Faith and Reason. My thoughts on God, science and the world

[Retro Rob]

What an intriguing (and scary) look into the mind of religious extremists.

I just want to know how you arrive at the conclusion of murder, which in the real world, is backed by evidence showing intent.

Call me extreme for simply asking for you to support your argument.

 

[WilliamM2]

Explain how its murder.

Murder is determined by intent, so how can you judge Gods intent?

Secondly, he has the right to set parameters and determine what's offense is punishable by death.

While I appreciate threads like this, it seems as if God doesn't fit the mode of an idealistic, "back-patting" sin allowing, permissive diety people think he should be. At the same time, we have standards as a groups and individually, and there are things we simply won't accept. Yet God set certain standards, and says "don't do XYz and you'll get a promise land, be in good health, and have my protection", and on he flip-side, "this is said punishment for doing XYZ" and its murder when you break the law?

How is that? Or are you gonna find another "he killed kids" passage?

Since he knew all along that they would disobey him, it was premeditated murder.

Nothing to worry about though, since they are just stories created to make believers by using fear.

 

[Retro Rob]

Since he knew all along that they would disobey him, it was premeditated murder.

Nothing to worry about though, since they are just stories created to make believers by using fear.

Promising someone good health, a plentiful promise land, is using fear?

 

[jackstar7]

I just want to know how you arrive at the conclusion of murder, which in the real world, is backed by evidence showing intent.

Call me extreme for simply asking for you to support your argument.

You supported it. God told them what he was going to do. So not only does his omniscience (if believed) make everything pre-meditated, but he threatened them first.

But you seem to start from the notion that god cannot be judged. I'm presuming that is due to its infinite and unknowable nature. That is circular, because it is only believed to be infinite and unknowable because of the book you say was inspired by it, or perhaps some personal experience that cannot be reproduced or even explained.

Who are we NOT to judge a god?

And again, he ordered his people to kill children. Your omnipotent god that could have just caused weather (something he's demonstrated previously) to push the offending people far away (to protect his followers), instead opts to have them killed by said followers, making the people he "loves" break his own rules.

You can cite his other works that you find more generous and loving, but it doesn't erase the horrors.

 

[busydude]

Then why do so many people get convicted for crimes despite "God told me to do this."

 

[Retro Rob]

You supported it. God told them what he was going to do. So not only does his omniscience (if believed) make everything pre-meditated, but he threatened them first.

But you seem to start from the notion that god cannot be judged. I'm presuming that is due to its infinite and unknowable nature. That is circular, because it is only believed to be infinite and unknowable because of the book you say was inspired by it, or perhaps some personal experience that cannot be reproduced or even explained.

Who are we NOT to judge a god?

And again, he ordered his people to kill children. Your omnipotent god that could have just caused weather (something he's demonstrated previously) to push the offending people far away (to protect his followers), instead opts to have them killed by said followers, making the people he "loves" break his own rules.

You can cite his other works that you find more generous and loving, but it doesn't erase the horrors.

You have a right to your view, but again, I brought up the other examples not to erase "horrors", but to show this hateful God helps people, particularly people like Paul, who was a former killer of Chrstians, for instance, before his conversion.

If anything, this tells me God has a way a judging people, because what they do on the outside isn't indicative of a person's heart condition necessarily. You'd think he'd kill people who kill his people, but this obviously isn't the case all the time.

You can judge God, like you can judge me if you want -- doesn't mean you're right.

 

[Paul98]

You supported it. God told them what he was going to do. So not only does his omniscience (if believed) make everything pre-meditated, but he threatened them first.

But you seem to start from the notion that god cannot be judged. I'm presuming that is due to its infinite and unknowable nature. That is circular, because it is only believed to be infinite and unknowable because of the book you say was inspired by it, or perhaps some personal experience that cannot be reproduced or even explained.

Who are we NOT to judge a god?

And again, he ordered his people to kill children. Your omnipotent god that could have just caused weather (something he's demonstrated previously) to push the offending people far away (to protect his followers), instead opts to have them killed by said followers, making the people he "loves" break his own rules.

You can cite his other works that you find more generous and loving, but it doesn't erase the horrors.

