And how do you know that Moses was a myth and never existed? I doubt you've ever even made it a course of study. I also question your credentials. If you're an atheist (as I assume you are), I find it highly ironic that you criticize Jews and Christians for believing in God without adequate evidence, yet you throw out the story of Moses without any evidence whatsoever. Are you a historian, archeologist, anthropologist? Wouldn't it be more accurate to say, "I believe that Moses is a myth and that he never existed. I also believe the exodus from Egypt never happened." Saying as you did that it didn't happen and that Moses never existed is a blanket statement of belief and faith on your part. I don't think you've even looked at the issue from the other side. See also this historical narrative .
Cold Steel
JoinedPosts by Cold Steel
-
45
About the ten plagues in Egypt
by runForever inalot of people are saying god is cruel for killing the firstborns and animals and people in the ten plagues.
but didn't god achieve his goal of making nations and people be in fear of him?.
-
-
-
45
About the ten plagues in Egypt
by runForever inalot of people are saying god is cruel for killing the firstborns and animals and people in the ten plagues.
but didn't god achieve his goal of making nations and people be in fear of him?.
-
-
Cold Steel
But didn't God achieve his goal of making nations and people be in fear of him?
In the scriptures, “fear” means more “respect” than terror. The Israelites were like children, always pushing the boundaries of what they could get away with. Pharaoh, on the other hand, had the free agency and the obligation to free the Israelites in conjunction with God’s will. God could have forced him to, but He didn’t. And if Pharaoh and his court refused to release the Israelites from their forced labor, then the Lord chose to inform him of the consequences. As the representative of the people, he most likely was under tremendous pressure from his constituents to keep the Israelites as forced labor. But he had seen what the Lord could do, and he knew that the Lord could deliver. The question most likely in his mind was whether his own gods were somehow testing him and his resolve. At any moment they might move against the god of these slaves and put Him in His rightful position.
When people and animals die, they simply move on to a different location. It’s only the grief of loss for those who remain behind that makes it so unbearable. And the Egyptians had it coming. The Lord warned them and forewarned them. It was only when they saw the southernmost part of the Israelites’ anatomies did they have second thoughts about freeing them.
If God exists, then we must accept the words of the prophets that He is merciful, kind, just, all knowing, all powerful and benevolent. It is God who sets the boundaries of what is good and what is evil; and we’re indeed fortunate that God is good and that the Universe follows suite. In the beginning, men needed discipline in regards to the Sabbath and other various aspects of their religion. In the days of Jesus, when men had gone too far in the other direction. Then Jesus had to remind them that the Sabbath was made for man and not the other way around. In both cases, it was the fear of God that kept the people in line. But the push was ultimately always towards the center. God wanted the people to regard Him as a loving parent, or even a friend. But first He had to win their respect. Admiration, love and faith would follow.
.
-
92
How could you justify that God killed all firstborn children in Egypt?
by Mr Fool inwas it necessary for god to kill all innocent firstborn children?
no other way out for the almighty god?.
-
-
Cold Steel
Your point about morals/integrity and atheism has been addressed numerous times on this forum. You have had to read the responses, and yet you spew the same tired, erroneous nonsense that, without your/a god, atheists will be monsters.
I never said that. I said that they, or anyone, could be monsters and that there would be no consequences, except what man administered.
But I will say this. No moral set of laws can come from men alone. Men, of themselves, do not produce virtuous laws that result in the betterment of mankind. It's impossible given the nature of man. And if I seem to "spew" the same "tired" stuff, it's because it's true. Men, minus God, are always monsters. Give me an example of where I'm wrong.
- The higher an individual's IQ the more likely they are to be atheist.
- The more formal education an individual has the more likely they are to be atheist.
- The more rational an individual's personality (think Myers Briggs, Intuitive Thinker NT), the more likely they are to be atheist.
- The more secular and atheistic a state, nation or region, the more likely it is to be functional with a higher level of integrity.
I've known many brilliant people who believed, deeply, in God. Douglas MacArthur, the brilliant tactician and general, believed deeply in God and was, despite his faults, one of the most disciplined, articulate men of the age. He never got a scratch in battle, even though men around him were dropping like flies. He led a company of men behind enemy lines in World War I and was the only survivor. He was attacked by three bandits who ambushed him and his driver and killed at least two of the three with only a hole through his hat. Coincidence? Perhaps, but the same thing happened with General Washington. Both men were brilliant men of faith who were convinced they had a divine destiny. On the other hand, I'm not impressed with the idiots like Hitchens and others who think themselves brilliant and above others. They're stuck up, arrogant and not nearly as smart as they think they are.
