Er... huh? What do you mean according to me? According to me he doesn't exist.

Sorry but that really made no sense at all. It sounded like a mixture of a copout and admitting I am right. According to you he is responsible for everything, and so yeah he kills everyone and causes pain. Not the coolest guy.

I can't continue a debate if you resort to cheap tactics and non-sequiters.

(November 8, 2014 at 2:47 pm)robvalue Wrote: Er... huh? What do you mean according to me? According to me he doesn't exist.

Sorry but that really made no sense at all. It sounded like a mixture of a copout and admitting I am right.

If you said that he killed people all the time, then you were attributing that to the God you don't believe exists. I was taking that reasoning one step further. Problem is you're leaving out the final part of the bible story.

(November 8, 2014 at 2:16 pm)robvalue Wrote: I forget where it is in the bible, but I think there's another story which is almost exactly the same as this one. I remember it from the Bible Reloaded. An ethereal donut for whoever remembers it first.

It's has very close parallels to the story of Lot in Sodom in Genesis Chapter 19. Is that what you're thinking of? The similarities are very striking.

(November 8, 2014 at 2:46 pm)Astrogod07 Wrote: The bible cannot be a timeless moral document if it fails to address the moral shortcomings of the characters within its narrative. The men of this city were Israelites of the tribe of Benjamin, and chapters 20 and 21 cover the civil war sparked by this event. Jesus may have condemned these actions, but the god of the old testament does not seem to. He endorses a war over the rape and murder of this woman, but is silent on the fact that her master deliberately sent her out to be raped in order to save himself.

Look our good old Yahweh up.

He started his career as a war god. So a civil war is just what he would like for some light hearted entertainment.

OK Lek end of discussion, nice talking to you, take care!

---

(November 8, 2014 at 2:50 pm)Astrogod07 Wrote:

(November 8, 2014 at 2:16 pm)robvalue Wrote: I forget where it is in the bible, but I think there's another story which is almost exactly the same as this one. I remember it from the Bible Reloaded. An ethereal donut for whoever remembers it first.

It's has very close parallels to the story of Lot in Sodom in Genesis Chapter 19. Is that what you're thinking of? The similarities are very striking.

Oh yeah, actually I presumed that was the one we were talking about here! Yes, the story is more or less identical. (Good evidence that it's made up, just a tale being retold.) I have posted the ethereal donut, should arrive any second now.

Actually, it is quite convincing that an entire town of men would all want to bum-rape angels. Two towns. I'll tell the story to my non existent children tonight.

[/quote]
Where do you get off saying that God should act the way you think he should?
[/quote]

Are we not allowed to point out God's inconsistencies? If we are all to be judged by him, can we not at least expect him to treat us all equally and fairly? This question would lead us into an entire separate discussion on the nature of morality, but is there some reason that we can't criticize god's actions when there are clearly better ways to handle things? I mean, this event does lead to a civil war, endorsed by god, in which tens of thousands of israelites die. My point is that god fails to address this obviously immoral act.

God allows wars.

God is a nob end.

Good for a PhD in theology?

If you're going to attribute things to God, read the whole bible and see where it begins and where it ends. You distort things when you take bits and pieces and don't fit them into the whole story.

(November 8, 2014 at 2:56 pm)Lek Wrote: If you're going to attribute things to God, read the whole bible and see where it begins and where it ends. You distort things when you take bits and pieces and don't fit them into the whole story.

It's kind of a big book. But it's supposed to be perfect, so everything should be consistent, but this is an example in which god's moral standard does not remain consistent. As was previously mentioned, God has killed people for far less. After all, he sent a bear to maul a bunch of youths for making fun of a bald prophet, but he doesn't have a word to say against a guy who sends his sex slave out to die? This isn't justifiable on its own, and it's not justifiable in the larger context of the bible either. It's simply a failure of biblical morality.

(November 8, 2014 at 2:56 pm)Lek Wrote: If you're going to attribute things to God, read the whole bible and see where it begins and where it ends. You distort things when you take bits and pieces and don't fit them into the whole story.

So, what you're saying is that there's some context that excuses, off the top of my head, genocide?