You will be unable to use logic and reason, he believes what he wants to and will not change his mind. It is interesting how someone can believe this, but it seems that there are a lot of people like this. What would be very interesting would be to see brain scans how the brain works to do this. If there is some specific thing that allows the brain to work the way it does. At what point does the brain do this, is it a born trait or does the brain change over time to reject any beliefs that contradict your own. I wonder how much DNA may have control over something like this.

 

[JD50]

I just want to know how you arrive at the conclusion of murder, which in the real world, is backed by evidence showing intent.

Call me extreme for simply asking for you to support your argument.

Your way of thinking is incredibly dangerous.

 

[WilliamM2]

Promising someone good health, a plentiful promise land, is using fear?

No, the threat of murder is using fear. I can't believe how dishonest you are.

 

[Retro Rob]

No, the threat of murder is using fear. I can't believe how dishonest you are.

Dishonest?

Were not the Israelites offered a promise land? Secondly, did they not attain it?

Yes and yes.

Are there consequences for certain actions? In EVERY civilized society, there are both consequences and rewards -- it's a delicate balance.

Would you say the threat of life imprisonment, or the death penalty (which we have in this country) is also "ruling by murder and fear"?.

Probably not, because they're designed to keep order. Likewise, God did the same thing...you do A, you can have a promised land, you do B and the suffer the penalty.

Every civilized society uses these sort of rules to encourage civil behaviors and discourage uncivil behaviors.

 

[smackababy]

Dishonest?

Were not the Israelites offered a promise land? Secondly, did they not attain it?

Yes and yes.

Are there consequences for certain actions? In EVERY civilized society, there are both consequences and rewards -- it's a delicate balance.

Would you say the threat of life imprisonment, or the death penalty (which we have in this country) is also "ruling by murder and fear"?.

Probably not, because they're designed to keep order. Likewise, God did the same thing...you do A, you can have a promised land, you do B and the suffer the penalty.

Every civilized society uses these sort of rules to encourage civil behaviors and discourage uncivil behaviors.

Except, the penalty for disobeying the laws in this country isn't "I am going to kill your children". Capital punishment is reserved for crimes that take life or treason, and they are only used as punishment against the person who committed the crimes, not innocents.

God, however, murdered children because of the sins of the father.

You are being dishonest if you think really are trying to argue the fact there are consequences means it wasn't murder or that it was okay.

 

[Retro Rob]

Except, the penalty for disobeying the laws in this country isn't "I am going to kill your children". Capital punishment is reserved for crimes that take life or treason, and they are only used as punishment against the person who committed the crimes, not innocents.

God, however, murdered children because of the sins of the father.

You are being dishonest if you think really are trying to argue the fact there are consequences means it wasn't murder or that it was okay.

Like I asked JD, on what basis do you draw "intent" to call murder?

This is really all I am asking, since "homicide" and "murder" are determined by the intent of the accused.

 

[jackstar7]

To clarify, I think both people calling you dishonest mean more specifically that you're being intellectually dishonest, not that you're telling some kind of lies in your posts.

As with me you talk about god judging a person's heart... but you don't address that children are somehow judged as better off dead by god. And god doesn't always do it by his own hand, instead he gets people to break his commandment in the most egregious way.

And I am free to judge god. I do so with fairness and based on the evidence brought forth in the book that is supposedly inspired divinely.

You refuse to admit the absurdity of this from a being to which you ascribe the traits of omnipotence and omniscience.

 

[Retro Rob]

To clarify, I think both people calling you dishonest mean more specifically that you're being intellectually dishonest, not that you're telling some kind of lies in your posts.

As with me you talk about god judging a person's heart... but you don't address that children are somehow judged as better off dead by god. And god doesn't always do it by his own hand, instead he gets people to break his commandment in the most egregious way.

And I am free to judge god. I do so with fairness and based on the evidence brought forth in the book that is supposedly inspired divinely.

You refuse to admit the absurdity of this from a being to which you ascribe the traits of omnipotence and omniscience.

I hear you, and I don't know why God judged children "better off" as dead, and since you don't know either, its dishonest to say "murder" because if God is so "unknowable", how can you possible attain his motives or intent?

This is really what I want to get to here, because I also think its dishonest to say " well God is unknowable....BUT he murders people" with murder only being applicable when the individual in question is "knowable" to some degree.

I won't admit God murdered people because I have no evidence of such, but I have acknowledged that people have died, even children.

I'm only dishonest because I'm not making a baseless charge against God because I don't have proof.

That's real honestly -- refraining from passing that sort of judgment based on evidence I can't seem to find.

