JREF Homepage Swift Blog Events Calendar $1 Million Paranormal Challenge The Amaz!ng Meeting Useful Links Support Us
James Randi Educational Foundation JREF Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   JREF Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy
Click Here To Donate

Notices


Welcome to the JREF Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.

Tags god

Reply
Old 2nd October 2007, 07:19 AM   #1
Greatest I am
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,126
God is our example. Genocide is good?

God is our example. Genocide is good?

Christians who believe in the Flood, justify God’s use of genocide as a good way to adjust the mentality of a people.
How then can Christians criticize man using the same tool. They cannot unless they also criticize God.
If God is to be our example of moral and ethical behavior, then we must embrace genocide as a viable means to an end.
Happily I do not believe in the flood for the main reason of not thinking that genocide is a good method of solving problems.
God could have just as easily snapped His fingers to adjust mankind. In this way He could not be accused of killing babies and children who were completely innocent of any wrongdoing.
Why did God use genocide if it is a poor example for the methodology of social adjustment?
Why would He open Himself to harsh and perhaps justified criticism?

Regards
DL
Greatest I am is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2007, 07:44 AM   #2
Freethinker
Graduate Poster
 
Freethinker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: The Uncanny Valley
Posts: 1,358
Originally Posted by Greatest I am View Post
Why did God use genocide if it is a poor example for the methodology of social adjustment?
Why would He open Himself to harsh and perhaps justified criticism?

Regards
DL
Not only that, he didn't just open himself to criticism. He knew that his actions would be one reason many of us wouldn't believe in him when he did it. Remember that omniscience thing. Oh, I forgot. He works in "Mysterious Ways".
__________________
"Did it indeed seem probable, as he had once overheard Dunbar ask, that the answers to the riddles of creation would be supplied by people too ignorant to understand the mechanics of rainfall? Had Almighty God, in all His infinite wisdom, really been afraid that men six thousand years ago would succeed in building a tower to heaven?"

Thoughts of the Chaplain in Heller's Catch-22
Freethinker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2007, 07:56 AM   #3
Safe-Keeper
Philosopher
 
Safe-Keeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Sogndal, Norway
Posts: 7,640
I know what the response will be. That for some reason, since God allegedly created morals, he does not have to abide by them. Humans can't murder, rape, cheat on our spouses, have sex with other men or work on Sundays, but should God want to, it'd be perfectly OK. Utter pish-posh for you and me, but it makes sense to certain people - somehow. What they never explain is how humans, then, such as Joshua sacking Jericho, are excepted when they carry out genocides.
__________________
In choosing to support humanitarian organizations, it's best to choose those that do not have "militant wings" (Mycroft, 2013)

Last edited by Safe-Keeper; 2nd October 2007 at 08:08 AM.
Safe-Keeper is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2007, 08:03 AM   #4
Mercer
New Blood
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 9
I guess those Christians who believe in the Flood would see it in terms of justice as much as 'social adjustment'. Presumably those people are seen as sinning against God in a way that deserves death, rather than being simply tools of social adjustment.
Mercer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2007, 08:23 AM   #5
madurobob
Philosopher
 
madurobob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Blue Heaven, NC
Posts: 5,691
Well, this atheist used to teach Sunday School to early teens! Here is how I described it:

The old testament god was like a bad parent. He left his children unattended. When he came back he found them misbehaving he punished them in a fit of anger, then left them on their own again. The cycle continues throughout the OT.

Finally, he figured out that he was not going about this correctly and, with a little prodding from Mrs God, he came up with a better plan. First, he made himself human in the form of Jesus so he could better understand what it meant to be human. Then, he gave his people the Holy Spirit and the ability to interact directly with him any time they wished. This direct access to God meant he could gently guide his people in proper behavior and not have to punish them in fits of rage.

So, I think most xtians would argue that the raging, genocidal god does not accurately describe their god. The NT god is a new and different guy, having spent some time in anger management therapy and good parenting classes.
__________________
Insert witty phrase or out of context post by another member here.
madurobob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2007, 08:33 AM   #6
Mercer
New Blood
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 9
Those who don't appreciate the OT God are less likely to be literalists about Noah, I would presume.
Mercer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2007, 08:46 AM   #7
Correa Neto
Philosopher
 
Correa Neto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Hunting rocks somewhere in Brazil
Posts: 7,804
Don't forget the "free will" answer.

