Why Should God Be the Moral Authority?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Oreoracle
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
This thread has gone off topic. If you want to debate God’s “actions” take it to the Apologetics forum. Thank you all.
 
Leela said:
So the great flood, soddom, and Gommorah don’t count because God did not order slaughter but instead actually carried slaughter out himself?
Click to expand...
You cannot also prove it that He carried slaughter out himself. That is also only your imagination.
Leela said:
Anyway, as I said before, God commanded that Joshua do to Ai what he did to Jericho which was to kill everyone including women and children. Pro-life? Yeah, right.
Click to expand...
So you mean God ordered Joshua to also march around Ai. Still, no order to slaughter.
Therefore, Pro-life still stands, thus God really should be the Moral Authority.
 
agangbern said:
You cannot also prove it that He carried slaughter out himself. That is also only your imagination.

So you mean God ordered Joshua to also march around Ai. Still, no order to slaughter.
Therefore, Pro-life still stands, thus God really should be the Moral Authority.
Click to expand...
I can’t prove it. But it is what the Bible says. I don’t believe the Bible, but I suppose that you do.
 
agangbern said:
We have read it. If the order to march around means to you as an order to attack, then it is an order to attack. But not an order to slaughter.
Click to expand...
Wow. Seriously. Was this order just for the sake of excercise. Even if you are willing to pretend you don’t understand these acts of genocide do you pretend that god did not drowned virtually everyone in the great flood or burn all the inhabitants of Sodom and Gohmorrah? And what does it mean if god’s prophets made up the commands to commit genocide; what value is a prophet who claims to be speaking for god when in fact they were not?
 
The_Catholic said:
You mean the Great Local Flood in the land of Ur? 😃
Click to expand...
But if it was a local flood, then the accounts of the bible were clearly way way way off. You cannot pick and choose which portions of the tale you’re going to believe, well at least not if you want to be consitent.
 
severntofall said:
But if it was a local flood, then the accounts of the bible were clearly way way way off. You cannot pick and choose which portions of the tale you’re going to believe, well at least not if you want to be consitent.
Click to expand...
Besides the lines of native American civilizations showing no break at the time of the Biblical flood, in addition to fossil and geological evidence, I do not believe the flood was world wide.

If you’d like to, go ahead, just don’t make the mistake of dogmatically delaring to other believer and non-believers that the only possible interpretation is a world wide flood. YEC make that same mistake and cause us theists to look like fools.

Ok, made my point, I probably should’ve just PM’ed you cause this thread has gone way off topic. I am done distrupting it. Let it go back on course.
 
This OT isn’t generating any more discussion and the thread has gone off on a tangent. Please feel free to start new threads to discuss side issues brought up in this thread or join existing threads of interest. Thank you everyone.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top