It's A Circular Argument, Ironhorse.

[bornagainathiest]

Here... http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/66352-the-omnipotence-of-god/page-2#.VMuKLJ2sUuk ...in post # 40 I force Ironhorse to confront a contradiction in scripture.

 

I ask him to concede that it is a contradiction, that the Bible therefore isn't trustworthy and that he's mistaken to trust it.

Or, if he won't concede, to argue his case that this isn't a contradiction.  Instead of replying to me and taking either of the offered options, he writes this...

 

"As a Christian, I freely admit there is a lot about God and the Bible I don’t understand or know.

However, my limited understanding is enough to persuade me that God as revealed in creation and in the message of the scriptures is enough for to me to have faith in."

 

...here.  http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/66459-too-stupid-to-know-theyre-stupid-the-dunning-kruger-effect/page-2#.VMuLMJ2sUuk In post # 34.

.

.

.

Now this is exceedingly clever!

This maneuver bypasses the usual rules of debate and logical argument, which tell us that if you don't understand something - then you shouldn't believe that it is true.  Skepticism is the default position when you cannot understand the issue in question.  Ironhorse admits that there's a lot he doesn't understand about God and the Bible.  Therefore, he should not believe that the Bible is the trustworthy and reliable word of God.  But he's craftily gone around this by the use of the F-word.  Faith.

 

"Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding" says Proverbs 3 : 5.

 

Don't understand, just believe!  

This is Ironhorse's 'Get-Out-Of-Jail-Free' card that he can play whenever there's something incorrect, false or contradictory in the Bible that he doesn't want to face up to.  All he has to do (as per his quote above) is to declare that he isn't up to the task of understanding the offending passage/s of scripture... yet there's enough in the rest of scripture for him to believe it's all true.  

 

So his understanding works well enough when he wants it to - but fails at all other times.

 

Really..?  

 

 

 

 

And I suppose using the Bible (Proverbs 3 : 5) to have faith in the rest of the Bible isn't a circular argument?

[Fweethawt]

Go eat a bowl of vegetable soup.

 

Soon after you're finished, you'll shit out a better reply than you will ever get from tinjackass.

[bornagainathiest]

Mebbe so, Fwee...

 

...but I've no serious expectation of a reply from him.

 

(TrueScotsMan, please take note!)

I write what I write for the benefit of the lurkers, the waverers and the newly-deconverted. 

So that they can see how Ironhorse squirms, wriggles and dodges to avoid facing up to the facts, the evidence and the truth.

So that they can see how he does everything in his power to cling to his beliefs, no matter what.

So that they can take note of his behaviour and seeing it, this will help them leave Christ and Christianity all the quicker.

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

[Thurisaz]

Sometimes it's quite funny to see a brain running the operating system Authority 0.1beta work...

 

...sometimes.

 

Reason 9.91 Final is so much better but oh well, to each his own.

[midniterider]

Sometimes it's quite funny to see a brain running the operating system Authority 0.1beta work...

 

...sometimes.

 

Reason 9.91 Final is so much better but oh well, to each his own.

 

I think they actually boot their brain with Reason 9.91 Final because they really could not function in today's society under Authority .1. And even though the underlying OS is Reason, they claim to use Authority to run all their software. We all know that's BS because nobody has written software for Authority .1 for at least 2000 years. :-) They just keep an Authority window running on VMware and 6 days out of the week it's minimized.

[sdelsolray]

Here... http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/66352-the-omnipotence-of-god/page-2#.VMuKLJ2sUuk ...in post # 40 I force Ironhorse to confront a contradiction in scripture.

 

I ask him to concede that it is a contradiction, that the Bible therefore isn't trustworthy and that he's mistaken to trust it.

Or, if he won't concede, to argue his case that this isn't a contradiction.  Instead of replying to me and taking either of the offered options, he writes this...

 

"As a Christian, I freely admit there is a lot about God and the Bible I don’t understand or know.

However, my limited understanding is enough to persuade me that God as revealed in creation and in the message of the scriptures is enough for to me to have faith in."

 

...here.  http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/66459-too-stupid-to-know-theyre-stupid-the-dunning-kruger-effect/page-2#.VMuLMJ2sUuk In post # 34.

.

.

.

Now this is exceedingly clever!

This maneuver bypasses the usual rules of debate and logical argument, which tell us that if you don't understand something - then you shouldn't believe that it is true.  Skepticism is the default position when you cannot understand the issue in question.  Ironhorse admits that there's a lot he doesn't understand about God and the Bible.  Therefore, he should not believe that the Bible is the trustworthy and reliable word of God.  But he's craftily gone around this by the use of the F-word.  Faith.

 

"Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding" says Proverbs 3 : 5.

 

Don't understand, just believe!  

This is Ironhorse's 'Get-Out-Of-Jail-Free' card that he can play whenever there's something incorrect, false or contradictory in the Bible that he doesn't want to face up to.  All he has to do (as per his quote above) is to declare that he isn't up to the task of understanding the offending passage/s of scripture... yet there's enough in the rest of scripture for him to believe it's all true.  

 

So his understanding works well enough when he wants it to - but fails at all other times.

 

Really..?  

 

 

 

 

And I suppose using the Bible (Proverbs 3 : 5) to have faith in the rest of the Bible isn't a circular argument?

 

Add to this Ironhorse's use of the argument from incredulity fallacy from his claim "my limited understanding is enough to persuade me that God as revealed in creation...is enough for to me to have faith in [it]."

 

This is also clever, and cowardly.  If challenged, he, like many other theists, will resort to the further apologetic of a special frame of reference stemming from his use of the word "revelation", i.e., only those that have faith can see, or God only reveals to special folks (Ironhorse, naturally) or the Holy Spirit teaches me.

 

So, Ironhorse statement contains two fallacies, begging the question (circular reasoning) and an argument from ignorance.

 

What is quite telling is what Ironhorse does not say about his faith - that it is based on childhood indoctrination.  He is in denial about this, going so far to claim he challenged his beliefs when younger.  One of his "investigations" in this regard is the biological theory of evolution.  But it is quite clear from some of his prior posts that he is willfully ignorant of that theory.  Quite ignorant.

 

A reasonable assessment of Ironhorse's mental, emotional and psychological status regarding his religion is that he was indoctrinated into that religion, he denies he was indoctrinated and he uses fallacies and apologetics to maintain that denial. 

 

[Ravenstar]

Christianity is the MS-DOS 4.0 of the mind.

 

The Bible is their reboot floppy.

 

 

This is fun!

[bornagainathiest]

 

Here... http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/66352-the-omnipotence-of-god/page-2#.VMuKLJ2sUuk ...in post # 40 I force Ironhorse to confront a contradiction in scripture.

 

I ask him to concede that it is a contradiction, that the Bible therefore isn't trustworthy and that he's mistaken to trust it.

Or, if he won't concede, to argue his case that this isn't a contradiction.  Instead of replying to me and taking either of the offered options, he writes this...

 

"As a Christian, I freely admit there is a lot about God and the Bible I don’t understand or know.

However, my limited understanding is enough to persuade me that God as revealed in creation and in the message of the scriptures is enough for to me to have faith in."

 

...here.  http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/66459-too-stupid-to-know-theyre-stupid-the-dunning-kruger-effect/page-2#.VMuLMJ2sUuk In post # 34.

.

.

.

Now this is exceedingly clever!

This maneuver bypasses the usual rules of debate and logical argument, which tell us that if you don't understand something - then you shouldn't believe that it is true.  Skepticism is the default position when you cannot understand the issue in question.  Ironhorse admits that there's a lot he doesn't understand about God and the Bible.  Therefore, he should not believe that the Bible is the trustworthy and reliable word of God.  But he's craftily gone around this by the use of the F-word.  Faith.

 

"Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding" says Proverbs 3 : 5.

 

Don't understand, just believe!  

This is Ironhorse's 'Get-Out-Of-Jail-Free' card that he can play whenever there's something incorrect, false or contradictory in the Bible that he doesn't want to face up to.  All he has to do (as per his quote above) is to declare that he isn't up to the task of understanding the offending passage/s of scripture... yet there's enough in the rest of scripture for him to believe it's all true.  

 

So his understanding works well enough when he wants it to - but fails at all other times.

 

Really..?  

 

 

 

 

And I suppose using the Bible (Proverbs 3 : 5) to have faith in the rest of the Bible isn't a circular argument?

 

Add to this Ironhorse's use of the argument from incredulity fallacy from his claim "my limited understanding is enough to persuade me that God as revealed in creation...is enough for to me to have faith in [it]."

 

This is also clever, and cowardly.  If challenged, he, like many other theists, will resort to the further apologetic of a special frame of reference stemming from his use of the word "revelation", i.e., only those that have faith can see, or God only reveals to special folks (Ironhorse, naturally) or the Holy Spirit teaches me.

 

So, Ironhorse statement contains two fallacies, begging the question (circular reasoning) and an argument from ignorance.

 

What is quite telling is what Ironhorse does not say about his faith - that it is based on childhood indoctrination.  He is in denial about this, going so far to claim he challenged his beliefs when younger.  One of his "investigations" in this regard is the biological theory of evolution.  But it is quite clear from some of his prior posts that he is willfully ignorant of that theory.  Quite ignorant.

 

A reasonable assessment of Ironhorse's mental, emotional and psychological status regarding his religion is that he was indoctrinated into that religion, he denies he was indoctrinated and he uses fallacies and apologetics to maintain that denial. 

 

 

This.

 

Specifically, the last sentence.  Right on the money, Sdelsolray!

.

.

.

Imho it would be a mistake for us to think of Ironhorse as any kind of helpless victim of an indoctrinated mindset.

He may have started off in a state of innocence and helplessness, but he is long past that now.  Now he is carefully and cleverly maneuvering and adjusting what he writes in response to our efforts to unmask and expose his chicanery.  

 

This is measured, deliberate and calculated evasion on his part.

 

Ironhorse knows what he's doing here.

 

Now he knows that we know too.

 

 

BAA.

[1AcceptingAThiest1]

Here... http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/66352-the-omnipotence-of-god/page-2#.VMuKLJ2sUuk ...in post # 40 I force Ironhorse to confront a contradiction in scripture.

 

I ask him to concede that it is a contradiction, that the Bible therefore isn't trustworthy and that he's mistaken to trust it.

Or, if he won't concede, to argue his case that this isn't a contradiction.  Instead of replying to me and taking either of the offered options, he writes this...

 

"As a Christian, I freely admit there is a lot about God and the Bible I don’t understand or know.

However, my limited understanding is enough to persuade me that God as revealed in creation and in the message of the scriptures is enough for to me to have faith in."

 

...here.  http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/66459-too-stupid-to-know-theyre-stupid-the-dunning-kruger-effect/page-2#.VMuLMJ2sUuk In post # 34.

.

Now this is exceedingly clever!

This maneuver bypasses the usual rules of debate and logical argument, which tell us that if you don't understand something - then you shouldn't believe that it is true.  Skepticism is the default position when you cannot understand the issue in question.  Ironhorse admits that there's a lot he doesn't understand about God and the Bible.  Therefore, he should not believe that the Bible is the trustworthy and reliable word of God.  But he's craftily gone around this by the use of the F-word.  Faith.

 

interesting thread.

 

do we know everything, every detail about our love ones?

does that mean we cant trust our husband wife and kids,

we dont know ALL and everything about our teachers and professors so we cant trust them?

we dont know all and everything the pilot or doctor so we cant trust them?

we dont know all or everything about the manager of a resurant but we trust their food?

 

because we dont know EVERYTHING?

we dont know everything about webmdave but we can trust him even tho there is a lot we may not know about his personal life.

 

Scientists still dont know alot about alot of things which they humbly admit, and they still are the most trusted source in the world.

[1AcceptingAThiest1]

 

 

They focus on a bigger fear: the fear of God and hell. Sadly, their faith is in fear more than anything else.

 

 

Such thinking is an example of what Orwell called "crimestop."

 

Following is an explanation of crimestop thinking, from Wikipedia:

 

Crimestop

 

"Crimestop" means to rid oneself of unwanted thoughts, i.e., thoughts that interfere with the ideology of the Party. This way, a person avoids committing thoughtcrime.

 

 

Fear??? the bible says "There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love." 1 John 4:18

 

Fear is a silly tactic use by some tv evangelists, they get viewers because they have to SCARE them into submission.

I myself rational person could never fall fo such easy see thru tricks. even the bible says be ware of false prophets

 

Tell me.....Why would God Warn us hundreds of times and many different things to watch out for in regards to deciet and false prophets?

 

 

 

Crimestop?

haha Tell me good sir, have you NEVER done this?

 

someone ever hurt you like a family member,  do you just tell them off and let your vocal chords RIp and let them have it with your words and break them?

 

or do you use respect and love and avoid unwanted thoughts harmful words and so that you can speak civally and peacefully?

 

granted this process can allow criminals to cmmit crime swithout thinking of the consequence, but in of itself it isnt explicity a bad thing

 

Tho this is the first time i ever heard of such a word, im just going by your definition. Thanks for the New word pal

[bornagainathiest]

 

(snip)

 

interesting thread.

 

do we know everything, every detail about our love ones?

does that mean we cant trust our husband wife and kids,

we dont know ALL and everything about our teachers and professors so we cant trust them?

we dont know all and everything the pilot or doctor so we cant trust them?

we dont know all or everything about the manager of a resurant but we trust their food?

 

because we dont know EVERYTHING?

we dont know everything about webmdave but we can trust him even tho there is a lot we may not know about his personal life.

 

Scientists still dont know alot about alot of things which the humbly admit, and they still are the most trusted soruce in the world.

 

 

Asking many questions about many different things and then drawing a false comparison between faith and science is a great way of deflecting attention away from this, A1.