Blame it on the poor use of free will. Had humans used their free will as god wanted them to do, there would be no punishment.

Simple, eh?
__________________
Racism, sexism, ignorance, homophobia, intolerance, extremism, authoritarianism, environmental disasters, politically correct crap, violence at sport stadiums, slavery, poverty, wars, people who disagree with me:
Together we can find the cure
Oh, and together we can find a cure to religion too…
Correa Neto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2007, 09:55 AM   #8
Darth Rotor
Salted Sith Cynic
 
Darth Rotor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Rat cheer
Posts: 35,694
Originally Posted by Freethinker View Post
Not only that, he didn't just open himself to criticism. He knew that his actions would be one reason many of us wouldn't believe in him when he did it. Remember that omniscience thing. Oh, I forgot. He works in "Mysterious Ways".
The Original "Decider."

DR
__________________
Helicopters don't so much fly as beat the air into submission.
"Jesus wept, but did He laugh?"--F.H. Buckley____"There is one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth ... His mirth." --Chesterton__"If the barbarian in us is excised, so is our humanity."--D'rok__ "I only use my gun whenever kindness fails."-- Robert Earl Keen__"Sturgeon spares none.". -- The Marquis
Darth Rotor is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2007, 06:02 AM   #9
Greatest I am
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,126
Originally Posted by Freethinker View Post
Not only that, he didn't just open himself to criticism. He knew that his actions would be one reason many of us wouldn't believe in him when he did it. Remember that omniscience thing. Oh, I forgot. He works in "Mysterious Ways".
It is mostly the fundamentals that believe that God cannot be understood.
This is because they read the Bible literally and does not make sence that way.
That is what happens when you start to believe in talking snakes.

They prefer a genocidal maniac for a God than to actually think of what is writen and why.

God is good and God is real.
The flood never happened.

Regards
DL
Greatest I am is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2007, 06:07 AM   #10
Greatest I am
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,126
Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper View Post
I know what the response will be. That for some reason, since God allegedly created morals, he does not have to abide by them. Humans can't murder, rape, cheat on our spouses, have sex with other men or work on Sundays, but should God want to, it'd be perfectly OK. Utter pish-posh for you and me, but it makes sense to certain people - somehow. What they never explain is how humans, then, such as Joshua sacking Jericho, are excepted when they carry out genocides.
Yes, many think that twisted way.

They do not mind the law maker breaking His own law.

It is like US politics. The people elect criminals so that they know that whatever evil it takes their president will do it to (save) the US. Regardless of the law.

Strange indeed.

Regards
DL
Greatest I am is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2007, 06:11 AM   #11
Greatest I am
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,126
Originally Posted by Mercer View Post
I guess those Christians who believe in the Flood would see it in terms of justice as much as 'social adjustment'. Presumably those people are seen as sinning against God in a way that deserves death, rather than being simply tools of social adjustment.
Hard to find justice in the killing of babies and children.
Removing the gift of free choice. God the Indian giver.
Why not. Break one rule or all of them, who will criticize the big guy.

Regards
DL
Greatest I am is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2007, 06:20 AM   #12
Greatest I am
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,126
Originally Posted by madurobob View Post
Well, this atheist used to teach Sunday School to early teens! Here is how I described it:

The old testament god was like a bad parent. He left his children unattended. When he came back he found them misbehaving he punished them in a fit of anger, then left them on their own again. The cycle continues throughout the OT.

Finally, he figured out that he was not going about this correctly and, with a little prodding from Mrs God, he came up with a better plan. First, he made himself human in the form of Jesus so he could better understand what it meant to be human. Then, he gave his people the Holy Spirit and the ability to interact directly with him any time they wished. This direct access to God meant he could gently guide his people in proper behavior and not have to punish them in fits of rage.

So, I think most xtians would argue that the raging, genocidal god does not accurately describe their god. The NT god is a new and different guy, having spent some time in anger management therapy and good parenting classes.
As an ex non believer I recognize the direction of your thinking and agree. This is only a problem for those who read the Bible literally.
Literal readers have to see a God who fails over and over again. How they can justify following a loser of a God I can't say.

You are right on though when you say that God's connection to us is individual. More of a gnostic notion by exactly on the mark.

The idea that many have of only through Jesus, should scrap this notion along with the idea that God would use genocide.

Regards
DL
Greatest I am is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2007, 06:24 AM   #13
Freethinker
Graduate Poster
 
Freethinker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: The Uncanny Valley
Posts: 1,358
Originally Posted by Greatest I am View Post
It is mostly the fundamentals that believe that God cannot be understood.
This is because they read the Bible literally and does not make sence that way.
That is what happens when you start to believe in talking snakes.
I disagree. The phrase "The Lord works in mysterious ways." is a common expression/excuse for almost all Christians.
__________________
"Did it indeed seem probable, as he had once overheard Dunbar ask, that the answers to the riddles of creation would be supplied by people too ignorant to understand the mechanics of rainfall? Had Almighty God, in all His infinite wisdom, really been afraid that men six thousand years ago would succeed in building a tower to heaven?"

Thoughts of the Chaplain in Heller's Catch-22
Freethinker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2007, 06:25 AM   #14
Greatest I am
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,126
Originally Posted by Correa Neto View Post
Don't forget the "free will" answer.

Blame it on the poor use of free will. Had humans used their free will as god wanted them to do, there would be no punishment.

Simple, eh?
God creates souls Perfect and gives us our natures witch are also Perfect.
Scripture indicates that all of God's works are Perfect.

That being the case, it would be strange for God to punish man for using the nature that He has given.

Like us killing dogs for walking on four legs.
Strange indeed but believable if you believe in the flood.

Regards
DL
Greatest I am is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2007, 06:31 AM   #15
Greatest I am
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,126
Originally Posted by Freethinker View Post
I disagree. The phrase "The Lord works in mysterious ways." is a common expression/excuse for almost all Christians.
You may be right but my experience is that most Christians have some flexibility in their thinking and reason is still present in them.

With literalism's reason has been supplanted with the belief of supernatural talking snakes, fish that spit out men after three days, demons and angels.

Regards
DL
Greatest I am is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2007, 06:39 AM   #16
Loss Leader
Opinionated Jerk
Moderator
 
Loss Leader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 14,524
Originally Posted by Greatest I am View Post
Christians who believe in the Flood, justify God’s use of genocide as a good way to adjust the mentality of a people.
How then can Christians criticize man using the same tool. They cannot unless they also criticize God.
If God is to be our example of moral and ethical behavior, then we must embrace genocide as a viable means to an end.

People who believe in preventative medicine, justify doctors who perform appendectomies as a good way to adjust the health of a patient.

How then can people criticize beet farmers who perform appendectomies? They cannot unless they also criticize doctors.

If doctors are to be our example of moral and ethical behavior, then we must embrace appendectomies done by lay people as a viable means to an end.


Quote:
Happily I do not believe in the flood for the main reason of not thinking that genocide is a good method of solving problems.

Happily, I do not believe that doctors should perform appendectomies for the main reason of not thinking that lay people performing appendectomies is a good method of solving problems.
__________________
Follow me on Twitter! @LossLeader
Loss Leader is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2007, 06:42 AM   #17
Bri
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,310
Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper View Post
I know what the response will be. That for some reason, since God allegedly created morals, he does not have to abide by them. Humans can't murder, rape, cheat on our spouses, have sex with other men or work on Sundays, but should God want to, it'd be perfectly OK. Utter pish-posh for you and me, but it makes sense to certain people - somehow. What they never explain is how humans, then, such as Joshua sacking Jericho, are excepted when they carry out genocides.
I think one common response has to do with the greater good. Since God knows all of the consequences of his actions, the morally appropriate action for God in a given situation would necessarily differ from ours since we can only know the relatively immediate consequences of our actions. In other words, God must act for the greater good, whereas we can only act for the immediate good.

ETA: I think this is essentially Loss Leader's argument above.

-Bri

Last edited by Bri; 3rd October 2007 at 06:46 AM.
Bri is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2007, 06:52 AM   #18
Greatest I am
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,126
Originally Posted by Loss Leader View Post
People who believe in preventative medicine, justify doctors who perform appendectomies as a good way to adjust the health of a patient.

