Yahweh is immoral

[muhammad_isa]

If you don't believe every word then how do you know what to believe?

I don't believe anything "word for word".
I believe in concept, and that language is a form of communication.
We have been given intellect to use.

That is what I do. I look at all of the relevant scriptures and evaluate.

 

[joelr]

No on your first volley,

And I noticed that I did answer your question on the second volley... you just didn't like it.

You understand the second volley because of the recent history which explains the why.

You don't understand the first because you don't understand the why.

No. Your first response was to suggest I would want "the continue the rape of Nanking across the globe." AGAIN(?!?!) you haven't explained what you mean? I was posting an immoral law in Deuteronomy about taking women and children as plunder. You asserted that I would want the Japanese to continue to plunder. Non-sequitur. Why would I want the Japanese to plunder when I'm protesting a law from a "God" who says to plunder women and children? So that makes no sense. You seem to be backed into a corner because you can only answer with cryptic statements that are all non-sequitur?


What do you mean "the recent history explains the why"? What recent history? Japanese plundering women and children? That doesn't explain anything? we don't plunder Japanese women and children in return? We do not kill all living things in Japan in return? Nothing you say is even close to answering anything in my post?

I disagree. If you though it was fictional, you wouldn't be addressing it.

Wrong in the highest way. If people followed Zeus and the gospels contained laws to plunder women and children I would also say Zeus was immoral on a religious forum. Yahweh is a made up God. The laws people wrote down and credited them to Yahweh messages are immoral. So I can get two points across. This is fiction created by people and it's also immoral, lending further evidence that this was not written by a deity but by people who had issues with nearby cultures and wanted them to be destroyed.
"lest ye be influenced by their false religion..." HA. As if a real God is showing up and doing all these miraculous things then you go to another city and are like "oh wow, can I join your fake religion?" "Yeah my God does cool stuff like fight sea monsters, follow us around the desert on fire and destroy cities but this false God you guys worship, that seems way better"

Again... you just don't like the answer because if you agreed with us bombing Japan, you lost your "moral foothold " with God.

Right, except your apologetics script is off here and I guess you haven't learned how to course correct then? I did not lose any moral foothold with any God by agreeing to bomb Japan. War is moral in secular thinking and war is moral in scripture. Where it DIFFERS is we do not then take ALL THE WOMEN AND CHILDREN as plunder of war after a surrender. We do not KILL ALL LIVING THINGS after surrender because they worship a different God. We do not buy slaves from those heathens around us after defeating the country.
Yahweh does want his people to do those things.

Self righteousness or pride doesn't look to good to me.

Sorry, pointing out horrific laws in your bible is not "self righteousness"? You just pointed out that the Japanese plundering China was a terrible act? Same thing? So are you being "Self righteousness"?
That's a creepy apologetic, almost cult-like (exactly cult-like), someone mentions a law in scripture is immoral and you call them self righteousness? Was it also self righteousness for those reporters to bring the epidemic of pediphiles in the Church to public awareness and to the law?

Besides that speaking up for those who may be oppressed under immoral laws is advised in scripture. And you sound self righteousness yourself in almost every post? This is a great example of cherry picking random verses to make the point of the minute.
also like the archaic cosmology of scripture the ideas on pride are outdated. There are different types of pride and one is positive and not egocentric. You can keep your psychology in the Iron Age if you like but these outdated judgments mean nothing.

 

[joelr]

I didn't expect you to figure to figure out why because of your anti-God position which is OK for me.

We can agree to disagree and still live in peace with each other.

I don't have an "anti-God" position. Like Zeus and Lord Krishna, Yahweh is a fictional story. Evidence supports that it's syncretic mythology is many many ways and stories about people getting revelations from Gods/Demigods number in the thousands. None are real. None have good evidence. All use older stories and re work them. All use pieces of different Theologies along the way as well.
Christianity is particularly easy to piece together just from the 2 nations that occupied Israel during the 2nd Temple Period.
I'm not "anti-God". Maybe there is a God? The current stories about Gods are definitely not real but that doesn't equate to "anti-God"?

But please, do explain why you find it to be moral for there to be a law to take women and children as plunder and to murder every living thing in 6 cities and if it is moral why we shouldn't still do it today according to this line of thought?

