10 Questions Biblical Literalists Cannot Honestly Answer

[The Grand Nudger]

Notice how, in the running and pissing pants theory of atheist encounters with a god..there's still no child sacrifice?

Yes. Notice how, in the account of Abraham which inspired this question...there wasn't any child sacrifice?

I think we all know the story.  God trolls Abe, hard, and Abe's all like "doy doy doy" -but ofc the story itself isn't even remotely the interesting part - or what we were discussing...so?  

The dilemma is familiar to us all, though exagerated for effect in magic book.  What do we do when compelled by authority to commit the unthinkable?  What is it about a person or an authority that would place us in distinctly different categories of response?  Wherein one person says "no, never" - and another says "maybe"...and a third says "doy doy doy" and grabs the knife.......with reference to child sacrifice?   

It seems as though any answer to those questions would be profoundly disturbing, not that I expect them from you.  I'm getting a distinctly trollish vibe, and I suspect that's how Abe would have felt after the whole ordeal was over.  Who contends that they would, maybe, kill their son, and responds to criticism of that sinister affirmation by calling anyone who wouldn't a pussy?  

[Mister Agenda]

Wow - just feeling the xtian love absolutely oozing through the screen lately.

It's almost like there's no supernatural force helping them live up to a higher standard.

---

 Who contends that they would, maybe, kill their son, and responds to criticism of that sinister affirmation by calling anyone who wouldn't a pussy?  

I think he's saying a command from an unfathomably powerful being would have us reaching for the knife in sheer terror. He's not entirely without a point, people can be terrorized into doing things that would normally be unthinkable for them. In theory, displeasing a reality warper would be a Very Bad Thing. Of course telling what the beast really wants can be dodgy; the Abrahamic God seems to be a trickster.

[vorlon13]

The other provisions mentioned are just in the law, and so only apply to Israel. This isn't a difficult concept. I don't know why skeptics struggle so much with it.

Jesus was very clear: "Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one letter, not one stroke of a letter, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. Therefore, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, will be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven."

It is a simple concept that it's only for Israel because Jesus said he was only here for the Jews and you're not a Jew so Jesus is not for you.

But Apostle Paul countermanded Jesus !!

Wherever Jesus is in gross and grievous error, Paul steps up to the plate and corrects the Son of God's sorry mistake riddled ass !!!


Praise Jesus PAUL !!!!

[The Grand Nudger]

I think he's saying a command from an unfathomably powerful being would have us reaching for the knife in sheer terror. He's not entirely without a point, people can be terrorized into doing things that would normally be unthinkable for them. In theory, displeasing a reality warper would be a Very Bad Thing. Of course telling what the beast really wants can be dodgy; the Abrahamic God seems to be a trickster.

Pretty sure he thinks that we're going to piss our pants and run away, but he thinks that -he- might be scared into stabbing.  

While we can certainly be scared into alot of things, filicide doesn't seem to be one of the commonly recurring ones, for most people.  I strongly suspect that the reaction "murdered own child" is an outlier in the field of being scared shitless.  

Similarly, people who would legitimately, not in some pantomime of their beliefs, but legitimately consider this act as a credible outcome of their having met a god or been told by a god to do it are expressing something that would be terrifying were it not for it;s absolute ubiquity in our culture.  Evil as wholesome as apple pie, like always.  Their fear or fealty outweighs the value of their child's life, to them - and to say so is taken as a sign of great faith and strong moral character.   Rather than consider it abjectly unjustifiable murder, the concept is framed as a difficult choice to make within the overall context of divine command and authority.   It takes a strong man to make such a difficult choice, to take such a leap of faith.  God, in the narrative, tests his faith by exploiting the weakness of his basic human love for a child. He is rewarded for his obediance, and the implication of having his faith so sorely tested is that he would -not- have been rewarded had he chosen to listen to the better angels of his own nature. The failure condition for this test, was basic human decency. I don't find anything in that to be ambiguous or tricky. God wants obedience.

All of this shit is positively valued in our culture............but from the point of view of a perpetual outsider it just seems like a band of ghouls trying to outdo each other for asslicking.

[emjay]

I think he's saying a command from an unfathomably powerful being would have us reaching for the knife in sheer terror. He's not entirely without a point, people can be terrorized into doing things that would normally be unthinkable for them. In theory, displeasing a reality warper would be a Very Bad Thing. Of course telling what the beast really wants can be dodgy; the Abrahamic God seems to be a trickster.

Pretty sure he thinks that we're going to piss our pants and run away, but he thinks that -he- might be scared into stabbing.  

While we can certainly be scared into alot of things, filicide doesn't seem to be one of the commonly recurring ones, for most people.  I strongly suspect that the reaction "murdered own child" is an outlier in the field of being scared shitless.  

