Great atheist webcomic

bluecanary

Glad you enjoyed it as much as I did, bohm.

glenster

You might be giving away some of the posters source material.

The cartoons seem meant to have you think about some things I think are in-
teresting. But actually, none of those things decide atheism or even who's a
nicer person among believers or non-believers in the way the cartoonist intends.
They're all concerns (how to interpret OT verses, etc.) you might look at if you
have faith in a God or not, but the considerations were edited to favor the
reader making the cartoonist's choice.
http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/social/humour/192961/1/Great-atheist-webcomic

1 (1st cartoon). Morality Amalekites Judging God

Prior to Jesus and Paul and having the faith spread regardless of country,
etc., it was law of the land. I don't think people should hurt or kill each
other over belief or non-belief choices, so neither should be law of the land or
it will happen. One exeption could be divine intervention, which is what those
stories claim.

The believer may take the accounts literally--if they do, they believe there
was divine intervention by God with the prerogative to do with it all as He
will, not that those things only happened between people (therefore were exam-
ples that encouraged infanticide, etc.). (Another choice is taking them theo-
logically but not literally.)

In these stories, there was repeated conflict with the Amalekites, who are
given as having been against the Isrealites not for land and such but for being
God's people. (It's something like the Nazis and Jews in WWII except with the
Jews getting divine intervention from a God flexing the prerogative muscle more
than usually--having the whole bunch wiped out.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amalek

The stories claim divine intervention with a higher quality being with prer-
ogative about life of any age, which makes a difference. (To make an analogy
with people and animals, people who eat animals of whatever age from eggs to
adults for food aren't regarded as immoral or unable to love, but if they killed
other people for food, they'd be considered as like Dahmer). By omitting that,
the cartoonist is being slippery about morals (a man eating a hamburger could be
characterized as Dahmer, God could be characterized as Godzilla), which isn't a
trait you want in someone teaching about them.

The God concept has to be reconciled with the good and bad of life. The bad
has always been understood as including that everybody of whatever age dies,
some in unfortunate ways (a lot more in the last year alone than in all such OT
verses put together).

The cartoons fail to do that. They force a choice of just good or just bad
as understood in interpersonal terms without indicating a God concept reconciled
to a world with both. An uncompromised one or the other would be unrealistic
about people or life--realistically, the best you can do is find the good in
them. If you're going to have a faith for God, it's similar (Job, etc.). The
cartoonist forces a just good or just bad choice and the answer is neither--
forced points simplify the truth so it's easier to remember but aren't worth
remembering.

Judging God: that refers to the concept of God being of a higher quality being
that owns it all and has the ultimate prerogative, and people couldn't rightly
claim equal or higher. It doesn't mean you can't have the free will to have
judgments and opinions of whatever kind otherwise, including about God, which is
self-evident.

2. The cartoon forces points like JWs leaders in a 'centric way about non-JWs
except by atheists about others. It forces that belief in God requires a con-
servative interpretation of divine intervention (although it's possible with the
examples given, some choose otherwise) and denial of the rational (defined as
the see-able, touchable things and such, like the things that lead us to decide
there was a big bang).

Belief in God is a choice to have faith in a possible God beyond the see-able,
touchable things of the same rationalism non-believers know, and the cartoon
forces the choice that you can either be an atheist or deny those things. A
belief in denying the known things is something the believer or non-believer may
criticize.

3. see 1.

4. Slavery, stubborn son, Amalekites

The NT drops a lot of the OT rules which wouldn't be the case if they were
ethical basics like don't lie, steal, or murder. Christians don't have them as
rules for Christians, just old history. One explanation the NT gives is that
God worked with people whose hearts were hardened, were set in their ways, so
only tried to change them so much while trying to work with them.

Jesus says something about that regarding Mosaic law on divorce at Matt.19:8.
Likewise, the Canaanite belief in other gods only seems to have been stopped in
the time of Isaiah, etc. It looks like whatever harshness God is depicted as
showing could have been a lot harsher if He'd only settle for having His own
way with everyone.

Jesus and Paul didn't need the faith to be law of the land to the extent that
Paul was pragmatic about slavery, which was the Roman law of the land in that
place and time. He didn't advise beating a slave and advised to try not to
become one.

Paul, living in the Roman Empire in which slavery was also the law of the
land, at the least taught to temper the understanding of it with an understand-
ing of treating others as you'd want to be treated yourself, be kind, etc., in
how he sent a slave, now converted to Christianity, back to the slave owner with
a note for the slave owner. It's not clear beyond that if that slave was set
free (although the tradition is he was).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_antiquity

"If then you regard me a partner, accept him as you would me. But if he has
wronged you in any way or owes you anything, charge that to my account; I, Paul,
am writing this with my own hand, I will repay it not to mention to you that you
owe to me even your own self as well)." (Philemon 1:17-19, NASB)

"Were you called while a slave? Do not worry about it; but if you are able
also to become free, rather do that." (1 Cor.7:21, NASB)

"For he who was called in the Lord while a slave, is the Lord's freedman;
likewise he who was called while free, is Christ's slave. You were bought with a
price; do not become slaves of men." (1 Cor.7:22,23)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible-based_advocacy_of_slavery#Biblical_texts_on_the_keeping_of_slaves

The JWs leaders were delinguent in regard to Paul's advice to rather try to be
free which found greater possibilties in the legal situation in the U.S. of the
1950's in a country with a non-violent civil rights movement. The problem came
from 'centric ethnic outlooks which caused harsh disparity in education between
races and less potential for black people to make what they wanted with their
lives. There was scriptural guidance for a moral imperative to change for the
better beyond just realizing that people of different races could find salvation
from faith in God (Num.12; Luke 6:31; 10:27, others).
http://gtw6437.tripod.com/id20.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethic_of_reciprocity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_segregation_in_the_United_States
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_Rights_Movement_%281896-1954%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_Rights_Movement_%281955-1968%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_and_slavery

"and He made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of
the earth, having determined their appointed times and the boundaries of their
habitation." (Acts 17:26, NASB)

"Treat others the same way you want them to treat you." (Luke 6:31, NASB)

"And he answered, 'YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND
WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR STRENGTH, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND; AND YOUR
NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF." Luke 10:27, NASB)

1 Timothy 8-11: slave traders are listed among law breakers.

Stubborn son--again, these stories are of people set in their ways living with
divine interventions which may be why I don't know of a case of the rule about
unruly children being enforced in the OT or renewed in the NT.

Amalekites--see 1.

5. The cartoon forces the point that belief in God requires warring between
different believers. As the list of links I gave at the next link shows, both
believers or non-believers who are too 'centric about their belief or non-be-
lief choice to the point of harsh intolerance of others, even making it law of
the land with harsh punishments, that caused that harm, and not either the
believers or non-believers who aren't too 'centric about it.

The solution isn't that everyone has to have the same belief or non-belief
choice but to not be too 'centric whether you believe in God or not--to be more
relaxed about the differences. The cartoons don't make a case for atheism but
ironically supply examples of a 'centric stance that's unnecessarily rigid and
not relaxed in the way that encourages people to get along better.
http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/beliefs/192985/1/Religious-Christendoms-Heavy-Blood-Guilt

glenster

correction--1 Timothy 1:8-11

Great atheist webcomic

bluecanary

bohm

bohm

bohm

bohm

bluecanary

glenster

freetosee

glenster

glenster

Share this