Thou Shalt Not Kill.

Author: Stephen

Posts

Total: 95
Melcharaz
Melcharaz's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 780
2
5
8
Melcharaz's avatar
Melcharaz
2
5
8
-->
@EtrnlVw

zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@RoderickSpode
Not at all.

Floods are common place.

Boats are boats. 

And mythical exaggerations are what they are.

And the god things is a valid hypothesis, but falls down because of the existence of a god....The theist hypothesis like all other hypotheses never quite start at the beginning.

zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@EtrnlVw
Figuratively speaking......The one eyed serpent and the juicy peach.
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,615
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@RoderickSpode
RoderickSpode reference your post 28 above is, for the best part, all irrelevant to the topic this thread. 

All of those reading here haven't missed the fact that you have steered clear of the murder of all of Jobs innocent children and avoided the subject like the plague. 

And you referencing other passages and verses from the scriptures that have absolutely nothing to do with issues raised in this particular topic  concerning YOUR god, won't change the fact that your god will murder for little or no reason at the drop of an hat, as proven by just the few examples that I have shown in post #1 page 1.

Well in reference to the snake, I don't think a literal snake spoke to Eve.

Neither do I. Only someone really, really stupid and stuck in the backward superstitious times of the ancients would believe that to be that case , wouldn't they.


I believe it was another god  he had punished for endowing mankind the knowledge and ability of reproduction, but the why and what you choose to call it is all  irrelevant  .  As I said, this being, what ever YOU choose to call it was indeed sentenced to be lower than ALL of the creature of gods creation,


yet YOUR god felt the need to have to prove something to it and YOUR god sanctioned the murder of ALL of his faithful servants children. WHY!!!?


"So the LORD God said to the serpent, "Because you have done this, "Cursed are you above all livestock and all wild animals! You will crawl on your belly and you will eat dust all the days of your life. Genesis 3:14







RoderickSpode
RoderickSpode's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,044
2
2
2
RoderickSpode's avatar
RoderickSpode
2
2
2
-->
@EtrnlVw

+1
Good post, I don't know why everyone abandons the figurative style of writing in the scripture when it's so obvious. I know part of it is because of the poor interpretations of religious people but this is a no-brainer. There was never a talking snake lol, the snake just represents temptation.
This is why atheists get all bothered because they think we believe in talking animals and so we follow an ignorant book, when that was never the point at all. Silly stuff like this we have to then explain. 
Thanks EtrnlVw!

Yes, and the focus on the snake has lead to ideas like a snake with legs, and dragons holding a conversation with Eve. And also notions that the snake/serpent being beautiful and luring Eve into sex.

I'm sure you've heard it all.
RoderickSpode
RoderickSpode's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,044
2
2
2
RoderickSpode's avatar
RoderickSpode
2
2
2
-->
@zedvictor4
Not at all.

Floods are common place.

Boats are boats. 

And mythical exaggerations are what they are.
And I may as well add boats transporting animals (like to zoos, circuses, etc.).

And the god things is a valid hypothesis, but falls down because of the existence of a god....The theist hypothesis like all other hypotheses never quite start at the beginning.
Would you mind expounding on the underlined portion?
RoderickSpode
RoderickSpode's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,044
2
2
2
RoderickSpode's avatar
RoderickSpode
2
2
2
-->
@Stephen
RoderickSpode reference your post 28 above is, for the best part, all irrelevant to the topic this thread. 

All of those reading here haven't missed the fact that you have steered clear of the murder of all of Jobs innocent children and avoided the subject like the plague. 

Really? Did you have some sort of a PM conference?


And you referencing other passages and verses from the scriptures that have absolutely nothing to do with issues raised in this particular topic  concerning YOUR god, won't change the fact that your god will murder for little or no reason at the drop of an hat, as proven by just the few examples that I have shown in post #1 page 1.
Going back to post #1, and referencing the other scriptures,

1. What would be the difference between the God of the Bible causing a house to cave in killing it's occupants, and an impersonal deistic creator
allowing a house to cave in killing it's occupants?

2. What would be worse, the God of the Bible causing a house to cave in killing it's occupants, and then taking their spirit/soul into paradise; or a deistic creator allowing a house to cave in killing it's occupants, producing complete death?

Neither do I. Only someone really, really stupid and stuck in the backward superstitious times of the ancients would believe that to be that case , wouldn't they.


