• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Good Bad & Ugly

nPeace

Veteran Member
I understand how you might feel. But you do realize, of course, that many nations, for the sake of discussion, have killed their enemy, right? And this,of course, would relate to man, woman, child. Oxen, etc. May I ask you how you feel about that?
Hey. Nice to see you again.
I'm not jumping in your conversation to push you out or anything. Feel free to continue.

I had asked @SeekingAllTruth to pose their question here, since I believe this is not their only objection, and I thought this would be the ideal thread for them.

Do you mind if I go ahead, or would you like me to let you continue your train of thought. I could wait, a few posts, no problem. :)
 

SeekingAllTruth

Well-Known Member
Seems that way doesn't it.
Do you know why the person is slaughtering the animals?
Would it be fair to say you jumped to a conclusion without having all the facts, based on how you feel - your emotions?
Not in this case. if one animal were threatening his life, then sure, kill it. But to shoot animals at random for the pure pleasure of it? Nope.
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
Not in this case. if one animal were threatening his life, then sure, kill it. But to shoot animals at random for the pure pleasure of it? Nope.
Would it be fair to say you jumped to another conclusion, not having the facts, but now making it a biased opinion, since you have no evidence that the reason is because the animals were trying to kill him?
You don't know the case here, do you?
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
I expect men to kill each other. I don't expect a god to advocate wholesale slaughter of every living thing. But I can believe Yahweh would do this and that leads to my real statement:

The opinion of many scholars: Yahweh is the mythical god of the early Israelis in the same way Zeus is the mythical god of the early Greeks. No difference. Yahweh possesses these traits of ordering murders because he was imbued with these murderous impulses by the men who possessed these traits who created the portrait of Yahweh when they wrote the Old Testament, drawing on their own murderous impulses. You are aware, I hope, that the Hebrews stole Yahweh from the Canaanites when the Hebrews lived among them in Canaan and then split off. The Exodus is pure myth--every scholar outside Christianity acknowledges this fact.

Israel’s Edomite neighbors worshiped Yahweh as a god of wars and storms. Yahweh arrived in Canaan, where the Israelites lived, brought by a group of his nomadic worshipers.

How YHWH Became God

Why the Exodus Story Has Value Despite Being Complete Myth

Why the Exodus Story Has Value Despite Being Complete Myth
When people kill one another, don't they become lilke god(s), making life and death decisions?
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Hey. Nice to see you again.
I'm not jumping in your conversation to push you out or anything. Feel free to continue.

I had asked @SeekingAllTruth to pose their question here, since I believe this is not their only objection, and I thought this would be the ideal thread for them.

Do you mind if I go ahead, or would you like me to let you continue your train of thought. I could wait, a few posts, no problem. :)
I find the reasoning very interesting, and before I read this post I did say more about that. So I'll be quiet for a while. :) :)
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
I find the reasoning very interesting, and before I read this post I did say more about that. So I'll be quiet for a while. :) :)
Okay thanks. I'll be sure to look for an opening to let you in. We can work together. No problem. :)
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
When people kill one another, don't they become lilke god(s), making life and death decisions?
That's actually very good!
The man slaughtering the animals is making a life and death decision, and acting as a god. Wow! I'm impressed!
t2007.gif

I'm tempted to give you the reigns here.
In fact, after my next post, you go ahead, and I'll listen.
I'll jump in if you miss anything. :)
 

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
The good: Abraham Lincoln by candlelight.

The good: A long time ago it was alone in teaching people how to read.

The good: It encourages reading.

The good: It's a very good mystery story.

The good: It has brought people together.
 

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
The bad: Badly translated.

The bad: People use it for their own power.

The bad: It has caused violence (not its fault, but it did).
 

We Never Know

No Slack
What specifically, if anything, do you find good
t2007.gif
, bad
s0608.gif
, ugly
s0634.gif
, about the Bible?
I'll start... Love.


In the Tanakh we find these commands...
(Leviticus 19:18) . . .You must not take vengeance nor hold a grudge against the sons of your people, and you must love your fellow man as yourself. I am Jehovah.
(Proverbs 25:21, 22) 21 If your enemy is hungry, give him bread to eat; If he is thirsty, give him water to drink, 22 For you will be heaping burning coals on his head, And Jehovah will reward you.

What does that mean though... What does it mean to love your fellowman?
Does it mean love him to have the freedom to indiscriminately murder?
For example, if your neighbor seeks to take an axe to your head, or he takes an axe to another's head, does loving one's neighbor mean that you should pat him on the back, and say, "I love you. Do what you want." Or should we go bring a glass of water, and say, "Here ... Drink this."?

I would say, trying to reason with someone, in the hope that they do not carry out their murderous intent, is a good thing, but is there a reasonable balance, where love for one's fellowman is concerned?
I would say, understanding what love is, can give us the correct answer.

