(November 20, 2016 at 2:07 pm)The Joker Wrote:

(November 20, 2016 at 1:29 pm)chimp3 Wrote: Bump!

This law is applies to Israel, have you ever seen a christian fathers going around stoning children, in the new testament this law is not necessary.

In the Old Testament, God appears harsh for three reasons. First, it was to demonstrate the exacting requirements of the Law--a perfect and demanding standard. Second, it ultimately demonstrates the need for grace that would eventually be manifested on the cross. Third, should rebellion take root the very heart of the gospel would be at risk since the prophecies of the Messiah coming to and through Israel could be undermined should rebellion become rampant and society fall apart causing the prophecies to fail. Therefore, we can conclude that this harsh requirement was a necessary legality to instill and designate the necessity of family order and respect and to ultimately provide another safeguard that would ensure the sacrifice of Christ.

So, no god directed cruelty on the new testament, is that your position? god changed his stripes?

But doesn't god state that he is never changing?

(November 20, 2016 at 2:20 pm)chimp3 Wrote:

(November 20, 2016 at 2:17 pm)The Joker Wrote: True

Obedience to authority is amoral.

You are right in speaking of the moral foundations of science, but you cannot turn round and speak of the scientific foundations of morality. Amoral is as if the Nazi’s were evil or not, or is murder really morally wrong, or why is rape morally reprehensible?

---

(November 20, 2016 at 2:25 pm)mh.brewer Wrote:

(November 20, 2016 at 2:07 pm)The Joker Wrote: This law is applies to Israel, have you ever seen a christian fathers going around stoning children, in the new testament this law is not necessary.

In the Old Testament, God appears harsh for three reasons. First, it was to demonstrate the exacting requirements of the Law--a perfect and demanding standard. Second, it ultimately demonstrates the need for grace that would eventually be manifested on the cross. Third, should rebellion take root the very heart of the gospel would be at risk since the prophecies of the Messiah coming to and through Israel could be undermined should rebellion become rampant and society fall apart causing the prophecies to fail. Therefore, we can conclude that this harsh requirement was a necessary legality to instill and designate the necessity of family order and respect and to ultimately provide another safeguard that would ensure the sacrifice of Christ.

So, no god directed cruelty on the new testament, is that your position? god changed his stripes?

When God says that He does not change, He is speaking about His nature and character. But this does not mean that He cannot change how He works with people throughout history.

As soon as I skimmed and saw Hitler (Christian), Stalin (Communist dictator), and Jim Jones (Really??), you lost any credibility in your arguments.

(November 20, 2016 at 2:27 pm)The Joker Wrote:

(November 20, 2016 at 2:20 pm)chimp3 Wrote: Obedience to authority is amoral.

You are right in speaking of the moral foundations of science, but you cannot turn round and speak of the scientific foundations of morality. Amoral is as if the Nazi’s were evil or not, or is murder really morally wrong, or why is rape morally reprehensible?

I was not speaking of the moral foundation of science. I was speaking of a religious claim to objective morality. Morality is not part of the equation if obedience to a morally wavering deity is the basis for behavior.

Joker Wrote:I think Atheist forum should be place where everyone can get right deep into atheist thinking and examine them for study. To be honest I Just don’t think Atheism is better than the Christian standard, now before you go on about how I am an idiot and calling me names, consider the following

Joker, thank you for joining AF.   It is cool that you want to study and learn more about atheistic thinking; however, I'm afraid the part in bold may come off to some as objectifying atheists rather than seeing them as people, which could impede your progress in establishing any kind of meaningful dialog with the atheist community here.

If I may, I have a question for you, sir.  Have you come here with an open-mind, or are you here to confirm pre-existing stereotypes concerning atheism? IMO, if you engage AF with an open-mind, then you may find that there are plenty of people here who are kind, respectful, and intelligent.  IMO, when interacting with people in certain contexts, their behavior, whether friendly or hostile, could be a direct result of how we handle the situation. 

With that said, I wish you luck in your endeavors, sir. Thank you for your time and attention.  Live long and prosper.

(November 20, 2016 at 9:21 am)The Joker Wrote: Morality is absolute and unchanging and comes from God,

Which is why we still kill people for working on the Sabbath.

(November 20, 2016 at 2:48 pm)The Valkyrie Wrote: As soon as I skimmed and saw Hitler (Christian), Stalin (Communist dictator), and Jim Jones (Really??), you lost any credibility in your arguments.

But cemented his credentials as at least a troll.  Can't blame Cath-y for seeing him as a Poe.  In her shoes I'd rather assume he was a bored atheist pulling our chains.  And honestly his stupidity now seems so deliberate as to make her case.

(November 20, 2016 at 2:27 pm)The Joker Wrote:

(November 20, 2016 at 2:25 pm)mh.brewer Wrote: So, no god directed cruelty in the new testament, is that your position? god changed his stripes?

When God says that He does not change, He is speaking about His nature and character. But this does not mean that He cannot change how He works with people throughout history.

You only partially responded so I'll ask again. Your position is that there is no god directed cruelty in the new testament, correct?

(November 20, 2016 at 3:31 pm)Whateverist Wrote:

(November 20, 2016 at 2:48 pm)The Valkyrie Wrote: As soon as I skimmed and saw Hitler (Christian), Stalin (Communist dictator), and Jim Jones (Really??), you lost any credibility in your arguments.

But cemented his credentials as at least a troll.  Can't blame Cath-y for seeing him as a Poe.  In her shoes I'd rather assume he was a bored atheist pulling our chains.  And honestly his stupidity now seems so deliberate as to make her case.

With a user name like "Joker" it makes you wonder. I'm still feeding.