I believe it was another god  he had punished for endowing mankind the knowledge and ability of reproduction, but the why and what you choose to call it is all  irrelevant  .  As I said, this being, what ever YOU choose to call it was indeed sentenced to be lower than ALL of the creature of gods creation,


yet YOUR god felt the need to have to prove something to it and YOUR god sanctioned the murder of ALL of his faithful servants children. WHY!!!?


"So the LORD God said to the serpent, "Because you have done this, "Cursed are you above all livestock and all wild animals! You will crawl on your belly and you will eat dust all the days of your life. Genesis 3:14
What exactly are you having a problem with? The curse was placed on the devil. What's the big mystery? I don't know of any Bible scholar who thinks differently. Are you still stuck on the crawling/walking thing?
EtrnlVw
EtrnlVw's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,869
3
3
5
EtrnlVw's avatar
EtrnlVw
3
3
5
-->
@zedvictor4
Figuratively speaking......The one eyed serpent and the juicy peach.

Lol, wow you guys understand figurative speech just not when it is in the Bible? BTW is that one the titles in the collection of your videos?
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,615
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@RoderickSpode
rickSpode reference your post 28 above is, for the best part, all irrelevant to the topic this thread. 

All of those reading here haven't missed the fact that you have steered clear of the murder of all of Jobs innocent children and avoided the subject like the plague. 

Really? 
Yes. really.
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@EtrnlVw
Ok, so it was perhaps a bit tongue in cheek. 

Nonetheless the analogy isn't so ridiculous if you think about it.

Resisting temptation and the sins of the flesh and all that.
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@RoderickSpode
Not sure what you meant re circuses and zoos.

Nonetheless when you consider the necessary logistics of the ark thing, it would have needed to have been one hell of a boat.


As for the hypothesis problem:

The underlying dilemma with all creation hypotheses is the something from nothing principle.

I personally cannot accept the idea that the something exists eternally.
EtrnlVw
EtrnlVw's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,869
3
3
5
EtrnlVw's avatar
EtrnlVw
3
3
5
-->
@zedvictor4
Ok, so it was perhaps a bit tongue in cheek. 

Nonetheless the analogy isn't so ridiculous if you think about it.

Resisting temptation and the sins of the flesh and all that.

Haha it was funny though...

RoderickSpode
RoderickSpode's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,044
2
2
2
RoderickSpode's avatar
RoderickSpode
2
2
2
-->
@zedvictor4
Not sure what you meant re circuses and zoos.

Nonetheless when you consider the necessary logistics of the ark thing, it would have needed to have been one hell of a boat.
I was just giving a couple of examples as to the why animals today are transported by ships.


As for the hypothesis problem:

The underlying dilemma with all creation hypotheses is the something from nothing principle.

I personally cannot accept the idea that the something exists eternally.
What is your take on an eternal universe?


BrotherDThomas
BrotherDThomas's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,140
3
3
7
BrotherDThomas's avatar
BrotherDThomas
3
3
7
-->
@RoderickSpode



.
RoderickSpode,

YOUR UNGODLY AND BIBLE IGNORANT QUOTE IN POST #28 : " Well in reference to the snake, I don't think a literal snake spoke to Eve. ...  I don't see any reason to assume that at all." 

We have to ask you outright, where do you get the authority to rewrite our serial killer Jesus' bible? Don't you realize that you are opening up a can of worms when doing so?  Huh?


JESUS STATED: 

Every word of God is flawless; he is a shield to those who take refuge in him.“ (Proverbs 30:5) 

Since every word of Jesus is flawless within the Bible, are you calling Jesus a LIAR when His direct words say that there was a talking snake in the contradicting Genesis narratives?


"God is not human, that he should lie, not a human being, that he should change his mind,  Does he speak and then not act? Does he promise and not fulfill?" (Numbers 23:19)  

Since Jesus does not LIE, therefore when Jesus' words in Genesis depicts a talking snake, then it is true, like the many other passages stated by Him that are disturbing.  Do you understand this simple biblical axiom? Obviously not!


Jesus and I get so tired of biblically ignorant pseudo-christians like you and EtrnIVw spewing forth your devil speak in this forum, where TRUE Christians like myself gain solace in that you will most certainly pay upon Judgment Day, praise Jesus' revenge!