 

Posted 24 January 2015 - 02:56 PM

1AcceptingAThiest1, on 24 Jan 2015 - 5:07 PM, said:

bornagainathiest, on 24 Jan 2015 - 1:47 PM, said:

 

 

1AcceptingAThiest1, on 23 Jan 2015 - 8:08 PM, said:

Baa. I will re read if I need to because I was Gone for 3weeks but I will address briefly

I do not mean for the sole purpose of knowing the future itself is the reason why God is more moral than Nazis

I'm saying because of the result if the future. God had a reason for doing what he did the Nazis did not.

If you knew by letting a robber leave the grocery store he would kill 1000 people in a mall. You would not have been so nice to let him leave.

God knew ahead of time of the horrible things that Ameikltes would have done to other people

Nazis killing people who did nothing *wrong* *and* on top of that who they didn't know if those people would have done anything horrible like killing more people.

Kill to stop more killing is what police do.

Kill just because....is selfish

That's difference between Nazis and God

 

I see, A1.

God had a reason for doing what he did and the Nazi did not.

So, if the Nazis had a good reason for doing what they did, they would be just as moral as God?

Is that what you're saying?

And God's 'good reason' was to kill to stop future killing...?

Then why didn't God kill Cain, to stop Cain killing Abel?

Why didn't God kill Doeg the Edomite?

To stop him killing 85 of God's own priests, the men and women of the town of Nob, it's children and infants, it's cattle and donkeys and sheep?  

None of these had done any harm to King Saul or Doeg.

And if you read 1 Samuel 22: 17 you'll see that none of King Saul's other officials raised a hand against the priests - because they knew this was a sinful and evil thing to do.

Saul and Doeg were clearly doing wrong ... why didn't God stop them?

 

we can take it even further lol

why didnt God hitlers Mom so hitler wouldnt have been born and holcoaust would never have happened?

why didnt he kill Hits Moms parents or the parents before them, that all would have prevented hitler

how for back do we go?....ok if God stopped all evil then nobody in the whole world shouldnt have been born since adam and eve or since the first common ancestor whichever you believe.

Where do we draw the line? want God to start chaning the wind in a specific moment and change the trajectory of all bullets fired to avoid any death?

Where do we draw the line? millions of scenarios

 

There's no need to take this any further than the Bible, your argument (God kills to prevent more killing) and my questions to you, A1.  So please don't deflect or dodge... just answer them.

 

Here they are again.

 

Why didn't God kill Cain, to stop Cain killing Abel?  

By your argument, God should have done this, because that's why he ordered the killing of the Amalekites - to prevent further killing.

 

Why didn't God kill Doeg, to stop him killing those 85 priests and everyone else in Nob?

By your argument, God should have done this, because that's why he ordered the killing of the Aamalekites - to prevent further killing.

 

Please also note the following, A1.

Saul (Doeg's commander) was disobedient to God, was non longer God's anointed in Israel (David was) and was ordering an act of genocide on the people of Nob.  They were believers in God, they were Israelites and not evil Aamalekites and they'd done no harm to Saul or Doeg.  So, by your very argument God should have killed Saul and Doeg, to prevent further killing.  Why didn't God do so?

 

And I'll add a New Testament question about God preventing killing by killing.

 

Matthew 2 : 16 - 18.

 

16 When Herod realized that he had been outwitted by the Magi, he was furious, and he gave orders to kill all the boys in Bethlehem and its vicinity who were two years old and under, in accordance with the time he had learned from the Magi. 17 Then what was said through the prophet Jeremiah was fulfilled:

18 “A voice is heard in Ramah,

    weeping and great mourning,

Rachel weeping for her children

    and refusing to be comforted,

    because they are no more.”

 

These babies had done no harm to anyone and they were the children of Israelite families, not the of the wicked Amalekites.  Therefore, by your own argument, God should have killed Herod to prevent further killing.  Yet he didn't.  He even sent a prophecy about this to his prophet Jeremiah, foretelling this event - so God WAS NOT ignorant of the coming slaughter.

 

So why didn't he do something about it, A1?  

Why did he let it happen when, according to you, he should have prevented it?

God ordered the killing of the evil Amalekites to prevent them killing, so why did he let Israelite babies die - when he could have easily struck Herod down?

 

Please answer these scripture-based questions.

Thanks,

BAA.

.

.

.

I've highlighted the questions in red for you A1.

 

Please clear your 'In' tray.

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

[mymistake]

 

Fear??? the bible says "There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love." 1 John 4:18

 

Fear is a silly tactic use by some tv evangelists, they get viewers because they have to SCARE them into submission.

 

 

Yet another example of how Christianity does not measure up to the words of the Bible.

