Excuses, excuses

[Thief]

Not only that? I'd be ready to spit in this beast's egomaniac face.

If god was willing to offer an apology? I may.... MAY... listen.

I may have to step back......a little bit further

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

When did God demand the raping of anyone let alone slaves?.

Classic: this atheist knows the bible better than one of it's worshipers.

God did command ancient Israel to destroy a people that had been trying to destroy Israel for centuries..

That's not what the story says-- in fact, Israel was moving into their territory, and was a foriegn invader...

Classic: this atheist knows the bible better than one of it's worshipers.

The ancient world was one that included slavery..

It also was one of eating pigs, wearing cotton and linen blends, and other things god wasn't afraid of forbidding...

... and shellfish. Many nations survived by eating shellfish.

But god was afraid to forbid owning people....

What would you have ancient Israel do? Release prisoners so they could attack them again or kill them all?.

How about Israel NOT invading the homeland of an indigenous people?

God was not afraid of the Tower or anything else..

False. God feared the tower builders would get into heaven, a without brutal murder of a sacrificial scape-goat first.

The people were building the thing in order to wage war on God..

Nope. That's not what the story says:

Classic: this atheist knows the bible better than one of it's worshipers.

He gave them time to come to their senses and when they didn't he separated them.

LOL!

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

See? Was that so difficult? But seriously, here’s the thing:

We have to weigh the texts. We have to weigh them against each other, against our own morality, against reason, and against other things. .

So you freely admit your morality comes NOT from the immoral bible?

Gotcha: you'll be an atheist yet.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

This isn’t fiction. It’s theology. You’ve gotta get out of your head the idea that this stuff actually happened in history.

Not to worry: You keep forgetting I'm an unbeliever. I do not think a single thing in the bible actually happened.

Except by sheer, random accident.

My hypothesis is that the bible was deliberately fabricated by cynical men, to create a system of control, over the masses. Constantine and his "expert" committee.

And then? They used this newly fabricated myth, and with the point of swords, forced people to comply-- or die.

Many chose death, interestingly enough....

 

[sojourner]

Moral depravity. You think nothing is wrong with owning people.

Of course, but as I said before, some things just don’t translate to our culture.

 

[sojourner]

So you freely admit your morality comes NOT from the immoral bible?

Gotcha: you'll be an atheist yet.

Not entirely, no. But remember: the Bible is not the whole of the religion. Irenaeus said in the second century that the faith stands upon the scriptures, the apostles’ teaching, and the teachings of their successors.

 

[sojourner]

Not to worry: You keep forgetting I'm an unbeliever. I do not think a single thing in the bible actually happened.

Except by sheer, random accident.

My hypothesis is that the bible was deliberately fabricated by cynical men, to create a system of control, over the masses. Constantine and his "expert" committee.

And then? They used this newly fabricated myth, and with the point of swords, forced people to comply-- or die.

Many chose death, interestingly enough....

That’s a pessimistic view — and one that doesn’t hold up, I’m afraid.

 

[Thief]

And then? They used this newly fabricated myth, and with the point of swords, forced people to comply-- or die.

that might be Moses?

 

[dybmh]

Bible is not the whole of the religion.

Bingo!

 

[Spartan]

If the Biblical god character exists and is as evil as that book depicts as being , why do some believers make excuses for its disgusting behaviour?

Here, let me educate you:

"Whenever a person raises the problem of evil, they are also positing the existence of good. When you say something is evil you assume something is good. If you assume there’s such a thing as good, you assume there’s such a thing as a moral law on the basis of which to differentiate between good and evil. If you assume there’s such a thing as a moral law, you must posit a moral law giver, because if there’s not a moral law giver, there’s no moral law. If there’s no moral law, there’s no good. If there’s no good, there’s no evil. So what is their question?" - Ravi Zacharias

"In secularism, if it leads to a society without shame, it will not survive." - Ravi Zacharias

Richard Dawkins vs. Ravi Zacharias

Dawkins: “What do I think about God? The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomanical, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.” – Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion

Ravi Zacharias responds: “Now, he (Dawkins) just finished telling us God’s a fictional character! That’s half of the point. The other half of the point is what he thinks about humanity. He goes on to say that basically, he believes in the goodness of humanity without God watching over. Either I’m confused or he is. If God doesn’t exist and all these descriptions apply, then who did these things? Who wrote the Old Testament if God didn’t inspire the words? That would be his answer. And who ordered all these things? That would be humanity. Why are you (Dawkins) so positive about humanity and so down on God when it was humanity who manufactured the God that you deny?” And who killed all those people throughout history – hundreds of millions of them, if God is fictional? It was humanity. And you – Dawkins – believe humanity is ‘good’! Atheists….