 

[busydude]

I hear you, and I don't know why God judged children "better off" as dead, and since you don't know either, its dishonest to say "murder" because if God is so "unknowable", how can you possible attain his motives or intent?

This is really what I want to get to here, because I also think its dishonest to say " well God is unknowable....BUT he murders people" with murder only being applicable when the individual in question is "knowable" to some degree.

I won't admit God murdered people because I have no evidence of such, but I have acknowledged that people have died, even children.

I'm only dishonest because I'm not making a baseless charge against God because I don't have proof.

That's real honestly -- refraining from passing that sort of judgment based on evidence I can't seem to find.

This whole post seems like a massive cop-out to me. How can God be "unknowable" when the scriptures, at least indirectly, shows his intent.

 

[WilliamM2]

To clarify, I think both people calling you dishonest mean more specifically that you're being intellectually dishonest, not that you're telling some kind of lies in your posts.

He knew what we meant. It's just more dishonesty.

 

[JD50]

Like I asked JD, on what basis do you draw "intent" to call murder?

This is really all I am asking, since "homicide" and "murder" are determined by the intent of the accused.

So god killed them on accident? You realize what intent means with regards to murder right?

 

[Retro Rob]

This whole post seems like a massive cop-out to me. How can God be "unknowable" when the scriptures, at least indirectly, shows his intent.

No, I wasn't saying God is "unknowable"...I was reversing their unknowable argument back on to those who say that.

Like, how can they judge the intent of the accused if they say he's unknown and unknowable?

That's the point I am making.

Now, jackstar didn't, IIRC, say God murdered people, but he did say he's unknowable.

He can clear up what he means by that.

 

[Retro Rob]

So god killed them on accident? You realize what intent means with regards to murder right?

You have to prove malice, I know what I am talking about and you know what I meant, and you would have to demonstrate that God unlawfully killed people.

Good luck with that.

Who makes laws for God to follow?

You have no case.

 

[JD50]

You have to prove malice, I know what I am talking about and you know what I meant, and you would have to demonstrate that God unlawfully killed people.

Good luck with that.

Who makes laws for God to follow?

You have no case.

What an amazing god and religion you have. Defending the killing of innocent children by playing semantics over the legal definition of the word murder. As usual, you're moving the goal posts once again.

 

[WilliamM2]

You have to prove malice, I know what I am talking about and you know what I meant, and you would have to demonstrate that God unlawfully killed people.

Although helpful, you do not need provide motive, intent, or prove malice to convict someone of murder.

 

[Retro Rob]

What an amazing god and religion you have. Defending the killing of innocent children by playing semantics over the legal definition of the word murder. As usual, you're moving the goal posts once again.

This isn't semantics, since in the real world, murder is a difficult charge to prove, and simply "believing" someone is guilty of it holds no water in the real world, so why now?

Tell a judge he's playing "semantics" if he gives you elements needing to be satisfied before he can charge an alleged murderer with murder.

 

[Retro Rob]

Although helpful, you do not need provide motive, intent, or prove malice to convict someone of murder.

Well, my bad, and thanks for the clarity.

But simply "believing" it, and saying it doesn't make it true, either.

 

[smackababy]

You have to prove malice, I know what I am talking about and you know what I meant, and you would have to demonstrate that God unlawfully killed people.

Good luck with that.

Who makes laws for God to follow?

You have no case.

So, your argument is that it is acceptable to kill children because someone else did not follow your directions as long as it is not against the law where you are or you are above the law in some way.

God "made" his own laws; the 10 commandments. "But those were laws for men, not God himself". Okay, all animals are created equal, some are just more equal than others...

So, the premeditate killing of innocent children because of the actions of another was okay? That doesn't make God to be bad in any way?

 

[smackababy]

This isn't semantics, since in the real world, murder is a difficult charge to prove, and simply "believing" someone is guilty of it holds no water in the real world, so why now?

Tell a judge he's playing "semantics" if he gives you elements needing to be satisfied before he can charge an alleged murderer with murder.

Murder is not difficult to prove. The differentiation of murder (1st, 2nd, 3rd degree) is what proves difficult.

If I told someone that if they did not do something I would kill their children, no matter how difficult the task, when I follow through with said threat, that is murder.

God intended to kill those children, there is no other way a concept like God can do something. It wasn't on accident.