.
RoderickSpode
RoderickSpode's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,044
2
2
2
RoderickSpode's avatar
RoderickSpode
2
2
2
-->
@BrotherDThomas
And I have property in Freehold, Iowa I'd like to sell you.
ATroubledMan
ATroubledMan's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 200
0
1
2
ATroubledMan's avatar
ATroubledMan
0
1
2
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Since Jesus does not LIE

"Now the Jews' feast of tabernacles was at hand."  "Are You coming with us?" His Brothers ask.(John 7:2)

In John 7:8, "Go ye up unto this feast: I go not up yet unto this feast; for my time is not yet full come."

John 7:10, "But when his brethren were gone up, then went he also up unto the feast, not openly, but as it were in secret."

Jesus and I
Sorry, but you can't include Jesus into your personal narrative as if he were standing there right in front of us.
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@BrotherDThomas
@ATroubledMan
>ATroubledMan: Was your John 7 reference supposed to be an example of Jesus lying? The matter is one of bearing false witness, not merely lying. There is a difference., but, actually, Jesus did neither. He said he was not going to the feast, and he only went in disguise, not as himself. And he stated why he was doing so, but his disciples did not understand. Is disguising one's self a sin? Well, some disguises are illegal, but that's quite another matter, and the record does not tell us if Jesus was pretending to be some official. Or if he was, it mayh ave been like a Halloween costume. In disguise, he can attend the feast, as he should being an obedient Jew.

>BrotherDThomas: I doubt Jesus is tired of us. He did atone for us. He may be disappointed in us at times, but tired of us? Nope. You can go ahead on your own and be tired, that's okay.
EtrnlVw
EtrnlVw's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,869
3
3
5
EtrnlVw's avatar
EtrnlVw
3
3
5
-->
@zedvictor4
The underlying dilemma with all creation hypotheses is the something from nothing principle.

Yet that's what you accept being a materialist lol, that what we are in this world came from nothing. Accepting the proposition of Theism everything comes from what I'll explain below. This way nothing ever comes from nothing once you understand what eternity means and how that works. As well what we observe in the universe and all its processes come from awareness (God). And creation through God never comes from nothing, God uses materials to create with and those are the processes we observe through science.

I personally cannot accept the idea that the something exists eternally.

That's an easy fix because it's just a matter of perspective. You're used to the experience of the continual passing of time, which is really just the passing of matter as it is in this universe. Remove the concept of matter passing away from your thinking, picture or conceptualize more of a static reality, or a fixed reality where the illusion of time passing is no longer relevant. If it makes it easier envision a cyclical reality, instead of a linear one. Now picture that static reality where awareness is always present, no beginning and no end, no passing of matter or "time" just an endless unified constant phenomenon. Out of this Reality everything has their origin and existence, it being the backdrop and canopy of our moving universe. So basically there was NEVER nothing, so that ends your dilemma right there.

On another note do you accept that energy is neither created or destroyed? because that then would contradict your statement. 


ATroubledMan
ATroubledMan's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 200
0
1
2
ATroubledMan's avatar
ATroubledMan
0
1
2
-->
@fauxlaw
 He said he was not going to the feast, and he only went in disguise, not as himself. And he stated why he was doing so, but his disciples did not understand. Is disguising one's self a sin?
Using that tactic in a argument is called a Red Herring. And yes, Jesus did bear false witness.

fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@ATroubledMan
Using that tactic in a argument is called a Red Herring. And yes, Jesus did bear false witness.

Using an argument is a fish? I take it your diet is not comprised of much fish. 
And I was completely unaware that the clothing I choose to wear may bear false witness. Of what, that I wear a tux to a beach party?
I accord Jesus exactly and entirely the same privilege. You can give him the red herring, and he will multiply it, because he can do that, too.
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@EtrnlVw
It's also an easy fix to ignore the issue.

And energy is a property of matter rather than matter being a property of energy.
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@RoderickSpode
Well.

Eternal universe is the dilemma.

No beginning is the problem...Once the components are in place there is then the opportunity for eternality....Never ending.

In this respect I subscribe to an oscillating universe hypothesis, and consequently can accept the notion of a god principle, which though is far more about the functionality, sequence and re-initiation of a process rather than anything to do with spirituality.

Spiritualising the god principle is probably an inevitable and also perhaps necessary phase of organic development though.  Especially If we regard the history of religion and the role it has played in the development of knowledge and understanding. In so much as, religious institutions provided focus and opportunity for learning, science and technological development.

No beginning though.