How then can people criticize beet farmers who perform appendectomies? They cannot unless they also criticize doctors.

If doctors are to be our example of moral and ethical behavior, then we must embrace appendectomies done by lay people as a viable means to an end.


Happily, I do not believe that doctors should perform appendectomies for the main reason of not thinking that lay people performing appendectomies is a good method of solving problems.

I believe in culling of a herd but if the herd is billions and the good part is only 8 out of the billions then reason would suggest that it is the one doing the culling that needs to adjust His thinking to the fact that it is the 8 that are odd and not the billions. The billions are the normal.

you would think that the God of the flood would have known this, after all He created the billions didn't He?

Regards
DL
Greatest I am is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2007, 06:55 AM   #19
Greatest I am
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,126
Originally Posted by Bri View Post
I think one common response has to do with the greater good. Since God knows all of the consequences of his actions, the morally appropriate action for God in a given situation would necessarily differ from ours since we can only know the relatively immediate consequences of our actions. In other words, God must act for the greater good, whereas we can only act for the immediate good.

ETA: I think this is essentially Loss Leader's argument above.

-Bri
If God was acting for the greater good then He would simply move the 8 to a new earth and not show us how to use genocide. He certainly had that power.

Then He would have been doing the moral right.

Regards
DL
Greatest I am is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2007, 06:56 AM   #20
Bri
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,310
That assumes you know what the greater good is. How did you acquire this information?

-Bri
Bri is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2007, 07:03 AM   #21
Greatest I am
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,126
Originally Posted by Bri View Post
That assumes you know what the greater good is. How did you acquire this information?

-Bri
Greater good should mean protecting the greater majority.

It is easy to see the scenario that I offer is better for not only the majority but for all.

No death and the same result is what I offer.
Surely if a human can come up with something better than God, it should be obvious that something is wrong with the story of the Flood.

It could not possibly be true. If it is then God is an idiot because man is the same now as he was before this alleged Flood.

No gain but lots of pain for many innocent.

Regards
DL
Greatest I am is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2007, 07:07 AM   #22
Bri
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,310
Sure, if your premise is correct that the greater good is always served by protecting the greater majority, you might have a point. But I'm not sure that Christians accept your premise. Can you please post a source for that information?

-Bri
Bri is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2007, 07:13 AM   #23
Greatest I am
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,126
Originally Posted by Bri View Post
Sure, if your premise is correct that the greater good is always served by protecting the greater majority, you might have a point. But I'm not sure that Christians accept your premise. Can you please post a source for that information?

-Bri
Try good old logic as a source.

If God cannot use logic then all is lost.
If you cannot follow logic then you are lost.

Any information that I could offer would be writen by man.
If you need a quote, the the Bible indicates that all of God's works are Perfect.
Why would He suddenly kill so many Perfect souls when there were options that would not kill any?

Regards
DL
Greatest I am is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2007, 07:14 AM   #24
Loss Leader
Opinionated Jerk
Moderator
 
Loss Leader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 14,524
Originally Posted by Greatest I am View Post
I believe in culling of a herd but if the herd is billions and the good part is only 8 out of the billions then reason would suggest that it is the one doing the culling that needs to adjust His thinking to the fact that it is the 8 that are odd and not the billions. The billions are the normal.

you would think that the God of the flood would have known this, after all He created the billions didn't He?

Why do you presume to be able to judge the actions of God?

Assume that God has knowledge and experience superior to any human on the planet. Why do you think you can apply your rules to God? His reasons do not have to make any more sense to you than a parent's reasons have to make to a two year-old.

If God exists and if he is such a perfect being, he should be above mortal judgment.

If you cannot rationally conceive of a perfect being acting in such a manner, perhaps God does not exist or perhaps he exists but you don't want to give him your allegience.

Considering that you believe that you have been in telapathic contact with the mind of God, this thread makes very little sense.
__________________
Follow me on Twitter! @LossLeader
Loss Leader is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2007, 07:14 AM   #25
fagin
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,029
Originally Posted by Bri View Post
I think one common response has to do with the greater good. Since God knows all of the consequences of his actions, the morally appropriate action for God in a given situation would necessarily differ from ours since we can only know the relatively immediate consequences of our actions. In other words, God must act for the greater good, whereas we can only act for the immediate good.

