Arkansas inflicts child abuse on its school children

[ElishaElijah]

No, it is pretty clear that you are opposed to the very IDEA that god might sanction Lot giving his daughters over much like he sanctions slavery.
Which is what I actually said.

So you go right ahead and beat up on your strawman.

It’s clear God did not sanction Lot giving his daughters to those evil men, otherwise the angels wouldn’t have intervened. When and if you admit that you can clarify the other scripture and will answer that, if not then that’s it.

 

[McBell]

It’s clear God did not sanction Lot giving his daughters to those evil men, otherwise the angels wouldn’t have intervened. When and if you admit that you can clarify the other scripture and will answer that, if not then that’s it.

I have to admit it is most comical watching you chase your tail.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It’s clear God did not sanction Lot giving his daughters to those evil men, otherwise the angels wouldn’t have intervened. When and if you admit that you can clarify the other scripture and will answer that, if not then that’s it.

Sorry, but that is a false dichotomy. As you know the angels would have been S.O.L. if the crowd had iron wheels. Then Lot's action might have been necessary.

What you refuse to see is that God could have approved that Lot was willing to throw out some innocents to defend his angels. If you read the OT will see that God wants people to at least go through the motions.

 

[ElishaElijah]

I have to admit it is most comical watching you chase your tail.

Or you unwilling to admit what that you said that God sanctioned Lot giving his daughters to be raped. If not then you agree with me that God did not sanction Lot. Which is it? Did God sanction that act as righteous or not? Simple to answer

 

[Subduction Zone]

Or you unwilling to admit what that you said that God sanctioned Lot giving his daughters to be raped. If not then you agree with me that God did not sanction Lot. Which is it? Did God sanction that act as righteous or not? Simple to answer

Approved of would have been a better choice in words. Since Lot was considered to be "righteous" it is reasonable to conclude that God approved of Lot's actions.

 

[ElishaElijah]

Approved of would have been a better choice in words. Since Lot was considered to be "righteous" it is reasonable to conclude that God approved of Lot's actions.

Wrong to assume that because someone is righteous in God’s sight that everything they do is approved of God. Not a scriptural principle or view that God has.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Wrong to assume that because someone is righteous in God’s sight that everything they do is approved of God. Not a scriptural principle or view that God has.

Women as property is supported by scripture. You could treat Hebrew women far differently from how you could treat Hebrew men. The rules of slavery supposedly from your God demonstrates this. A Hebrew man could sell his daughter into slavery. At times sex slavery and there was no end to it. He could not sell his sons into slavery. Verse after verse shows that a woman was considered to be property. If a man owns slaves he could give a slave "wife" to a Hebrew male slave. Male Hebrew slaves were the equivalent of indentured servants. But when his term was done the "wife", and any of their children still belonged to the master. If he wanted to stay with his wife and kids he had to volunteer for lifelong slavery. That tells us that even though women were treated as property that there were some decent Hebrews even in those days. And there were fellow Hebrews willing to take advantage of the rules of their God.

 

[McBell]

Or you unwilling to admit what that you said that God sanctioned Lot giving his daughters to be raped. If not then you agree with me that God did not sanction Lot. Which is it? Did God sanction that act as righteous or not? Simple to answer

Still chasing your tail.

And with an almighty holier than thou twist!

 

[ElishaElijah]

Still chasing your tail.

And with an almighty holier than thou twist!

You won’t answer, lol I hear you, I never said, oh maybe I did, let me blame someone.

 

[ecco]

The First was about Lot whom God found to be a righteous person. If your God had said Lot was good sometimes and evil sometimes --- but He didn't. He found Lot's actions righteous!

Because God considered Lot righteous does not mean that when Lot offered his daughters to the perverted men of Sodom, that that act was righteous. Not moving on till you admit that. The angels did what God sanctioned.

Harvey Weinstein was found to have had inappropriate relations with several women. Our legal/moral system did not think he was a righteous person. It put him in jail.

Lot offered his virgin daughters to a mob. Your God found this action in keeping with what a righteous person would do. Your God did not punish Lot. Your God rewarded Lot.

What was it you wanted me to admit?




