or less described. It is instead meant to question the authenticity of the supremely good, supremely powerful, and supremely interested God of Abraham and Isaac.[/quote]
I don’t get how it questions the “goodness” of a being that defines “goodness” for himself, and us. Your “goodness,” what objective measure do you claim for it? Not a ‘deist’ god, who is nearly if not completely removed from us, surely.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
[quote]smh_23 wrote:
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
[quote]smh_23 wrote:
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Even the mightiest, most benevolent and wisest king can’t prevent the fox from stealing the occasional chicken. And even of he could, should he?[/quote]
If someone has the power to prevent tragedy, with no inconvenience to himself, and chooses not to do it, then what do we say of this man?
Think of my earlier line about the coyote. I carry a pistol and wander in the night. I come upon a coyote preparing to eat an abandoned baby in the wilderness. I watch it eat and then go on my way. What kind of man am I?[/quote]
Einstein said he didn’t believe in a god that played dice. Heisenberg showed that in fact Einstein was mistaken: God plays with a nearly infinite number of dice, each with a nearly infinite number of faces.
I don’t believe in a god who micromanages the cosmos. A god who allows supernovas to wipe out entire solar systems is not going to divert a single electrostatic discharge in order so that one living organism will live another day. This is nothing against God. Stuff just happens. [/quote]
I tend to agree. However, you’re not describing the God of Christianity–the one who has opinions of homosexual sex and adultery and the foreskin. The one who created and saves people, who is a jealous God, who is supremely interested in their comings and goings of man, even in the comings and goings of the contents of his mind and heart.[/quote]
Well, no, of course not. That would be silly. Such a god would be just like a person only with a whole bunch more power, and that thinks like you do. You can’t lift off from such a platform.
:)[/quote]
Funny, I look around at an increasingly permissive society and see the opposite.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
[quote]smh_23 wrote:
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
[quote]smh_23 wrote:
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Even the mightiest, most benevolent and wisest king can’t prevent the fox from stealing the occasional chicken. And even of he could, should he?[/quote]
If someone has the power to prevent tragedy, with no inconvenience to himself, and chooses not to do it, then what do we say of this man?
Think of my earlier line about the coyote. I carry a pistol and wander in the night. I come upon a coyote preparing to eat an abandoned baby in the wilderness. I watch it eat and then go on my way. What kind of man am I?[/quote]
Einstein said he didn’t believe in a god that played dice. Heisenberg showed that in fact Einstein was mistaken: God plays with a nearly infinite number of dice, each with a nearly infinite number of faces.
I don’t believe in a god who micromanages the cosmos. A god who allows supernovas to wipe out entire solar systems is not going to divert a single electrostatic discharge in order so that one living organism will live another day. This is nothing against God. Stuff just happens. [/quote]
I tend to agree. However, you’re not describing the God of Christianity–the one who has opinions of homosexual sex and adultery and the foreskin. The one who created and saves people, who is a jealous God, who is supremely interested in their comings and goings of man, even in the comings and goings of the contents of his mind and heart.[/quote]
Well, no, of course not. That would be silly. Such a god would be just like a person only with a whole bunch more power, and that thinks like you do. You can’t lift off from such a platform.
:)[/quote]
Funny, I look around at an increasingly permissive society and see the opposite. [/quote]
You see the opposite of what?
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
[quote]smh_23 wrote:
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
[quote]smh_23 wrote:
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Even the mightiest, most benevolent and wisest king can’t prevent the fox from stealing the occasional chicken. And even of he could, should he?[/quote]
If someone has the power to prevent tragedy, with no inconvenience to himself, and chooses not to do it, then what do we say of this man?
Think of my earlier line about the coyote. I carry a pistol and wander in the night. I come upon a coyote preparing to eat an abandoned baby in the wilderness. I watch it eat and then go on my way. What kind of man am I?[/quote]
Einstein said he didn’t believe in a god that played dice. Heisenberg showed that in fact Einstein was mistaken: God plays with a nearly infinite number of dice, each with a nearly infinite number of faces.
I don’t believe in a god who micromanages the cosmos. A god who allows supernovas to wipe out entire solar systems is not going to divert a single electrostatic discharge in order so that one living organism will live another day. This is nothing against God. Stuff just happens. [/quote]
I tend to agree. However, you’re not describing the God of Christianity–the one who has opinions of homosexual sex and adultery and the foreskin. The one who created and saves people, who is a jealous God, who is supremely interested in their comings and goings of man, even in the comings and goings of the contents of his mind and heart.[/quote]
Well, no, of course not. That would be silly. Such a god would be just like a person only with a whole bunch more power, and that thinks like you do. You can’t lift off from such a platform.
:)[/quote]
Funny, I look around at an increasingly permissive society and see the opposite. [/quote]
You see the opposite of what?[/quote]
That such a god–with such worries–would be just like a person.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
[quote]smh_23 wrote:
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
[quote]smh_23 wrote:
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Even the mightiest, most benevolent and wisest king can’t prevent the fox from stealing the occasional chicken. And even of he could, should he?[/quote]
If someone has the power to prevent tragedy, with no inconvenience to himself, and chooses not to do it, then what do we say of this man?
