Jump to content


Photo

Atheists: Is Murder Acceptable With You?


  • Please log in to reply
186 replies to this topic

#21 JayShel

JayShel

    Former Atheist

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPip
  • 777 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Age: 36
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Saved July 12, 2007

Posted 06 October 2012 - 07:17 PM

Actually you didn't dismantle my argument you proved it. The point I was making was that many many people have claimed to be Christians but are willing to kill. I'm not talking about the odd mass murderer but the thousands of 'christians' who fought and killed fellow 'christians' in e.g. WW1 WW2


Oh I misunderstood your argument. There is a difference between zealously taking the lives of others for selfish gains (out of malice), and killing out of self-defense or to defend innocent lives (of their friends and family). When faced with the same, I would ask forgiveness for each person that I killed, believing each bullet fired was intended to defend the lives of my family, praying that innocents be spared on the other side. It certainly isn't a great situation to be in.

Why doesn't God prevent bad things from happening, like Christians murdering Christians? I suppose it depends on the circumstances. He created a world in which our actions have real consequences so that there can be no doubt of our guilt and need of redemption. Also, in the vein of being killed, we should never be complacent, expecting that we will wake up tomorrow. We should always be ready to give an account of our lives before Jesus.

#22 jason

jason

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 662 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 38
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • florida

Posted 07 October 2012 - 04:51 AM

yes gilbo there is and the athiest logic fails on that account and idea of the two consenting adults.

#23 jonas5877

jonas5877

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 214 posts
  • Age: 54
  • no affiliation
  • Agnostic
  • Salisbury, MD

Posted 07 October 2012 - 06:46 AM

Oh I misunderstood your argument. There is a difference between zealously taking the lives of others for selfish gains (out of malice), and killing out of self-defense or to defend innocent lives (of their friends and family). When faced with the same, I would ask forgiveness for each person that I killed, believing each bullet fired was intended to defend the lives of my family, praying that innocents be spared on the other side. It certainly isn't a great situation to be in.

Why doesn't God prevent bad things from happening, like Christians murdering Christians? I suppose it depends on the circumstances. He created a world in which our actions have real consequences so that there can be no doubt of our guilt and need of redemption. Also, in the vein of being killed, we should never be complacent, expecting that we will wake up tomorrow. We should always be ready to give an account of our lives before Jesus.

Then the Biblical definition of murder is "taking the lives of others for selfish gains (out of malice)"? What scriptures support this definition?

Did the Hebrews and Joshua gain something by killing all the people of Jerhico? I would say they did. Does the key to that killing being classified as not murder (good killing) and the killing of a family to take their money being classified as murder (bad killing) lie in that one word "selfish"?

#24 Fred Williams

Fred Williams

    Administrator / Forum Owner

  • Admin Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,540 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Broomfield, Colorado
  • Interests:I enjoy going to Broncos games, my son's HS basketball & baseball games, and my daughter's piano & dance recitals. I enjoy playing basketball (when able). I occasionally play keyboards for my church's praise team. I am a Senior Staff Firmware Engineer at Micron, and am co-host of Pseudo Science Radio.
  • Age: 53
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Broomfield, Colorado

Posted 07 October 2012 - 07:15 AM

I agree that the word murder is used despite non-Christians trying to change it to "kill" in order to demean Christian men and women serving in the military. However, I have not been able to define murder using the Bible and that has always bothered me. From your reading of the Bible, what is your definition of murder? What scriptures support that definition?


Easy question to ask but quite hard to answer. Nice use of shock value, though. There is a difference between the rules of a government and the morals within a society ruled by that government. I am sure the parents of those children were dismayed at the loss of their children but they may have been proud of the fact that they were sacrificed for the god of their religion. Their feelings would probably be similar to those of the parents of the soldiers who lost their lives in battle. However, a government forcing the sacrifice despite the morality of the society, would be considered wrong by that society. With the world so interconnected, the judgement of what is moral within a particular society is usually weighed against the morals of humanity as a whole. Those morals tend toward equal treatment of individuals and the right to remain alive, able to choose your own religion...etc.


No Jonas, its a very easy question to answer if you are not locked in a world view that forces you to admit to a reprehensible position. It's very easy to say it is absolutely wrong to toss your kids into the fire, but admitting as such destroys your position completely.

Above you are essentially admitting that if the morality of the society approves, its OK to toss your kids in the fire. That's just dumb. You need to get out of the Matrix (video here).

Here is another example to show how schizophrenic your position is. According to your logic, since our society as a whole deemed it OK to own a black man, by your standard slavery was perfectly OK.

Fred

#25 JayShel

JayShel

    Former Atheist

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPip
  • 777 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Age: 36
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Saved July 12, 2007

Posted 07 October 2012 - 07:28 PM

Then the Biblical definition of murder is "taking the lives of others for selfish gains (out of malice)"? What scriptures support this definition?

Did the Hebrews and Joshua gain something by killing all the people of Jerhico? I would say they did. Does the key to that killing being classified as not murder (good killing) and the killing of a family to take their money being classified as murder (bad killing) lie in that one word "selfish"?


If you are really interested I would suggest studying the Bible itself on the matter, or using this for a bit of quick reference: https://en.wikipedia...er_in_the_Bible

Joshua was engaging in warfare to claim the land of Canaan which God had promised to the bloodline of Moses two generations before. Killing of these people was part of the righteous judgement of God of the people being slain. http://www.apologeti...13&article=2810

#26 jonas5877

jonas5877

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 214 posts
  • Age: 54
  • no affiliation
  • Agnostic
  • Salisbury, MD

Posted 08 October 2012 - 07:36 AM

No Jonas, its a very easy question to answer if you are not locked in a world view that forces you to admit to a reprehensible position. It's very easy to say it is absolutely wrong to toss your kids into the fire, but admitting as such destroys your position completely.

Above you are essentially admitting that if the morality of the society approves, its OK to toss your kids in the fire. That's just dumb. You need to get out of the Matrix (video here).

Here is another example to show how schizophrenic your position is. According to your logic, since our society as a whole deemed it OK to own a black man, by your standard slavery was perfectly OK.

Fred

You are essentially saying that if God says so, it's OK to toss your kids in a fire. When Scott Roeder killed the abortion doctor George Tiller did you consider that "Ok"? What if he claimed that God told him to do so? Do you accept his claim at face value and say that the killing of George Tiller was good, or do you believe that Mr. Roeder was delusional or lying and denounce his actions?

Morality comes from God so He determines what is moral at any particular time. Does that make for an objective morality when that morality is subject to God? I guess you could say yes if correct morality is defined as "whatever God tells me".

#27 jonas5877

jonas5877

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 214 posts
  • Age: 54
  • no affiliation
  • Agnostic
  • Salisbury, MD

Posted 08 October 2012 - 07:56 AM

If you are really interested I would suggest studying the Bible itself on the matter, or using this for a bit of quick reference: https://en.wikipedia...er_in_the_Bible

Joshua was engaging in warfare to claim the land of Canaan which God had promised to the bloodline of Moses two generations before. Killing of these people was part of the righteous judgement of God. http://www.apologeti...13&article=2810

Instead of telling me what the Bible defines as murder, you send me to a wikipedia article that tells me what actions that resulted in the death of a human were considered punishable by the laws of Moses and what actions were not considered punishable. Ok. Basically, murder is a killing of a human being that is not sanctioned by the Law....an unlawful killing.
Killing of all the peoples inhabiting the Promised Land was not murder, even babies in their mother's wombs, because God said to do it.

The second article basically said that God is a just God and His determination that those people must die is morally correct. The author even stated that it was better for those children to die on Earth so they could live in Paradise rather than allow them to grow up and lose Paradise because they would be taught immorality by their parents.
If this is a correct view of morality, then wouldn't it be better for Christians to kill the children of non-Christians and thus send them to Heaven before they can be influenced by the teachings of their parents?
Shouldn't you actually support abortions for non-Christian women?

If any action is morally correct when God says it is, then how can you determine if any particular action by another person is morally correct? How do you know what God told them to do?

#28 JayShel

JayShel

    Former Atheist

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPip
  • 777 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Age: 36
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Saved July 12, 2007

Posted 08 October 2012 - 09:09 AM

Instead of telling me what the Bible defines as murder, you send me to a wikipedia article that tells me what actions that resulted in the death of a human were considered punishable by the laws of Moses and what actions were not considered punishable. Ok. Basically, murder is a killing of a human being that is not sanctioned by the Law....an unlawful killing.