ETA:
Still no comment on God and Moses ordering the rounding up of all the young virgin daughters of the fallen army and giving them to the victorious soldiers.
Still no comment on God and Moses ordering the killing of the sons wives and mothers of the fallen army's soldiers.

Did you think I would forget?

 

[ElishaElijah]

Harvey Weinstein was found to have had inappropriate relations with several women. Our legal/moral system did not think he was a righteous person. It put him in jail.

Lot offered his virgin daughters to a mob. Your God found this action in keeping with what a righteous person would do. Your God did not punish Lot. Your God rewarded Lot.

What was it you wanted me to admit?




ETA:
Still no comment on God and Moses ordering the rounding up of all the young virgin daughters of the fallen army and giving them to the victorious soldiers.
Still no comment on God and Moses ordering the killing of the sons wives and mothers of the fallen army's soldiers.

Did you think I would forget?

#1217

 

[Subduction Zone]

I was dealing with one example at a time and addressed the first one. When you admit you were wrong about God and He didn’t have anything to do with Lot offering his daughters and that you slandered God by your comments on this situation then I will gladly move on and answer the next one.

That was not an answer to his post. The question is was Lot considered righteous. And the Bible supports that not only was he considered to be righteous, but that act itself would have been seen as righteous by God.

I posted another passage that was almost identical. Except there were no magical angels to step in. The man gave up his concubine to save another. He showed no compassion the next morning after she had been raped to death. His actions were never said not be righteous. In fact the Bible appears to have approved of his actions. It was a bizarre story.

 

[ElishaElijah]

Lot offered his virgin daughters to a mob. Your God found this action in keeping with what a righteous person would do. Your God did not punish Lot. Your God rewarded Lot.

This is a false statement and premise, will explain one more time and then that’s it.
Example: David was a man after God’s own heart yet he committed adultery and murder. According to your thinking, God approved, which He did not.
Lot was considered righteous but to say God approved of Lots decision in this situation is false and proved by the angels saving them.
If you’re going to make a example using Harvey Weinstein then it’s more like the perverted Sodomites and the Hollywood and political enablers

 

[Subduction Zone]

This is a false statement and premise

How is it false? You do not just get to claim that something is false, you must be able to demonstrate that it is false.

 

[ElishaElijah]

How is it false? You do not just get to claim that something is false, you must be able to demonstrate that it is false.

Multiple times and if you still can’t get it then moving on, if you can’t see that you won’t see anything after that and we’re done then, thank-you very much.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Multiple times and if you still can’t get it then moving on, if you can’t see that you won’t see anything after that and we’re done then, thank-you very much.

No, at best you only cherry picked verses from the Bible. That "proof" was refuted when other supplied verses that said the opposite. It is all but impossible to "prove" anything with the Bible since it is a smorgasbord of being on both sides of almost everything:

BibViz Project - Bible Contradictions, Misogyny, Violence, Inaccuracies interactively visualized

 

[Subduction Zone]

Or for an animated version:

 

[ElishaElijah]

No, at best you only cherry picked verses from the Bible. That "proof" was refuted when other supplied verses that said the opposite. It is all but impossible to "prove" anything with the Bible since it is a smorgasbord of being on both sides of almost everything:

BibViz Project - Bible Contradictions, Misogyny, Violence, Inaccuracies interactively visualized

Smorgasborg

No, at best you only cherry picked verses from the Bible. That "proof" was refuted when other supplied verses that said the opposite. It is all but impossible to "prove" anything with the Bible since it is a smorgasbord of being on both sides of almost everything:

BibViz Project - Bible Contradictions, Misogyny, Violence, Inaccuracies interactively visualized

I understand that you’re confused about the Bible and don’t understand it. Without the Spirit you can’t.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Smorgasborg

I understand that you’re confused about the Bible and don’t understand it. Without the Spirit you can’t.

Your lack of the Spirit is not why you are confused.

You cannot afford to understand the Bible. Understanding it would refute your faith.

 

[McBell]

Smorgasborg

I understand that you’re confused about the Bible and don’t understand it. Without the Spirit you can’t.

ROTFLMAO

You claim that "without the Spirit" that we can not understand the Bible and yet here you are .. doing what exactly?
I mean, if there is no way for us to understand what you are talking about, why are you wasting your breath talking about it?