From the Bible, love is described, not as an emotion, but an action.
At 1 Corinthians 13:4-7, it says that love is patient and kind, but it also says, love does not rejoice over unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth.
It is clear that there is a balance, where love requires justice - for the murdered, and their families, the raped victim, and their family, the mugged old lady, and her family, etc.

So if your neighbor takes an axe to someone's head, and seeks to take off your head, love would cause you to act justly.
t1301.gif

This is what God's law in the Tanakh required. (Numbers 35:15-34)

To me, this is a very good thing about the Bible.
The Bible strongly recommends... in fact, commands love, and love is closely connected to justice, and righteousness.
So that God's love move him to act justly against unrighteousness.
Of Jesus, the scriptures say, "You loved righteousness, and you hated lawlessness." (Hebrews 1:9)
There is reasonable balance.

The evidence that God is love, and how he displayed that quality, in a balanced way, is one very good thing about the Bible. (1 John 4:8)

Are there other good things about the Bible?
Are there bad, and ugly things?
What specific things can you share.

They all exist and its a good movie :)
 

SeekingAllTruth

Well-Known Member
Would it be fair to say you jumped to another conclusion, not having the facts, but now making it a biased opinion, since you have no evidence that the reason is because the animals were trying to kill him?
You don't know the case here, do you?
You're asking me to believe it's possible all the animals were conspiring to kill him????????
1j2kh57pkm9sl.png
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
You're asking me to believe it's possible all the animals were conspiring to kill him????????
1j2kh57pkm9sl.png
:facepalm: Wow. More assumptions. When will it end. :facepalm:
I notice you didn't answer the question, but I understand. ;)

This certainly is a good demonstration of how people use limited wisdom to accuse persons who know more than they do.
Perhaps you have never heard of diseased animals, and how they pose a threat to human and animal life.
If you knew the alleged animals allegedly responsible for allegedly spreading the Corona virus, would you have "put them down"?

Those with knowledge and understanding of the seriousness of the situation, certainly do.
To slaughter on meat healthy pets are allowed. Killing Animals suffering from and suspicious of disease or contagious diseases threatened death (severe injuries, fractures, burns and other damage) is allowed in cases stipulated by the relevant

During an outbreak of infectious disease, large-scale depopulation of livestock may be necessary to curb further spread of the pathogen and prevent associated welfare problems arising. The health and welfare of infected or at-risk animals is a primary concern.

The man killing the annuals knows more than the observer, passing by and criticizing him.
While the critic thinks all manner of ill about the "killer", the "killer" knows that the critic is just ignorant, and not showing himself very wise as to not inquire as to why, but just jump to conclusion, and take a biased stand, or position, based purely on opinion.

With me so far?
@YoursTrue wants to chime in, so I will stay quiet for a while. :)
 
Last edited:

epronovost

Well-Known Member
@nPeace

Are to saying that infants, elderly people, children and pregnant women were putting the Israelite army in a grave and imminent threat of death after the military defending them had been vanquished? If you are not attempting to draw such comparison with your animal extermination example, then I suggest you stop makin such dubious comparison and engage with the charges. You do not need perfect knowledge of a situation to gage the morality of an egreiously violent action like a genocide.
 

SeekingAllTruth

Well-Known Member
:facepalm: Wow. More assumptions. When will it end. :facepalm:
I notice you didn't answer the question, but I understand. ;)

This certainly is a good demonstration of how people use limited wisdom to accuse persons who know more than they do.
Perhaps you have never heard of diseased animals, and how they pose a threat to human and animal life.
If you knew the alleged animals allegedly responsible for allegedly spreading the Corona virus, would you have "put them down"?

Those with knowledge and understanding of the seriousness of the situation, certainly do.
To slaughter on meat healthy pets are allowed. Killing Animals suffering from and suspicious of disease or contagious diseases threatened death (severe injuries, fractures, burns and other damage) is allowed in cases stipulated by the relevant

During an outbreak of infectious disease, large-scale depopulation of livestock may be necessary to curb further spread of the pathogen and prevent associated welfare problems arising. The health and welfare of infected or at-risk animals is a primary concern.

The man killing the annuals knows more than the observer, passing by and criticizing him.
While the critic thinks all manner of ill about the "killer", the "killer" knows that the critic is just ignorant, and not showing himself very wise as to not inquire as to why, but just jump to conclusion, and take a biased stand, or position, based purely on opinion.

With me so far?
@YoursTrue wants to chime in, so I will stay quiet for a while. :)
Truth is, I thought of the diseased animal slaughter scenario you mention while I was writing. That's why I qualified it with the man smiling as he slaughtered them. But I think we should just cut to the chase. You tell me why you think God was justified to kill innocent babies. I can anticipate you're going to say, "Maybe they were going to grow up to be idolaters and sinners and so yahweh just got rid of everyone." maybe you're going to say, "The babies were tainted with the sin of their parents to the 3rd generation" or something similar. Please elucidate why you believe yahweh was justified.
 
Top