What is your take on the beginning?
RoderickSpode
RoderickSpode's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,044
2
2
2
RoderickSpode's avatar
RoderickSpode
2
2
2
-->
@zedvictor4
I think some might get a bit too hung up on the term spirituality. The same would hold true for the term supernatural. In other words, for the latter, what we might consider supernatural would be natural for a creator of a universe. We have no way of knowing how to create a universe apart from a synthetic one in a lab. So the idea presumes a supernatural accomplishment. A spiritual realm could probably be termed another way that doesn't anoint itself a religious myth.

As to your question, I don't have a problem with the idea of a creator with no beginning, because we're so limited in our understanding of time to begin with. I think the cliche example dealing with the problem of one traveling back in time and preventing their birth is actually a good example of our inefficiency to make any definite claims against an eternal God.

Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,615
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
Anyway, getting back on track, just a few examples of this Christian god obsession with killing.

Kill People Who Don’t Listen to Priests (Deuteronomy17:12 NLT)
Kill Witches (Exodus 22:17 NAB)
Kill Homosexuals (Leviticus 20:13 NAB)
Kill Fortunetellers (Leviticus 20:27 NAB)
Death for Hitting Dad. (Exodus 21:15 NAB)
Death for Cursing Parents (Proverbs 20:20 NAB)
All who curse their father or mother must be put to death. They are guilty of acapital offense. (Leviticus 20:9 NLT)
Death for Adultery (Leviticus 20:10 NLT)
Death for Fornication (Leviticus 21:9 NAB)
Death to Followers of Other Religions. (Exodus 22:19 NAB)
Kill Nonbelievers (2 Chronicles 15:12-13 NAB)
Kill False Prophets (Zechariah 13:3 NAB)
Kill the Entire Town if One Person Worships Another God (Deuteronomy 13:13-19NLT)
Kill Women Who Are Not Virgins On Their Wedding Night (Deuteronomy 22:20-21NAB)
Kill Followers of Other Religions. (Deuteronomy 13:7-12 NAB)
Mention another God? Kill em! (Deuteronomy 17:2-5 NLT)
Death for Blasphemy (simply speaking). (Leviticus 24:10-16 NLT)
Kill False Prophets (Deuteronomy 13:1-5 NLT) (Deuteronomy 18:20-22 NLT)
Infidels and Gays Should Die (Romans 1:24-32 NLT)
Kill Anyone who Approaches the Tabernacle (Numbers 1:48-51 NLT)
Kill People for Working on the Sabbath (Exodus 31:12-15 NLT)
Kill Brats (2 Kings 2:23-24 NAB)
God Kills the Curious (1Samuel 6:19-20 ASV)
Kill Sons of Sinners (Isaiah 14:21 NAB)
God Will Kill Children (Hosea 9:11-16 NLT)
Kill Men, Women, and Children (Ezekiel 9:5-7 NLT)
God Kills all the First Born of Egypt (Exodus 12:29-30 NLT)
Kill Old Men and Young Women (Jeremiah 51:20-26)
God Will Kill the Children of Sinners (Leviticus 26:21-22 NLT)
More Rape and Baby Killing (Isaiah 13:15-18 NLT)
Mass Murder (1 Samuel 15:2-3 NAB)
God Kills Some More (Jeremiah 15:1-4 NLT)
You Have to Kill (Jeremiah 48:10 NAB)
The Danites Kill the Next Town (Joshua 19:47 NAB)
God Promises More Killing (Ezekiel 35:7-9 NLT)
The Angel of Death (Exodus 23:23 NAB)
God Kills an Extended Family (1 Kings 14:9-16 NLT)
Mass Murder (Judges 20:48 NAB)
The Angel of Death (2 Kings 19:35 NAB)
Kill Your Neighbors (Exodus 32:26-29 NLT)
Kill the Family of Sinners. (Joshua 7:19-26 Webster’s Bible)
Kill Followers of Other Religions (Numbers 25:1-9 NLT)
Kill All of Babylon (Jeremiah 50:21-22 NLT)
Micah Kills a Whole Town. (Judges 18:27-29 NLT) (Note that God approves of thisslaughter in verse 6.)
Death to the Rape Victim promoted/commanded (Deuteronomy 22:23-24 NAB)
Rape of Female Captives promoted (Deuteronomy 21:10-14 NAB)
Rape and the Spoils of War (Judges 5:30 NAB)
God Assists Rape and Plunder (Zechariah 14:1-2 NAB)
Exodus 32:27 God himself murders about 3,000people.
BrotherDThomas
BrotherDThomas's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,140
3
3
7
BrotherDThomas's avatar
BrotherDThomas
3
3
7
-->
@RoderickSpode




.
RoderickSpode,

YOUR RUNAWAY QUOTE TO MY GODLY POST #44:  “And I have property in Freehold, Iowa I'd like to sell you.”

