Why does god kill children?

by Comatose 269 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • tec
    tec

    You forgot the most important, reason for lies and selfish greed and motivation.

    That too... though done in ignorance most often, I think.

    Sorry, tec, but your statement contradicts your own holy book. 2 Timothy 3:16 says "all scripture is inspired of god". The Bible does not claim that only some of the scriptures are inspired.

    No, it doesn't actually. Not everything in the bible is scripture. I think I did say that above... you must have missed it.

    Only one of two conclusions is correct:

    I think there are more than two, as not everything in the bible IS scripture. So the misunderstand here, is yours (and also the religions who have taught that the bible is the Word of God, and inerrant, and all scripture... who would have taught that to you, in error, themselves)

    Scripture is inspired... as in received from the Spirit, in spirit.

    The book of Luke is not inspired. He states upfront that he 'investigated' all things to record the testimony of others, on what happened.

    1. Either the Bible writer is lying, which means the book that contains the lie is also false,

    Paul... the author of the letter to Timothy, in which he says this... is not saying what you have been taught. Unless you think that Paul thought his letters (in which he has made a distinction between something from himself, as opposed to something from God) were scripture.

    2. or, the Bible is correct and you've chosen to disregard the portions of it you personally disagree with, which puts you at odds with the god you claim to worship.

    The bible is not inerrant. It does not even make that claim about itself. Written IN the bible is the verse regarding the lying pen of the scribes (I am sure i put that above too)... as well as a warning at the end of Revelation for those who would add or take away from the book (why write a warning for something that cannot happen?) As well as the fact that we KNOW that people can tamper and twist verses, choosing meanings that go with what they already beleive... because we have all seen this in the NWT.

    So, if by your own admission, not all of the Bible is inspired or reliable, how can you believe what it says about Jesus?
    The accounts about him are contained in the same book you admit is not 100% inspired, true or reliable.

    By going TO Him, to be taught BY Him.

    The bible is a witness (or rather many witness) accounts to Christ. A finger pointing to Christ. So that we can learn about Him... but to truly know Him (to know also what might be misunderstood or taught incorrectly) then we may go TO Him, and have Him teach us.

    The bible is not the word of God. Christ is the Word of God. The LIVING Word.

    I love these illogical, self-nullifying statements Christians make. And, the truly sad part is, they haven't thought about it enough to realize what they're doing, but will argue their position ad nauseum.

    No, the sad part is that you are buying into a lie that men have taught. That the bible is inerrant and inspired in its entirety. Your entire argument is based on that. You are the one who has not thought enough about it to realize what you are doing.

    There is NO basis to beleive that the bible is inerrant (in fact there is basis to believe that it is NOT inerrant: Jer 8:8, and contradictions such as the one pointed out at the top of the last page), or to believe that it is an all or nothing book. It was never written as such.

    These are things that you and others have overlooked... to instead listen to the lie that men and religion have taught you. I don't know why you do that. I don't know how you can say in one hand, that men don't know wha they're talking about and they are wrong (such as the wts)... and in the other hand, still give credence to the things that they teach? Is that not you trying to have things both ways?

    Peace,

    tammy

  • AndDontCallMeShirley
    AndDontCallMeShirley
    Abraham is one person that was willing to "do it"....and that is why he went so far as to try to sacrifice issac

    ---

    So, if child sacrifice is so offensive to God, why did he use child sacrifice (or the threat of it) as a test of Abraham's loyalty? Your god is a legendary hypocrite!

    And, your hero Abraham is no better than the people he condemned, because in order to please his god he was willing to commit atrocities equally as repugnant as the ones he was condemning.

    myelaine, you sure make a lot of assumptions about god's thinking, the motivations of people that served god, ancient cultures, etc.

    Here's what you fail to see: the accounts as written in the Bible are so offensive to the moral sensitivities of a normal human being, one is forced to rationalize, speculate and make huge assumptions in order for those accounts to square up with sound moral judgments. To take them at face value is to align yourself with one of the most inhumane characters ever concocted.

  • AndDontCallMeShirley
    AndDontCallMeShirley

    tec- you certainly do have a dizzying logic!

    No follow-up comment on my part is necessary, as you are doing an excellent job of revealing the absurdity of your claims all by yourself.

    The bible is a witness (or rather many witness) accounts to Christ

    No, the Bible is the ONLY witness about Christ- the Bible you reject as errant and uninspired. Massive fail, tec !

    ---

    EP: Do you think we should kill children of Nazi's and KKK members? If not, why are you not up to God's standards? Children of divorce or drug abusers? All groups more likely to have issues and do something naughty.

    Do you advocate killing them?

    I doubt you'll get an answer on this, EP. Fundamentalists always ignore answering the questions which will automatically void their previous arguments.

    No matter which wat nyelaine answers, she'll either reveal that she is morally bankrupt or her god is morally bankrupt. Either way she'll nullify her own position.

  • tec
    tec

    No follow-up comment on my part is necessary

    Of course not... because then you might actually have to think... does the bible claim to be inerrant and inspired? Or am I just believing what men have taught me?

    You prove to me that the bible is in and of itself... inerrant and inspired... that it even claims to be that itself... and you might have a point.

    You cannot do that though... because it is not true.

    Peace,

    tammy

  • tec
    tec

    I also do not reject the bible. I just don't claim it to be more than what it is.

    The bible is also not one book (except that man has made it into one) It is many books; many authors; many witnesses: A compliation of scripture, history, law, poetry, individual stories of individual people; witness accounts (plural) to Christ while He was in the flesh; witness accounts to Christ as the Spirit, Revelation and prophets.

    Peace,

    tammy

  • AndDontCallMeShirley
    AndDontCallMeShirley

    tec:

    does the bible claim to be inerrant and inspired?

    Yes, it does, tec: 2 Timothy 3:16 says, "all scripture is inspired of god".

    It is too uncomfortable for you to acknowledge this verse, that is why you ignore it.

    If you want to rationalize around this verse and say you don't believe it's true, that's your right. However, then you are also forced to acknowledge that what this book says about Jesus can also be dismissed just as easily.

    Oh, by the way, you claimed that the Bible is only one of many books that detail Jesus' life and activities. I'd sure like to see your source material proving that.

    tec:

    You prove to me that the bible is in and of itself... inerrant and inspired

    I'm not claiming it is inspired or inerrant. I find it laughable that you missed this point. However, many/most Christians DO believe it is inspired and inerrant, and I am exposing the fallacious basis of their arguments.

    tec:

    I also do not reject the bible.

    You reject what disagrees with your personal opinions. Classic cherry-picking. And as has been mentioned earlier, if you can reject some of it, then how can you reasonably criticize a person who decides to reject ALL of it, even the parts about Jesus ?

  • cofty
  • AndDontCallMeShirley
    AndDontCallMeShirley

    LOL, Cofty.

    Christian logic:

    Abraham = "good"

    Andrea Yates = "evil"

    Yates had the disadvantage of murdering her children AFTER the Bible was written. It's poor timing, that's all.

  • Sayswho
    Sayswho

    It's not who's correct but WHATs correct .... I said this before God's a bad communicator.

    EP: That's if there is a God!

    SW

  • tec
    tec

    Yes, it does, tec: 2 Timothy 3:16 says, "all scripture is inspired of god".

    We have already been over that... twice now. Not everything written is scripture. Nor does something being inspired... mean that it is not subject to the errors of the scribes. (errros in copying; in casting their own slant to what was said or written; etc etc. Do YOU have a response to Jeremiah 8:8?)

    It is too uncomfortable for you to acknowledge this verse, that is why you ignore it.

    The fact that I have now responded to it three times, proves that I am not ignoring it. It is not uncomfortable a verse in the least.

    Perhaps the question should be why are YOU ignoring THAT?

    If you want to rationalize around this verse and say you don't believe it's true, that's your right. However, then you are also forced to acknowledge that what this book says about Jesus can also be dismissed just as easily.

    Perhaps go and re-read all that I have written about this verse.

    Oh, by the way, you claimed that the Bible is only one of many books that detail Jesus' life and activities. I'd sure like to see your source material proving that.

    No, I never claimed that... lets look at what I actually said:

    The bible is also not one book (except that man has made it into one) Itis many books; many authors; many witnesses: A compliation of scripture, history, law, poetry, individual stories of individual people; witness accounts (plural) to Christ while He was in the flesh; witness accounts to Christ as the Spirit, Revelation and prophets.

    Want to find the place and quote where I said what you think I said?

    I'm not claiming it is inspired or inerrant. I find it laughable that you missed this point. However, many/most Christians DO believe it is inspired and inerrant, and I am exposing the fallacious basis of their arguments.

    Well, here I thought you were talking to me in our conversation. I mean, you're working pretty hard to convince me that I am ignoring the bible claiming itself to be inerrant and inspired. I am simply telling you that it does not state that about itself; there is no valid reason to believe that it is supposed to be so, and so not hypocritical not to accept everything written as is.

    You reject what disagrees with your personal opinions. Classic cherry-picking.

    I do not. I would reject what disagrees with Christ. I would also reject the interpretation of some things that also disagrees with Christ.

    So... cherry-picking... sure. In accordance with Christ and what HE teaches... seeing as HE is the Truth, Word and Image of God. Nothing and no one else. He is also the One we are SUPPOSED to listen TO.

    And as has been mentioned earlier, if you can reject some of it, then how can you reasonably criticize a person who decides to reject ALL of it, even the parts about Jesus ?

    Have you seen me criticize a person for rejecting the bible?

    I can discuss what is written IN the bible with those who are criticising Christ or God based ON the bible... and I may well question someone who chooses something else over what Christ has said, who says their faith is in Christ.

    But i sure don't go around criticising people for rejecting the bible.

    Peace,

    tammy

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit