RE: Four questions for Christians
June 23, 2013 at 3:40 pm
(This post was last modified: June 23, 2013 at 3:51 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
(June 23, 2013 at 1:55 pm)Consilius Wrote: This Bible story did not take place in a democratic 21st century society. This is ancient Egypt. Rulers all around the ancient world killed kids because of what their parents did. It was the common practice. The Egyptians had no reason to expect anything other than the very punishment he had dished out to others. That would be unfair: God judging people by his own unique law code that just so happens to match our particular time and place and not theirs is arbitrary judgement and would be illegal all around the world.Regardless of whether or not it was common practice, or who did it, we would consider this a very base sort of immorality. If I am to apply this sort of standard, and if it is to be relevant than you must bring something to the table which amounts to more than a singsong TQ. "Pharoah did it, kings did it, it was common" - is simply more of the same and is as unacceptable now (for the very same reason) as it was the previous two times. I will not explain this again. Does your gods unique code of law match our own, do you figure? Because it seems to me, that this whole genocide bit is part of that code - and not part of ours. Lets not pretend that the code you're talking about belongs in the "now", as opposed to the "then". You like to imagine a fair god, perhaps a more pleasant or just god, good for you, I suggest you ditch this tale for what it is. Fiction. Then you might not feel compelled to defend such horrid shit in such a breathtakingly incompetent way.
Quote:You just condemned war itself. You can't ask an entire nation to forgive an aggressor because the leader of the country says we should be forgiving. That would be endangering the lives of millions of people. The leader of the nation can get martyred on his or her own, but he or she shouldn't expect the citizens to do so as well.No, I've repeatedly condemned the actions of a character in a narrative, and further explained why you have failed to defend them in the manner you clearly wish to do. This is the second time I'll remind you that I have not brought this (hippies, war etc) up, nor have I implied anything of the sort. If you cannot defend the claims made by the narrative - and lets be clear, it doesn't appear that you're capable of doing so....then that's that. You can continue to voice the same defense, I will continue to remind you of it's inadequacy. If there is a way that this narrative (and particularly the characters in this narrative) can be reconciled, you have not found it. So perhaps, and this is just a suggestion - take it or leave it- you should cut "god" a break and stop dragging it's "good name" through the mud of your own ill-conceived justifications?
If you want to bicker with someone over the morality of conflict be my guest, start that thread, find someone who's even remotely interested in engaging you in that conversation.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!