Similarly, people who would legitimately, not in some pantomime of their beliefs, but legitimately consider this act as a credible outcome of their having met a god or been told by a god to do it are expressing something that would be terrifying were it not for it;s absolute ubiquity in our culture.  Evil as wholesome as apple pie, like always.  Their fear or fealty outweighs the value of their child's life, to them - and to say so is taken as a sign of great faith and strong moral character.   Rather than consider it abjectly unjustifiable murder, the concept is framed as a difficult choice to make within the overall context of divine command and authority.   It takes a strong man to make such a difficult choice, to take such a leap of faith.  God, in the narrative, tests his faith by exploiting the weakness of his basic human love for a child. He is rewarded for his obediance, and the implication of having his faith so sorely tested is that he would -not- have been rewarded had he chosen to listen to the better angels of his own nature. The failure condition for this test, was basic human decency. I don't find anything in that to be ambiguous or tricky. God wants obedience.

All of this shit is positively valued in our culture............but from the point of view of a perpetual outsider it just seems like a band of ghouls trying to outdo each other for asslicking.

Yes, it's an utter bullshit state of affairs; when I was growing up I asked one of my parents (I'll leave it at that) what they would do in that situation and was told that yes, they would sacrifice me without a second thought. The takeaway for me then just as much as now is the same: that strip away all the noble language and talk of God's will etc and what it boils down to is the selfish you want to go to heaven and will do anything it takes to get there. That's all that has ever meant to me, and was not a nice message to learn growing up... always playing second fiddle to God. Like wanting to scream... 'I'm here... I'm real... you can see me! but you choose this thing you can't see and can't prove over me'.

[Cyberman]

To borrow a leaf out of the excellent God On Trial, when yhwh commanded Abraham to kill his son, why didn't Abe refuse? Why didn't he teach it the mercy that's in our hearts? He didn't even question the command, which I get it was the whole point of the story. So it must have been within what Abraham knew was the character of his god; that it was something it would do. He didn't think to wonder if what he was told to do was right or wrong - something we've known since the Eden Incident apparently.

The real smoking gun? "God" knew all this before it even got out of bed that morning. It knew the number of hairs on the guy's head, ffs. It definitely knew there was more than Elisha had, for one thing (see Operation Goldilocks).

What a more inspiring story it could have been, to have had Abraham standing up to yhwh and explaining exactly why such blind obedience is wrong and how might never makes right - and have yhwh commending him for his morality in questioning a questionable authority, resisting evil and the importance of questioning one's sources. Then smiting him with cancer of the cock anyway, because Old Testament God is still a massive shit.

[Drich]

Sure, so what do you say Dirch you want to be my slave?

I like every other human being not living in a state of delusion/western country would have to consider it depending on my status and ability to provide for myself and my family.

I'll treat you just like the Bible commands. I'll beat you up every day, since slave can be pummeled almost to death as long as he/she survives

Punishes sport read the passage again. you can just beat for no reason.

"Anyone who beats their male or female slave with a rod must be punished if the slave dies as a direct result, but they are not to be punished if the slave recovers after a day or two, since the slave is their property".

bt again the crime must fit the punishment least God judge you using the same measure you judge others.

(Exodus 21:20–21). For the very first day I'll give you a shiner, but since I'm so good I'll let you pick underneath which eye you want, but don't worry your eye will be safe because although there is certainly nothing wrong with beating you up as long as you don't lose any body parts "An owner who hits a male or female slave in the eye and destroys it must let the slave go free to compensate for the eye. And an owner who knocks out the tooth of a male or female slave must let the slave go free to compensate for the tooth." Exodus 21:26–27

So you'll have bruises and broken bones since they are tolerable violence since you said "slavery can indeed be a good thing", so what are you waiting for?

wow the first day and the power of own a slave has carried you outside the law of God. No wonder people like you are taught all slavery is bad.. because you have no human decency. meaning you can not care nor be trusted with the care of another human life with hurting it to please yourself.

[The Grand Nudger]

See what this religion does to people?  One would kill his son, and the other would sell him.

I mean, that, or...they're just bullshitting us out of a refusal to acknowledge their own disagreement with god and magic book.

[vorlon13]

Well . .

God tolerated His son being executed to appease Himself as being a fair trade for updating Judaism, but then lost interest in the project when Paul hijacked the faith and turned it upside down.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

10. Do you believe hell is a justifiable punishment for a simple lack of belief?

Nope. But as Biblically hell isn't punishment for a simple lack of belief, it's not an issue. People who say this don't understand mercy. It's like saying that every person who is in prison is being punished for not successfully applying for a pardon. No, they're in there for a crime. If they get pardoned, that's a separate matter.

And lack of belief was the most heinous crime.