ETA: I think this is essentially Loss Leader's argument above.

-Bri
Damn sure I can't see what the greater good is in Darfur, or many other similar places.
Sounds like a lottery of birthplace to me, not a master plan.
fagin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2007, 07:21 AM   #26
Greatest I am
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,126
Originally Posted by Loss Leader View Post
Why do you presume to be able to judge the actions of God?

Assume that God has knowledge and experience superior to any human on the planet. Why do you think you can apply your rules to God? His reasons do not have to make any more sense to you than a parent's reasons have to make to a two year-old.

If God exists and if he is such a perfect being, he should be above mortal judgment.

If you cannot rationally conceive of a perfect being acting in such a manner, perhaps God does not exist or perhaps he exists but you don't want to give him your allegience.

Considering that you believe that you have been in telapathic contact with the mind of God, this thread makes very little sense.
Perfect sence.

I have indicated that the flood never happened so I have no problem with the morals of my God. He has my allegiance.

Can I judge that genocide is wrong. Yes I can.

Are you saying that there is a moral justification for genocide?
Am I wrong in my opinion?

Why can I apply my rules to God. We are made in His image are we not?
What is good for Him is good for us, right?

Regards
DL
Greatest I am is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2007, 07:22 AM   #27
Bri
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,310
Originally Posted by Greatest I am View Post
Try good old logic as a source.
Can you show me the logical proof that the greater good is always served by preserving the largest number of people? I've not seen that particular argument before.

Quote:
Any information that I could offer would be writen by man.
I guess that's pretty much my point.

Quote:
If you need a quote, the the Bible indicates that all of God's works are Perfect.
Why would He suddenly kill so many Perfect souls when there were options that would not kill any?
Do you think that Christians interpret whichever passage you're paraphrasing to mean that the greater good must always be served by allowing all people to live? Even mass murderers? I believe the Bible condones the death penalty, so if a Christian interpreted the Bible in that way, indeed it would be an inconsistent interpretation.

I suspect that few if any Christians interpret the Bible that way.

If "perfect" includes free will (and consequently the ability to do evil), then it is quite possible that the greater good is sometimes served by killing some people.

-Bri
Bri is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2007, 07:28 AM   #28
Bri
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,310
Originally Posted by fagin View Post
Damn sure I can't see what the greater good is in Darfur, or many other similar places.
Sounds like a lottery of birthplace to me, not a master plan.
You'd be much better off using natural disasters as examples. Darfur is a poor example since it involves people doing evil.

Whether the situation in Darfur is for the greater good would depend on whether mankind having the free will to choose to do good over evil is a greater good than mankind always doing good but having no choice.

-Bri
Bri is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2007, 07:30 AM   #29
Greatest I am
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,126
Originally Posted by Bri View Post
Can you show me the logical proof that the greater good is always served by preserving the largest number of people? I've not seen that particular argument before.



I guess that's pretty much my point.



Do you think that Christians interpret whichever passage you're paraphrasing to mean that the greater good must always be served by allowing all people to live? Even mass murderers? I believe the Bible condones the death penalty, so if a Christian interpreted the Bible in that way, indeed it would be an inconsistent interpretation.

I suspect that few if any Christians interpret the Bible that way.

If "perfect" includes free will (and consequently the ability to do evil), then it is quite possible that the greater good is sometimes served by killing some people.

-Bri
If free will is a gift that God gave then He is an Indian giver if He sent a flood. Even in the killing of innocent babies and children.

You are saying that genocide is justifiable.
Show there any genocide has helped man.

Even in the flood, no change ore benefit came to God except to show us an example of the lawmaker giving doubt to all of His laws because He broke it Himself without justification.

Genocide is the majority against a minority except in God's case.
Strange indeed.

Regards
DL
Greatest I am is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2007, 07:33 AM   #30
Bri
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,310
Originally Posted by Greatest I am View Post
Can I judge that genocide is wrong. Yes I can.

