Christian school.

[Darth Wong]

Killing, I think, is permissable in only 2 circumstances: if God specifically comes down and says to do it, or in a just war

Morality according to Jonathan Boyd: if you think God wants you to, then go right ahead and kill women, children, little babies, anybody.

Plop this guy into the medieval crusades, and he would have been at the head of the charge, butchering Muslim babies with a big shit-eating grin on his face.

[Cthulhu-chan]

deserve death? for what?

For not paying attention to god, of course. I mean, we exist merely to stroke his ego, don't ya know? He's super, super powerful, but has a glass jaw for self-esteem, so he needs us to constantly tell him he's the shiznit. Plus, he's ridden with lots of guilt, so he needs us to keep repeating that he's such a groovy guy that would never hurt us if we didn't deserve it. Hell, if we keep it up, he just might believe it.

[Jonathan]

For the umpteenth time, the Bible praises the ancient Israelites for committing mass-murder in the service of their bloodthirsty god. I recommend everyone look at the Hatemail page entry for "Jonathan Boyd" on my Creationism website.

It praises God when the Israelites kill some evil people at his command. God did not come along and say 'go torture all those Protestants'.

Actually #1 is to have no other god before the Judeo-Christian God, and #2 is to have no graven images. None of the original ten commandments said anything about loving your fellow man. But of course, we all know how poor Biblical consistency is, and it's no surprise that Jesus would get them wrong. He was only human, after all.

Jesus was summarising. The first 4 of the 10 commandments concern our attitude toward God, which is summed up by 'love him' and the next 6 concern our attitude toward other people, which is summed up by 'love them.'

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. It tells us to go and spread the Gospel to people. Kinda hard ot do if you kill them.

Yadda yadda yadda, acting as if the Old Testament doesn't exist, or that Jesus never told us to worship the God who claimed responsibility for such atrocities.

Funny, I've always made it very clear that I believe that the OT talks about the Christian God and is an accurate, inspired account. I I've also made it clear that God deserves to be worshipped. As would be clear from my posts, as you're so fond of saying. I believe that I've also explained the difference between a time of Law and a time of Grace. There was no Good News to tell people in the OT because Jesus hadn't come yet.

Who ignores the Bible more? Me, or a typical medieval Crusader?

Judge not lest ye be judged. I'm not going to make a call on that, other than to say that none of us follow it perfectly and that the crusades were certainly not Christian.

Ah yes, this is the theological equivalent of "you brought this punishment down upon yourself, boy! Now stay still while I give you a whuppin'!"

No, it's the equivalent of saying 'you brought this on yourself but if you say sorry, I'll take the whuppin' instead'

Killed, not murdered. Murdered is a pejorative term and shouldn't be used in a debate about whether such an action was right or not because it implies that your mind is made up and you are refusing to consider other possabilities.

Murder is the technically correct term for killing someone in any situation other than self-defense,

No, it's the technically correct term for killing someone unlawfully.

asshole.

Now that's just plain not nice. Let's hug and make up. I think that sd.net could do with a few group hugs :^)

Of COURSE murder is a perjorative term; MOST of us recognize that it's bad to kill people! Too bad you don't.

I think that it's bad for us to unless we have a very, very, very good reason.

Precisely. You think it's OK to murder people and torture them forever because they ALL deserve it equally, since there is no difference between mass-murder and swearing. And you don't understand why you're a raving loon.

I think it's okay for people to be cut off from God is that's what they really want. The fact that that entails being cut off from al that is good and loving and they've been warned about it is their problem. God's done everything he can for us by dying on the cross and offering to take our place.

If you reject God, you're asking to be separated from him, right? So that's what God gives people. Cuts them off from him forever. Of course he warns them what it's going to be like, but people are still convinced that it'll be a lot more fun without him. I find is sad that they get it wrong, but it's their choice and they got exactly what they asked for.

And you get exactly what you ask for, which is to be vilified as an utterly amoral fanatic and a moron.

So, rather than respond to my point, you call me names. Isn't there a phrase to describe that?I'll just go check the logical fallacies sticky at the top of the page...

