Judges 1
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
20-11-2015, 09:07 PM
RE: Judges 1
(20-11-2015 07:26 PM)jason_delisle Wrote:  
(20-11-2015 07:17 PM)jennybee Wrote:  That's not what it says in the passage. It was ordered by God.

2 Samuel 12:11 "Thus saith the LORD, Behold, I will raise up evil against thee out of thine own house, and I will take thy wives before thine eyes, and give them unto thy neighbour, and he shall lie with thy wives in the sight of this sun."
You are right. I have to admit that in this particular case it was God's wrath. I was incorrect.

So think about that. God's wrath is at David: but the women (presumably not involved at least in the adultery) and (innocent) child pay the ultimate price. They DIE or are TORTURED, for David's sins, because God is ANGRY.

Now, I'm a parent, and I know you are, too. I get angry with my kid. My kid can be incredibly boneheaded. Know what? I recognize my anger as a personal flaw and NOT helpful in correcting my kid's problems, so I try (a lot harder than God seems to) to avoid acting out of anger. Guess what: I get way, way better results in training my kid than God has in training humanity. My kid is a great person (born that way, I think), and I've helped shape him in that direction, by using methods that the Bible god has seemingly not considered.

Why do you find this god worthy of worship? The moral position is to reject the god of the Bible. Fortunately, the intellectual position is to understand that the god of the Bible is imaginary, although understandable, and that religion addresses existential and moral questions to which there are better answers. Those questions are worthy and important for us as humans, but we have much better answers than the Bible provides.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like julep's post
20-11-2015, 09:09 PM
RE: Judges 1
(20-11-2015 05:17 PM)jason_delisle Wrote:  
(20-11-2015 04:54 PM)Chas Wrote:  Because it's not loving. This is not a difficult concept, unless you jettison reason.
If a parent disciplines their child are they not showing love even though the child is suffering because of it?

Second, the use of 2 samuel 11 and 12 was taken out of context.

Loving parents don't kill or rape their children. If they do, we call them monsters.

You only make yourself look like a brainwashed moron defending that behavior.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-11-2015, 09:16 PM
RE: Judges 1
(20-11-2015 07:07 PM)jason_delisle Wrote:  
(20-11-2015 06:55 PM)jennybee Wrote:  No this is what it would be like:

Parent: Don't play with fire or you will get burned.

Child plays with fire anyway.

Parent gets pissed and lights child's friend on fire to teach child playing with fire a lesson.
I don't agree. I look at God to be more of a very strict yet loving parent who believes in the "school of hard knocks". Rather a vengeful psychopath.

I'll take "vengeful psychopath" for $200, Alex. Drinking Beverage

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
20-11-2015, 09:23 PM
RE: Judges 1
(20-11-2015 07:09 PM)jason_delisle Wrote:  In the end it really doesn't matter what my views on the subject is. I don't think anyone here really believes any of it ever really happened anyway. So why explain.

Because people like you try to defend monstrous behavior from a book of tales about a being for whom there is no evidence.

The morality portrayed is warped and evil. Beliefs such as that fly planes into buildings, murders hundreds in Paris, burns people at the stake. Anyone who believes those horseshit stories is capable of believing all sorts of lies.

That is dangerous to everyone else. Drinking Beverage

If you can't rationally explain why you believe that shit, then maybe it's not worthy of belief.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
20-11-2015, 09:27 PM
RE: Judges 1
(20-11-2015 07:12 PM)jason_delisle Wrote:  
(20-11-2015 07:08 PM)epronovost Wrote:  In your example, it's not your doing but it’s your responsibility if your child gets hurt while you could have stopped it and explained him in a better fashion. If you suspect that your child is going to do something dangerously stupid after you told not to do it, it’s you responsibility to explain him in a better fashion. There is no right to be willfully incompetent when you have a positon of authority. God, being the supreme authority, is supremely responsible and is stuck with a Nirvana argument, unlike the rest of us, concerning his actions.
Ok. So let's just say I told you not to play with the fire or else you will get burned. Am I responsible if you do? Did I cause you to get burned because you didn't listen to me?

If you are a parent? Yes. Your job is to educate and protect your children, not watch them walk into danger and do fuck all.

Do you even read the crap you write? Consider

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
20-11-2015, 09:44 PM (This post was last modified: 20-11-2015 09:48 PM by The Organic Chemist.)
RE: Judges 1
(20-11-2015 04:44 PM)jason_delisle Wrote:  
(20-11-2015 02:23 PM)jennybee Wrote:  Why shouldn't he have David's wives raped and his baby killed for David's sin?? You're kidding right? You can't call yourself "just" and "loving" and then do that. That is not just or loving.
Have you ever read 2 Samuel 11 and 12?
If so, you may want to reread it.