 

 

 

 

Tell me.....Why would God Warn us hundreds of times and many different things to watch out for in regards to deciet and false prophets?

 

God is a puppet.  God says whatever the puppet master, in this case the men who wrote the Bible, wanted the puppet to say.  Ever notice how God never warns us about anything that was invented in modern times?  If the puppet masters didn't know about something then God didn't know either.

 

The Bible is full of deceit and false prophets.

[midniterider]

 

Here... http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/66352-the-omnipotence-of-god/page-2#.VMuKLJ2sUuk ...in post # 40 I force Ironhorse to confront a contradiction in scripture.

 

I ask him to concede that it is a contradiction, that the Bible therefore isn't trustworthy and that he's mistaken to trust it.

Or, if he won't concede, to argue his case that this isn't a contradiction.  Instead of replying to me and taking either of the offered options, he writes this...

 

"As a Christian, I freely admit there is a lot about God and the Bible I don’t understand or know.

However, my limited understanding is enough to persuade me that God as revealed in creation and in the message of the scriptures is enough for to me to have faith in."

 

...here.  http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/66459-too-stupid-to-know-theyre-stupid-the-dunning-kruger-effect/page-2#.VMuLMJ2sUuk In post # 34.

.

Now this is exceedingly clever!

This maneuver bypasses the usual rules of debate and logical argument, which tell us that if you don't understand something - then you shouldn't believe that it is true.  Skepticism is the default position when you cannot understand the issue in question.  Ironhorse admits that there's a lot he doesn't understand about God and the Bible.  Therefore, he should not believe that the Bible is the trustworthy and reliable word of God.  But he's craftily gone around this by the use of the F-word.  Faith.

 

interesting thread.

 

do we know everything, every detail about our love ones?

does that mean we cant trust our husband wife and kids,

we dont know ALL and everything about our teachers and professors so we cant trust them?

we dont know all and everything the pilot or doctor so we cant trust them?

we dont know all or everything about the manager of a resurant but we trust their food?

 

No, I don't know everything about these people. But I do know these people exist, at least. I can go talk to them and ask them questions. I can experience them with the 5 senses which goes a long way towards lending credibility to them. How can I trust anything about Jesus when he is never ever here? 

because we dont know EVERYTHING?

we dont know everything about webmdave but we can trust him even tho there is a lot we may not know about his personal life.

 

I dont have to imagine in my head what Dave might be thinking. I could send him a PM and I bet he would even answer it. That's cuz Dave is real. :-) Dave, a mere human being, more real than the almighty Jesus. How can that be? :-)

 

Scientists still dont know alot about alot of things which they humbly admit, and they still are the most trusted source in the world.

 

Too bad Jesus never created a medication or a communications device or an automobile or a new alloy of metal or a better housing insulation or a microprocessor or a washing machine or an airplane or ....  maybe he would be more trusted then.

[Thurisaz]

Ah and here we go again. Morontheists... not able to even make it look like they have a point without quoting from the book of bullshit.

 

...zzzZZZZZZzzzzzzzZZZZZzzzzz...

[Fweethawt]

Ah and here we go again. Morontheists... not able to even make it look like they have a point without quoting from the book of bullshit.

 

...zzzZZZZZZzzzzzzzZZZZZzzzzz...

Its enough to make a T-rex do a double facepalm. Or die trying...

[Guest Furball]

You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep-seated need to believe. - Carl Sagan

[1AcceptingAThiest1]

 

 

(snip)

 

interesting thread.

 

do we know everything, every detail about our love ones?

does that mean we cant trust our husband wife and kids,

we dont know ALL and everything about our teachers and professors so we cant trust them?

we dont know all and everything the pilot or doctor so we cant trust them?

we dont know all or everything about the manager of a resurant but we trust their food?

 

because we dont know EVERYTHING?

we dont know everything about webmdave but we can trust him even tho there is a lot we may not know about his personal life.

 

Scientists still dont know alot about alot of things which the humbly admit, and they still are the most trusted soruce in the world.

 

 

Asking many questions about many different things and then drawing a false comparison between faith and science is a great way of deflecting attention away from this, A1.

 

Posted 24 January 2015 - 02:56 PM

1AcceptingAThiest1, on 24 Jan 2015 - 5:07 PM, said:

bornagainathiest, on 24 Jan 2015 - 1:47 PM, said:

 

 

1AcceptingAThiest1, on 23 Jan 2015 - 8:08 PM, said:

Baa. I will re read if I need to because I was Gone for 3weeks but I will address briefly

I do not mean for the sole purpose of knowing the future itself is the reason why God is more moral than Nazis

I'm saying because of the result if the future. God had a reason for doing what he did the Nazis did not.