No, I expect Christians to respect individuals on their own merits. But of course, it's not surprising that YOU would think in terms of group associations, because that's how it works in your twisted morality.

Actually, I was turning back various questions that were being thrown about concerning respect. I never stated what I thought on the matter, so you're just jumping to conclusions and name-calling needlessly. Get some sleep. You'll be less grumpy in the morning.

You can't cancel out evil by pointing out good things. Would you expect people to forgive a mass-murderer because he helps out at the soup kitchen?

Remarkable, we're in agreement. Of course you can't cancel out evil, which is why people need forgiven and salvation through grace, rather than earning their way into God's favour, which I've said repeatedly. I think that forgiveness should always be offered to everyone, though they will not actually be forgiven unless they say they're sorry and sincerely mean it.

But this is really about God and his actions, isn't it? If evil can not be cancelled out, and the wages of sin is death, then all sinners are deserving of death unless they seek forgiveness. That's why I justify God killing sinners in the OT.

Yes, and you wonder why I despise the actions of the Old Testament God, and have little more respect for the revised New Testament God, whose only real improvement is to defer his cruelty until the afterlife. What greater injustice is there than punishing people not based on their actions in life, but based on their beliefs?

It is based very much on their actions - their failure to follow the laws. Failure to worship God above all else. Of course, it's hard to worship something you don't believe in.

Oldest bullshit line in the book. If God loves the sinner, why does he place conditions on forgiving him which have nothing to do with atonement, and everything to do with kissing his ass?

Forgiveness is unconditional unless you count sincerity when asking for forgiveness as a condition. There are certain signs of sincerity, such as a desire to worship God, but that doesn't mean that they are actual requirements.

[Jonathan]

Alright, how many sins can an infant be guilty of?
That is total bullshit as a defence.

Sinful desires in their heart, which God will be aware of. However, knowing their heart, he will know if they have a desire to turn to him and would later in life ask for forgiveness which they are incapable of expressing now. I believe therefore, that God would judge them according to their hearts and any with the desire to seek forgiveness would go to Heaven, which is much better than being stuck down here and those without the desire would go to Hell, which is where they would end up anyway.

[Jonathan]

deserve death? for what?

For not paying attention to god, of course. I mean, we exist merely to stroke his ego, don't ya know? He's super, super powerful, but has a glass jaw for self-esteem, so he needs us to constantly tell him he's the shiznit. Plus, he's ridden with lots of guilt, so he needs us to keep repeating that he's such a groovy guy that would never hurt us if we didn't deserve it. Hell, if we keep it up, he just might believe it.

Why would God, being all powerful need anything? He asks for worship because he deserves it and enjoys it and deserves to enjoy it.

[Jonathan]

Killing, I think, is permissable in only 2 circumstances: if God specifically comes down and says to do it, or in a just war

Morality according to Jonathan Boyd: if you think God wants you to, then go right ahead and kill women, children, little babies, anybody.

I said 'if God comes down and says to do it' and have on other occassions made it very clear that it's the kind of thing that you'd have to be very, very, very, certain about it, spend time in prayer over the issue, have some sort of sign that it's the right thing to do, etc. If I thought I heard a voice telling me to kill someone, I'd spend a long time making sure that I'm not imagining things and request some sort of brain scan to make sure I haven't fallen on my head. The pattern of the Bible is that judgement was carried out here on earth by man at God's bidding, while we lived under the Law. Now that we are under Grace, that judgement is delayed until Jesus' Second Coming, when he will judge in person. I don't picture God using us as instruments of judgement, killing people, in this age. I do not believe that God would call anyone to kill except in a just war.

Plop this guy into the medieval crusades, and he would have been at the head of the charge, butchering Muslim babies with a big shit-eating grin on his face.

Yes, because when I said that they were wrong, I really meant that I wished I'd lived a thousand years earlier and been leading the charge Chuck in a bit more emotive language and you might have that lynch mob you're after.

[Darth Wong]

It praises God when the Israelites kill some evil people at his command. God did not come along and say 'go torture all those Protestants'.

Deuteronomy 2:30-34

But Sihon king of Heshbon refused to let us pass through. For the LORD your God had made his spirit stubborn and his heart obstinate in order to give him into your hands, as he has now done. The LORD said to me, "See, I have begun to deliver Sihon and his country over to you. Now begin to conquer and possess his land." When Sihon and all his army came out to meet us in battle at Jahaz, the LORD our God delivered him over to us and we struck him down, together with his sons and his whole army. At that time we took all his towns and completely destroyed them--men, women and children. We left no survivors.

And from Deuteronomy 3:2-6

The LORD said to me, "Do not be afraid of him, for I have handed him over to you with his whole army and his land. Do to him what you did to Sihon king of the Amorites, who reigned in Heshbon." So the LORD our God also gave into our hands Og king of Bashan and all his army. We struck them down, leaving no survivors. At that time we took all his cities. There was not one of the sixty cities that we did not take from them--the whole region of Argob, Og's kingdom in Bashan. All these cities were fortified with high walls and with gates and bars, and there were also a great many unwalled villages. We completely destroyed them, as we had done with Sihon king of Heshbon, destroying every city--men, women and children.

Remember, kiddies; it's OK to butcher children if you think God says so, because they must be "evil"! Just ask Jonathan Boyd!

[Cthulhu-chan]

Why would God, being all powerful need anything? He asks for worship because he deserves it and enjoys it and deserves to enjoy it.

So you admit he's self-centered. Mighty big of you. As for assuaging his guilt, why do you think he nailed himself to some wood? Certainly not for anything we did! We've only exercized our "god given" right to choose our own path. Nah, he was making up for all those tantrums he threw when we mad choices he didn't like. It was all rather a hollow gesture, seeing as he didn't really die...

[Darth Wong]

Morality according to Jonathan Boyd: if you think God wants you to, then go right ahead and kill women, children, little babies, anybody.

I said 'if God comes down and says to do it' and have on other occassions made it very clear that it's the kind of thing that you'd have to be very, very, very, certain about it, spend time in prayer over the issue, have some sort of sign that it's the right thing to do, etc.

None of which changes your claim that if you think God wants you to, then it's all right to go ahead and butcher women and children.

If I thought I heard a voice telling me to kill someone, I'd spend a long time making sure that I'm not imagining things and request some sort of brain scan to make sure I haven't fallen on my head. The pattern of the Bible is that judgement was carried out here on earth by man at God's bidding, while we lived under the Law. Now that we are under Grace, that judgement is delayed until Jesus' Second Coming, when he will judge in person. I don't picture God using us as instruments of judgement, killing people, in this age. I do not believe that God would call anyone to kill except in a just war.

According to your beliefs, he did before.

Plop this guy into the medieval crusades, and he would have been at the head of the charge, butchering Muslim babies with a big shit-eating grin on his face.

Yes, because when I said that they were wrong, I really meant that I wished I'd lived a thousand years earlier and been leading the charge Chuck in a bit more emotive language and you might have that lynch mob you're after.

Don't play games, Johnny Crusader. You just admitted that if you honestly, sincerely believe that God wants you to murder babies, then it's OK to murder babies. The Crusaders honestly believed God wanted them to do it; you benefit only from the knowledge of hindsight and historians whose sense of morality is better than yours.

[Kuroneko]

Ah, so it was intended less as a commandment and more of a clarification... the actual commandments being more specific and found elsewhere in the books, i.e. "don't murder" and "don't torture." That would make more sense.

Pretty much, yeah. The Sermon on the Mount does a lot of clarification of what the Law given in the OT is about...

Alright. Then I have no problem with the 'Golden Rule' in itself.

If you're not convinced it's right, don't do it, would be my way of doing things. Killing, I think, is permissable in only 2 circumstances: if God specifically comes down and says to do it, or in a just war (i.e. one which is to prevent a larger evil. WWII would be a just war for instance, while the Crusades were not).

Though you have to understand... I won't believe a claim made by anyone that he has been commanded by God to kill another person on just their word. If God wants to me to believe, he'll have to come down and tell me himself. Until then, I'll go with delusion as the more likely cause.

Self defence is something I'm not sure about.

