Objective Moral Values

[Louis Riel]

Why is bulllshit?

Because it justifies the murder of the innocent.

[Michael]

I don't think I will ever reconcile the Old Testament with the New Testament.

If those that are troubled about the Old Testament God, i hear this book is a good one if you're interested: http://www.amazon.com/God-Moral-Mons.../dp/0801072751

[Michael]

If justice has to do anything with objectivity it ain't gonna depend on a Subject, no matter how Great the subject is, in this case God.

YouTube - Are God's Moral Commands Arbitrary?
Same deal..

[Michael]

Because it justifies the murder of the innocent.

How??? murder of the Innocent?.. Isn't it possible that it is Gods perogative to execute judgment..

[Louis Riel]

How??? Isn't it possible that it is Gods perogative to execute judgment.. Innocent?..

How?Did you read the text?Yes...innocent....babies who couldnt utter words were massacred in the name of God.What is their sin?Their parents didnt believe enough?

Its Gods right to kill "his" own creation right?God gave us free will and then he commands his followers to kill those who stray from the path?And then "he" judges them in the afterlife?Seems like overkill no?That kind of God isnt just or moral and if anything resembles the one y'all call Satan more than anything else.

The kind of reasoning found in that text is what got Jesus nailed to the cross.....he blasphemed and he paid the price...aint it grand?

[Vangelovski]

How?Did you read the text?Yes...innocent....babies who couldnt utter words were massacred in the name of God.What is their sin?Their parents didnt believe enough?

Its Gods right to kill "his" own creation right?God gave us free will and then he commands his followers to kill those who stray from the path?And then "he" judges them in the afterlife?Seems like overkill no?That kind of God isnt just or moral and if anything resembles the one y'all call Satan more than anything else.

The kind of reasoning found in that text is what got Jesus nailed to the cross.....he blasphemed and he paid the price...aint it grand?

Louis,

Are you trying to prove a "contradiction" in the Bible or justify your own subjective moral beliefs? If you are trying to prove a "contradiction" in the Bible, then focus on what the Bible says.

As for "innocent" babies (according to the Bible - i.e., not your subjective moral values, noone is innocent), do you think those babies would have remained "innocent"? They obviously do not have the intellectual maturity to choose between God and atheism, but God judges them justly and would, I believe, have taken them into heaven. Had they lived, they would have committed the same sins as their parents, that actually included sacrificing their own children!

Finally, if there was no punishment then justice would be meaningless. That would be a contradiction!

[Vangelovski]

I just saw the Leviticus "response" by Vangel and have the honesty to say you are right unlike you in the misqouting of Job the flat earthist. I should have taken my time to look at it closely. What ever.

Makedonin's first attempt at intellectual honesty! This is a cause for celebration

If only he could do this more often and combine that with staying on topic!

[Louis Riel]

Are you trying to prove a "contradiction" in the Bible or justify your own subjective moral beliefs? If you are trying to prove a "contradiction" in the Bible, then focus on what the Bible says.

I dont need to try and prove anything,the bible does that itself.

As for "innocent" babies (according to the Bible - i.e., not your subjective moral values, noone is innocent), do you think those babies would have remained "innocent"?

Of course no one is innocent according to the bible because then no one would need to be savedAs far as what those kids wouldve grown up to be.....i guess we'll never know hey?

They obviously do not have the intellectual maturity to choose between God and atheism, but God judges them justly and would, I believe, have taken them into heaven.

I believe those people that were massacred by Gods chosen people were most likely polytheists or animists....not atheists.What makes you think those folks lacked intellectual maturity?The Egyptians lacked intellectual maturity?The Babylonians?

Had they lived, they would have committed the same sins as their parents, that actually included sacrificing their own children!

Thats a pretty big assumption....but anyways...wasnt it God that commanded Abraham to kill his own son Isaac?I know it was only a prank....but old Abe was just about ready to do it no?

Finally, if there was no punishment then justice would be meaningless. That would be a contradiction!

Thats not true....justice isnt about punishment,although some times it may require punishment.Do you think Jesus deserved the punishment he got?Was that just?

[Michael]

Louis, it comes down to this, it's Gods perogative, any assumption you make about Gods justice is a burden of proof you cannot carry, you are in no position to say that God couldn't have had morally sufficient reasons..

As for "innocent" babies ... God judges them justly and would, I believe, have taken them into heaven. Had they lived, they would have committed the same sins as their parents, that actually included sacrificing their own children!

This seems plausible.. It makes sense.. And who are we to say that it is not the case.. Again, we are in no position to make that claim, that is a burden of proof no one can carry. As long as there is even the possibility that God had morally sufficient reasons for it then there is no logical contradiction between the given case and God's character... Like it or not..

[Vangelovski]

I dont need to try and prove anything,the bible does that itself.



Of course no one is innocent according to the bible because then no one would need to be savedAs far as what those kids wouldve grown up to be.....i guess we'll never know hey?



I believe those people that were massacred by Gods chosen people were most likely polytheists or animists....not atheists.What makes you think those folks lacked intellectual maturity?The Egyptians lacked intellectual maturity?The Babylonians?



Thats a pretty big assumption....but anyways...wasnt it God that commanded Abraham to kill his own son Isaac?I know it was only a prank....but old Abe was just about ready to do it no?



Thats not true....justice isnt about punishment,although some times it may require punishment.Do you think Jesus deserved the punishment he got?Was that just?

You can 'attempt' to find a contradiction, but you won't. Makedonin has tried and was totally demonslished by a number of posters on the Hellenic Religion thread, which now he tries to ignore and is mostly repeating the same old falacious garbage to waste all of our time.

Being a polyist or animist is no better than being an atheist - they are still rejecting God.