 

[muhammad_isa]

..I was posting an immoral law in Deuteronomy about taking women and children as plunder..

I think that you need to ask a Rabbi.

Personally, I believe that the OT is mostly correct. It only needs a few words to be altered during revision to become incorrect, in some passages.

I think that it is obvious that "plundering women and children" is not justified, overall. It is genocide.

However, if women are in the military, what then?
..and where does one draw the line about children if they are killing others?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't agree with the indiscriminate bombing that went on in WWII, from both sides. Since weapons have become more powerful, it is a lot more difficult to make judgments about morality.

Fortunately, we have G-d to decide between us all one day.
We can only do our best.
Turning away from G-d altogether does not promote peace. History shows that those nations which persecute believers become authoritarian and corrupt.

 

[joelr]

I don't believe anything "word for word".
I believe in concept, and that language is a form of communication.
We have been given intellect to use.

That is what I do. I look at all of the relevant scriptures and evaluate.

That doesn't add up. It's not linear. Writers are using older text as source so of course they are going to confirm older scripture?

 

[joelr]

I think that you need to ask a Rabbi.

A Rabbi's job is not to deal with atheists. They are the lowest on the pole for that sort of thing, the person to represent such questions would be an apologist. I already know all the apologetics because I study it. It's insulting psuedo-scientific crank designed to justify myths that don't make sense.

Personally, I believe that the OT is mostly correct. It only needs a few words to be altered during revision to become incorrect, in some passages.

I think that it is obvious that "plundering women and children" is not justified, overall. It is genocide.

However, if women are in the military, what then?
..and where does one draw the line about children if they are killing others?

Women were not in the military then. But yes it's an immoral law. I don't know what you mean by "mostly correct"?
The stories are all borrowed myths and archaeology has shown it's not historical. They are just religious myths.

I don't agree with the indiscriminate bombing that went on in WWII, from both sides. Since weapons have become more powerful, it is a lot more difficult to make judgments about morality.

Fortunately, we have G-d to decide between us all one day.
We can only do our best.
Turning away from G-d altogether does not promote peace. History shows that those nations which persecute believers become authoritarian and corrupt.

God is a fiction from religious myths. Europe is now largely secular. They are not authoritarian and corrupt. Much of the U.S. is secular as well.
Not believing ancient myths has nothing to do with peace. Secular humanism exists. The many Greek philosophies existed prior to modern religions and teach how to live with virtues, morals and many types of philosophies.
You keep saying we "have God"? Provide evidence that is reasonable.

 

[muhammad_isa]

The stories are all borrowed myths and archaeology has shown it's not historical. They are just religious myths.

You're joking. You can't prove anything by "archaeology" except that a very old text is not completely accurate.
I don't claim that it is.

 

[joelr]

You're joking. You can't prove anything by "archaeology" except that a very old text is not completely accurate.
I don't claim that it is.

The archaeological evidence shows things like the Israelites emerged from the Canaanite society and there was no armed conflict.

"
What have archeologists learned from these settlements about the early Israelites? Are there signs that the Israelites came in conquest, taking over the land from Canaanites?
The settlements were founded not on the ruins of destroyed Canaanite towns but rather on bedrock or on virgin soil. There was no evidence of armed conflict in most of these sites. Archeologists also have discovered that most of the large Canaanite towns that were supposedly destroyed by invading Israelites were either not destroyed at all or destroyed by "Sea People"—Philistines, or others.

So gradually the old conquest model [based on the accounts of Joshua's conquests in the Bible] began to lose favor amongst scholars. Many scholars now think that most of the early Israelites were originally Canaanites, displaced Canaanites, displaced from the lowlands, from the river valleys, displaced geographically and then displaced ideologically.

So what we are dealing with is a movement of peoples but not an invasion of an armed corps from the outside. A social and economic revolution, if you will, rather than a military revolution. And it begins a slow process in which the Israelites distinguish themselves from their Canaanite ancestors, particularly in religion—with a new deity, new religious laws and customs, new ethnic markers, as we would call them today."


It has shown the united monarchy was much smaller scale than claimed:

"
The Bible describes it as a glorious kingdom stretching from Egypt to Mesopotamia. Does archeology back up these descriptions?
The stories of Solomon are larger than life. According to the stories, Solomon imported 100,000 workers from what is now Lebanon. Well, the whole population of Israel probably wasn't 100,000 in the 10th century. Everything Solomon touched turned to gold. In the minds of the biblical writers, of course, David and Solomon are ideal kings chosen by Yahweh. So they glorify them.

Now, archeology can't either prove or disprove the stories. But I think most archeologists today would argue that the United Monarchy was not much more than a kind of hill-country chiefdom. It was very small-scale."

It also showed that early Israelites worshipped a Goddess Ashrea as a consort of Yahweh. They were a pair. Ashera was a Canaanite Goddess so this lends credibility the Israelites were from Canaan.

We don't need archeology to see the myths in the Bible are from older cultures and re-worked to fit this new religion.

 

[Sedim Haba]

But please, do explain why you find it to be moral for there to be a law to take women and children as plunder and to murder every living thing in 6 cities and if it is moral why we shouldn't still do it today according to this line of thought?

I'd have to say this must be taken into context of the time and place were it is relevant. Aztecs sacrificed who they captured that was obviously moral to them.

 

[joelr]

I'd have to say this must be taken into context of the time and place were it is relevant. Aztecs sacrificed who they captured that was obviously moral to them.

Context of time and place is not relevant. Ridiculous apologetics like that are designed to give answers that sound pleasing unless you actually think it through and realize it's crank, wu or psuedo-science.
Women and children being forced to be used as plunder was never moral and was always a horrible way to treat humans.

Yes I agree the Israelites thought taking women and children as plunder was moral, as long as it was societies they hated. And they obviously wrote these laws. But the point is that some people think these laws are from a God who understands morality. A God who would make these acts as laws would be an immoral God. This God also wanted to murder every living thing in 6 cities if at war with those cities.
If one wants to admit the laws were just written by people, the God things is made up, then sure that explains the reason for all the immoral laws. The actual context of the time was that in that time people made up laws and then claimed that they were given by their national God. That's just how things were done.

 

[Kenny]

No. Your first response was to suggest I would want "the continue the rape of Nanking across the globe." AGAIN(?!?!) you haven't explained what you mean? I was posting an immoral law in Deuteronomy about taking women and children as plunder. You asserted that I would want the Japanese to continue to plunder. Non-sequitur. Why would I want the Japanese to plunder when I'm protesting a law from a "God" who says to plunder women and children? So that makes no sense. You seem to be backed into a corner because you can only answer with cryptic statements that are all non-sequitur?


What do you mean "the recent history explains the why"? What recent history? Japanese plundering women and children? That doesn't explain anything? we don't plunder Japanese women and children in return? We do not kill all living things in Japan in return? Nothing you say is even close to answering anything in my post?




Wrong in the highest way. If people followed Zeus and the gospels contained laws to plunder women and children I would also say Zeus was immoral on a religious forum. Yahweh is a made up God. The laws people wrote down and credited them to Yahweh messages are immoral. So I can get two points across. This is fiction created by people and it's also immoral, lending further evidence that this was not written by a deity but by people who had issues with nearby cultures and wanted them to be destroyed.
"lest ye be influenced by their false religion..." HA. As if a real God is showing up and doing all these miraculous things then you go to another city and are like "oh wow, can I join your fake religion?" "Yeah my God does cool stuff like fight sea monsters, follow us around the desert on fire and destroy cities but this false God you guys worship, that seems way better"




Right, except your apologetics script is off here and I guess you haven't learned how to course correct then? I did not lose any moral foothold with any God by agreeing to bomb Japan. War is moral in secular thinking and war is moral in scripture. Where it DIFFERS is we do not then take ALL THE WOMEN AND CHILDREN as plunder of war after a surrender. We do not KILL ALL LIVING THINGS after surrender because they worship a different God. We do not buy slaves from those heathens around us after defeating the country.
Yahweh does want his people to do those things.





