The children and infants of those sinful nations that god destroys are unrighteous too, of course. God of the bible would never order his righteous people to slaughter the innocent. If he did, then those babies were evil too, right?
![[Image: 10314461_875206779161622_3907189760171701548_n.jpg]](https://scontent-a-dfw.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfp1/t1.0-9/10314461_875206779161622_3907189760171701548_n.jpg)
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: February 12, 2025, 12:00 pm
Thread Rating:
|
Genocide in the Old Testament
|
 (September 21, 2013 at 10:18 am)John V Wrote: If prohibiting 5-year-old humans from drinking alcohol while allowing adults to do so is a double standard, then yes, double standards are part of my ideal type for humans as well as god. Do you disagree? We accept that animals should not be held to human moral standards because they are too simple to grasp and apply the concept of morality and, therefore, could not rise to the standards we hold for ourselves. What's the excuse for why God is incapable, or unwilling, to rise to our standards? In other words, why should we give him a pass on morals like we give to animals?  (September 21, 2013 at 1:26 pm)Ryantology Wrote: We accept that animals should not be held to human moral standards because they are too simple to grasp and apply the concept of morality and, therefore, could not rise to the standards we hold for ourselves. What's the excuse for why God is incapable, or unwilling, to rise to our standards? In other words, why should we give him a pass on morals like we give to animals?You always like to sneak in words like "rise" when discussing moral standards. Moral standards are different. Saying that one is higher or lower than another is mere opinion.  (September 21, 2013 at 1:53 pm)John V Wrote:(September 21, 2013 at 1:26 pm)Ryantology Wrote: We accept that animals should not be held to human moral standards because they are too simple to grasp and apply the concept of morality and, therefore, could not rise to the standards we hold for ourselves. What's the excuse for why God is incapable, or unwilling, to rise to our standards? In other words, why should we give him a pass on morals like we give to animals?You always like to sneak in words like "rise" when discussing moral standards. Moral standards are different. Saying that one is higher or lower than another is mere opinion. I'd say an asshole who has the power to stop bad shit 100% of the time but does not, is an asshole. Lecturing us on the word "moral" is funny considering the inept deadbeat you worship.  (September 21, 2013 at 1:53 pm)John V Wrote: You always like to sneak in words like "rise" when discussing moral standards. Moral standards are different. Saying that one is higher or lower than another is mere opinion. Weren't you berating me about dodging issues a page ago?
"YOU take the hard look in the mirror. You are everything that is wrong with this world. The only thing important to you, is you." - ronedee
Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects! RE: Genocide in the Old Testament
September 21, 2013 at 2:40 pm
(This post was last modified: September 21, 2013 at 2:41 pm by Ryantology.)
(September 21, 2013 at 1:53 pm)John V Wrote: You always like to sneak in words like "rise" when discussing moral standards. Moral standards are different. Saying that one is higher or lower than another is mere opinion. Moral standards are different, but not arbitrarily so. We hold less advanced beings to less stringent standards. Why do we hold more advanced beings to the same standard as we do for simpler beings, especially when that advanced being is purported to be the very source of morals? (September 21, 2013 at 2:40 pm)Ryantology Wrote: Moral standards are different, but not arbitrarily so. We hold less advanced beings to less stringent standards. Why do we hold more advanced beings to the same standard as we do for simpler beings, especially when that advanced being is purported to be the very source of morals?Aside from the same issue regarding words like advanced (it ain't the supposedly less advanced creatures causing global warming, you know) and stringent, you have an additional problem. We hold less advanced beings to less stringent standards. They don't hold us to any standards. 
Our pets don't hold us to any standards?
Lemonvariable72
Copenhagen School  Religious Views: Its all bullshit to keep you handing money to the usher. (September 21, 2013 at 3:13 pm)BadWriterSparty Wrote: Our pets don't hold us to any standards? Not quite so sure about that, my cat doesn't like it much if I don't feed her.
To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day, To the last syllable of recorded time; And all our yesterdays have lighted fools The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle! Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player, That struts and frets his hour upon the stage, And then is heard no more. It is a tale Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, Signifying nothing.
Exactly my point. Dogs, cats, birds, etc. actually learn to resent their owners if there is perceived neglect.
|
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