I was refering to babies not having the intellectual maturity, but you are correct, some adults appear not to have it either.

Justice requires punishment of evil - think about it.

Jesus took OUR punishment so that WE don't have to. That is a JUST God not contradicting Himself and a God that LOVES us so much that He Himself took the punishment that we, a speck of dust in this universe, deserve.

[Soldier of Macedon]

Louis, it comes down to this, it's Gods perogative, any assumption you make about Gods justice is a burden of proof you cannot carry, you are in no position to say that God couldn't have had morally sufficient reasons..

Michael, isn't the burden of proof on you to support the position that God did have morally sufficient reasons for ordering the Israeli-led execution of innocent people? To say that such an act is God's 'perogative', and accept it as such without question, seems naive to say the least. You are suggesting that 'justice' is whatever God says. That isn't objective.

Had they lived, they would have committed the same sins as their parents, that actually included sacrificing their own children!

I consider that a presumption for which there is no possible means of corroboration. If the same was suggested for Jesus' ancestors when they themselves were infants, then Jesus himself would not have existed.

[Vangelovski]

Michael, isn't the burden of proof on you to support the position that God did have morally sufficient reasons for ordering the Israeli-led execution of innocent people? To say that such an act is God's 'perogative', and accept it as such without question, seems naive to say the least. You are suggesting that 'justice' is whatever God says. That isn't objective.

I consider that a presumption for which there is no possible means of corroboration. If the same was suggested for Jesus' ancestors when they themselves were infants, then Jesus himself would not have existed.

SoM,

God knows what people will do. But even without that, we know that they would have sacrificed their own children because they had been doing it for a historically long period of time and it was part of their religion, justified by their own subjective moral value system.

If you read the Bible, you'll see that some of Jesus' 'ancestors' were sinners and we know that they will be dealt with according to their faith, like everyone else. God deals with everyone, the timing and method are up to him. Noone can claim that the timing and method of their death is 'unfair', we have no basis for doing so.

In relation to your response to Michael, if God exists and he created humans, then what basis do we have to question His motivations or reasons for doing something? A cardboard box has as much of a basis on which to question you for throwing it out in the garbage.

What I think Michael was tyring to say is that we have insufficient information (i.e., foresight into the future among others), in which case we cannot prove what Louis claims he can.

[Vangelovski]

From an objective perspective, yes, the act itself is evil, but the act is in fact a reaction to a previous evil, which, in this case, could mean justice - an eye for an eye, as stated in the Bible. Ever watched the movie, A Time To Kill? It wasn't about feeling good, but instead about seeking justice through revenge in a society where there was no other option. Would this then mean that an act of evil can result in good (pertaining to the movie, the two individuals that raped the young girl would no longer be around to commit such an offence again)? Interested in your thoughts.

SoM,

Sorry for the delay on this one. This was a tough question and I may not be able to satisfy you with an answer, though I do know who may. I assume you are asking for the Biblical response here.

Revenge is evil, plain and simple. Carrying out justice can be good. You say this happened (in the movie) in a society where there was no other option. Such societies do in fact exist - in Africa for example where failed states are neither willing or able to deliver justice and prevent further crime by the perpetrators. In such a situation, these men may have been the ONLY ones willing and able to a) deliver justice and b) protect people from this crime reoccuring.

This leaves us with the issue of motivation. Lets for arguments sake say that they were equally motivated by revenge and the need for justice/prevention of future crimes. I am of the opinion that only God can judge that.

The solution to that problem would be for the individual to be honest with themselves as to their motivations.

[Michael]

Michael, isn't the burden of proof on you to support the position that God did have morally sufficient reasons for ordering the Israeli-led execution of innocent people? To say that such an act is God's 'perogative', and accept it as such without question, seems naive to say the least. You are suggesting that 'justice' is whatever God says. That isn't objective.

I consider that a presumption for which there is no possible means of corroboration. If the same was suggested for Jesus' ancestors when they themselves were infants, then Jesus himself would not have existed.

SoM,
In relation to your response to Michael, if God exists and he created humans, then what basis do we have to question His motivations or reasons for doing something? A cardboard box has as much of a basis on which to question you for throwing it out in the garbage.

What I think Michael was tyring to say is that we have insufficient information (i.e., foresight into the future among others), in which case we cannot prove what Louis claims he can.

Yeah, that's essentially what i was trying to say...

If you want to argue that there is an inconsistency / contradiction between Gods loving nature and Gods judgment in these episodes, then what you need to do is show that God couldn't have had morally sufficient reasons for it. You need to show that it is impossible for God to have had morally sufficient reasons - No one can carry that burden of proof. On the other hand, it's easy to provide an example that shows that God could have had morally sufficient reasons for this which Vangelovski has done. So long as the possibility is there, there is no logical contradiction. There is no burden of proof on this side.

It's an emotional topic, i know that, you just have to be objective about this and be extra cautious to not let emotion get in the way... Remember that earth is not our final destination. Given that God created us and every other fabric of existance, where do we get this idea that God doesn't have the right to take our lives? God is not robbing us of something here? There is nothing injust about God taking our earthly lives today as opposed to 30 years from today. Where do we get our right to dwell on earth that trumps Gods will and judgement?

....

[indigen]

Vangelovski, SOM, RTG, Phoenix and Osiris, among others, don't you guys think ENOUGH TIME and ENERGY has been exhausted on this topic, which to me seems like a futile diversion and escapism from the political reality at hand for Macedonians in the here and now?

Secondly, I would much rather you guys got together and drafted some stern protest letters, memorandums or resolutions in OPPOSITION to the ICJ case being pursued by the VASSALS from Skopje than spending so much time on this topic (and in the process ending up even more divided).

So pochit,
Indigen