|
|
|
pleco
SFN Addict
USA
2998 Posts |
 Posted - 02/14/2007 : 12:57:03 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Robb
It was recorded in verse 1 that Abraham loved Isaac. I doubt you could kill someone you love without emotion. Where did Abraham lie to his son?
Also, Abraham knew that God promised (Gen 17:15)that Sarah would be the mother of Nations and Kings. If Isaac was dead, then God would be a liar. He must have believed that god would stop him or God would raise Isaac from the dead.
If you are true beleiver, you know if you killed your son your son would go to heaven, so what's the big deal? He is doing God's commandment anyway. No emotion is mentioned in the bible, so you can't read any into it.
The lie happens in Genesis 22:8 - it is an intentional misdirection. Abraham had no idea what would happen other than he would kill his son.
Also, by your statement that Abraham already knew of the promise, then this wasn't a real test at all. As a matter of fact, since God made a promise to Sarah, then commanded Abraham to kill which would break the promise, knowing that he wouldn't allow it, is God a deciever? Also, why should God test him? Doesn't God already know everyone even before they were concieved?
Perhaps this wasn't really God, but the Devil? And the author of Genesis got it wrong?
Fun, isn't it? 
|
by Filthy
The neo-con methane machine will soon be running at full fart. |
|
 |
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2007 : 13:11:53 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Robb
quote:
Originally posted by BigPapaSmurf
Technically nothing would be wrong about it. But right and wrong are a matter of perspective and there may be a few billion folks who would do whatever they can to stop you.
Are you saying that right and wrong should be decided on a majority vote?
Perhaps it should be. 'Most all of us have moral and ethical considerations that influence our actions, and consider: few if any wars have ever been started by by the common population of any country.
Evolution has dictated that we are a social primate. As such, we conform to the mores of our societies in the much same ways as any troop of baboons, a quite distant cousin or ours. Like the 'boons, we punish those who violate the rules of the society. Unfortunately, unlike the baboons, we sometimes allow ambitious psychopaths to lead us -- Hitler, Stalin, G.W.Bush, Pol Pot, and so forth, to lead us. We follow them blindly, and this detrimental the welfare if the species.
The major extinctions of the past were caused by outside influences; I am all but convinced that we will be the cause of our own.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
|
BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard
3192 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2007 : 13:33:11 [Permalink]
|
What I am saying is that right and wrong are human creations and not set in stone. Majority vote is a popular method for democracies, though most of the time its decided by deluded fools.
|
"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History
"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini |
| Edited by - BigPapaSmurf on 02/14/2007 13:34:14 |
|
|
|
Robb
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2007 : 14:20:45 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by pleco
If you are true beleiver, you know if you killed your son your son would go to heaven, so what's the big deal?
As long as he understands he is a sinner, repents and accepted Gods grace of Jesus.
quote:
He is doing God's commandment anyway. No emotion is mentioned in the bible, so you can't read any into it.
The Bible said he loved Isaac. In some way this is emotion.
quote:
The lie happens in Genesis 22:8 - it is an intentional misdirection. Abraham had no idea what would happen other than he would kill his son.
Isaac was the sacrifice and God provided him.
quote:
Also, by your statement that Abraham already knew of the promise, then this wasn't a real test at all. As a matter of fact, since God made a promise to Sarah, then commanded Abraham to kill which would break the promise, knowing that he wouldn't allow it, is God a deciever?
No, God kept his promise.
quote:
Also, why should God test him? Doesn't God already know everyone even before they were concieved?
I will ask God this someday.
quote:
Perhaps this wasn't really God, but the Devil? And the author of Genesis got it wrong?
Jesus quoted Genesis as it was the truth.
|
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. - George Washington |
|
|
|
Robb
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2007 : 14:25:08 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by filthy
quote:
Originally posted by Robb
quote:
Originally posted by BigPapaSmurf
Technically nothing would be wrong about it. But right and wrong are a matter of perspective and there may be a few billion folks who would do whatever they can to stop you.
Are you saying that right and wrong should be decided on a majority vote?
Perhaps it should be. 'Most all of us have moral and ethical considerations that influence our actions, and consider: few if any wars have ever been started by by the common population of any country.
Evolution has dictated that we are a social primate. As such, we conform to the mores of our societies in the much same ways as any troop of baboons, a quite distant cousin or ours. Like the 'boons, we punish those who violate the rules of the society. Unfortunately, unlike the baboons, we sometimes allow ambitious psychopaths to lead us -- Hitler, Stalin, G.W.Bush, Pol Pot, and so forth, to lead us. We follow them blindly, and this detrimental the welfare if the species.
The major extinctions of the past were caused by outside influences; I am all but convinced that we will be the cause of our own.
The mores of our society are arbitrary. We have mores because that is what most people believe. But does that make it the truth? Why do you think it was bad (you called him a psychopath) for Hitler to have killed all 6 million Jews? |
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. - George Washington |
|
|
|
Robb
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2007 : 14:26:36 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by BigPapaSmurf
What I am saying is that right and wrong are human creations and not set in stone. Majority vote is a popular method for democracies, though most of the time its decided by deluded fools.
I agree. So how can we in good concience put people in jail for molesting children if no truth is set in stone? |
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. - George Washington |
|
|
|
Robb
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2007 : 14:32:57 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Hawks
I think that the question is a bit misguided. I would substitute Christians for evolution-deniers. The two terms are simply correlated in this instance. Or, maybe that's what you were testing? To see if skeptics would assume that when you say christian. Aha, got you.
No test, only an honest question, I am not that smart. I only wanted to find out how Christians buy into myths about evolution to dispell them whenever I can.
|
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. - George Washington |
|
|
|
pleco
SFN Addict
USA
2998 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2007 : 14:54:41 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Robb
The Bible said he loved Isaac. In some way this is emotion.
The Bible says a lot of things, some of which are not true.
quote:
Isaac was the sacrifice and God provided him.
So this is how you explain it? If you want to read emotions into Abraham, then I read deception. I find this a weak argument on your part.
quote:
No, God kept his promise.
So God is a deceiver.
quote:
I will ask God this someday.
You don't have to, it is in the Bible.
quote:
Jesus quoted Genesis as it was the truth.
That makes Jesus wrong on several fronts then. |
by Filthy
The neo-con methane machine will soon be running at full fart. |
|
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2007 : 15:30:52 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Robb
quote:
Are you saying that if your god wasn't real you would just go on a killing spree and destroy the Earth?
No, but what would be wrong with it if I chose to?
The Golden Rule is older than Christianity, and it's a logically supportable position. It's strong enough that together with cause-and-effect and action-and-reaction principles, that rule of law can be based upon it. Murder is not wrong because God says so. It's because you are robbing someone of the most precious thing the murdered person has: his life.
Eye for an eye is present in laws older than Christianity, and in places all over the world, and murder is punishable everywhere. From code-of-laws formulated by ancient Hammurabi, to Nordic provincial laws from before AD. Or even Native Americans I would guess, even though I don't know anything about Native American society.
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
moakley
SFN Regular
USA
1888 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2007 : 15:41:00 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Robb
quote:
Originally posted by BigPapaSmurf
What I am saying is that right and wrong are human creations and not set in stone. Majority vote is a popular method for democracies, though most of the time its decided by deluded fools.
I agree. So how can we in good concience put people in jail for molesting children if no truth is set in stone?
Why is the stone that your truth is set in the final arbiter in determining what is right and what is wrong? Functioning societies were around prior to the time when your truth was recorded and independent of your truth. Perhaps you are overlooking a much simpler explanation. A recognition by the group that behavior that benefits the individual benefits the group and behavior that harms an individual harms the group. Leading to a system of rewards and punishments as is warranted by the behavior.
Is this perfect, probably not, but could it have originated independent of your truth, absolutely. To suggest otherwise is a bit naive. |
Life is good
Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned. -Anonymous |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2007 : 16:20:36 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Robb
Are you saying that right and wrong should be decided on a majority vote?
As opposed to dictatorial fiat by an absentee landlord? Absolutely.
quote:
So how can we in good concience put people in jail for molesting children if no truth is set in stone?
Because it would go against our consciences not to. Because it goes against our (human) ethics to allow people to molest children. Why would we need to "truth set in stone" when policing our own?
Robb, morals are relative, but that doesn't mean anything goes. Our laws and consciences are informed primary by what we find offensive, disturbing, unfair, or disruptive. By what we have evolved to find offensive, disturbing, unfair, or disruptive. Things which most people have a built in aversion to.
Think of other evolved aversions, Robb. Because human beings lack sufficient antibodies to consume dead meat or fecal matter, unlike some other animals, people pretty much universally find the odor of rotting meat or scat offensive. Now, taste is relative. I hate mushrooms while other people love them. But just because taste is relative doesn't mean that cow shit tastes as good as cupcakes.
