05 Dec 10
1 edit
Originally posted by jaywillThe second thing I consider is that these were not God's crimes, but all of God's acts are righteous.
[b]==================================
But the same charge can be levelled at Christians. It's easy for them to talk about God's love and mercy and sweep the heinous acts of barbarism under the carpet.
Just as Hitchens may focus on the negative aspects of Gods character in the Bible and sweep aside the love and mercy, Christians do the exact opposi may be that then the genocide of man against man is also justified, ie the Holocaust.[/b]
Righteous, i've heard that word used before in this context. Here's the dictionary definition of 'righteous' -
1. (of a person or conduct) Morally right or justifiable; virtuous.
2. Perfectly wonderful; fine and genuine.
I can't see how condemning people to death can be called righteous, and not just any old death but an agonising death. Condemning someone to a slow agonising painful death is not righteous, it's anything but that, it's henious.
It's interesting to note that the Iraninan regime deals with adulterers the same way your God specified, by being stoned to death. I don't think you'd call the Iranian regime 'righteous' would you?
Relatively speaking the degrees of punishment must reveal degrees of danger to the whole of human society.
Which brings me to my next point. Capital punishment does not act as a deterrent, that's a fact. If your God is omnipotent and omniscient as is claimed then he would have known this, the sentencing to death of people was nothing more than a fruitless exercise then.
So the question for me is why did your God sentence people to brutal deaths whilst knowing that the punishment wasn't going to have any affect on the crimes?
05 Dec 10
Originally posted by KellyJayI'm not sure what you're talking about, but i think you have the wrong end of the stick Kelly.
Why do you think Christians sweep heinous acts of barbarism under the carpet?
Seriously, people (all of us) according to Christianity are sinners by nature so
there are going to be those making claims about God using Jesus' name and not
that are going to be acting as sinners act with heinous acts of barbarism and so
on. That is human nature simply playi ...[text shortened]... than that, I'd have to ask you why in the
world would you think it would be otherwise?
Kelly
The 'henious acts of barbarism' i'm referring to are the punishments dished out by your Christian God in the OT. ie stoning and burning to death.
05 Dec 10
Originally posted by Proper KnobWell, God appoints all death, there is a time appointed for each of us to die it is
I'm not sure what you're talking about, but i think you have the wrong end of the stick Kelly.
The 'henious acts of barbarism' i'm referring to are the punishments dished out by your Christian God in the OT. ie stoning and burning to death.
the natural order of things. So you find that wrong?
Kelly
06 Dec 10
9 edits
Originally posted by Proper Knob===================================
[b]The second thing I consider is that these were not God's crimes, but all of God's acts are righteous.
Righteous, i've heard that word used before in this context. Here's the dictionary definition of 'righteous' -
1. (of a person or conduct) Morally right or justifiable; virtuous.
2. Perfectly wonderful; fine and genuine.
hilst knowing that the punishment wasn't going to have any affect on the crimes?[/b]
Righteous, i've heard that word used before in this context. Here's the dictionary definition of 'righteous' -
======================================
If you are an atheist then you are hard pressed to explain by what moral law you discriminate between righteous and unrighteous.
You have to subconsciously adopt a Judeo / Christian world view in order to assume leverage to scold God as being unrighteous.
Secondly, you have no way of knowing how slow or quick the execution of those under Joshua's conquest was in most cases.
It is quite possible that beside the anxiety of knowing they were about to die, most possibly never knew what hit them.
The Israelite kings had a reputation of being "merciful" kings as I pointed out. (See 1 Kings 20:31)
=======================
I can't see how condemning people to death can be called righteous, and not just any old death but an agonising death. Condemning someone to a slow agonising painful death is not righteous, it's anything but that, it's henious.
============================
You run with that. I will run with God being righteous.
For certain the full truth we will both know someday.
But for God to show His hatred of sin in the Old Testament furnishes a more impressive backround upon which I can appreciate that in the eternal scheme of things, Christ died a substitionary torment of death on behalf of all people for all time.
The hatred and judgment for temporal sins causes the atoning redemptive death of the Son of God for all sinners to be all the more impressive. Had the Old Testament revealed a laxed tolerant attitude of God towards iniquity then I would not think God giving His Son to save us was such a big deal.
===========================
It's interesting to note that the Iraninan regime deals with adulterers the same way your God specified, by being stoned to death. I don't think you'd call the Iranian regime 'righteous' would you?
============================
For instances of the God's present attitude on stoning women I turn to the Gospel of John chapter 8. There Jesus convicted the consciences of the stoners by telling them "He who is without sin among you, let him cast the first stone."
So while you consult with Iranian news to ascertain God's final word on stoning women, I rather consult the New Testament and see how Jesus Christ handled the matter.
==========================
Relatively speaking the degrees of punishment must reveal degrees of danger to the whole of human society.
Which brings me to my next point. Capital punishment does not act as a deterrent, that's a fact. If your God is omnipotent and omniscient as is claimed then he would have known this, the sentencing to death of people was nothing more than a fruitless exercise then.
==================================
I don't think anything God does is "fruitless".
I think the musings of athiests like yourself are pretty fruitless.
==========================
So the question for me is why did your God sentence people to brutal deaths whilst knowing that the punishment wasn't going to have any affect on the crimes?
=============================
The question I have is of your mind is nothing more then the product of random interactions of molecules with no purpose, a grand accident, what ground do you claim to make any judgement at all about the righteousness or unrighteousness of an act.
Life under your system is meaningless and accidental. And "good" or "evil" under your philosophy is just an illusion caused by the random colliding of energy and matter with no purpose, goal, or plan.
06 Dec 10
1 edit
Originally posted by jaywillWhilst i formulate a response to your posts, here's a couple of videos of someone being stoned to death. Once you've watched them, explain to me how that is 'righteous'.
[b]===================================
Righteous, i've heard that word used before in this context. Here's the dictionary definition of 'righteous' -
======================================
If you are an atheist then you are hard pressed to explain by what moral law you discriminate between righteous and unrighteous.
You have to subcons andom colliding of energy and matter with no purpose, goal, or plan.[/b]
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f7f_1285099569
Be warned, not for the squeamish.