(November 3, 2012 at 7:34 pm)Reasonable_Jeff Wrote:

(November 3, 2012 at 7:27 pm)Stimbo Wrote: What if the "don't kill" injunction conflicted with biblical principles? Would you still stand by your position of "submit[ting] to authority unless it conflicts with Biblical truth"?

You're talking about the euthyphro dilemma.

No I'm not, I'm not keen on herrings at the best of times and red ones even less. I'll restate the question:

What if what is commanded in your holy book is in direct conflict with societal considerations? Specifically with regard to the original question, suppose your god via your book commanded you to kill for whatever reason, say stoning adulteres to death, yet society didn't let you (which it doesn't). To whom do you pledge your allegiance?

The_Germans_are_coming Wrote: So since your god is a "perfect moral being"

God's "perfect morality" is call Righteousness. Righteousness is NOT 'Morality.'Morality is man standard of or attempt at Righteousness with the sin he is willing to incorperate or live with mixed into God's Righteous Standard. This personal sense of righteousness or as Christ Identifies it this Self Righteousness often time over values certain areas of the Law to try make up for the over looked areas. In essence 'Morality' is whatever we want it to be, because it is a failed attempt at True Righteousness that has been justified through a strong sense of Self Righteousness.

Quote:i would like you to explain how the things above can be seen as "moraly ok"

It can't because God does not yield to Man's self Righteous Standard.

Capitol Punishment can be deemed a Righteous Act because putting someone to Death in of itself is not a sin. Only The unsanctioned taking of life is a sin.
In the resources you left along with the bible verses you quoted are sanctioned events when putting one to Death is allowed by God. Therefore a Righteous act, even if soceity deems it 'Immoral.'

These Acts we know as sin (the actual act) have no intrinsic value in of themselves. It is commiting these acts outside the perscribed path that God has made allowances for, that makes any of these acts a sin.

(November 4, 2012 at 10:19 am)Drich Wrote: God's "perfect morality" is call Righteousness. Righteousness is NOT 'Morality.'Morality is man standard of or attempt at Righteousness with the sin he is willing to incorperate or live with mixed into God's Righteous Standard. This personal sense of righteousness or as Christ Identifies it this Self Righteousness often time over values certain areas of the Law to try make up for the over looked areas. In essence 'Morality' is whatever we want it to be, because it is a failed attempt at True Righteousness that has been justified through a strong sense of Self Righteousness.

Not this bullshit argument again!

Your Christ or god can say what they like - but at the end of the day their 'righteousness' is nothing but their own moral standard - their own 'self-righteousness'. There is nothing true or perfect about it. In fact, your god's moral standard - his righteousness - is about as corrupt as it gets. Your god's morality is whatever he wants it to be. There is not an iota of consistency and objectivity in it. The human moral standards - the human righteousness - has grown and evolved and is now far superior to your god's.

(November 4, 2012 at 10:19 am)Drich Wrote: It can't because God does not yield to Man's self Righteous Standard.

And, thankfully, rational men no longer yield to god's self-righteous standard.

(November 4, 2012 at 10:19 am)Drich Wrote: Capitol Punishment can be deemed a Righteous Act because putting someone to Death in of itself is not a sin. Only The unsanctioned taking of life is a sin.

Righteous by whose sanction? God's? I cannot imagine a more worthless basis for sanction.

Quote:God's "perfect morality" is call Righteousness.

Um, 2 Samuel 24

Quote:15 So the Lord sent a plague on Israel from that morning until the end of the time designated, and seventy thousand of the people from Dan to Beersheba died.

This because "David" fucked up taking a census.

This makes your god a first class cunt.

(Of course, the story is total horseshit but it does show the mindset of the assholes who wrote it.)

In regards to this current morality debate:


Murders who think their justified in wiping out whole peoples on a whim should not be worshiped, but condemned.


Question to Min: Is there any evidence in the archeological record of people dying in this fashion? Surely, history must have the bodies, if it occurred. You'd think that you're come across the site and just find bones EVERYWHERE. Is there anything like that out there that is not easily explained (such as Pompeii's fall to the volcano)?

You ARE aware that bones are biological tissue and decay in a relatively short time, right?
Only those that fossilize or are otherwise preserved can be observed after more than a few hundred years.

(November 4, 2012 at 1:58 pm)pocaracas Wrote: You ARE aware that bones are biological tissue and decay in a relatively short time, right?
Only those that fossilize or are otherwise preserved can be observed after more than a few hundred years.

I'm not talking about full skeletons, but bone fragments are certainly likely, yes? Maybe?

Maybe... depends on what those people did with the bodies... If they burned them, you can forget about finding any of them.

(November 4, 2012 at 2:05 pm)pocaracas Wrote: Maybe... depends on what those people did with the bodies... If they burned them, you can forget about finding any of them.

Wouldn't fires have to be extraordinarily hot to burn bone? I guess it would be easy to argue that a god could have produced a flame of that kind.