Think of my earlier line about the coyote. I carry a pistol and wander in the night. I come upon a coyote preparing to eat an abandoned baby in the wilderness. I watch it eat and then go on my way. What kind of man am I?[/quote]
Einstein said he didn’t believe in a god that played dice. Heisenberg showed that in fact Einstein was mistaken: God plays with a nearly infinite number of dice, each with a nearly infinite number of faces.
I don’t believe in a god who micromanages the cosmos. A god who allows supernovas to wipe out entire solar systems is not going to divert a single electrostatic discharge in order so that one living organism will live another day. This is nothing against God. Stuff just happens. [/quote]
I tend to agree. However, you’re not describing the God of Christianity–the one who has opinions of homosexual sex and adultery and the foreskin. The one who created and saves people, who is a jealous God, who is supremely interested in their comings and goings of man, even in the comings and goings of the contents of his mind and heart.[/quote]
Well, no, of course not. That would be silly. Such a god would be just like a person only with a whole bunch more power, and that thinks like you do. You can’t lift off from such a platform.
:)[/quote]
Funny, I look around at an increasingly permissive society and see the opposite. [/quote]
You see the opposite of what?[/quote]
That such a god–with such worries–would be just like a person.
[/quote]
Do you have concerns about the kinds of things that SMH described in the post above, i.e. homosexual sex, foreskins, adultery, abortion…? Do you believe that God shares these concerns?
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]smh_23 wrote:
Anyway, this is not really meant as an attack on the god of the Deist, which is the god you’ve more or less described. It is instead meant to question the authenticity of the supremely good, supremely powerful, and supremely interested, and supremely just God of Abraham and Isaac.
[/quote]
Fixed that for you.
[/quote]
Noted. But there is no justice in the killing of an infant, so the problem remains.
Your point, about my finite mind not being able to comprehend, is not invalid. But that pretty much ends the conversation for both of us, then. And I can’t be blamed for not believing if I was created in such a way as to be incapable of understanding.
By the way, Push, I see that I’ve “ignored” a couple of your responses to me. I’m not doing this on purpose, it’s that damn delay.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
[quote]smh_23 wrote:
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
And if it wasn’t a coyote eating a baby human, but a spider eating a fly, would you still pull the trigger on the spider?[/quote]
I would not.
But I would save the baby, as I am utterly sure you would too.
The question is, would God?
And the answer is no, so far as anybody has the ability to tell.[/quote]
I would save the baby because it is a member of my own species.
Would a god save another infant god from being engulfed by a collapsing universe?
That would be the standard by which one should judge the behavior of gods. [/quote]
If this is so, and God’s view of me is analogous to my view of a fly, then Christianity (along with Judaism and Islam and Hinduism and most of the rest) is a lie.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]smh_23 wrote:
It really is amazing. It’s probably the first and only thing I’ve encountered that my brain could simply not make sense of. I mean, objectively random radioactive decay? As in, not only can it not be predicted, but there is no hidden variable governing the particulars of its happening?
I simply cannot make anything of that. I can say the words, and I can know what they’re signifying, but I cannot fathom that reality operates in such a way.[/quote]
Hmmm…there is something in this post…hmmmmmm…what is it I’m thinking of, smh?[/quote]
Oh, absolutely.
Here’s the thing, though: I don’t defend quantum mechanics as “the truth.” In fact, I fully expect something else to come along and at least partially dethrone it someday, just as it partially dethroned Newtonian mechanics.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
I would save the baby because it is a member of my own species.
[/quote]
So the bonobo would play second fiddle in a similar “hypothetical?”
[/quote]
If I saw a coyote about to eat an infant bonobo who had the manual dexterity to play second fiddle, I would definitely shoot the coyote. Such a prodigy should not be allowed to perish.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]smh_23 wrote:
Anyway, this is not really meant as an attack on the god of the Deist, which is the god you’ve more or less described. It is instead meant to question the authenticity of the supremely good, supremely powerful, and supremely interested God of Abraham and Isaac.[/quote]
I don’t get how it questions the “goodness” of a being that defines “goodness” for himself, and us.[/quote]
You believe in an objective morality, and you believe that you understand this objective morality to the extent that you can say that abortion is evil, i.e., “not good.”
Tell me, is the killing of an infant good, or bad? Or does it “depend?” And, if the latter, how are you any better than the slimiest relativist?
And, furthermore, if this God really defines “good” and “bad” for himself, can He take bodily form and then proceed to rape every single living human, from the oldest centenarian to the youngest infant, and then define that as “good?”
And if He did so, would you defend Him and live Him?
In the end, it comes down to this: either you don’t believe it to be an objectively bad–or unjust, or evil, or whatever you want to call it–thing for an infant to be killed, or you believe that God allows objectively evil to occur even when that evil has no bearing on human free will. And if you believe the latter, then you don’t believe in God’s purported omnipotence, omniscience, and omnibenevolence.
[quote]Karado wrote:
Varq typed: “I would save the baby because it is a member of my own species.”
Sans the Coyote situation, if the baby is the size of a Pea in the womb
would you still try to save it from being aborted because it’s still a member
of your ‘own species’?
[/quote]
I’ve just bought a ticket to a fancy fundraising dinner benefiting the local right-to-life group. Draw your own conclusions.
(Claps)…If true, good for you Man, there’s hope for you yet.