Gods immorality.

[Vincent]

No, it does not defeat the argument. 

Defend that position from a rational standpoint. Anyone who willfully murders children who have committed no crimes is not a moral being in my book. You may share a different opinion.

Why don't you read the thread. I have responded to all these objections and I am not typing all those responses again.

I couldn't find any logical responses by you regarding these dilemmas. Copy and paste the answers you are referring to.

[robvalue]

Kevin: I know, it's making me cringe.

And this is even after handing over the benefit of the doubt that the bible contains any truth. The story can't be kept straight even then, without doing what WLC does and surrendering all humanity and accountability.

What happens once we bring other religions into the picture? "They're all just wrong." Right. And they'll scream the same back at him.

It's this ridiculous idea that the religion they were indoctrinated in just happens to be the "right" one that baffles me the most. How does that not break the spell? It's so fucking obvious. Well, indoctrination is a very powerful thing. Astonishing, really. But utterly disgusting.

[SteveII]

Well, we're lucky we have Steve here to tell us who is and isn't being talked to by God.

It is absolutely hilarious to see him twisting in the wind.  At every turn he weakens his own god by placing limits on what he can and can't do, and has the gall to imply he can know the mind of his deity.  Even better, he never addresses what we keep hounding him on.  He keeps saying, "Well, god would never do that" despite his own book saying he did at least once (more than once if you're smart enough to not just think that everyone except Noah and his family were good, or that Original Sin is utterly ridiculous).

None of that addresses what WLC said, which Steve agreed with:

The framework for my ethical theory is what is called divine command morality. What is that? That is an ethical theory which says that our moral duties are constituted by God’s commands. It is God’s commandments to us that give us right and wrong; that determine what we should and should not do. Therefore, if God issues you a command to do something, that becomes your moral duty and it would be wrong for you not to do it. 

Even better, further in the article Steve posted:

Now someone might say, “Are you saying that God can command someone to murder somebody else? Is that what you are saying?” No, I am not saying that God can command you to murder someone. I am saying that God can command you to do something which in the absence of a divine command would have been murder but is not murder in virtue of that divine command because it now becomes your moral duty. 

Note that WLC doesn't falter.  He doesn't try to hide behind caveats.  He flat out says that if god orders you to do something, you have a moral duty to do it.

WLC is arguing a philosophical point and showing that the command to wipe out the Amalekites has no bearing on human morality and does nothing to prove anything. 

I was responding to the question about the women who kill their babies because God told them to. My point, which you must have missed, was that God has given us new commands (the NT). To consider the question of God commanding murder now is in direct violation of his most important and final revelation (Christ and his instructions). This is something NOT addressed at all in WLC's article because it is not the topic. If you want to know what he thinks on this very different subject, ask him.

[Goosebump]

I'm no scholar, but isn't that old testament? So some sects can claim they are new testament believers and that other stuff is some old shit.

Other then that you have the "it's god's plan", or god's the only one that can judge, or god's the only one that can take and give life etc... Some parts justify other parts if you ignore the parts that don't.

Also most folks are taught religion from childhood, they are surrounded in a world where over 80% of everybody believes in some version; and we now know we don't really have full developed brains till our 20s. With those pathways built up over the years before the brain can critically analysis them it's no wonder some folks can't be reasoned with.

[Goosebump]

No, it does not defeat the argument. 

Defend that position from a rational standpoint. Anyone who willfully murders children who have committed no crimes is not a moral being in my book. You may share a different opinion.

Why don't you read the thread. I have responded to all these objections and I am not typing all those responses again.

I couldn't find any logical responses by you regarding these dilemmas. Copy and paste the answers you are referring to.

I like your avatar!

[robvalue]

I'm no scholar, but isn't that old testament? So some sects can claim they are new testament believers and that other stuff is some old shit.

Other then that you have the "it's god's plan", or god's the only one that can judge, or god's the only one that can take and give life etc... Some parts justify other parts if you ignore the parts that don't.

Also most folks are taught religion from childhood, they are surrounded in a world where over 80% of everybody believes in some version; and we now know we don't really have full developed brains till our 20s. With those pathways built up over the years before the brain can critically analysis them it's no wonder some folks can't be reasoned with.

This is what pisses me off. We get bombarded with how self evident it is that Christianty (or whatever) is true, yet few parents dare let their kid get to even the age of 7 before indoctrinating them. Let alone older.