Did you go to Tradesecret’s school of “Runaway from disturbing biblical axioms” by changing topics at will to try and save face?  Is this going to be your Satanic modus operandi henceforth? Yes?

Your comical and ungodly position of knowing more than Jesus’ true LITERAL words in the two contradicting Genesis narratives is embarrassing, and this is probably why you cannot address my said post about you rewriting the scriptures in your post #28.  The irony is, you want to call yourself a Christian NOT!  LOL

Take note of the following passage stated by Jesus that you trample over in the name of Satan, and that you are blatantly guilty of to try and save yourself further embarrassment, to wit:  “Knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone's own interpretation.” (2 Peter 1:20). GET IT?  When Jesus stated the serpent talked, he talked, period!

Consider yourself lucky that I did not bring up the Talking Donkey and the Burning Bush within the scriptures!


At this time, you are excused until Jesus' true words and I have to correct you once again.



.

BrotherDThomas
BrotherDThomas's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,140
3
3
7
BrotherDThomas's avatar
BrotherDThomas
3
3
7
-->
@Stephen


Stephen,

Your biblical proof in your post #54 above of my Jesus, as Yahweh God incarnate, being a serial killer, and at the same time He is to be ever loving and forgiving, wholeheartedly shakes apart my faith at times.  Subsequent to your biblical examples of my faiths killing Jesus, I try and find passages that are showing a more loving and forgiving example of Jesus, even though they are contradicting to what you have shown.

Then on top of this, pseudo-christians like Roderick Spode, et al, make themselves known to contradict the Bible in trying to rewrite it like he did in his post #28 within this thread.  Whereas, the TRUE Christian like myself has enough problems with just dealing with the Bible itself in the 21st century.

Being a TRUE Christian in the 21st century is harder than walking on water in the summertime.
BrotherDThomas
BrotherDThomas's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,140
3
3
7
BrotherDThomas's avatar
BrotherDThomas
3
3
7
-->
@ATroubledMan



.

ATroubledMan,

YOUR BLATANT ATTACK UPON JESUS QUOTE: "Sorry, but you can't include Jesus into your personal narrative as if he were standing there right in front of us."

First off, are you family to the equally bible ignorant Roderick Spode? I most certainly can have Jesus in front of us in spirit when I speak His word.  JESUS STATED: "For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them.” (Matthew 18:20) UNDERSTOOD? HUH?


Learn your bible to prevent you from removing one foot to insert the other into your mouth.  You give Christianity a bad name. 


.



BrotherDThomas
BrotherDThomas's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,140
3
3
7
BrotherDThomas's avatar
BrotherDThomas
3
3
7
-->
@fauxlaw



.
faduxlaw,

YOUR IGNORANT QUOTE UPON JESUS CAN'T BE TIRED OF HIS CREATION: "I doubt Jesus is tired of us. He did atone for us. He may be disappointed in us at times, but tired of us? Nope. You can go ahead on your own and be tired, that's okay."

Barring the fact that Jesus did not atone for us in a true sacrificial way, He can get tired of us and can stand only so much insolence towards Him, where the best example is bringing forth His Great Flood by murdering His entire creation because He got tired of His Hebrews were evil!  Can you imagine the poor mothers in horror as they watched their innocent babies take their last gasp of air before they went under the ocean waters for the last time to die a horrific death of drowning?  All the while, our Jesus was watching this drastic situation, ewwwwww.  (Hebrews 4:13)


As another example, Jesus got tired of homosexuals and lesbians, as shown in the verse below, and JUST GAVE UP on them.  Get it?

For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:  And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet.” (Romans 1:26-27)


As explicitly shown, DEBATEART must be the new hangout for the plethora of pseudo-christians on the internet, how sad.  :(


.


fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@BrotherDThomas
blah, blah, blah. Tell it to someone who actually cares about your mirror through which you see everyone else, but not so well.
EtrnlVw
EtrnlVw's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,869
3
3
5
EtrnlVw's avatar
EtrnlVw
3
3
5
-->
@zedvictor4
It's also an easy fix to ignore the issue.

Excuse me?

And energy is a property of matter rather than matter being a property of energy.

So you're ignoring me again? I take it you understood what I wrote?