Are you saying that there is a moral justification for genocide?
Am I wrong in my opinion?
Genocide would be immoral for humans since we cannot know the consequences of our actions. The same action may be the most moral choice that God could make in the same circumstances.

Quote:
Why can I apply my rules to God. We are made in His image are we not?
What is good for Him is good for us, right?
Not necessarily. The reason has already been explained in this thread. God's actions would necessarily differ from ours if an all-knowing God is to act morally.

-Bri
Bri is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2007, 07:38 AM   #31
Bri
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,310
Originally Posted by Greatest I am View Post
If free will is a gift that God gave then He is an Indian giver if He sent a flood. Even in the killing of innocent babies and children.
How so? Do Christians believe that the flood removed free will from humanity?

Quote:
You are saying that genocide is justifiable.
Show there any genocide has helped man.
First, I didn't say that genocide is justifiable. I said that it may be justifiable for an all-knowing God who is acting for the greater good. I would have no way of verifying whether or not a particular action by God was actually for the greater good or not. Nor would you. But you were the one making the claim that genocide by God would necessarily be wrong, so can you show where any genocide by God was not for the greater good?

Quote:
Even in the flood, no change ore benefit came to God except to show us an example of the lawmaker giving doubt to all of His laws because He broke it Himself without justification.
How do you know what the change or benefits of the flood were? Can you show a reference where Christians believe that God wants us to do as he does rather than as he commands us to do? Can you show that our having doubt wasn't for the greater good?

Quote:
Genocide is the majority against a minority except in God's case.
Strange indeed.
Not strange at all. Genocide is certainly the stronger against the weaker. The minority would commit genocide more often if they could.

-Bri

Last edited by Bri; 3rd October 2007 at 07:44 AM.
Bri is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2007, 07:41 AM   #32
Gord_in_Toronto
Penultimate Amazing
 
Gord_in_Toronto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 14,408
You can either believe that God exists and, judged on his actions, He is a freeking, deranged, idiot or that he does not exist, based on the complete lack of evidence.

I vote for the second.
__________________
"Reality is what's left when you cease to believe." Philip K. Dick
Gord_in_Toronto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2007, 07:51 AM   #33
Greatest I am
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,126
Originally Posted by Bri View Post
How so? Do Christians believe that the flood removed free will from humanity?



First, I didn't say that genocide is justifiable. I said that it may be justifiable for an all-knowing God who is acting for the greater good. I would have no way of verifying whether or not a particular action by God was actually for the greater good or not. Nor would you. But you were the one making the claim that genocide by God would necessarily be wrong, so can you show where any genocide by God was not for the greater good?



How do you know what the change or benefits of the flood were? Can you show a reference where Christians believe that God wants us to do as he does rather than as he commands us to do? Can you show that our having doubt wasn't for the greater good?



Not strange at all. Genocide is certainly the stronger against the weaker. The minority would commit genocide more often if they could.

-Bri
I don't know how to make you give your head a shake.

If you wish to believe that God is justified in using genocide then the fact that most men will not agree will not move you.

We will have to change all moral rules to include genocide as a good moral tool for any strong force. This is after all the example given to those who want to believe in a Flood. Justice for eight and death for billions.

Lets hope this does not catch on because we here are in a minority.

Might makes right. Sure.

Regards
DL
Greatest I am is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2007, 08:06 AM   #34
Bri
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,310
Originally Posted by Greatest I am View Post
I don't know how to make you give your head a shake.

If you wish to believe that God is justified in using genocide then the fact that most men will not agree will not move you.
Don't get me wrong. I don't really disagree with your opinion. I'm simply pointing out that Christians have a different opinion and it's not so easy to prove them wrong, if that's your intention.

Quote:
We will have to change all moral rules to include genocide as a good moral tool for any strong force.
Not at all. Even most Christians don't believe that genocide is condoned in the Bible. Specifically, there are commandments in the Bible that would prohibit human beings from committing genocide.

However, as far as I know there is nothing in the Bible that says that God's actions and our actions must be the same in all circumstances. Logically, it would make sense that God's actions would have to differ from ours if God were to act morally in light of knowing all of the consequences of his actions.