If you knew by letting a robber leave the grocery store he would kill 1000 people in a mall. You would not have been so nice to let him leave.

God knew ahead of time of the horrible things that Ameikltes would have done to other people

Nazis killing people who did nothing *wrong* *and* on top of that who they didn't know if those people would have done anything horrible like killing more people.

Kill to stop more killing is what police do.

Kill just because....is selfish

That's difference between Nazis and God

 

I see, A1.

God had a reason for doing what he did and the Nazi did not.

So, if the Nazis had a good reason for doing what they did, they would be just as moral as God?

Is that what you're saying?

And God's 'good reason' was to kill to stop future killing...?

Then why didn't God kill Cain, to stop Cain killing Abel?

Why didn't God kill Doeg the Edomite?

To stop him killing 85 of God's own priests, the men and women of the town of Nob, it's children and infants, it's cattle and donkeys and sheep?  

None of these had done any harm to King Saul or Doeg.

And if you read 1 Samuel 22: 17 you'll see that none of King Saul's other officials raised a hand against the priests - because they knew this was a sinful and evil thing to do.

Saul and Doeg were clearly doing wrong ... why didn't God stop them?

 

we can take it even further lol

why didnt God hitlers Mom so hitler wouldnt have been born and holcoaust would never have happened?

why didnt he kill Hits Moms parents or the parents before them, that all would have prevented hitler

how for back do we go?....ok if God stopped all evil then nobody in the whole world shouldnt have been born since adam and eve or since the first common ancestor whichever you believe.

Where do we draw the line? want God to start chaning the wind in a specific moment and change the trajectory of all bullets fired to avoid any death?

Where do we draw the line? millions of scenarios

 

There's no need to take this any further than the Bible, your argument (God kills to prevent more killing) and my questions to you, A1.  So please don't deflect or dodge... just answer them.

 

Here they are again.

 

Why didn't God kill Cain, to stop Cain killing Abel?  

By your argument, God should have done this, because that's why he ordered the killing of the Amalekites - to prevent further killing.

 

Why didn't God kill Doeg, to stop him killing those 85 priests and everyone else in Nob?

By your argument, God should have done this, because that's why he ordered the killing of the Aamalekites - to prevent further killing.

 

Please also note the following, A1.

Saul (Doeg's commander) was disobedient to God, was non longer God's anointed in Israel (David was) and was ordering an act of genocide on the people of Nob.  They were believers in God, they were Israelites and not evil Aamalekites and they'd done no harm to Saul or Doeg.  So, by your very argument God should have killed Saul and Doeg, to prevent further killing.  Why didn't God do so?

 

And I'll add a New Testament question about God preventing killing by killing.

 

Matthew 2 : 16 - 18.

 

16 When Herod realized that he had been outwitted by the Magi, he was furious, and he gave orders to kill all the boys in Bethlehem and its vicinity who were two years old and under, in accordance with the time he had learned from the Magi. 17 Then what was said through the prophet Jeremiah was fulfilled:

18 “A voice is heard in Ramah,

    weeping and great mourning,

Rachel weeping for her children

    and refusing to be comforted,

    because they are no more.”

 

These babies had done no harm to anyone and they were the children of Israelite families, not the of the wicked Amalekites.  Therefore, by your own argument, God should have killed Herod to prevent further killing.  Yet he didn't.  He even sent a prophecy about this to his prophet Jeremiah, foretelling this event - so God WAS NOT ignorant of the coming slaughter.

 

So why didn't he do something about it, A1?  

Why did he let it happen when, according to you, he should have prevented it?

God ordered the killing of the evil Amalekites to prevent them killing, so why did he let Israelite babies die - when he could have easily struck Herod down?

 

Please answer these scripture-based questions.

Thanks,

BAA.

.

.

.

I've highlighted the questions in red for you A1.

 

Please clear your 'In' tray.

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

 

 

 

i answered this already in another thread

 

Copy and paste

 

lol do you sovle all math problems the same way?

God had a specific reason why does his action for each event, it would be inaccurate to project his response and reason for one event and say that should be the cornerstone response to all events that he responses to.

 

in This Sauls scenario yes God didnt Kill him, but do you think he got away Scott free? haha i dont think so...1 Samuel 16:14

 

Saul then reconciled with David later on, so perhaps there was a PURPOSE to why God didnt kill him 1 Samuel 16:21–23

 

so let me go further on this Saying God did something for ONE thing is the same way he handles EVERYTHING is call fallacy of division. Which you should know better.

 

i ask again where does God draw the line if he has to kill to stop killing? does he kill because of a bad thought that could have manifested into killing like a school shooting, maybe the kid wanted to shoot the school because he was bullied, would God kill the kid who was going to shoot the school or kill the bully who prompted the kids thought to go on a shooting range, or should he kill the bullies parents or grandparents?......again where does God draw the line.