The link has examples from the Bible which was the whole point. If you want to know how murder is defined in a Biblical context, you have to study the Bible. There were circumstances that killing was not unlawful, and circumstances that they were which is important to note. It is also important to note that when Jesus saccrificed Himself on the cross to pay our debt of blood atonement for our sins against God, He fundamentally changed many things. One change that pertains to this conversation is the killing of people that are against God (more on that later).


Deut 19:6 Otherwise, the avenger of blood might pursue him in a rage, overtake him if the distance is too great, and kill him even though he is not deserving of death, since he did it to his neighbor without malice aforethought.



You are not guilty of murder if you kill someone without malice or forethought.

Killing of all the peoples inhabiting the Promised Land was not murder, even babies in their mother's wombs, because God said to do it.



Yes it was lawful killing for that specific instance because of what God was accomplishing through this situation (see more below starting with "In this case").

The second article basically said that God is a just God and His determination that those people must die is morally correct.


He hates sin and has requires blood atonement for it. These people were in sin as stated in Deuteronomy 10:16-18

16 However, in the cities of the nations the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. 17 Completely destroy[a] them—the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites—as the Lord your God has commanded you. 18 Otherwise, they will teach you to follow all the detestable things they do in worshiping their gods, and you will sin against the Lord your God.




The author even stated that it was better for those children to die on Earth so they could live in Paradise rather than allow them to grow up and lose Paradise because they would be taught immorality by their parents.



It is not the ideal situation, but if your life is cut short, say if you are a young child or mentally handicapped and mentally unable to be held responsible for your actions, then God will judge your heart. I am not sure all of them would go to Heaven, but that is one take on it.


In this case, the Judgement of God was multi-faceted, fulfilling His promise of land to the Israelites, blood attonement for the sins of the societies in the promise land, raising up the nation of Israel to lead to the birth, death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ to provide blood atonement for the sins of the world, preventing Israel from learning the evil worship practices of the indigenous people, and preventing evil worship practices of indigenous people from bringing future generations into sin against God. Under the old covenant, God does not always kill, or ask people to kill those who are in sin against Him, but when He does, He usually has other reason as well, and/or has given people plenty of time to repent.

If this is a correct view of morality, then wouldn't it be better for Christians to kill the children of non-Christians and thus send them to Heaven before they can be influenced by the teachings of their parents?
Shouldn't you actually support abortions for non-Christian women?



Skip forward to the times of the new covenant (which is hugely significant). Simply put, no. You can read more about that here: http://carm.org/why-...ill-h*m*sexuals (when you click this link, take out the * and replace them with o's in h*m*sexuals in the URL since this forum edits that word, and apparently it affects links too)

See also this parable taught by Jesus: http://www.gotquestions.org/parable-wheat-tares.html

We are not to shorten someones life because we think they might be working for Satan. Actually, even Satan played right into God's hands many times in the Bible, causing more good than he intended, for example working in Judas to betray Jesus and have Him executed.

Many people raised in non-Christian homes come to follow Jesus Christ, so this last question/argument doesn't make sense, especially in context of the new covenant.

If any action is morally correct when God says it is, then how can you determine if any particular action by another person is morally correct?


It's easy; are they acting in accordance with what God has laid out in scripture, specifically in the new covenant under Jesus Christ?

How do you know what God told them to do?


I would look at scriptures to know that they are behaving according to the revelation of God. Anyone claiming that God told them to do something immoral is exposed when comparing it against scripture. Ultimately, they are morally accountable to God, not to me, so that should be the main factor weighing on their mind when doing anything.

#29 Fred Williams

Fred Williams

    Administrator / Forum Owner

  • Admin Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,540 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Broomfield, Colorado
  • Interests:I enjoy going to Broncos games, my son's HS basketball & baseball games, and my daughter's piano & dance recitals. I enjoy playing basketball (when able). I occasionally play keyboards for my church's praise team. I am a Senior Staff Firmware Engineer at Micron, and am co-host of Pseudo Science Radio.
  • Age: 53
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Broomfield, Colorado

Posted 08 October 2012 - 09:25 PM

You are essentially saying that if God says so, it's OK to toss your kids in a fire. When Scott Roeder killed the abortion doctor George Tiller did you consider that "Ok"? What if he claimed that God told him to do so? Do you accept his claim at face value and say that the killing of George Tiller was good, or do you believe that Mr. Roeder was delusional or lying and denounce his actions?