You must be joking. You refer to a story where David screws a married lady, has her husband killed, and then god kills the child for what they did. How monstorous. What kind of a sick POS kills a kid for what their parents did? Just so we are clear:

Quote:After this, the Lord afflicted the child that Uriah’s wife had born to David, and the child[j] became very ill. 16 David begged God on behalf of the youngster. He[k] fasted, went inside, and spent the night lying on the ground. 17 His closest advisors at the palace[l] got up, remained with him, and tried to help him get up from the ground, but he would not do so. He also wouldn’t eat with them.
18 A week later, the child died, and David’s staff was afraid to tell him that the child had died. They were telling themselves, “Look, when the child was still alive, we talked to him but he wouldn’t listen to what we said. Now what kind of trouble will he bring on himself if we tell him that the child has died?”
2 Samuel 12.

Did you read that? GOD KILLED A CHILD. He did so not because of anything the child had done, but what the parents did. This is the stuff that makes me greatful that your god is non extstent. He is pure evil and despicable if these stories are indeed true. Are you a parent? If so, how can you possibly say that your morality derives from such a hideous idea where you could look at your child and think that it is ok for it to die for something you did?

"If we are honest—and scientists have to be—we must admit that religion is a jumble of false assertions, with no basis in reality.
The very idea of God is a product of the human imagination."
- Paul Dirac
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like The Organic Chemist's post
20-11-2015, 09:50 PM
RE: Judges 1
(20-11-2015 06:22 PM)jason_delisle Wrote:  
(20-11-2015 06:14 PM)Clockwork Wrote:  Yeah but... Feels like the baby wasn't of value (which it doesn't according to Leviticus) and Bathsheba was just a tasty morsel for him. It's like David mattered but they didn't.
Where does it say in Leviticus that babies don't have value? Second, Bathsheba was just as guilty.
Leviticus 27:6 (valuation). And in Numbers 3:15-16 says don't count kids under 1 month.

And why was David given a chance to repent and not her?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Clockwork's post
20-11-2015, 09:54 PM
RE: Judges 1
(20-11-2015 07:09 PM)jason_delisle Wrote:  In the end it really doesn't matter what my views on the subject is. I don't think anyone here really believes any of it ever really happened anyway. So why explain.
Can't speak for anyone else, but I just want your take on it. No, I don't think the Bible is actual history. I have no ulterior motives. Just discussion with a theist that won't give me "you don't want to know." That is Alla's job. Smile
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Clockwork's post
20-11-2015, 11:09 PM
RE: Judges 1
(20-11-2015 07:09 PM)jason_delisle Wrote:  In the end it really doesn't matter what my views on the subject is. I don't think anyone here really believes any of it ever really happened anyway. So why explain.

It does matter because people use these tales and examples to dictate policy home and abroad. The entirety of the problems in Israel are because different people think they have a divine claim to a plot of land.

"If we are honest—and scientists have to be—we must admit that religion is a jumble of false assertions, with no basis in reality.
The very idea of God is a product of the human imagination."
- Paul Dirac
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like The Organic Chemist's post
21-11-2015, 06:10 AM
RE: Judges 1
(20-11-2015 09:00 PM)jason_delisle Wrote:  
(20-11-2015 08:31 PM)epronovost Wrote:  Depends. Have you done all in your power to explain me the danger and the stupidity of my actions? Have you made use of different techniques when you realised I wasn't understanding or listenning? Were you convinced I would never do it? Could you have stopped me in a more direct fashion without putting yourself (or me) at risk of suffering equal or even superior problems? Were you there when the evenement happenned? Were you suppose to take care of me? Are you in a situation of much greater authority? Who and what are you supposed to be? A friend, a father, a protector, a lover, a teacher an ennemy, a passerby? Depending on your answers to those questions, the situation will be judged differently. In most cases, its safe to assume that we are both guilty. My punishment was to be burned. What's going to be yours?

PS: Need I remind you that humans cannot be hold to be perfect. Doing otherwise would be commiting a Nirvana fallacy. If God is perfect, then he must be all the time. Thus, your exemple commits the fallacy of false equivocation and is a strawman. God has to be much better in all aspect than a human. We must hold him to higher standards of excellence and morality. Not lower and then finding excuses for him to justify his weaknesses. Like Descartes said and Spiderman popularise:«With great powers, come great responsabilities».
Can you please explain this "Nirvana fallacy "? I an not familiar with it.

The Nirvana fallacy is the idea that a solution is only acceptable if it solves completely and perfectly the issue (AKA the perfect solution). It’s a fallacy to demand this from any human since we aren't perfect and are bound by our circumstances so expecting humans to find perfect solution all the time is ridiculous. A God, being for all intent and purpose perfect and bound by no circumstances, can, and thus should, be expected to find perfect solutions all the time. If you claim to be omnipotent and omniscient and produce a less than perfect solution to a problem than you are by definition either lazy, negligent or callous.

Your comparison is a strawman fallacy because you are comparing human capacities to god-like capacities and expect us to accord it the same level of lenience when it comes to failure. Basically you are comparing apple with oranges.

Freedom is servitude to justice and intellectual honesty.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes epronovost's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: