I don't get it...if you are a non-Catholic Christian, then why aren't you a Catholic Christian?

[TriuneUnity]

Well if good and evil were subjective anyone anywhere could justify any of their actions as good. See my example of the nazis a few posts back.

That is interesting though larkin, you cannot claim they were wrong. Agnostics always like to point to the “evils” of God (I did when I was agnostic) and yet turn around and say that evil isn’t real, that it is all subjective. They want their cake and to eat it too. They don’t want to believe that evil truly exists (and therefore good must exist) but at the same time want to believe that God (particullary the God Christians believe in) is evil. You cannot have it both ways either something can be absolutely evil or it is subjective and therefore you cannot say that whatever God has done was evil. You can say that you don’t like it based on your 20th-21st century morals and other “combinations” but you cannot say that anything was evil.

Excellent points, Roman. By defining good and evil, they are admitting to a standard of good and a stand of evil.

As to the question of the wars against the Canaanites, Amorites, etc…

Yes, perfectly justified. They were evil, God is perfectly good. They are creations, God is the Creator. He was perfectly just to punish them for their sins and He used the arm of the Israelites to do so. Lest we think that such peoples were innocent, peaceful, and minding their own business… They sacrificed their children to idols, wantonly attacked neighboring peoples, temple prostitution, etc.

And yet, even in God’s judgment of them, He was still merciful. Let us not forget Rahab the prostitute, who was a Canaanite. Jesus also has the blood of Moabites (via Ruth) in His human lineage.

 

[larkin31]

Well if good and evil were subjective anyone anywhere could justify any of their actions as good. See my example of the nazis a few posts back.

That is interesting though larkin, you cannot claim they were wrong. Agnostics always like to point to the “evils” of God (I did when I was agnostic) and yet turn around and say that evil isn’t real, that it is all subjective. They want their cake and to eat it too. They don’t want to believe that evil truly exists (and therefore good must exist) but at the same time want to believe that God (particullary the God Christians believe in) is evil. You cannot have it both ways either something can be absolutely evil or it is subjective and therefore you cannot say that whatever God has done was evil. You can say that you don’t like it based on your 20th-21st century morals and other “combinations” but you cannot say that anything was evil.

Now please:

God bless

so, I answer your question about the trials, but you won’t answer mine about God’s killings in the OT.

Nice job. You can expect that I will ignore you now.

 

[Roman_Catholic_1]

I don’t know them real well, but I will trust that they were done properly and were right.

How can you say this with you stating this earlier:

I believe that the** best behavior **is a combination of one’s own conscience informed by the morality and historical and artistic and cultural history of one’s society.

The criminals in the Nuremberg trials were not judged based off of their “combinations” otherwise there would have been no fault found in their actions. How can you say that the trials were “right” and done “properly” when the war criminals were judged based off of someone else’s “combinations”. In fact since the trials go against your subjective standard for good and evil you have to come to the conclusion that the trials were evil Justice was not served at Nuremberg. In fact a grave injustice was done. “Innocent” people were hung for following their (your) subjective “combinations”…

I think that you are missing my point, almost entirely. I may give up on you. I don’t deny that I have a value system. Of course I do! I just assert that value systems do not exist outside of brains that can think of them.

And I am showing the flaw in your value system. I have justified the holocaust and was able to condemn the Nuremberg trials based off of your “best” standard for governing peoples actions.

God bless you

 

[Roman_Catholic_1]

so, I answer your question about the trials, but you won’t answer mine about God’s killings in the OT.

Nice job. You can expect that I will ignore you now.

I answered your question. They could not be evil based on your subjective standards. You may not like them based on your “combinations” but they could not be evil. Now if you want to believe they were truly absolutely evil then we have a different conversation entirely.

I answered your question. You are looking for a way out of this corner you have been drawn into.

God bless you

 

[larkin31]

I answered your question. They could not be evil based on your subjective standards…

HAHA

I was asking you to answer according to your value system, of course. I have more respect for the poster above who actually answered the question.

You have been “greeting” me with false summaries and dishonest evasions of questions. We don’t have to agree, but you must at least be fair and honest.

 

[Roman_Catholic_1]

Excellent points, Roman. By defining good and evil, they are admitting to a standard of good and a stand of evil.

As to the question of the wars against the Canaanites, Amorites, etc…

Yes, perfectly justified. They were evil, God is perfectly good. They are creations, God is the Creator. He was perfectly just to punish them for their sins and He used the arm of the Israelites to do so. Lest we think that such peoples were innocent, peaceful, and minding their own business… They sacrificed their children to idols, wantonly attacked neighboring peoples, temple prostitution, etc.

And yet, even in God’s judgment of them, He was still merciful. Let us not forget Rahab the prostitute, who was a Canaanite. Jesus also has the blood of Moabites (via Ruth) in His human lineage.

Thanks Truine, great answer yourself.

God bless

 

[larkin31]

As to the question of the wars against the Canaanites, Amorites, etc…

Yes, perfectly justified. They were evil, God is perfectly good. They are creations, God is the Creator. He was perfectly just to punish them for their sins and He used the arm of the Israelites to do so. Lest we think that such peoples were innocent, peaceful, and minding their own business… They sacrificed their children to idols, wantonly attacked neighboring peoples, temple prostitution, etc.

Thank you for answering directly. I won’t criticize your faith, but I will disagree with your conclusion. God killed everything but a pair in the flood. Children under 3 years old were killed. In Gommorrah, children under 3 were killed. I thought that the RCC considered those children innocent. This means that genocide by God is justified simply because God did it. That is hard for some people to stomach because of the logical weakness in the argument. Faith, yes. Logic, no.

 

[Roman_Catholic_1]

HAHA

I was asking you to answer according to your value system, of course. I have more respect for the poster above who actually answered the question.