Sorry, pointing out horrific laws in your bible is not "self righteousness"? You just pointed out that the Japanese plundering China was a terrible act? Same thing? So are you being "Self righteousness"?
That's a creepy apologetic, almost cult-like (exactly cult-like), someone mentions a law in scripture is immoral and you call them self righteousness? Was it also self righteousness for those reporters to bring the epidemic of pediphiles in the Church to public awareness and to the law?

Besides that speaking up for those who may be oppressed under immoral laws is advised in scripture. And you sound self righteousness yourself in almost every post? This is a great example of cherry picking random verses to make the point of the minute.
also like the archaic cosmology of scripture the ideas on pride are outdated. There are different types of pride and one is positive and not egocentric. You can keep your psychology in the Iron Age if you like but these outdated judgments mean nothing.

I'm sorry... but you seem to be speaking with a lot of bias with no open mind.

I'm fine with you having a viewpoint that is different from mine.

Tell you what, when we see God face to face, He will correct us all.

 

[Sheldon]

You can't prove anything by "archaeology"

 

[muhammad_isa]

Well? What has been proved?

 

[ppp]

Tell you what, when we see God face to face, He will correct us all.

When there turns out to be no god, then he won't.

 

[Sheldon]

Well? What has been proved?

 

[joelr]

I'm sorry... but you seem to be speaking with a lot of bias with no open mind.

This is demonstrably incorrect as I just asked you to explain how you justify these blatantly immoral passages. Is that how it works? One questions scripture and you label them "close minded" and refuse to speak anymore? My bias is towards what is actually true. I'm always open to good evidence. Are you? I'm the one asking questions.
Go ahead, tell me how these laws are not immoral?

Tell you what, when we see God face to face, He will correct us all.

Yahweh is a fictional character made up by early Israelites. Originally he had a consort Goddess named Ashera and was a national God of Israel. After Hellenism influenced all the religions in the region one of the many changes made was each national God was changed to supreme God.
That is a myth. If you think a myth is real you need evidence.

You are commanded by scripture in many places (1 Corinthians 9:16-23, 2 Timothy 4:5) to always be ready (1 PETER 3:15) to explain all of these things.

 

[Kenny]

This is demonstrably incorrect as I just asked you to explain how you justify these blatantly immoral passages. Is that how it works? One questions scripture and you label them "close minded" and refuse to speak anymore? My bias is towards what is actually true. I'm always open to good evidence. Are you? I'm the one asking questions.
Go ahead, tell me how these laws are not immoral?

You have gone all over the map. Which laws? I have two... love your God with all of your heart, mind, soul and strength and love your neighbor as yourself

Yahweh is a fictional character made up by early Israelites. Originally he had a consort Goddess named Ashera and was a national God of Israel. After Hellenism influenced all the religions in the region one of the many changes made was each national God was changed to supreme God.
That is a myth. If you think a myth is real you need evidence.

You are commanded by scripture in many places (1 Corinthians 9:16-23, 2 Timothy 4:5) to always be ready (1 PETER 3:15) to explain all of these things.

No problem... not trying to proselytize, just answering your question.

All have sinned and come short of the glory of God. Hopefully you won't lie and say you are sinless.
The wages of sin is death. You will die physically because the ground is cursed. Hopefully you understand that you will die.
We are separated from God but there is a gift, eternal life through Jesus Christ. God has deemed that His sacrifice was sufficient to satisfy all judgment against you. He paid the price so you won't.
In that Jesus was raised from the dead, He must have the power to raise you and me from the dead.
Now, if you don't want the gift of spending an eternity with Jesus, God will honor your will.

What part do you want me to defend?

 

[ppp]

All have sinned and come short of the glory of God.

I haven't, and I don't.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Which laws? I have two... love your God with all of your heart, mind, soul and strength and love your neighbor as yourself.

Highly commendable .. but there is more.

What about adultery, and charging interest to your neighbour?
Is that OK?

Now, if you don't want the gift of spending an eternity with Jesus, God will honor your will.

Can G-d snuff Himself out? No .. it makes no sense.
The reason why the spirit [soul] doesn't die at death, is because it is immortal. Immortal things don't get snuffed out.

 

[ppp]

Can G-d snuff Himself out?

If you claim that your god is omnipotent, then yes.

What about adultery, and charging interest to your neighbour?

It's up to your spouse.