(July 3, 2013 at 2:49 am)Ryantology Wrote:Is that a "tu quoque" defense I hear?(July 3, 2013 at 1:59 am)Consilius Wrote: What the specific event could possibly be is irrelevant. Let's say that children could be made into the optimal bioweapons for an intergalactic conquest that would supply earth with unheard of bounties of natural resources.
My argument is not limited to this case I just made up. It represents much more.
I believe the specific event is of paramount importance. There are specific examples of child genocide described as 'good' in the context of Christian morality. It is not just an ambiguous idea to Christianity; child genocide is explicitly acceptable according to the morals you are supposed to adhere to. If you are attempting to suggest that secular morality does not hold a higher ground, you have to come up with at least one reasonable scenario in which a modern secular morality would, in a manner like your morality, not only regard mass slaughter of children as acceptable but an act which is explicitly considered positive.
I mean, is "God said so" the only acceptable justification?
Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: January 7, 2025, 5:25 am
Thread Rating:
Four questions for Christians
|
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Users browsing this thread: 23 Guest(s)