No you didn’t. You asked if they were good:

Were any of God’s killings of many many persons in the Old Testament “good”?

How can I answer you if they were good considering when you believe the “best” way to tell is based on a combinatuion of ones own conscience, their morality and culture? I don’t know your “combinations”?

God bless

 

[Roman_Catholic_1]

larkin, any thoughts to post #1080?

God bless you

 

[TriuneUnity]

Thank you for answering directly. I won’t criticize your faith, but I will disagree with your conclusion. God killed everything but a pair in the flood. Children under 3 years old were killed. In Gommorrah, children under 3 were killed. I thought that the RCC considered those children innocent. This means that genocide by God is justified simply because God did it. That is hard for some people to stomach because of the logical weakness in the argument. Faith, yes. Logic, no.

You’re welcome. God gives ample “reason” for His actions in the Flood (even though, quite frankly, He doesn’t have to). They are parallel to His actions with the invasion of Canaan. Yes, children were killed. And like the rest of humanity, they were born in iniquity and sin. Sinners, regardless of their age, deserve nothing but condemnation. In a metaphysical sense, that God allowed any part of humanity to exist beyond Adam and Eve is pure mercy.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Why he allowed the Gong Show to ever happen is another mystery we’ll never solve!

You’re welcome. God gives ample “reason” for His actions in the Flood (even though, quite frankly, He doesn’t have to). They are parallel to His actions with the invasion of Canaan. Yes, children were killed. And like the rest of humanity, they were born in iniquity and sin. Sinners, regardless of their age, deserve nothing but condemnation. In a metaphysical sense, that God allowed any part of humanity to exist beyond Adam and Eve is pure mercy.

 

[TriuneUnity]

Why he allowed the Gong Show to ever happen is another mystery we’ll never solve!

Or Monty Hall!

 

[PRmerger]

I don’t have to. You asserted that it IS. The onus is on you.

This reminds me of a dialogue I had here on the CAFs with a Protestant who vehemently objected to the fact that there are now over 40,000 Christian denominations. (I offered this statistic as a way to dismiss the paradigm "The Holy Spirit is all you need to lead you to truth when you read the Bible)

He kept proclaiming: There are NOT 40,000 denominations.

Ok. I was willing to discuss what he thought the actual number was, provided he gave a source.

He just kept proclaiming: There are NOT 40,000 denominations

Ok. Then how many are there, and how do you know?

Same thing here. Ok. Conscience is NOT the moral authority we must always obey. So give an example of a time when it’s NOT morally good to disobey your conscience.

That should not be that hard a question, Larkin, if you’re going to support your claim…

 

[PRmerger]

How can one call conscience binding when it is contradicted and violated so many times each day?

That’s like saying, “How can a stop sign be binding when it is violated so many times each day?”

Just because someone does not listen to his conscience does not mean he is doing the morally right thing.

Give an example of someone contradicting and violating his conscience and it being the moral thing.

 

[larkin31]

You’re welcome. God gives ample “reason” for His actions in the Flood (even though, quite frankly, He doesn’t have to). They are parallel to His actions with the invasion of Canaan. Yes, children were killed. And like the rest of humanity, they were born in iniquity and sin. Sinners, regardless of their age, deserve nothing but condemnation. In a metaphysical sense, that God allowed any part of humanity to exist beyond Adam and Eve is pure mercy.

Wow

Is this Catholic dogma? Is there Catechism on this? Just curious.

But thanks again for answering directly. This is refreshing. Even pregnant women with fetuses in their bellies were very likely killed in those mass destructions. I have never heard anyone defend it this way. Or only say, “God had his reasons, and that is enough for me.”

 

[TriuneUnity]

Wow

Is this Catholic dogma? Is there Catechism on this? Just curious.

But thanks again for answering directly. This is refreshing. Even pregnant women with fetuses in their bellies were very likely killed in those mass destructions. I have never heard anyone defend it this way. Or only say, “God had his reasons, and that is enough for me.”

I am not sure if it is Catholic dogma, but it is Lutheran dogma. Certainly, God had His reasons. He makes those reasons abundantly clear in the Old Testament, though.

 

[larkin31]

I am not sure if it is Catholic dogma, but it is Lutheran dogma. Certainly, God had His reasons. He makes those reasons abundantly clear in the Old Testament, though.

sorry, I thought you were Catholic. I see now that you are not.

So, even fetuses were tainted with these sins and merited slaughter?

 

[larkin31]

That’s like saying, “How can a stop sign be binding when it is violated so many times each day?”

Just because someone does not listen to his conscience does not mean he is doing the morally right thing.

Give an example of someone contradicting and violating his conscience and it being the moral thing.

Stop signs are not absolutely binding, either.

All morals come from the minds of sentient beings. Even God did, and as such is a projection of our minds and other cultural memes.

 

[PRmerger]

Wow

Is this Catholic dogma? Is there Catechism on this? Just curious.

But thanks again for answering directly. This is refreshing. Even pregnant women with fetuses in their bellies were very likely killed in those mass destructions. I have never heard anyone defend it this way. Or only say, “God had his reasons, and that is enough for me.”

And here’s another one: the Lord giveth; the Lord taketh. Blessed be the name of the Lord.

Best to read this article: Hard Sayings of the Old Testament by Jimmy Akin.

 

[TriuneUnity]

sorry, I thought you were Catholic. I see now that you are not.

So, even fetuses were tainted with these sins and merited slaughter?

We are conceived in sin. Therefore, we are all, regardless of our temporal age, fallen sons and daughters of Adam and Eve. As a result, we deserve only judgment. The only one who can mete that judgment out, however, is God. Which He did, through His chosen people.