If self-defense is a sin, then I will sin in this manner.

Bascially, I'm of the opinion that we all deserve death...

We were just talking about how Nietzsche viewed Christianity as nihilistic not so long ago... could you give your reasons for this view?

[Jonathan]

Deuteronomy 2:30-34

And from Deuteronomy 3:2-6

Remember, kiddies; it's OK to butcher children if you think God says so, because they must be "evil"! Just ask Jonathan Boyd!

Your passages talk about specific instances where God gives specific commands. Nowhere does he grant a licence to gow round doing this. And I've already pointed out that this is a consequence of living under the Law, rather than under Grace as we do now, so judgement was brought upon people rather more immediately back then.

[Darth Wong]

Deuteronomy 2:30-34

And from Deuteronomy 3:2-6

Remember, kiddies; it's OK to butcher children if you think God says so, because they must be "evil"! Just ask Jonathan Boyd!

Your passages talk about specific instances where God gives specific commands. Nowhere does he grant a licence to gow round doing this. And I've already pointed out that this is a consequence of living under the Law, rather than under Grace as we do now, so judgement was brought upon people rather more immediately back then.

Notice how the bullshitter resorts to the classic fundie moron trick of explaining his beliefs while completely ignoring the underlying point, which is the morality of his claim that it's OK to kill women and children if you think God wants you to.

EDIT: not to mention his claim that all of the victims of God's OT cruelty were "evil", even though I have just shown through the use of direct Bible quotes that these victims included children. Typical evasion: show that he's either wrong or hopelessly immoral, and watch him do the fundie knee-jerk: "ummm, I'll just explain my beliefs again".

[Jonathan]

Notice how the bullshitter resorts to the classic fundie moron trick of explaining his beliefs while completely ignoring the underlying point, which is the morality of his claim that it's OK to kill women and children if you think God wants you to.

Notice how when Mike finds a debate hard, he'll step back and start throwing insults.

I was clarifying my position and giving reasons for why I hold the position. Looks like I'll have ton do it again. I don't believe it's okay to kill women and children if you think God wants you to. I think that we all deserve death for our sins and if God decided to judge us here and now and chose someone as his means of judgement to kill someone the person being judged, that would be right. However, having spent tonight thinking about it, we now live under Grace, rather than the Law, so God's judgement is deferred until the Second Coming and he would never ask us to do that, so if anyone claims that they're doing it at his command, thay're most likely nuts or lying.

[Darth Wong]

Notice how the bullshitter resorts to the classic fundie moron trick of explaining his beliefs while completely ignoring the underlying point, which is the morality of his claim that it's OK to kill women and children if you think God wants you to.

Notice how when Mike finds a debate hard, he'll step back and start throwing insults.

Avoiding the point in favour of style over substance fallacies and ad-hominems, eh? Typical fundie debate tactics. You did not address the point; that is fallacious. If I address the point and add an insult, that is NOT fallacious, even if it is not polite.

Fact: you claimed that all of the victims of God's OT cruelty were "evil", so it was OK to kill them.
Fact: I showed that many of them were children.
Fact: You completely ignored this point and tried to change the subject to questions of immediacy and specific vs general commands for cruelty.

I was clarifying my position and giving reasons for why I hold the position. Looks like I'll have ton do it again. I don't believe it's okay to kill women and children if you think God wants you to.

Then why did you say it was OK to do so in the OT?

I think that we all deserve death for our sins and if God decided to judge us here and now and chose someone as his means of judgement to kill someone the person being judged, that would be right.

How is that different from "it's OK to kill somebody if God says so?"

However, having spent tonight thinking about it, we now live under Grace, rather than the Law, so God's judgement is deferred until the Second Coming and he would never ask us to do that, so if anyone claims that they're doing it at his command, thay're most likely nuts or lying.

Trying to wriggle away from admitting your own gross immorality, eh? The fact remains that you said it's OK to kill people if you think God wants you to, and now you're trying to wriggle out of that with excuses, restating the same thing in different terms, and finally, mumbling that God would never ask for that anyway (even though he's done so before, and changed his mind before), even though that has nothing to do with the basic point that if God really did ask you to, you would do it.

Point blank: if God himself came down and commanded you to kill a baby, would you do it? Don't try to avoid the moral question by saying he wouldn't ask you to do that or assuming you don't believe him; this is about YOUR moral values, not God's history. WOULD YOU DO IT?

[Cthulhu-chan]

That doesn't change the fact that it was wrong then, as well. Whole-sale slaughter because "they don't worship my invisible friend" is always immoral.

[Jonathan]

None of which changes your claim that if you think God wants you to, then it's all right to go ahead and butcher women and children.

I don't believe it's okay to kill women and children if you think God wants you to. I think that we all deserve death for our sins and if God decided to judge us here and now and chose someone as his means of judgement to kill someone the person being judged, that would be right. However, having spent tonight thinking about it, we now live under Grace, rather than the Law, so God's judgement is deferred until the Second Coming and he would never ask us to do that, so if anyone claims that they're doing it at his command, thay're most likely nuts or lying.

If I thought I heard a voice telling me to kill someone, I'd spend a long time making sure that I'm not imagining things and request some sort of brain scan to make sure I haven't fallen on my head. The pattern of the Bible is that judgement was carried out here on earth by man at God's bidding, while we lived under the Law. Now that we are under Grace, that judgement is delayed until Jesus' Second Coming, when he will judge in person. I don't picture God using us as instruments of judgement, killing people, in this age. I do not believe that God would call anyone to kill except in a just war.

According to your beliefs, he did before.

Yes... I believe I said that and just explained why I don't think he would call us to do that anymore. Would you care to comment on that? Or is this the IWOI I hear so much about?

Don't play games, Johnny Crusader.

Awww, you've got a pet name for me. I'm touched. Do I get to call you snookums now :^) I spell Jonny without an h, BTW, as do most right thinking Jonathans. It's nice to be called Jonny again. Get called John in England and it seems so much stuffier and more formal than being Jonny when I'm at home.

So, thanks for the homely touch :^)

You just admitted that if you honestly, sincerely believe that God wants you to murder babies, then it's OK to murder babies.

No, I said that that if God called you to carry out judgement on someone in that way, then it would be right.

The Crusaders honestly believed God wanted them to do it;

That doesn't mean he did. And I think a lot of them were in it for the looting, raping and pillaging. And possibly the looping, wrapping and packing of spoils of war.

you benefit only from the knowledge of hindsight and historians whose sense of morality is better than yours.

I think I would have benefitted from my knowledge, intelligence and most importantly, God revealing himself in the Bible and come to the same conclusion. I am basing everything I say on the Bible, which was the same back then as it is now.

[Darth Wong]

By the way, I couldn't let this go without comment:

Ah yes, this is the theological equivalent of "you brought this punishment down upon yourself, boy! Now stay still while I give you a whuppin'!"

No, it's the equivalent of saying 'you brought this on yourself but if you say sorry, I'll take the whuppin' instead'

So God will torture himself for eternity? Funny, there's nothing in the Bible about that. Oh wait, you believe that Jesus being crucified is somehow equivalent to everything wrong that ever happened in the world

You can't cancel out evil by pointing out good things. Would you expect people to forgive a mass-murderer because he helps out at the soup kitchen?

Remarkable, we're in agreement. Of course you can't cancel out evil, which is why people need forgiven and salvation through grace, rather than earning their way into God's favour, which I've said repeatedly. I think that forgiveness should always be offered to everyone, though they will not actually be forgiven unless they say they're sorry and sincerely mean it.

But this is really about God and his actions, isn't it? If evil can not be cancelled out, and the wages of sin is death, then all sinners are deserving of death unless they seek forgiveness. That's why I justify God killing sinners in the OT.

Notice how he quietly changes the subject from God's evil to the evil of "sinners", almost as if he doesn't recognize that by his own logic, God's own acts of evil make him irredeemable. It's always so hard to pin down a slippery fundie on the question of God's evil.

Oldest bullshit line in the book. If God loves the sinner, why does he place conditions on forgiving him which have nothing to do with atonement, and everything to do with kissing his ass?

Forgiveness is unconditional unless you count sincerity when asking for forgiveness as a condition. There are certain signs of sincerity, such as a desire to worship God, but that doesn't mean that they are actual requirements.

Sincerity is irrelevant when you are asking forgiveness from God rather than the victim of your crimes, and you are not making any kind of atonement for them. But of course, many Biblical "sins" are victimless, aren't they, so there's no victim from whom to ask forgiveness. How convenient, then, that God is placed in that position.

[Darth Wong]

I don't believe it's okay to kill women and children if you think God wants you to. I think that we all deserve death for our sins and if God decided to judge us here and now and chose someone as his means of judgement to kill someone the person being judged, that would be right.

Which is exactly the same thing as "it's OK to kill women and children if you think God wants you to".

According to your beliefs, he did before.

Yes... I believe I said that and just explained why I don't think he would call us to do that anymore. Would you care to comment on that? Or is this the IWOI I hear so much about?

Speak for yourself, sophistic asshole. Your explanations don't work for shit; God is supposedly infinite and inscrutable, hence you cannot know whether he will simply change his mind again.

Don't play games, Johnny Crusader.

Awww, you've got a pet name for me. I'm touched. Do I get to call you snookums now :^) I spell Jonny without an h, BTW, as do most right thinking Jonathans. It's nice to be called Jonny again. Get called John in England and it seems so much stuffier and more formal than being Jonny when I'm at home.

So, thanks for the homely touch :^)

I like the way you use these long rebuttals to off-hand comment sin order to draw attention to them and away from your own immoral arguments.

You just admitted that if you honestly, sincerely believe that God wants you to murder babies, then it's OK to murder babies.

No, I said that that if God called you to carry out judgement on someone in that way, then it would be right.

And how is that different? All you've done is replace "if God wants you to" with "if God called you to".

The Crusaders honestly believed God wanted them to do it;

That doesn't mean he did. And I think a lot of them were in it for the looting, raping and pillaging. And possibly the looping, wrapping and packing of spoils of war.

You're still ignoring the whole point, which is that you believe killing is OK if God wants you to, and this is the exact mentality which led to so much suffering in the past.

I think I would have benefitted from my knowledge, intelligence and most importantly, God revealing himself in the Bible and come to the same conclusion. I am basing everything I say on the Bible, which was the same back then as it is now.

Yes, it was, wasn't it? The importance of that fact seems lost on you.

[Jonathan]

Alright. Then I have no problem with the 'Golden Rule' in itself.

Good stuff. This is a pleasant debate so far. Thank you for your courtesy, it makes a much welcome change from some people.

Though you have to understand... I won't believe a claim made by anyone that he has been commanded by God to kill another person on just their word. If God wants to me to believe, he'll have to come down and tell me himself.

In most cases, I get to say he already did that with Jesus :^)

Until then, I'll go with delusion as the more likely cause.

Yeah, I would to since we're living under Grace rather than Law, so God's probably going to hold off on judgement until the second Coming.

If self-defense is a sin, then I will sin in this manner.

It's a tricky one. I don't want to bring harm to people, but at the same time, I feel that there is work for me to do here. I hope I'm never in the situation.

Oh and suicide would be wrong, but giving your life to save another's would be okay.

We were just talking about how Nietzsche viewed Christianity as nihilistic not so long ago... could you give your reasons for this view?

<groan> Can't stand that guy. What exactly was it he said?

Just grabbed this from the Internet Encyclopaedia of Philosophy to make sure I have my definition right:

Nihilism is the belief that all values are baseless and that nothing can be known or communicated. It is often associated with extreme pessimism and a radical skepticism that condemns existence. A true nihilist would believe in nothing, have no loyalties, and no purpose other than, perhaps, an impulse to destroy. While few philosophers would claim to be nihilists, nihilism is most often associated with Friedrich Nietzsche who argued that its corrosive effects would eventually destroy all moral, religious, and metaphysical convictions and precipitate the greatest crisis in human history. In the 20th century, nihilistic themes--epistemological failure, value destruction, and cosmic purposelessness--have preoccupied artists, social critics, and philosophers. Mid-century, for example, the existentialists helped popularize tenets of nihilism in their attempts to blunt its destructive potential. By the end of the century, existential despair as a response to nihilism gave way to an attitude of indifference, often associated with antifoundationalism.

For a start, Christianity says that we draw our value system straight from God and that he knows everything and communicates what we need to know to us. It celebrates faith, hope and love and concentrates very much on the Gospels which are, literally, good news, offering salvation to all. It deplores apathy, encourages faithfulness and seeks to build up God's kingdom.

Kinda the opposite of nihilism. He was one messed up guy. Many philosophers seem to be. I think it was Sartre who hated God because some guy stared at him in a bar. That's just not being right in the head.

[Jonathan]

Alright. Then I have no problem with the 'Golden Rule' in itself.

Good stuff. This is a pleasant debate so far. Thank you for your courtesy, it makes a much welcome change from some people.

Though you have to understand... I won't believe a claim made by anyone that he has been commanded by God to kill another person on just their word. If God wants to me to believe, he'll have to come down and tell me himself.

In most cases, I get to say he already did that with Jesus :^)

Until then, I'll go with delusion as the more likely cause.

Yeah, I would to since we're living under Grace rather than Law, so God's probably going to hold off on judgement until the second Coming.

If self-defense is a sin, then I will sin in this manner.

It's a tricky one. I don't want to bring harm to people, but at the same time, I feel that there is work for me to do here. I hope I'm never in the situation.

Oh and suicide would be wrong, but giving your life to save another's would be okay.

We were just talking about how Nietzsche viewed Christianity as nihilistic not so long ago... could you give your reasons for this view?

<groan> Can't stand that guy. What exactly was it he said?

Just grabbed this from the Internet Encyclopaedia of Philosophy to make sure I have my definition right:

Nihilism is the belief that all values are baseless and that nothing can be known or communicated. It is often associated with extreme pessimism and a radical skepticism that condemns existence. A true nihilist would believe in nothing, have no loyalties, and no purpose other than, perhaps, an impulse to destroy. While few philosophers would claim to be nihilists, nihilism is most often associated with Friedrich Nietzsche who argued that its corrosive effects would eventually destroy all moral, religious, and metaphysical convictions and precipitate the greatest crisis in human history. In the 20th century, nihilistic themes--epistemological failure, value destruction, and cosmic purposelessness--have preoccupied artists, social critics, and philosophers. Mid-century, for example, the existentialists helped popularize tenets of nihilism in their attempts to blunt its destructive potential. By the end of the century, existential despair as a response to nihilism gave way to an attitude of indifference, often associated with antifoundationalism.

For a start, Christianity says that we draw our value system straight from God and that he knows everything and communicates what we need to know to us. It celebrates faith, hope and love and concentrates very much on the Gospels which are, literally, good news, offering salvation to all. It deplores apathy, encourages faithfulness and seeks to build up God's kingdom.

Kinda the opposite of nihilism. He was one messed up guy. Many philosophers seem to be. I think it was Sartre who hated God because some guy stared at him in a bar. That's just not being right in the head.

[Darth Wong]

Alright. Then I have no problem with the 'Golden Rule' in itself.

Good stuff. This is a pleasant debate so far. Thank you for your courtesy, it makes a much welcome change from some people.

It also helps that he doesn't force you to answer the tough questions, eh?

Since you ignored it the first time around, I will ask it again: if you sincerely believed that God changed his mind about this "grace" thing and ordered you to kill a baby, WOULD YOU DO IT?

[Jonathan]

So God will torture himself for eternity? Funny, there's nothing in the Bible about that. Oh wait, you believe that Jesus being crucified is somehow equivalent to everything wrong that ever happened in the world

Ever feel guilty for something? Imagine a lifetime's worth of guilt. Now imagine several billion lifetimes of guilt. Image you're having to endure that without your wife. Imagine the pain of being separated from her when you feel you need her the most. Imagine that pain magnified a billion times over. You've got a bare inkling then of what Jesus went through on the cross.

[Remarkable, we're in agreement. Of course you can't cancel out evil, which is why people need forgiven and salvation through grace, rather than earning their way into God's favour, which I've said repeatedly. I think that forgiveness should always be offered to everyone, though they will not actually be forgiven unless they say they're sorry and sincerely mean it.

But this is really about God and his actions, isn't it? If evil can not be cancelled out, and the wages of sin is death, then all sinners are deserving of death unless they seek forgiveness. That's why I justify God killing sinners in the OT.

Notice how he quietly changes the subject from God's evil to the evil of "sinners", almost as if he doesn't recognize that by his own logic, God's own acts of evil make him irredeemable. It's always so hard to pin down a slippery fundie on the question of God's evil.[/quote]

Yes, come luck at how I muffled my keyboard and modded it to type with invisible ink. Then, when you realise I"m being sarcastic, look at what I wrote last time, particularly the bit where I say, 'That's why I justify God killing sinners in the OT.' indicating that I had just been discussing why I disagree with the assertion that God's actions were evil, which is a discussion of God's evil, the very thing you claim I was not discussion. Cut the crap Mike and make up your mind whether you want a debate or not.

Sincerity is irrelevant when you are asking forgiveness from God rather than the victim of your crimes, and you are not making any kind of atonement for them. But of course, many Biblical "sins" are victimless, aren't they, so there's no victim from whom to ask forgiveness. How convenient, then, that God is placed in that position.

God is the victim of every sin because it's his laws you're breaking, his word you're going against, his love you're rejecting, his glory you're denying, so whether you actually mean it or not matters when you ask him for forgiveness.

[Darth Wong]

Ever feel guilty for something? Imagine a lifetime's worth of guilt. Now imagine several billion lifetimes of guilt. Image you're having to endure that without your wife. Imagine the pain of being separated from her when you feel you need her the most. Imagine that pain magnified a billion times over. You've got a bare inkling then of what Jesus went through on the cross.

Actually, he suffered physical pain, breathing impairment, and then finally death. All of that other stuff exists only in your head.

Notice how he quietly changes the subject from God's evil to the evil of "sinners", almost as if he doesn't recognize that by his own logic, God's own acts of evil make him irredeemable. It's always so hard to pin down a slippery fundie on the question of God's evil.

Yes, come luck at how I muffled my keyboard and modded it to type with invisible ink. Then, when you realise I"m being sarcastic, look at what I wrote last time, particularly the bit where I say, 'That's why I justify God killing sinners in the OT.' indicating that I had just been discussing why I disagree with the assertion that God's actions were evil, which is a discussion of God's evil, the very thing you claim I was not discussion. Cut the crap Mike and make up your mind whether you want a debate or not.

Speak for yourself, asshole. You tried to refute claims of God's evil based on his evil acts by referencing positive passages in the Bible. I pointed out that this is bullshit, and you responded by simply ignoring that point and shifting the subject to the evil of "sinners" rather than the evil of God.

What would it take to show that God is evil? Oh yes, it's IMPOSSIBLE to do that in your eyes because you have simply defined God not to be evil. I guess the concept of circular logic figures heavily in your reasoning process.

God is the victim of every sin because it's his laws you're breaking, his word you're going against, his love you're rejecting, his glory you're denying, so whether you actually mean it or not matters when you ask him for forgiveness.

That is not victimhood. In order to victimize someone, you must actually harm him in some way, not just offend him or reject his advances. If we use your fucked-up definition of victimhoods, a spurned stalker is a victim.

[Cthulhu-chan]

How can an "all powerful" being be a victim of anything? For that matter, why the fuck did he "give" us the power of choice if he hates the inevitable result? Oh, and your acertation that several hours of suffering "billions of peoples' guilt" is in any way comparable to even a single person's suffering for all eternity is goddamn BRILLIANT. Not a single person in the whole of human history has ever done ANYTHING to warrant suffering for eternity without hope of parole.

[Darth Wong]

Johnny, I see you refuse to answer this question, so I will keep asking it:

If you sincerely believed that God changed his mind about this "grace" thing and ordered you to kill a baby, WOULD YOU DO IT?

Third time now. You can't ignore this question forever.