It's the same with morals. There are some moral aversions which are pretty much universal in the human species. Any deviation from the norm is just that--deviant behavior--and can rightfully be stamped out by the rest of the group. The consciences which we have all evolved compels us to do so.
So where does our moral authority come from? In a word, us. We are the baseline by which we judge morals, Robb. Human beings. Human morality is an intrinsic part of the human character. It is us. It doesn't come from anywhere.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 02/14/2007 16:31:15 |
|
|
|
JohnOAS
SFN Regular
Australia
800 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2007 : 16:34:20 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by beskeptigal
It doesn't matter. Regardless of what you consider your level of importance to be, what I said was the myth is believing that if you evolved you are lesser than if some god created you.
If you believe that the creator was some flavour of all-powerful, then it is actually quite reasonable to assume that his/her design would be superior to something resulting from an emergent, purposeless process such as evolution.
I personally don't believe this at all, if we were deliberately and consciously designed, then the deity responsible must've skipped a few engineering classes.
quote:
Originally posted by beskeptigal
The myth is that it's somehow demeaning to have evolved. That's just stupid. I am who I am regardless of how the human race came to be.
I agree with the first part. However, some portion of who you are is highly dependant on how the human race came to be. Many behaviours are "built-in" and all but impossible to avoid, regardless of how much an individual may like to do so. |
John's just this guy, you know. |
| Edited by - JohnOAS on 02/14/2007 16:51:46 |
|
|
|
GeeMack
SFN Regular
USA
1093 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2007 : 19:29:47 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Robb...quote:
Originally posted by me...
Kil didn't "assign a purpose" to evolution, but your misrepresenting his comment isn't surprising. That kind of dishonesty seems common among those who desperately cling to their belief in magic at the expense of understanding science.
How was I dishonest? It was a truthful question. It seemed to me he was assigning a purpose to evolution and wanted clarification.
Asking Kil how he could assign a purpose to evolution, when in fact he hadn't, indicated you don't actually understand the process. And you've always been willing to admit that you believe in magic. It may not have been your intent to do so, but misrepresenting evolution, or statements made about it, is a dishonest tactic often used by the superstitious when they want to avoid understanding the science of evolution. It seemed that's what you were doing.quote:
Some advice: If you want to educate someone as you try to in the rest of your post, then do not insult them when they have honest questions.
And some advice for you: If you actually are making an effort to educate yourself about evolution, you might do well to try a bit harder to understand what is actually being said. Unfortunately for you, Robb, there are many who have come ahead of you and made your job more difficult by feigning a desire to learn more about the science. All too often they weren't interested in learning about evolution at all. All too often they were simply trying their damnedest to discredit it, or to find a loophole in it, in order to support their superstitious beliefs. If that isn't your game, you might consider investing a little extra effort to make sure you don't appear to be playing it.
|
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2007 : 20:59:27 [Permalink]
|
quote:
The mores of our society are arbitrary. We have mores because that is what most people believe. But does that make it the truth? Why do you think it was bad (you called him a psychopath) for Hitler to have killed all 6 million Jews?
I'm not sure I understand this. Do you think it was good that Hitler exterminated 6,000,000 jews? Does anyone aside from our modern-day, wannabe-nazis, think that?
And really, what is the difference between the jews and everyone else, discounting some minor genetics? We are, after all, the same species, the lot of us.
A basic code of behavior is hard-wired into all social species, be they ape, equine, or ourselves (another ape, when you come right down to it). In our case, we've added to those codes in various ways, for good or ill. And while we change them around almost daily, we never change those few, basic rules. Could anyone imagine a society where homocide was not only legal but encouraged? Or larceny? Or... treason?
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist!
|
|
|
|
Hawks
SFN Regular
Canada
1383 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2007 : 01:19:54 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Robb
quote:
Originally posted by Neurosis
Are you saying that if your god wasn't real you would just go on a killing spree and destroy the Earth?
No, but what would be wrong with it if I chose to?
Why would it be any more wrong if there is a god? Are you suggesting that murder is wrong just because god claims so? What if god claimed that murder was OK (or even encouraged it)? Would you accept that or would you still think that is was wrong? If you would still think that it was wrong, then surely what god says about it doesn't really matter. |
METHINKS IT IS LIKE A WEASEL
It's a small, off-duty czechoslovakian traffic warden! |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