Quote:
This is after all the example given to those who want to believe in a Flood. Justice for eight and death for billions.
Those who believe in the flood tend to believe that it was an action performed by God for the greater good. However, those who believe in the flood don't tend to believe that the Bible condones human beings "playing God" given our imperfect ability to predict the results of our actions.

-Bri
Bri is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2007, 08:51 AM   #35
Correa Neto
Philosopher
 
Correa Neto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Hunting rocks somewhere in Brazil
Posts: 7,804
Originally Posted by Greatest I am View Post
God creates souls Perfect and gives us our natures witch are also Perfect.
Scripture indicates that all of God's works are Perfect.

That being the case, it would be strange for God to punish man for using the nature that He has given.

Like us killing dogs for walking on four legs.
Strange indeed but believable if you believe in the flood.

Regards
DL
He, don't worry, there's always a lame excuse reason...

Humans were perfect when god created them. But after the fall, god punished humans, turning them in to imperfect beings.

Its like we killing dogs that are not walking on all fours the way we want them to do...
__________________
Racism, sexism, ignorance, homophobia, intolerance, extremism, authoritarianism, environmental disasters, politically correct crap, violence at sport stadiums, slavery, poverty, wars, people who disagree with me:
Together we can find the cure
Oh, and together we can find a cure to religion too…
Correa Neto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2007, 09:03 AM   #36
Greatest I am
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,126
Bri

Any Christian can say that the greater good was done when billions of souls are killed to save 8 would need a shrink.

Numbers do not lie. To kill billions so that 8 can live would be the greatest folly of all for any God to get into.
Christians have to recognize that the Bible is not to be taken literally.
If there is a Satan then He leads the literal readers of the Bible and all other fundamentalists.

Too bad.

Regards
DL
Greatest I am is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2007, 09:09 AM   #37
Greatest I am
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,126
Originally Posted by Correa Neto View Post
He, don't worry, there's always a lame excuse reason...

Humans were perfect when god created them. But after the fall, god punished humans, turning them in to imperfect beings.

Its like we killing dogs that are not walking on all fours the way we want them to do...
Those who read the Bible literally will agree with your view.

Thank God I do not read the Bible literally. No talking snakes for me thanks.

God is good.
No flood to mare His good name.
God, the all powerful, has no need to make men suffer.
If He wanted change to His Perfect systems He would make those changes.
Since He does not then we can conclude that things are as they should be.

This is how God shows His Perfection.
Only those of little faith would believe that He would have to resort to killing men.

Regards
DL
Greatest I am is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2007, 09:17 AM   #38
Bri
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,310
Originally Posted by Greatest I am View Post
Any Christian can say that the greater good was done when billions of souls are killed to save 8 would need a shrink.

Numbers do not lie. To kill billions so that 8 can live would be the greatest folly of all for any God to get into.
Any Christian who would say that they know what constitutes the greater good would need a shrink. But I'm guessing there are few Christians who would say that.

Quote:
Christians have to recognize that the Bible is not to be taken literally.
If there is a Satan then He leads the literal readers of the Bible and all other fundamentalists.
I don't think the question has much to do with literalism. The question is whether the Bible advocates genocide, on which I think that both literalists and non-literalists are in agreement. Non-literalists might say that the flood story isn't meant to be taken literally and leave it at that, whereas literalists would say that the Bible doesn't intend for us to do what God does, but rather to do what God commands us to do.

You may be confusing fundamentalism with radicalism though.

-Bri
Bri is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2007, 09:19 AM   #39
homer
Thinker
 
homer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Devon England
Posts: 221
If God is just a computer programmer who devised all that we see as an entertainment then he can do exactly what he wants since he created us . Must be barking mad of course ,or maybe he was just a youngster at that time and has since grown up .
homer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2007, 09:21 AM   #40
Bri
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,310
Originally Posted by Greatest I am View Post
Only those of little faith would believe that He would have to resort to killing men.
We can demonstrate the fallacy inherent in the logic that God cannot kill because he is perfect and killing is always morally wrong.

The act of killing someone isn't always morally wrong. It is the context of the act which makes it morally right or wrong. For example, it would be morally right to kill someone in self-defense, or to prevent them from harming someone else.

-Bri
Bri is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

JREF Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:16 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2001-2013, James Randi Educational Foundation. All Rights Reserved.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.