Morality comes from God so He determines what is moral at any particular time. Does that make for an objective morality when that morality is subject to God? I guess you could say yes if correct morality is defined as "whatever God tells me".


Yes, morality does come from God, but he doesn't fit into the criminal you are trying to make him in to, in your attempt to justify your own belief that its OK to kill kids and own black slaves, provided the society has determined its OK. God put the law on our hearts, and hence why you and everyone reading this knows just how ludicrous your position is, but nevertheless you'll not retract it because you won't allow yourself to deny absolute morality.

It is absolutely wrong to murder abortion doctors according to the Bible. See http://americanrtl.o...ntism-worksheet

Fred

#30 jonas5877

jonas5877

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 214 posts
  • Age: 54
  • no affiliation
  • Agnostic
  • Salisbury, MD

Posted 09 October 2012 - 09:34 AM

Yes, morality does come from God, but he doesn't fit into the criminal you are trying to make him in to, in your attempt to justify your own belief that its OK to kill kids and own black slaves, provided the society has determined its OK. God put the law on our hearts, and hence why you and everyone reading this knows just how ludicrous your position is, but nevertheless you'll not retract it because you won't allow yourself to deny absolute morality.

It is absolutely wrong to murder abortion doctors according to the Bible. See http://americanrtl.o...ntism-worksheet

Fred

I didn't say I thought it was ok to kill kids and own black slaves. In fact, I do not think either one is ok. If our society allowed or forced that I would disagree with it and refuse to participate. I am an anti-abortionist.

I never said your God was a criminal for having ordered the killing of children in the past. I have no idea what that God knows or what is the correct thing for Him to order His followers to do. I lack that perspective simply because I cannot see the future. Bad things happen to good people and you cannot lose your faith simply because you don't know why you are going through a trial.

What I said was your God can tell you to perform any act, and you must comply because to refuse is a sin. He has ordered the death and enslavement of people in the past, including children. Because He can order and has required those types of actions, you cannot look at any particular action and state whether it is good or bad. You simply don't know, especially if the person performing that action states that God told him to do it.

#31 JayShel

JayShel

    Former Atheist

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPip
  • 777 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Age: 36
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Saved July 12, 2007

Posted 11 October 2012 - 05:05 AM

If any action is morally correct when God says it is, then how can you determine if any particular action by another person is morally correct? How do you know what God told them to do?


This is what Jesus Christ (God incarnate) had to say on the matter

15 “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. 16 You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles? 17 Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Therefore by their fruits you will know them. Matthew 15:7-20



But what are the fruits? Paul spells it out for us in his letter to the Galatians:

22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. Galatians 5:22-23



#32 jonas5877

jonas5877

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 214 posts
  • Age: 54
  • no affiliation
  • Agnostic
  • Salisbury, MD

Posted 11 October 2012 - 10:26 AM

This is what Jesus Christ (God incarnate) had to say on the matter

15 “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. 16 You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles? 17 Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Therefore by their fruits you will know them. Matthew 15:7-20


But what are the fruits? Paul spells it out for us in his letter to the Galatians:

22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. Galatians 5:22-23

I don't really understand how this applies to the point I was making. If we are to compare what a person says or does to the fruit of the Spirit, how do we make that comparison?
For example: A woman kills all her children and her husband by poisoning them. She states that God told her to do it. She appears to be at peace with what she has done, and shows loving mannerisms toward the bodies of her dead family. If she didn't show any malice toward her family before killing them and shows no malice toward them now, can you conclude that she violated God's law?

Were her actions as moral or immoral? Please explain how you came to whatever conclusion you decide.

#33 JayShel

JayShel

    Former Atheist

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPip
  • 777 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Age: 36
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Saved July 12, 2007

Posted 11 October 2012 - 03:56 PM

[quote name='miles' timestamp='1349472163' post='85994']
An atheist (a person who does not believe in god) and a psychopath (a person who does not experience empathy) are not the same thing. The pre-frontal cortex of a normal human being, whether atheist or theist, is the region of the brain that generates a emotional response to the actions and expressions of other people. The capacity for empathy for others is sufficient in most people, regardless of religious belief, to reject murder.[/quote]
I am glad we can agree on a few things, such as on the premise that an atheist is different from a psychopath. As I stated before, I don't attempt to argue that and atheist cannot or would not attempt to behave morally without a belief in God.


Paul wrote in Romans:
[quote]
7 eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality; 8 but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness—indignation and wrath, 9 tribulation and anguish, on every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek; 10 but glory, honor, and peace to everyone who works what is good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. 11 For there is no partiality with God.
12 For as many as have sinned without law will also perish without law, and as many as have sinned in the law will be judged by the law 13 (for not the hearers of the law are just in the sight of God, but the doers of the law will be justified; 14 for when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things in the law, these, although not having the law, are a law to themselves, 15 who show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and between themselves their thoughts accusing or else excusing them) 16 in the day when God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according to my gospel.
[/quote]


So empathy is God's law written on your heart.


[quote]
If you want a more formal justification I'd suggest picking up nearly any ethics textbook that discusses systems of morality (Kant's categorical imperative, Mill's utilitarianism, ethical egoism, etc.). You'll find that with the exception of divine command theories, just about every model of morality rejects the idea that morals are determined by god and that each model is capable of justifying prohibitions on murder, even if they do it for different reasons.[/quote]


Yes I studied philosophy in both high school and college.

[quote]Here's some very brief examples of how different moral systems can justify prohibitions on murder.
Kant:
An individual should behave in a way they want everyone to behave
Everyone committing murder is not desirable
An individual should not commit murder
[/quote]


This seems familiar....
[quote]
[url=""%5D%5B/url%5D<a name="en-NKJV-23329"> 10 Or if he asks for a fish, will he give him a serpent? 11 If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask Him! 12 Therefore, whatever you want men to do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.
Matthew 7:10-12[/quote]
So I would agree that this is a good basis for good moral behavior. This ties in with empathy, it is God's law written on your heart.


[quote]Mills:
An individual should act in a way that maximizes happiness of everyone
Committing murder does not maximize happiness of everyone
An individual should not commit murder[/quote]
In the coliseum, people fighting to the death maximized the happiness of everyone.
Often times, happiness is based on shifting desires and goals, which can lead to regret later on when they change.


Christians have a belief similar to this though, but it differs in two important ways:

  • It is not based on happiness, but fulfilling our deep need to worship God (which gets twisted into worshiping other things such as s@x, gambling, food, etc) and maximizing our wellbeing.

  • We do not determine how to do this, but God has told us how to do this in His infinite wisdom.

Egoism:
An individual should act in their own self-interest
Not being murdered is in each individuals self-interest.
If the consequences of an action outweigh the benefits, the number of people choosing the action is reduced.
To reduce each individual's chances of being murdered, groups of individuals (aka society) should create consequences for murder that exceed the benefits.
An individual should not commit murder because the consequences outweigh the benefits
[/quote]
Egoism is particularly scary, because a social or legal punishment is all that stands between you and any criminal act. If you think the risk of punishment is low enough, or worth it, you will act how you want to regardless. Let's not forget if you BECOME the law, or society, you can do what every you want to whoever you want. Might makes right.

#34 JayShel

JayShel

    Former Atheist

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPip
  • 777 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Age: 36
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Saved July 12, 2007

Posted 11 October 2012 - 04:19 PM

I don't really understand how this applies to the point I was making. If we are to compare what a person says or does to the fruit of the Spirit, how do we make that comparison?
For example: A woman kills all her children and her husband by poisoning them. She states that God told her to do it. She appears to be at peace with what she has done, and shows loving mannerisms toward the bodies of her dead family. If she didn't show any malice toward her family before killing them and shows no malice toward them now, can you conclude that she violated God's law?

Were her actions as moral or immoral? Please explain how you came to whatever conclusion you decide.


The post you responded to was just a supplement for my previous post. Please refer to this post for an answer to the moral dilemma you posted above.

#35 MarkForbes

MarkForbes

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,114 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Africa
  • Age: 35
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Waverley

Posted 12 October 2012 - 11:58 AM

I don't really understand how this applies to the point I was making. If we are to compare what a person says or does to the fruit of the Spirit, how do we make that comparison? For example: A woman kills all her children and her husband by poisoning them. She states that God told her to do it. She appears to be at peace with what she has done......

That assumes that God sets rules arbitrary just like a despot(And in this case).However the Christian view is that God is morally consistent.

#36 Minnemooseus

Minnemooseus

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPip
  • 82 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Duluth, Minnesota
  • Age: 56
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Duluth, Minnesota

Posted 13 October 2012 - 05:28 PM

Any input on the dilemma that arises out of this, ie the last part of my post about Syria?


Note: Above is from message 6.

Sorry, this slipped by me. I eventually looked back at your previous message to realize where you were coming from. Now some semi-random thoughts:

There is the saying "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely".

Not claiming to be any sort of Syria expert, but my impression is that there is a wealthy citizen class that is hanging onto their lifestyle by their fingernails.

Bashar al-Assad is in the position that Saddam Husein and Muammar Qaddafi were in - If for whatever reason he falls out of power, he's a dead man. He has nothing to loose by hanging on by any means. The only other possibility was that the new leadership of Tunisia was offering him asylum if he would step down. It wasn't that Tunisia thought he deserved asylum. It was just that they recognized that doing such would be the only way to support Assad's desire to survive and to also end the war in Syria.

Now, why are his supporters supporting him? Well, many are probably that wealthy citizen class. If not, there is the natural tendency of military personal to unthinkingly follow authority. And there is the general insanity of war.

Or something like that.

Moose

Added by edit - Message 6 line.

Edited by Minnemooseus, 13 October 2012 - 05:32 PM.


#37 JayShel

JayShel

    Former Atheist

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPip
  • 777 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Age: 36
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Saved July 12, 2007

Posted 13 October 2012 - 11:54 PM

Note: Above is from message 6.

Sorry, this slipped by me. I eventually looked back at your previous message to realize where you were coming from. Now some semi-random thoughts:

There is the saying "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely".

Not claiming to be any sort of Syria expert, but my impression is that there is a wealthy citizen class that is hanging onto their lifestyle by their fingernails.

Bashar al-Assad is in the position that Saddam Husein and Muammar Qaddafi were in - If for whatever reason he falls out of power, he's a dead man. He has nothing to loose by hanging on by any means. The only other possibility was that the new leadership of Tunisia was offering him asylum if he would step down. It wasn't that Tunisia thought he deserved asylum. It was just that they recognized that doing such would be the only way to support Assad's desire to survive and to also end the war in Syria.

Now, why are his supporters supporting him? Well, many are probably that wealthy citizen class. If not, there is the natural tendency of military personal to unthinkingly follow authority. And there is the general insanity of war.

Or something like that.

Moose

Added by edit - Message 6 line.


You sidestepped the question.

#38 jason777

jason777

    Moderator

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,670 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Machining, Engine Building, Geology, Paleontology, Fishing
  • Age: 40
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Springdale,AR.

Posted 14 October 2012 - 06:30 AM

I suppose I should change the thread title to, "Why is murder wrong". I still haven't seen anything that tells me WHY.

Again, if we are just a bunch of molecules, that over billions of years, went from a big lifeless rock and evolved to what we are today (humans), why is it wrong if your average Joe wants to kill someone? Yes, society, laws, etc say (in general) it is wrong. Why?


Because we reap what we sow. If a man murders another man, then that man should pay the same price. If a man steals, then he should pay for the value of the thing he stole or go to jail. Make sense?

When David told his general to put Uriah in a position that he would likely get killed because David got his wife pregnant, it wasn't just a soldier that got killed in battle, it was a sinister motive. God decided to have mercy on David for this murder, but he commanded that the child shall die, the kingdom to be stripped away from David, and evil to be raised up in his own house. He ruined Uriah's life and his families life, so it's fair that God ruined his life.

#39 jonas5877

jonas5877

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 214 posts
  • Age: 54
  • no affiliation
  • Agnostic
  • Salisbury, MD

Posted 14 October 2012 - 10:39 AM

That assumes that God sets rules arbitrary just like a despot(And in this case).However the Christian view is that God is morally consistent.

I didn't say the "rules" were arbitrary. In fact, I actually went out of my way to state that they probably were not arbitrary. The Bible states that everything God does is for our good.

Please describe what you mean by "morally consistent". Morally consistent from who's point of view?

God lets bad (from our point of view) things happen to people whether those people serve Him or do not serve Him. Does that make God bad? The Bible states that He works all things for good. Satan petitions God to let him sift you as wheat, but God is still the one to allow the sifting to take place. God could stop it but He does not. Does that make God's action morally incorrect? The Bible says no.

God could command His followers to do anything, up to and including mass killing of children. He has made such a command in the past and I see no requirement in the New Testament that He refrain from doing so now. Therefore, we, as beings of limited understanding, cannot know if an action by anyone is actually morally incorrect or a commandment from God.

Is there something in Scripture that I missed which makes my conclusion faulty?

#40 jonas5877

jonas5877

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 214 posts
  • Age: 54
  • no affiliation
  • Agnostic
  • Salisbury, MD

Posted 14 October 2012 - 11:04 AM

The link has examples from the Bible which was the whole point. If you want to know how murder is defined in a Biblical context, you have to study the Bible. There were circumstances that killing was not unlawful, and circumstances that they were which is important to note. It is also important to note that when Jesus saccrificed Himself on the cross to pay our debt of blood atonement for our sins against God, He fundamentally changed many things. One change that pertains to this conversation is the killing of people that are against God (more on that later).

You are not guilty of murder if you kill someone without malice or forethought.

I am not sure how you are using the words "malice" or "forethought". Do you think that the soldiers killing all the inhabitants of Jerhico did not have malice in their hearts or had not thought about the killings beforehand?

Yes it was lawful killing for that specific instance because of what God was accomplishing through this situation (see more below starting with "In this case").

He hates sin and has requires blood atonement for it. These people were in sin as stated in Deuteronomy 10:16-18

It is not the ideal situation, but if your life is cut short, say if you are a young child or mentally handicapped and mentally unable to be held responsible for your actions, then God will judge your heart. I am not sure all of them would go to Heaven, but that is one take on it.


In this case, the Judgement of God was multi-faceted, fulfilling His promise of land to the Israelites, blood attonement for the sins of the societies in the promise land, raising up the nation of Israel to lead to the birth, death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ to provide blood atonement for the sins of the world, preventing Israel from learning the evil worship practices of the indigenous people, and preventing evil worship practices of indigenous people from bringing future generations into sin against God. Under the old covenant, God does not always kill, or ask people to kill those who are in sin against Him, but when He does, He usually has other reason as well, and/or has given people plenty of time to repent.


My point was not to judge God's decisions. I am not in a position to do that. However, I did show that God can and has ordered the killing of persons that we would call innocent.

Skip forward to the times of the new covenant (which is hugely significant). Simply put, no. You can read more about that here: http://carm.org/why-...ill-h*m*sexuals (when you click this link, take out the * and replace them with o's in h*m*sexuals in the URL since this forum edits that word, and apparently it affects links too)

See also this parable taught by Jesus: http://www.gotquesti...heat-tares.html

We are not to shorten someones life because we think they might be working for Satan. Actually, even Satan played right into God's hands many times in the Bible, causing more good than he intended, for example working in Judas to betray Jesus and have Him executed.

Many people raised in non-Christian homes come to follow Jesus Christ, so this last question/argument doesn't make sense, especially in context of the new covenant.

It's easy; are they acting in accordance with what God has laid out in scripture, specifically in the new covenant under Jesus Christ?



I would look at scriptures to know that they are behaving according to the revelation of God. Anyone claiming that God told them to do something immoral is exposed when comparing it against scripture. Ultimately, they are morally accountable to God, not to me, so that should be the main factor weighing on their mind when doing anything.

Neither of the articles you provided addressed the problem that I pointed out. The articles talked about taking action on your own to enforce the old Law. It did not show that you should not listen if you think God is telling you to to do something that is usually considered immoral. I have found no Scripture in the New Testament that tells us God cannot or will not require us to kill. In fact, God will kill millions according to Revelation.

If we are not to use capital punishment on those who sin, should the followers of Christ support the use of the death penalty? Shouldn't Christians be voting for life in prison instead, so that the prisoner gets as much opportunity as possible to come to Christ?




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users