 

IF God is real why dont he JUST FORCE you to belive him right now, if he wanted to be worshipped so bad?

 

 

two

Even the very worst of criminals may live long and prosperous lives might be asked ‘Why does not God kill more people, or even all people, like in the days of Noah? But God’s postponement of justice is not the absence of justice, delayed justice is still justice.

 

herod died a horrible death

"Herod had died in a most dramatic fashion. Josephus the jewish historian states that a loathsome disease descended upon the ruler as a judgment from God on account of his sins. He describes the horrible details —burning fever, ulcerated entrails, foul discharges, convulsions, stench, etc. (Antiquities 17.6.5)."

 

i see how you nicely doged my questions were they too hard to answer?

i said them for a reason

why didnt God kill hitler(replace hitler with Herod) it could be ANYONE.

If God had stepped in and intervened and stopped Hitler, He would have had to stop every sinner in the World from doing his sin and wickedness! He would have had to interfere with the power of choice and the free will of man and man's choice in determining his own fate

 

what about adam and eve

He would've had to forcibly prevent them from eating of it! But in order for them to have free will and choice, to demonstrate what would happen if man could have his own way and choose to do evil, for the whole plan of God to succeed in showing the awful consequences of evil and the blessings of doing good, He had to let them go ahead and have their own way. He's let man go ahead and have his own way and do as he pleases ever since, in order to especially save and bless those who voluntarily choose to love and serve Him forever!

[1AcceptingAThiest1]

 

 

Here... http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/66352-the-omnipotence-of-god/page-2#.VMuKLJ2sUuk ...in post # 40 I force Ironhorse to confront a contradiction in scripture.

 

I ask him to concede that it is a contradiction, that the Bible therefore isn't trustworthy and that he's mistaken to trust it.

Or, if he won't concede, to argue his case that this isn't a contradiction.  Instead of replying to me and taking either of the offered options, he writes this...

 

"As a Christian, I freely admit there is a lot about God and the Bible I don’t understand or know.

However, my limited understanding is enough to persuade me that God as revealed in creation and in the message of the scriptures is enough for to me to have faith in."

 

...here.  http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/66459-too-stupid-to-know-theyre-stupid-the-dunning-kruger-effect/page-2#.VMuLMJ2sUuk In post # 34.

.

Now this is exceedingly clever!

This maneuver bypasses the usual rules of debate and logical argument, which tell us that if you don't understand something - then you shouldn't believe that it is true.  Skepticism is the default position when you cannot understand the issue in question.  Ironhorse admits that there's a lot he doesn't understand about God and the Bible.  Therefore, he should not believe that the Bible is the trustworthy and reliable word of God.  But he's craftily gone around this by the use of the F-word.  Faith.

 

interesting thread.

 

do we know everything, every detail about our love ones?

does that mean we cant trust our husband wife and kids,

we dont know ALL and everything about our teachers and professors so we cant trust them?

we dont know all and everything the pilot or doctor so we cant trust them?

we dont know all or everything about the manager of a resurant but we trust their food?

 

No, I don't know everything about these people. But I do know these people exist, at least. I can go talk to them and ask them questions. I can experience them with the 5 senses which goes a long way towards lending credibility to them. How can I trust anything about Jesus when he is never ever here? 

because we dont know EVERYTHING?

we dont know everything about webmdave but we can trust him even tho there is a lot we may not know about his personal life.

 

I dont have to imagine in my head what Dave might be thinking. I could send him a PM and I bet he would even answer it. That's cuz Dave is real. :-) Dave, a mere human being, more real than the almighty Jesus. How can that be? :-)

 

Scientists still dont know alot about alot of things which they humbly admit, and they still are the most trusted source in the world.

 

Too bad Jesus never created a medication or a communications device or an automobile or a new alloy of metal or a better housing insulation or a microprocessor or a washing machine or an airplane or ....  maybe he would be more trusted then.

 

 

this is a false analysis

 

of course you wont trst God or Jeuss because you dont have a relationship with him or know him or even think he exists

This doesnt address my response the BAAs Response to Ironhorse. In ironhorse can he Does believe God exists he Does have a relationship with him, so WITHIN THIS FRAMEWORK, if he says there is alot about God he doesnt know, he is still within his logical right to trust him

 

In the same way doctors pilots and managers are real to you as God is real to us, you may not know everything about them but still trust them. In the same Way if a christian believes God is real but doesnt know everything he is within his means to trust him too

[1AcceptingAThiest1]

Ah and here we go again. Morontheists... not able to even make it look like they have a point without quoting from the book of bullshit.