 

[JJ50]

Here, let me educate you:

"Whenever a person raises the problem of evil, they are also positing the existence of good. When you say something is evil you assume something is good. If you assume there’s such a thing as good, you assume there’s such a thing as a moral law on the basis of which to differentiate between good and evil. If you assume there’s such a thing as a moral law, you must posit a moral law giver, because if there’s not a moral law giver, there’s no moral law. If there’s no moral law, there’s no good. If there’s no good, there’s no evil. So what is their question?" - Ravi Zacharias

"In secularism, if it leads to a society without shame, it will not survive." - Ravi Zacharias

Richard Dawkins vs. Ravi Zacharias

Dawkins: “What do I think about God? The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomanical, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.” – Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion

Ravi Zacharias responds: “Now, he (Dawkins) just finished telling us God’s a fictional character! That’s half of the point. The other half of the point is what he thinks about humanity. He goes on to say that basically, he believes in the goodness of humanity without God watching over. Either I’m confused or he is. If God doesn’t exist and all these descriptions apply, then who did these things? Who wrote the Old Testament if God didn’t inspire the words? That would be his answer. And who ordered all these things? That would be humanity. Why are you (Dawkins) so positive about humanity and so down on God when it was humanity who manufactured the God that you deny?” And who killed all those people throughout history – hundreds of millions of them, if God is fictional? It was humanity. And you – Dawkins – believe humanity is ‘good’! Atheists….

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Have you actually read what the Bible

Yes. From cover to cover.

Do you also understand that most aspects of the Law of Moses applied only to ancient Israel and to no other person or people?

Which matters not at all in terms of how immoral that law is.

God was very strict with ancient Israel

And yet he allows them to engage in slavery and even regulates the practice.

This was their desire. He "specifically singled out" sin, not just homosexuality.

But slavery is a-okay.

Rape and adultery (other sexual sins) were also punished with death.

No. The punishment for a rapist if both are single was that he was forced to marry his victim.


If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days

Sin does more harm than death.

Wow.....
Death is the ultimate "harm", Einstein.
The most severest of harm you can inflict on someone, is literally killing them.

If you disagree with that, then I have no idea what you mean when you use the word "harm".

No on in ancient Israel was executed for having a same-sex attraction, but for committing sexual sin.
Most sexual sins were were punishable with death.

And you consider that just / moral?
Today, we call that crimes against humanity....

Only to the ignorant.

No. Instead, to those who actually have a moral compass...

However, I am grateful that I was not an ancient Israelite.

Because you realise how brutally immoral it all was.
It's the same reason that you are grateful that you weren't born in North Korea.

I am grateful for the Lord Jesus Christ and His mercy.

What mercy?

 

[JJ50]

Yes. From cover to cover.


Which matters not at all in terms of how immoral that law is.


And yet he allows them to engage in slavery and even regulates the practice.



But slavery is a-okay.



No. The punishment for a rapist if both are single was that he was forced to marry his victim.


If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days




Wow.....
Death is the ultimate "harm", Einstein.
The most severest of harm you can inflict on someone, is literally killing them.

If you disagree with that, then I have no idea what you mean when you use the word "harm".



And you consider that just / moral?
Today, we call that crimes against humanity....



No. Instead, to those who actually have a moral compass...



Because you realise how brutally immoral it all was.
It's the same reason that you are grateful that you weren't born in North Korea.



What mercy?

Excellent post.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Do you know who the Amalekites were?

Humans.

Do you not know that they had been fighting to destroy the people of Israel ever since the days of Moses?
Israel had continually beaten back the Amalekites for centuries, but they kept coming back.
You don't believe that Israel had a right to self-preservation?

Right, right...
It was out of "self-preservation" that they had to kill infants, sucklings, cattle, women, the elderly,...
Except the virgin girls off course. Out of "self-preservation", those just had to be captured and taken home as sexslaves.

Yep, makes perfect sense!

So loving. So just. So mercifull.





Imagine Israel invading Iran and executing everybody, including infants and sucklings, and enslaving 9-year old virgins and then them defending their behaviour by saying it's "self defense".

To quote the thread title: "Excuses, excuses"

Give me break.... There is NO context in which it is just or moral to go in such infantacidal / genocidal killing sprees. NO context at all. Especially not if you are an all-powerfull, all-knowing god. Surely you'ld find more humane solutions if needed.

But this dude clearly isn't humane or moral. It's vindictive immoral dictator, worse then Kim Jong Un.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

No, I’m simply insisting that you be specific in your arguments, instead of indiscriminately throwing claims around that either aren’t true or misrepresent what the text actually means.

Another one who's presence and posts in this specific thread are quite ironic

 

[LightofTruth]

[

Isn't it at least a little arrogant? Do you go around telling your wife, your children, your parents, or your friends that "YOU MUST LOVE ME."? Do you do that? No? Why not? Isn't that what a "perfect" being does? Well? By your estimation - isn't it?

Ever heard of wedding vows?

"I, ___, take thee, ___, to be my wedded husband/wife, to have and to hold, from this day forward, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish, till death do us part,

 

[JJ50]

Ever heard of wedding vows?

"I, ___, take thee, ___, to be my wedded husband/wife, to have and to hold, from this day forward, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish, till death do us part,

Not a sensible vow, if a marriage goes wrong and there is no fixing it, the couple should divorce. I remember begging my 'born again' Christian parents to divorce. They never got on and their rows, didn't do their children any good at all.

 

[LightofTruth]

Not a sensible vow, if a marriage goes wrong and there is no fixing it, the couple should divorce. I remember begging my 'born again' Christian parents to divorce. They never got on and their rows, didn't do their children any good at all.

Since "born again" means to be raised from the dead they would not have been married.

 

[JJ50]

Since "born again" means to be raised from the dead they would not have been married.

Of course they were married, that is a silly thing to say!

 

[LightofTruth]

Of course they were married, that is a silly thing to say!

Humans break promises, God doesn't.