|
|
|
|
the_ignored
SFN Addict
2562 Posts |
 Posted - 10/23/2011 : 21:00:33
|
Wow. This is chilling. This is even worse than William Lane Craig. Why? Read on.
Well, I couldn't let that stand, though it's my fault for commenting there in the first place. I don't know why I always get dragged into this bullshit...
Well, my current reply:
Italics is his reply which I quote in my current reply, bolded statement is my comment that he's quoting in his reply to me, blah blah.
I would agree that God can take the lives of whomever He wishes (1 Sam. 2:6), but I do not agree that all children dying in infancy necessarily get an automatic ticket to heaven.
And that just...makes it worse. Ai. So you believe that babies can be sent to hell? Are you serious? What exactly are you getting at here?
"The same thing could theoretically be said of those who are taken by abortionists, could it not?"
How so?
Well apparently according to what you said, perhaps not. So again, are you saying that those babies can be sent to hell?
Why's it wrong when humans do it and not when your god does it? All that bible bull about "god being able to do what he wants because everything belongs to him" is not true morality...it's not even true responsibility towards one's own children that would be expected of parents in real life!
And that makes all the difference in the world. Since God owns everything and gets to do what He wants with what is His (Matt. 20:15).
Ah, huh. You claim that the concept of morality is because of the existence of your god? Yet he can do whatever he wants? With no regard to the victim whatsoever? And that's moral to you?
We obviously define morality differently then.
The only "moral" gleaned from what you said is: "might makes right" and "Do what I say, not what I do". Well, that and parents have the right to kill their own kids, but uh, you're "pro-life" right?
Anyway, if you have no problem with god killing babies, why do you people even call yourselves "pro-life"? Why the pretense?
That's not morality at all. It's a ticket for your god (if he existed) to do whatever he wants. That's closer to anarchism than any sort of moral code.
Isn't there a bible verse that commands us to be perfect, just as "god" is perfect"? Matthew 5:48
If god can do whatever he wants, and we can't, that verse becomes incoherent. It pretty much implies that god is held to some kind of standard that we are supposed to live up to also. Does that mean that god can lie, and we can't?
Using your reasoning, how can we tell whether your god's actions are good or not? If he kills babies and it's not "wrong" then why do we say that some of his other actions are "good"?
If he can do whatever he wants then we can't judge his actions for good or ill. |
Wow, this guy is not only a presupper, he's crazy too. Look at one of his links under the "Apologetics" section on the right hand side of his blog:
AlienIntrustion.
Naturally, I'm fighting this guy on another blog but at least that blog is a skeptical blog whose post I link to has the blogger arguing against Dusman's circular reasoning.
|
>From: enuffenuff@fastmail.fm
(excerpt follows):
> I'm looking to teach these two bastards a lesson they'll never forget.
> Personal visit by mates of mine. No violence, just a wee little chat.
>
> **** has also committed more crimes than you can count with his
> incitement of hatred against a religion. That law came in about 2007
> much to ****'s ignorance. That is fact and his writing will become well
> know as well as him becoming a publicly known icon of hatred.
>
> Good luck with that fuckwit. And Reynold, fucking run, and don't stop.
> Disappear would be best as it was you who dared to attack me on my
> illness knowing nothing of the cause. You disgust me and you are top of
> the list boy. Again, no violence. Just regular reminders of who's there
> and visits to see you are behaving. Nothing scary in reality. But I'd
> still disappear if I was you.
What brought that on? this. Original posting here.
Another example of this guy's lunacy here. |
Edited by - the_ignored on 10/23/2011 21:15:19
|
|
|
the_ignored
SFN Addict
2562 Posts |
Posted - 10/24/2011 : 02:29:45 [Permalink]
|
This idiocy gets even worse...Look at the contradiction here:
"I was always of the belief that morality takes into consideration the victim's point of view."
It does when Christ's law is assumed as the ultimate authority of ethics, but when God is tossed out of the picture, man does what's right in his own eyes (Judges 21:25).
What?? Look at what you just said to me earlier...
"So, what's the difference? From the victims' view: Nothing. The only difference is in who orders the killings."
And that makes all the difference in the world. Since God owns everything and gets to do what He wants with what is His (Matt. 20:15).
Does that even sound like you're taking the victim's point of view into account here?? NO! Add to that the fact that you don't seem to assume that babies killed automatically get into heaven yet you have no problem with god killing them, you are NOT taking the victims point of view in account at all. |
|
>From: enuffenuff@fastmail.fm
(excerpt follows):
> I'm looking to teach these two bastards a lesson they'll never forget.
> Personal visit by mates of mine. No violence, just a wee little chat.
>
> **** has also committed more crimes than you can count with his
> incitement of hatred against a religion. That law came in about 2007
> much to ****'s ignorance. That is fact and his writing will become well
> know as well as him becoming a publicly known icon of hatred.
>
> Good luck with that fuckwit. And Reynold, fucking run, and don't stop.
> Disappear would be best as it was you who dared to attack me on my
> illness knowing nothing of the cause. You disgust me and you are top of
> the list boy. Again, no violence. Just regular reminders of who's there
> and visits to see you are behaving. Nothing scary in reality. But I'd
> still disappear if I was you.
What brought that on? this. Original posting here.
Another example of this guy's lunacy here. |
 |
|
|
ThorGoLucky
Snuggle Wolf
USA
1487 Posts |
Posted - 10/24/2011 : 15:34:39 [Permalink]
|
| Irrationality can be great entertainment. Thanks for sharing, Ig. |
|
|
|
justintime
BANNED
382 Posts |
Posted - 10/24/2011 : 17:49:26 [Permalink]
|
What most of you illiterates don't understand is the HAND of GOD was strict when the IQ of humans were slightly above those of monkeys. It is over 2000 years since the scriptures have been passed on.
What you are quoting are the old Gods tough love found in archaic scriptures. Today God is viewed as a reasonable, flexible god quite removed from the day to day management of monkeys and their close cousins (humans) and more into the intelligent design he helped to envision. |
|
|
|
the_ignored
SFN Addict
2562 Posts |
Posted - 10/24/2011 : 21:32:45 [Permalink]
|
Well, Dusman replied.
Holy fuck, just...holy fuck. Worse, he's a husband AND a father!
| 1. Yes, babies can be sent to Hell since they are conceived in Adam (Psalm 51:5; 58:3; Rom. 5:19). I could care less whether you think such is hogwash or not, for such is God. |
Yeah, well anyway, italics is him writing:
1. Yes, babies can be sent to Hell since they are conceived in Adam (Psalm 51:5; 58:3; Rom. 5:19). I could care less whether you think such is hogwash or not, for such is God.
You say you're a father, what if your kid died as a baby? Would you still call your god "good" if you believe that he sent your kid to hell?
He was, after all, concieved in Adam. Have you explained this biblical truism to your kid, just how lucky he is that he lived long enough to accept your god so that he could escape hell as a baby?
And what is his "justification" for sending them to hell anyway? Is it THEIR fault that they were "conceived in sin"? Did they CHOOSE to sin? No. They never had a chance.
Don't you think a "good" god who's truly worthy of that adjective would take into account that those babies never actually committed any sins?
After all, why did he kill the canaanites? Because they were killing their kids. Isn't sending babies to hell a lot worse than just merely killing them?
2. God killed the Canaanites after over 400 years of patience against their bestiality, child sacrifice, homosexuality, ritual orgies, and false religion that led to the above practices.
Yep...god had to kill all of them including their kids for the crimes which included, uh...killing their kids.
5. Morality is *grounded* in the being of God and not apart, above, or outside of Him, thus Euthyphro's Dilemma doesn't apply.
What does that even mean? It means this: You've just said that it's moral because god does it, basically.
Seriously: How can you prove such a statement when your own god acts morally inconsistent like that?
You say in point 4 that your god is "justified" in killing people therefore it's not truly murder.
A rose by any other name...still is a rose. What "justification" can there be to kill babies, especially when one of the reasons those people were killed was because they were killing their babies
Apart from God, there is no grounds for objective morality because for morality to be objective it has to appeal to a transcendent, objective source outside of all men.
What makes you think that xians even HAVE "absolute morality" in the first place?
You have no problem with God killing babies and even sending them to bloody HELL, yet you pretend to be "pro-life" because it's wrong for humans to kill babies without god's sanction.
I know that apologists like Robert Turkel and Glen Miller list all sorts of reasons why those people should have been killed (just as you have), but guess what: That amounts to situational ethics, not "absolute morality". To claim that god had reasons to kill babies is just that: situational ethics.
You don't have true morality...you have, as I said earlier: "might makes right" and "do as I say, not as I do".
If you say that morality is defined by your god, then morality is entirely subjective to your god. Whatever god orders is moral irregardless of whether it's considered Ok for humans to do that same action or not and the point of view of the victim is not taken into account, as you've shown.
Contrary to what you said earlier, your version of "morality" does NOT take the victims view into account at all. You have just shown it again with your "point #1" in your reply to me above.
According to your version of "morality" then Susan Smith did nothing wrong because she thought that god was telling her to kill her kids.
Yep..."absolute morality" at play here, eh? Here. Why not have the ancient Israelis just take the infants and kids in, you know, the ones who would NOT actually be guilty of those acts you mentioned, and raise them right? After all, he can supply food,right? (ie. Manna)?
Besides, he had the soldiers take in virgin Midianite women after they killed off everyone else, and they'd be a lot less "innocent" than those kids would have been.
You say you feel for me on judgment day? Please. Assuming such fantasy exists in the first place, my hands are CLEAN compared to those of your morally hypocritical god.
I feel sorry for your kid. His father has an anti-human religious philosophy that masquarades as "absolute morality" .
I can only imagine how you were able to tell him that god loves him, but if he died as a baby, he'd still go to hell! |
|
>From: enuffenuff@fastmail.fm
(excerpt follows):
> I'm looking to teach these two bastards a lesson they'll never forget.
> Personal visit by mates of mine. No violence, just a wee little chat.
>
> **** has also committed more crimes than you can count with his
> incitement of hatred against a religion. That law came in about 2007
> much to ****'s ignorance. That is fact and his writing will become well
> know as well as him becoming a publicly known icon of hatred.
>
> Good luck with that fuckwit. And Reynold, fucking run, and don't stop.
> Disappear would be best as it was you who dared to attack me on my
> illness knowing nothing of the cause. You disgust me and you are top of
> the list boy. Again, no violence. Just regular reminders of who's there
> and visits to see you are behaving. Nothing scary in reality. But I'd
> still disappear if I was you.
What brought that on? this. Original posting here.
Another example of this guy's lunacy here. |
| Edited by - the_ignored on 10/24/2011 22:25:10 |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Presupper not true "pro-life"
