oldfella1962
Senior Member
regardless not a guy I'd want to have in charge or depend on.
Welcome Guest!
Is my atheist dad in heaven?
- Thread starter atlashunter
- Start date
regardless not a guy I'd want to have in charge or depend on.
Israel
BANNED
Do you believe Adam was appointed to this?
To "face himself" and learn he had no power to resist himself? (Dare we forget "who" Eve is? From whom...she came out of? The very "stuff" of Eve? That constitutes...Eve?)
The strangeness of sin. In a moment all became "else" to Adam.
Is it its most compelling work? To deceive in that way? To fracture...where once no fracture was seen? The introduction of the appearance...of fracture, the seeing of a fracture?
What, in all does not change? What in all...did not change?
I see only one.
What remained of the given...that proved in its remaining to a perfect persistence and showed itself then, true? To what might Adam still look...and find a perfection?
And, is it any different "for us"? Or, are we fractured in our sight...from Adam?
Is there a perfect of reason, a perfection of reason to an understanding purposed in that reason, that He who has become for us all salvation, and even all of reason, bears a name?
He has eyes like blazing fire, and many royal crowns on His head. He has a name written on Him that only He Himself knows. He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and His name is The Word of God.
Last edited:
atlashunter
Senior Member
In post 760 you said any time someone kills at the behest of god it is misinterpreted and misunderstood. Now you’re giving me a link rather than your own answer that justifies these commands to kill on grounds that the Israelites would have been led to evil had they not committed genocide. Does this pass your smell test? Because it sure doesn’t pass mine. Murder an entire group of people including children and infants lest they might persuade you to live immorally. Seems the horse has already left the barn in this case. Should this godly principle still be put into action today? There are plenty of folks running around who are wicked to hear Christians tell it and leading people astray. Why should they also not be murdered? Who’s to say this unchanging god isn’t still instructing people to murder on this basis if he’s already done it in the past? And is this what passes for morality in the Christian religion? I think you can all do better than this.
Spotlite
Resident Homesteader
Rather than retyping a lot of words, the link well explains how the cross ended all of that. So yes, if a person goes on a killing spree while trying to use scripture to justify it, they are misinterpreting and misunderstanding.
I’m aware that there’s a lot of people leading others astray, I find nothing scriptural that justifies killing them, if you understand the complete role of the cross. That too is also explained in that info.
atlashunter
Senior Member
That’s your interpretation and you’re entitled to it. So are others. The original point on which we are now in agreement is that this god of yours is one who has not only commanded murder but has commanded mass murder. That’s not a misinterpretation. That’s what is in your religious book. I’m not particularly interested in the apologists defense of it.
Spotlite
Resident Homesteader
I don’t feel compelled to giving an apologetic defense for it.
The point you have tried to make is that “Religious people” are following scripture when they fly planes into a building.
The only point I wanted to make was they misinterpreted scripture.
atlashunter
Senior Member
You miss the point. I cannot say whether or not they were really acting at the behest of a deity. I have my own suspicions on the matter. But one cannot say this god that they and you worship has never and would never command murder. Your religious texts says otherwise.
atlashunter
Senior Member
And at this point you’ve already acknowledged that to be the case. Your only dispute is whether they were doing God’s will in that instance. If it could be shown beyond doubt that they were then you would be compelled to call it a moral act.
Spotlite
Resident Homesteader
I believe the plane flyers were acting on their belief and instruction of “Allah”. Can’t tell you a lot about their beliefs other than our own govt is saying that it’s a religion of peace with the exception of radicals.
So I can safely assume that just like in my belief system, that misinterpretation and misunderstanding of any text happens elsewhere too.
oldfella1962
Senior Member
this is the main problem I have with Christianity - the god of the bible does horrendous things like commanding mass murder - but the default reasoning is "god has his reasons/we are too stupid to understand his thought process/if we have faith we will eventually understand but if not then no big deal, just trust & obey".
I'm not seeing "god's love" in the equation at all. The message I see from god is "obey or be eternally punished."
So basically power & fear. We humans are contemptible, imperfect creatures (no argument from me there) so we must "love" the very entity that will send us to eternal torment if we don't. 
Explaining this arrangement to an alien from another planet with no concept of religion would drive them
Yes there is one escape from the torment which involves again obedience - no love as humans feel it involved. Anyone can say they believe in (or love) jesus/god but obedience is the bottom line. And to really obey you must turn a blind eye to anything that your brain tells you is wrong - whether morally wrong (telling your chosen people to commit mass murder on several occasions or even commit it yourself) or factually wrong (Noah's ark).
Granted loving your neighbor, being peaceful and merciful & law abiding & whatnot is preferable to the alternative, so there is a positive effect on society for the average person.
But the basic message is "I hate you pathetic creatures and will send you to eternal torment if you don't fear, worship & obey me & my sinless son who I sacrificed because you idiots can never seem to get it right."
WaltL1
Senior Member
this is the main problem I have with Christianity - the god of the bible does horrendous things like commanding mass murder - but the default reasoning is "god has his reasons/we are too stupid to understand his thought process/if we have faith we will eventually understand but if not then no big deal, just trust & obey".
I'm not seeing "god's love" in the equation at all. The message I see from god is "obey or be eternally punished."
Explaining this arrangement to an alien from another planet with no concept of religion would drive them
Yes there is one escape from the torment which involves again obedience - no love as humans feel it involved. Anyone can say they believe in (or love) jesus/god but obedience is the bottom line. And to really obey you must turn a blind eye to anything that your brain tells you is wrong - whether morally wrong (telling your chosen people to commit mass murder on several occasions or even commit it yourself) or factually wrong (Noah's ark).
Granted loving your neighbor, being peaceful and merciful & law abiding & whatnot is preferable to the alternative, so there is a positive effect on society for the average person.
But the basic message is "I hate you pathetic creatures and will send you to eternal torment if you don't fear, worship & obey me & my sinless son who I sacrificed because you idiots can never seem to get it right."
The alien would be like -Explaining this arrangement to an alien from another planet with no concept of religion would drive them
oldfella1962
Senior Member
The complete role of the cross makes mass killing by god and/or his chosen people redundant? Riddle me this:
relatively soon after creating the world & mankind god realized humans would never stop sinning so he destroyed the world except for the few who were acting right. Sure enough after a while enough people were acting right so they became his "chosen people" AKA Jews. They weren't perfect, but they had potential so god helped them massacre their enemies and win enough battles so that they didn't go extinct, and their culture got well established over time.
A couple of thousand years and change later both the Jews and the savage non-Jews were still sinning. Granted the crazy violent "kill & rape em' all let me sort it out" battles weren't happening as often but things weren't still right with the world. So god sent his son as a sacrifice because all the other sacrificing wasn't winning god's favor.
So without the cross Jews would still be stuck with god in angry violent brutal mode and acting accordingly? No, since their religion doesn't consider jesus their savior yet they gave up the bronze age kill & plunder ways on their own. So I guess the cross is for anyone & everyone to accept since mankind will never get their act together & stop sinning because just our mere human existence is one big sin since Adam & Eve.
So believers in the true god of the bible/torah before jesus was crucified (which would have been Jews I guess) don't have to kill in god's name on a mass scale anymore since god sent a sacrifice that they don't believe in or follow.
Spotlite
Resident Homesteader
In short, these “killings” you speak of were judgement against sin and the “wicked”. For their day, they’re actually considered “lawful killings” since it was a commandment from God. And as we have seen in recent discussion, lawful killings are okThe complete role of the cross makes mass killing by god and/or his chosen people redundant? Riddle me this:
relatively soon after creating the world & mankind god realized humans would never stop sinning so he destroyed the world except for the few who were acting right. Sure enough after a while enough people were acting right so they became his "chosen people" AKA Jews. They weren't perfect, but they had potential so god helped them massacre their enemies and win enough battles so that they didn't go extinct, and their culture got well established over time.
A couple of thousand years and change later both the Jews and the savage non-Jews were still sinning. Granted the crazy violent "kill & rape em' all let me sort it out" battles weren't happening as often but things weren't still right with the world. So god sent his son as a sacrifice because all the other sacrificing wasn't winning god's favor.
So without the cross Jews would still be stuck with god in angry violent brutal mode and acting accordingly? No, since their religion doesn't consider jesus their savior yet they gave up the bronze age kill & plunder ways on their own. So I guess the cross is for anyone & everyone to accept since mankind will never get their act together & stop sinning because just our mere human existence is one big sin since Adam & Eve.
So believers in the true god of the bible/torah before jesus was crucified (which would have been Jews I guess) don't have to kill in god's name on a mass scale anymore since god sent a sacrifice that they don't believe in or follow.
Jews sacrificed to push aside their sin. Since the Jews were Gods chosen people, a blood sacrifice would be required, and would be for all of mankind, including the wicked.
So yes the cross fixed all of that. Of course there are those that don’t believe that but that’s a separate topic.
atlashunter
Senior Member
In short, these “killings” you speak of were judgement against sin and the “wicked”. For their day, they’re actually considered “lawful killings” since it was a commandment from God. And as we have seen in recent discussion, lawful killings are ok
Jews sacrificed to push aside their sin. Since the Jews were Gods chosen people, a blood sacrifice would be required, and would be for all of mankind, including the wicked.
So yes the cross fixed all of that. Of course there are those that don’t believe that but that’s a separate topic.
If you think lawful killings are always ok then you think the holocaust was ok. Really you’re just making yourself look bad trying to defend the wholesale slaughter of people. He makes a good point. Jews don’t share your belief in the cross so in their view they are still under OT law. Your reasons for thinking god ordering mass murder is a relic of the past don’t apply to them. Or muslims. Or most of the history of Christianity for that matter. Stop trying to defend the indefensible.
Spotlite
Resident Homesteader
There’s no reasoning with you. I don’t think any killings are ok other than self defense where you are not given a choice. I went from all killings are wrong to giving your point of lawful killings and the law is what we make it and looking at it objectively and reasonably.
You’re disdain / hatred with Christianity will not allow you to do the same. Too closed minded.
There was an era where slavery was legal and acceptable. Times change. I guess in your world, it doesn’t and every white man still owes the descendants of slavery victims......
Carry on with your rant.
Last edited:
atlashunter
Senior Member
You keep making reference to “lawful killings are ok” as if anyone but you has said that.
Spotlite
Resident Homesteader
Ok, look at this solely on a legal / illegal perspective. I may have misunderstood you.
Right now, regardless if it was against the persons will or not, if you assisted someone in suicide in a state where it was not legal, what are you legally charged with??? The only way to change that is to what???
For states that allow it for "terminally ill, mentally capable" adults, how are they proving that the patient is mentally capable when they're usually on mind altering drugs? That is a sticker for me. Seems like at some point someone is going to get laid to rest because others are ready to move on.
Last edited:
Similar threads
