Protestantism

» Brother_Jones - General Comment

In response to General Comment posted by Migisi:

Would you like to address the TOPIC of this thread, Jones? It's about God and Children,

I would like to address the topic and I think this particular thread has a lot of potential because it gets to the very heart of whether there might be a god. It is probably one of the most unusual mysteries to me as to why so many Jews claim to be unbelievers and atheists. It has to do with how they look at history, I guess. They see God having a cold shoulder and abandoning them at the ovens in Germany. And that is a little different than the charge you and Oliver are making. But it has a similar component. That of being a believer in God when things go terribly wrong in life. And it all appears to be His fault.

i am just an oldtimer for the Lord.

-- posted by Brother_Jones

» Brian Tubbs - Clarification of Terms

I'd really like for us to agree on terms, offenses, and whether we're judging God or the Israelites.

With respect to terms, what do we mean by "killing" and "murder"? The Sixth Commandment, for instance, reads "Thou shalt not kill" in the KJV, but the original Hebrew is better translated as "murder" in our modern English. So, it's not like God says to never kill - and then orders killing. Let's make sure we're consistent in our terminology.

AS to the offenses, is the outrage that the Israelites, acting on God's orders (according to the Bible) killed children? Or is that merely ONE of the outrages? If so, we really need to take this at the broader level. Are talking about genocide? If so, why? Are we really talking about killing and war? Because the deaths of civilians - sometimes the widespread death of civilians - is often a byproduct of war? What specifically is the offense that we should focus on here?

Lastly, are we putting God on trial or the ancient Hebrews? Please don't say "Both," because - at least speaking for myself - I don't have time to defend both. And defending both requires two different types of arguments. For instance...if we're focusing on God, then we have to take into account His nature. If we're talking just about the ancient Hebrews, then we have to take into account that they apparently believed they were acting on God's orders. This may not (probably should not - in and of itself) get them off the hook, but it does speak to motive and intent.

Bottom line....these passages present a WIDE array of issues and emotions. If you want me and any other Christian to address them, I'm asking that we narrow this down and make it as manageable as possible.

» HeadZenCards - Confrontation?

Brian, you said: "Frothing at the mouth"?? What are you talking about, Oliver? And I didn't misstate any timing.
.
Brian, you said this in your lead off to this thread:
Oliver has thrown out this charge that "the LORD GOD" calls on his followers (Oliver implies routinely) to kill children. He's thrown that line out ther (sic - shame on you for attacking Pinky when you make mistakes also) enough that I think it's time to CONFRONT IT...
.
The last thing to "confront" me was a dog ALMOST frothing at the mouth. I know that you are not confronting me, only my ideas but anyone who uses the word "confront" in that context is asking for a fight, growling like a dog.
.
I throw dogs almost frothing at the mouth cookies, if I have them. Then we can both could feel good about backing away from each other. Your cookie was me calling your manner of attack "almost frothing at the mouth". You were unable to back off.
Now I know where you stand, but I respect the animal a bit more than you because his position is much more honest than yours.
.
Let's ignore the LORD GOD for another paragraph or two. (It's my pleasure.)
.
Brian, you said you did not "misstate any timing". I answered you at 1:59, not 4:59. My response to your clarion call to "confront" MY "charge" was the first negative response you received. Therefore, you did misstate the timing.
.
No big deal to me, it just speaks volumes about your character and reliability.
.
I appreciate that your life is busy. Do you think everyone else is not involved in humanity? But then, for you to "confront" and then run away is par for the course.
.
My sense is that you will be back and want a definition of what we mean by LORD GOD and children, trying to ignore what is in black and white in the KJV.

-- posted by HeadZenCards

» Brian Tubbs - Confrontation?

In response to Confrontation? posted by HeadZenCards:

I was referring to posts 4 and 5, Oliver. It was in post 5, I believe, where you implied you had scared me off. THOSE were the times and the posts I cited - and did so accurately.

As to my use of the word "confront," I wasn't talking about confronting YOU personally in some kind of 'pistols at dawn' way. I was talking about confronting the ISSUE - the issue of God ordering the deaths of children. THAT was what I was talking about confronting.

Look, I don't know what has happened here between us - but I've tried to limit my criticism to your behavior. You're now directing assaults right at my character and integrity.

The reasons why I haven't directly responded to everyone's points, questions, attacks, etc. are:

1) TIME CONSTRAINTS - I simply have other obligations to attend to outside of Suite101

2) In some cases, I don't want to get into a p$##ing match with people - like you and I are in right now. So, I've ducked some of your more inflammatory posts accordingly.

I don't know what more I can say here, Oliver. Your hostility toward me specifically and toward Christians in general is quite evident. All I can do at this point is ask you - one more time - will you refrain from attacking people personally? Will you refrain from being deliberately inflammatory and provocative?

» redback - Clarification of Terms

In response to Clarification of Terms posted by BrianTubbs:
Be it 'killing' or 'murder'...only death is the constant. 'Murder' and 'unlawful killing' etc are terms used to set relative culpability under manmade laws. And we all can relate horror stories of the 'system's' unfairness, not just the (retired?) police who visit here. We blame the system, rather than ourselves as part of a broader society that "allows it to happen". OR impotently objecting?

When you ask:
"...by what objective moral standard do we determine that the killing of children and infants is wrong?"
I'm holding my breath that good, wiggle room-free answers come out of it, not simply the dog fights I already see.

'We blame God when things go wrong in our lives' is another generalisation. OK, 'we don't blame him for everything all the time' is the rarely given concession.

Are we questioning or judging God OR questioning what the Bible really means here? I still see that as a separate issue and from a recent post, I understand you do too.

By whatever inconsistent standards flawed man uses to justify killing children including infants...doesn't the Bible set the "moral" high ground? Or the generic, ethical (insert term) benchmark? How does the Koran help out those who fumble for answers here?

"...Are we really talking about killing..." "...For instance...if we're focusing on God, then we have to take into account His nature...."
Yes Minister? At the risk of discussing just how academic a death of a child needs to be and can be, in getting to the preferred Biblical 'truth' of the matter, I simply wonder what the learned Christian's understanding of it all is.

Hence my fairdinkum response to you.

-- posted by redback

» pink101 - General Comment

In response to General Comment posted by Brother_Jones:
.
"...there might be a god..."
.
There might be.
.
A concept in Kaballah has it that there was--before creation--a single entity that was all that was. Nothing was there that was not this single entity--God.
.
The entity was all knowing and fully complete in and of and within itself for there was nothing that was not included in the entity.
.
You and me and everything else was a part of that entity--we all belonged to it as a part of it.
.
That idea shows us what a god might be.
.
But, that god was not fully satisfied and wondered if there was a possibility outside of it; so, it divested itself of its singleness and it exploded into what we now have--the universe with all its galaxies.
.
Our single minded interest is a desire to recombine our self back into the singleness.
.
That's the hint of an idea Kaballah has about the god that might be.
.

-- posted by pink101

» HeadZenCards - Utterly Destroy

In response to Confrontation? posted by BrianTubbs:

Brian, if you believe in the Bible, you cannot honestly argue "the issue of God ordering the deaths of children".

1 Samuel 15:1 Samuel also said unto Saul, The LORD sent me to anoint thee to be king over his people, over Israel: now therefore hearken thou unto THE VOICE OF THE WORDS OF THE LORD.

15:2 THUS SAITH THE LORD OF HOSTS, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt.

15:3 Now go and smite Amalek, and UTTERLY DESTROY all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, INFANT AND SUCKLING, ox and sheep, camel and ass.

No Jew or Christian can honestly argue "the issue of God ordering the deaths of children". All they can do is try to confuse the issue. I will not fall for that trick again.

In the fiction that is the Bible, the voice of the words of the LORD GOD ordered his followers to utterly destroy infants and sucklings.

This disqualifies the voice of the words of the LORD GOD from EVER AGAIN being an authority on what to do ABOUT ANYTHING, in fiction and in real life, at least for people who care about children.

-- posted by HeadZenCards

» HeadZenCards - Confrontation?

In response to Confrontation? posted by BrianTubbs:

The LORD GOD has more to say about bad people's children that shows what an idiot he would be if he were not a fictional character.

Lev. 26:22 I will also send wild beasts among you, which shall rob you of your children...

Wild beasts, sent upon the direction of the LORD GOD, shall rob bad people of all their children. Yet, a few verses later:

Lev. 26:29 And ye shall eat the flesh of your sons, and the flesh of your daughters shall ye eat.

How can we eat the flesh of our sons and daughters if the wild beasts have robbed us of them, LORD GOD?

Glad I live in a world where I'll never know. Aren't you, Brian?

-- posted by HeadZenCards

» Migisi - Clarification of Terms

In response to Clarification of Terms posted by BrianTubbs:
.
sometimes the widespread death of civilians - is often a byproduct of war?
.
The complete annihilation of entire cultures because they worshiped other gods, and to steal their lands and plunder their cities is NOT an unintentional 'byproduct of war'. Slicing open pregnant women, hacking infants to death, systematic torturing and slaughtering noncombatants, raping and enslaving women and children as described in the Bible were not 'accidents' of war. You're not saying these atrocities were merely collateral damage, are you?
.
Lastly, are we putting God on trial or the ancient Hebrews? Please don't say "Both," because - at least speaking for myself - I don't have time to defend both.
.
Are you asking participants here to chose which defendent you should represent? In my post #4, I presented scriptural evidence that God ordered and had a direct hand in genocide and infanticide. His Israelite champions complied with his directives to commit such acts, and they praised him for it. Yes, I charge 'both' God and the Israelites with murder. You'll have to chose the defendant you feel you can defend - that is, if you take the case. You might ask one of your associates to represent the other.

-- posted by Migisi

» HeadZenCards - Taking The Challenge

In response to Clarification of Terms posted by Migisi:

Hi Migisi!

Brian is busy saving the world today so he can't play.

However, I will take up your challenge, in the only honest manner a Christian apologist can. (Obfuscation or avoidance is not an honest way to play, Brian.)

OK, fine! The LORD GOD is guilty of inspiring its followers to kill children from time to time.

So what? He's GOD. He can do whatever He wants.

What would you replace the Bible with anyway?

Why do you spend money when it says "In God We Trust"? Aren't you tacitly supporting the murder of children? Why not send all that money to me?

(I could create more bunny trails here. You get the whiff of the odor of the attack most apologists think is effective...)

At this point, I would jump to your defense. Not many would read it, but those who did would notice an improvement in what they had to breath.

The God of our founders was not the LORD GOD of the Bible. They were Deists like Thomas Paine, who had no patience for the LORD GOD, Holy Ghost and Jesus story either.

As an influence, I don't know WHAT to replace the LORD GOD who inspires his followers to murder children story with.

There is another step to take before that.

First, we must REJECT that kind of story. I'd LOVE to live in a world where the LORD GOD story is looked upon (and studied) in the same manner we look at (and study) Zeus now, but that's still a few generations away.

What are the benefits of rejecting stories of child murdering Gods?

The society may become less violent, less likely, when backed into a corner, to try and snarl its way out of the present difficulty.

This is what modern Christian apologist and modern politicians appear to do. They seem to reason that the End Is Coming Soon anyway, so we might as well kill them all and let Jesus sort them out.

After all, what did the LORD GOD advise HIS followers to do?

-- posted by HeadZenCards