 

...zzzZZZZZZzzzzzzzZZZZZzzzzz...

 

 

While you are sleeping, dream about how you would get rid of Evil.

 

what specific step would you do to rid humanity fo all bad thoughts and evil deeds?

 

if you never wake up then that sunderstandable, because its only a dream

[TrueFreedom]

 

Ah and here we go again. Morontheists... not able to even make it look like they have a point without quoting from the book of bullshit.

 

...zzzZZZZZZzzzzzzzZZZZZzzzzz...

 

 

While you are sleeping, dream about how you would get rid of Evil.

 

what specific step would you do to rid humanity fo all bad thoughts and evil deeds?

 

if you never wake up then that sunderstandable, because its only a dream

 

Are you saying that it's impossible to get rid of Evil? Even for God?  Then why call him God?

[mymistake]

 

Ah and here we go again. Morontheists... not able to even make it look like they have a point without quoting from the book of bullshit.

 

...zzzZZZZZZzzzzzzzZZZZZzzzzz...

 

 

While you are sleeping, dream about how you would get rid of Evil.

 

what specific step would you do to rid humanity fo all bad thoughts and evil deeds?

 

if you never wake up then that sunderstandable, because its only a dream

 

 

 

Do we have to get rid of evil as flawed, weak humans or did you mean how to get rid of evil if we were in God's shoes and were all powerful?

 

 

If it is the latter then there is a simple mechanism that is right there inside Christian mythology.  It's a tool in God's very own tool box.  Skip life on Earth.  God doesn't make Earth.  God doesn't make a Garden of Eden.  God doesn't make any crafty serpent, any demon or even Satan.  God starts by making Heaven.  Then everybody goes to Heaven, there is no evil or suffering.  

[mymistake]

 

 

of course you wont trst God or Jeuss because you dont have a relationship with him or know him or even think he exists

This doesnt address my response the BAAs Response to Ironhorse. In ironhorse can he Does believe God exists he Does have a relationship with him, so WITHIN THIS FRAMEWORK, if he says there is alot about God he doesnt know, he is still within his logical right to trust him

 

In the same way doctors pilots and managers are real to you as God is real to us, you may not know everything about them but still trust them. In the same Way if a christian believes God is real but doesnt know everything he is within his means to trust him too

 

 

 

Uh no.  Believing the Easter Bunny is real does not mean the believer has a relationship with the Easter Bunny.  There is much more to a relationship than one person believing in and trusting the other.  A stalker can believe and trust in the human he is stalking.  That belief and trust doesn't turn the crime into a relationship.  And of corse of the object of your trust is imaginary there can be no relationship.  Imaginary people only have relationships in literature.

 

Also "logical right" is a meaningless phrase.  Trust isn't logical.  Trust is thought so everybody has the right to their own thoughts.

 

God is not as real to you as doctors or pilots.  You can verify people exist.  You can only make believe God exists.  This is an objective difference.

 

You are going to drive yourself insane if you bend your thinking too much.

[Thurisaz]

While you are sleeping, dream about how you would get rid of Evil.

If that's your motivation to stay in the cult, you better think about what good to expect from an entity that, according to its own "revealed word™", created that very same evil.

 

Case closed.

[FreeThinkerNZ]

While you are sleeping, dream about how you would get rid of Evil.

 

First I'd ask you to define "evil", but lets just assume you mean people's choices that harm others.  The first most obvious way to minimise such choices is through education, in the family and in the community.  Ensuring that as many people as possible have decent living conditions and the resources they need to raise their children well, and get specialised intervention where needed, should go a long way to reducing harmful choices.  The next most obvious way is to build and maintain free, democratic societies that function under the rule of law.  The second is of course a prerequisite to the first.

 

Both tools have been and continue to be seriously limited by the sinister, pervasive influence of religion worldwide, particularly the Abrahamic religions.  Just one example for each tool: adequate, empowering, secular sexuality education is not federally mandated in the US, because of religion, and contributes to all kinds of harm, including sexual assault, unwanted pregnancies and STIs; and the press freedom so treasured in European countries is under direct threat from religious extremists who want special treatment and a free pass for their barbaric beliefs and practices.

 

Xianity is throughly immoral, rotten to its core, and this has been proven time and again.  If you want to rid the world of evil, start by ridding it of xianity and its bedfellows.

[bdp]

'god' never had to allow evil in the first place; I never asked to be born let alone be party to your 'god's psychotic experiment.  Usual disclaimer, I don't actually believe in your god or any other, just humoring you for the sake of discussion.

 

...and anyway I thought the whole 'dying on the cross' was to eradicate evil, among other things.  What's your 'god' waiting for?