What are they scared of? That God is going to mark them down on those childhoods years? Or that if they don't program them early their kid won't believe all the mythology? No one needs to be indoctrinated to believe in mathematics or gravity. Or anything that has reason behind it.

[Goosebump]

I'm no scholar, but isn't that old testament? So some sects can claim they are new testament believers and that other stuff is some old shit.

Other then that you have the "it's god's plan", or god's the only one that can judge, or god's the only one that can take and give life etc... Some parts justify other parts if you ignore the parts that don't.

Also most folks are taught religion from childhood, they are surrounded in a world where over 80% of everybody believes in some version; and we now know we don't really have full developed brains till our 20s. With those pathways built up over the years before the brain can critically analysis them it's no wonder some folks can't be reasoned with.

This is what pisses me off. We get bombarded with how self evident it is that Christianty (or whatever) is true, yet few parents dare let their kid get to even the age of 7 before indoctrinating them. Let alone older.

What are they scared of? That God is going to mark them down on those childhoods years? Or that if they don't program them early their kid won't believe all the mythology? No one needs to be indoctrinated to believe in mathematics or gravity. Or anything that has reason behind it.

I don't think they think any of those things. I don't think they think about it at all. After all it's what was done to them, they are already under the influence. Not teaching it to their kids doesn't even enter the thought process; it's just what is done. There own indoctrination makes it quite clear they have to indoctrinate their children. Else the kid will go to hell or some such nonsense right?

I don't see any malevolence. Just the indoctrinated doing what they were indoctrinated to do.

[robvalue]

Yeah, you're right. Sometimes I forgot how clear things are outside the bubble.

This is why I want to prompt parents to think, and not to just do what was done to them. To allow their child the right to make their own mind up, rather than it being done for them.

I've tried to bring this point up to theists on the forum, to get them to think about it, but they have always instantly dismissed it out of hand. Maybe we can get someone out there, who is reading this, to think about it.

[SteveII]

I'm no scholar, but isn't that old testament? So some sects can claim they are new testament believers and that other stuff is some old shit.

Other then that you have the "it's god's plan", or god's the only one that can judge, or god's the only one that can take and give life etc... Some parts justify other parts if you ignore the parts that don't.

Also most folks are taught religion from childhood, they are surrounded in a world where over 80% of everybody believes in some version; and we now know we don't really have full developed brains till our 20s. With those pathways built up over the years before the brain can critically analysis them it's no wonder some folks can't be reasoned with.

This is what pisses me off. We get bombarded with how self evident it is that Christianty (or whatever) is true, yet few parents dare let their kid get to even the age of 7 before indoctrinating them. Let alone older.

What are they scared of? That God is going to mark them down on those childhoods years? Or that if they don't program them early their kid won't believe all the mythology? No one needs to be indoctrinated to believe in mathematics or gravity. Or anything that has reason behind it.

I have 5 kids -- all indoctrinated so as not to grow up and be like you. You see, once you believe there is a God, all the rest makes sense and falls into place.

[Time Traveler]

So, whether I would obey if I were the leader is moot.

Complete dodge of the moral question.

These and other verses indicate that those who have not heard the gospel can still find God.

Can you point to one credible case where someone raised in another religion in another culture, having never been introduced to Judaism or Christianity, suddenly knew about Yahweh and Jesus specifically?

Also, is just the ability to "find God" enough for salvation? If so, who needs Jesus for salvation?

Christ chose to die on the cross for the redemption of everyone who believes.

Therefore, had Christ not chosen to die on the cross for the redemption of everyone who believes, no one would find redemption - even if they believed in God. This belies your previous statement that "those who have not heard of the gospel can still find God." What good is "finding God" without redemption?

Furthermore, why did Jesus not choose to live a long life, spread more divine wisdom directly, and still redeem everyone who believes? What is accomplished through a torturous, bloody death (that isn't really a sacrifice of God's child as you see it)?

---

Steve, at this point, I'm going to let you off the hook as far as I'm concerned. Your depth of cognitive dissonance is apparent to almost anyone reading through this thread. I'm truly sorry it isn't apparent to you. Until you realize the intentional slaughter of innocents, blood sacrifices, and salvation only through belief is not morally justifiable, even for a deity, no matter what the time, place, or circumstances, you will continue to defend the indefensible and dodge the hard moral questions.