God will not take lightly of this act. On a pleasure/pain basis wouldn’t it seem fit to put to death people that stray others away from following the character of God? For if an idol worshiper convinces some Israelites to stray from God wouldn’t convicting the idol worshiper to death in order to save the souls of a certain number of Israelites be justice, according to Mr. Harris view of pleasure verses pain? If we look at pleasure/pain principle wouldn’t killing one idol-worshiper who is tempting others to walk away from God be good if it prevents the souls of a certain number of people from straying away from God and being denied the presence of God in the afterlife?
You assume far too much! Firstly, you assume there IS a god, and secondly you assume humans have souls. These are two assumptions atheists don’t make. From that vantage point, who cares what conclusion your logic arrives at, it makes no difference.
Before I continue in justifying the laws in the Old Testament one must hold to the following presuppositions, if one does not hold to these presuppositions than I doubt little of what I will say will do much good:
1. God is infinitely holy and good
2. All of the human race sins and is in rebellion against God
3. Sin must be punished whenever God’s character is attacked
4. The human race must hear the seriousness of our sin and flee to Christ
For the wages of sin is death, sins of the heart and outward sins.
As virtually none of us here hold to these presuppositions, let’s please leave it at that.
God will not take lightly of this act. On a pleasure/pain basis wouldn’t it seem fit to put to death people that stray others away from following the character of God? For if an idol worshiper convinces some Israelites to stray from God wouldn’t convicting the idol worshiper to death in order to save the souls of a certain number of Israelites be justice, according to Mr. Harris view of pleasure verses pain? If we look at pleasure/pain principle wouldn’t killing one idol-worshiper who is tempting others to walk away from God be good if it prevents the souls of a certain number of people from straying away from God and being denied the presence of God in the afterlife?
You assume far too much! Firstly, you assume there IS a god, and secondly you assume humans have souls. These are two assumptions atheists don’t make. From that vantage point, who cares what conclusion your logic arrives at, it makes no difference.
Pete, you chose an appropriate paragraph from this nutcase’s little tirade, because it focuses in on the fact that, to him, it’s reasonable, logical and makes a great deal of sense to slay entirely innocent people. Frankr in past postings has said equivalent things. And people wonder why atheists feel compelled to speak out.
[quote author=“fletch_F_Fletch”]
4th Comment: Before I continue in justifying the laws in the Old Testament one must hold to the following presuppositions, if one does not hold to these presuppositions than I doubt little of what I will say will do much good:
1. God is infinitely holy and good
2. All of the human race sins and is in rebellion against God
3. Sin must be punished whenever God’s character is attacked
4. The human race must hear the seriousness of our sin and flee to Christ
Translation: Sinners, take heed. I simply can’t help you unless you take my word absolutely: In order to believe in god, you must first believe in god.
Wow! Arrogance, ignorance, circular logic. All the ingredients of a true believer.
Pete, “you chose an appropriate paragraph from this nutcase’s little tirade, because it focuses in on the fact that, to him, it’s reasonable, logical and makes a great deal of sense to slay entirely innocent people.”
My point was to Sam Harris’ view of pleasure/pain principal it is perfectly fine for anyone to slay entirely innocent people. My nerve endings aren’t connected to theirs, what gives?
For everyone else, I posted this for ‘Nugget’ to read on why God commanded such acts. I wasn’t making any argument based on my presuppositions, I was simply stating them.
[quote author=“Occam’s Razor”]What’s really chilling is that, apparently, this bloke is a teacher.
I don’t think he was tiring to give you chills, and maybe he just wants some one else get a fresh reality, but by your statement, I reckon ‘bloke’ means ‘spiritually alive person’. What word would Occam’s Razer (razor) give to someone defined as ‘spiritually dead’ like P’d off professing atheists?
[quote author=“Ivan”][quote author=“Occam’s Razor”]What’s really chilling is that, apparently, this bloke is a teacher.
I don’t think he was tiring to give you chills, and maybe he just wants some one else get a fresh reality, but by your statement, I reckon ‘bloke’ means ‘spiritually alive person’. What word would Occam’s Razer (razor) give to someone defined as ‘spiritually dead’ like P’d off professing atheists?
“Pete, you chose an appropriate paragraph from this nutcase’s little tirade, because it focuses in on the fact that, to him, it’s reasonable, logical and makes a great deal of sense to slay entirely innocent people. Frankr in past postings has said equivalent things. And people wonder why atheists feel compelled to speak out.
Fletch, you are a sick motherfucker.”
What exactly is your argument? If you continued to read the argument that I posted I continue to claim it is not ‘perfectly reasonable, logical and makes a great deal of sense to slay entirely innocent people.”
My point…Which you cleary missed was if morality is solely defined by pleasure/pain than some very scarry things can happen. For instance, weren’t the consequences of the French Revolution and the Bolshevik Revolution clearly acts where the leaders held to a pleasure/pain view? If Robespierre and Lenin can hold to these principals than certainly God can hold to these principals, and as we see you appear to not like that very much. If you had continued to read my post I clearly showed, through scripture, that God does not want the gospel preached through the sword but rather through love and compassion.
You do make another point that I find quite interesting. You say, “it’s reasonable, logical and makes a great deal of sense…” Well isn’t morality based on your reason and logic? If so what grounds do you have when someone else’s morality is based on THEIR reason and logic? It seems your giving me a lot of commands on how one ‘should’ and ‘should not’ act. Don’t you find that quite interesting if everything is solely matter? After all, can there be such thing as ‘good’ matter and ‘bad’ matter? Why can’t ‘master matter’ act on ‘slave matter’? Doesn’t the master receive much pleasure and his nerve endings certainly arn’t connected to the slave, what gives? I could go on but I think your getting my point.
On a side note please don’t call me a ‘motherfucker’ that hurts my self-esteem. I do realize why you are greatly skeptical with the motives of Christians, as I am to. As some 1980’s arena rock singer once said, “Please give me a chance.”
[quote author=“fletch_F_Fletch”]My point…Which you cleary missed was if morality is solely defined by pleasure/pain than some very scarry things can happen. For instance, weren’t the consequences of the French Revolution and the Bolshevik Revolution clearly acts where the leaders held to a pleasure/pain view? If Robespierre and Lenin can hold to these principals than certainly God can hold to these principals, and as we see you appear to not like that very much. If you had continued to read my post I clearly showed, through scripture, that God does not want the gospel preached through the sword but rather through love and compassion.
You do make another point that I find quite interesting. You say, “it’s reasonable, logical and makes a great deal of sense…” Well isn’t morality based on your reason and logic? If so what grounds do you have when someone else’s morality is based on THEIR reason and logic? It seems your giving me a lot of commands on how one ‘should’ and ‘should not’ act. Don’t you find that quite interesting if everything is solely matter? After all, can there be such thing as ‘good’ matter and ‘bad’ matter? Why can’t ‘master matter’ act on ‘slave matter’? Doesn’t the master receive much pleasure and his nerve endings certainly arn’t connected to the slave, what gives? I could go on but I think your getting my point.
On a side note please don’t call me a ‘motherfucker’ that hurts my self-esteem. I do realize why you are greatly skeptical with the motives of Christians, as I am to. As some 1980’s arena rock singer once said, “Please give me a chance.”
You’re repeating yourself, Fletch. I think you said that you’re a teacher. If so, I’m sorry that’s the case. If I hurt your self esteem, then maybe your esteem was in need of an adjustment. If I simply insulted your sick fucking world view, then maybe I was more effective than I’d expected to be.