And BTW, I know many brilliant people who voted for Mr. Obama. I, being of medium intelligence, on the other hand, knew what kind of a president he'd be before he was even elected. So much for brilliance and common sense, especially when the latter isn't so common!
At least you boil it down to what typiclaly annoys theists about atheists - what mature, responsibile consenting adults choose to do with their genitalia. Why do you continue to repeat tired, erroneous garbage? Requiring a belief in a deity in order to do the right thing is weak and un-evolved. Atheists typically have figured out how to do the right thing for no other reason than it is the right thing, and our list of malfeasant behaviors - other than the aforementioned genitalia - would almost certainly match a similar list by a rational caring theist.
I don't know why atheists are so caught up with "genitalia," because they're the ones who generally bring it up first. What about abortion? Few atheists I've met seem to think it's no more important than taking an aspirin for a headache. Besides, since you brought it up, I've never known a truly great man or woman who was sexually promiscuous. Of course I tend to look up to great men who were more contained.
At any rate, this thread is done. I'm out of here. Continue on if you wish.
-
92
How could you justify that God killed all firstborn children in Egypt?
by Mr Fool inwas it necessary for god to kill all innocent firstborn children?
no other way out for the almighty god?.
-
-
Cold Steel
You mean the same god that ordered the genocide of people who had the audacity to live on their own land first, which genocide included the slaughter of infants, old people and animals? The same god that not only approved of slavery but codified it? The same god that was just as happy to slaughter his own people as he was in slaughtering "pagan" people?
Shirl, the people living on their own land weren't just folks. They were profligate, degenerate, idolatrous and vicious. Talk about murdering infants, they threw them into a furnace. Their “worship” was almost wholly sexual. In several circumstances, the Lord offered to spare the less wicked people as long as they gave the Israelites safe passage through their lands; however, they feared the Israelites and rejected peace. So in this case, by attacking the Israelites, they brought about their own destruction.
But as the Israelites wandered in the desert, there also was rebellion in their own ranks. Korah, a first cousin of Moses, instigated a rebellion over the priesthood. Being Levites, they held the lesser priesthood, but they coveted the higher priesthood shared by Moses and Aaron. The Lord, through Moses, separated the two camps. The rebels were subsequently consumed in an earthquake, and 250 princes of Israel, who also coveted the priesthood, were killed by fire. Instead of seeing the Lord’s hand in all this, many in the congregation actually blamed Moses and Aaron for this evil. The Lord then sent a plague among the camps and only through an act of atonement were the people spared. But many still were embittered towards Moses and Aaron.
The point here is that by rebelling against Moses, the people thought they were in the right. They were warned repeatedly before the Lord took action against them. They had witnessed Moses’ miracles before Pharaoh and the plagues, as well as the miraculous parting of the Red Sea and the destruction of the Egyptian army. Yet they thought Moses was in the wrong and blamed him for the deaths of the rebels.
When the people were denied the entrance into the land of promise because of their conduct at the base of Mount Sinai, they determined to attack Canaan anyway, despite the Lord’s admonitions against it. The Canaanites soundly trounced them and yet Moses had forewarned them against the attack.
So people frequently disagree with the Lord, even when they believed in His existence. They also thought they were right, even when God showed He was against them. The Lord also had to move the Canaanites out of their lands to give it to the Israelites. Had they been a righteous people, they could have integrated themselves into the Israelite culture, but they had their own cultures and their own forms of fertility worship, which was highly repugnant to the Lord. He did not want it to infect the Israelites because, as the form of worship under Moses was monotheism with an emphasis on making people better through mastering their base desires, Canaanite worship was based in decadent and deviant sexual practices and the murder of infants.
-
92
How could you justify that God killed all firstborn children in Egypt?
by Mr Fool inwas it necessary for god to kill all innocent firstborn children?
no other way out for the almighty god?.
-
-
Cold Steel
What if an entity called man invented god? That is the big question. It is actually the answer.
Have you read Asimov’s short story, The Last Question?
.
-
92
How could you justify that God killed all firstborn children in Egypt?
by Mr Fool inwas it necessary for god to kill all innocent firstborn children?
no other way out for the almighty god?.
-
-
Cold Steel
Could you please define “morality”?
Very well. Morality is the attribute, or quality, of honesty, virtue, honor, loyalty, righteousness and steadfastness that exists in the confines of that which is given us by God. Without the latter, which is not mere sophistry, morality changes. Immoral sexual behavior, abortion and a host of other issues become increasingly debatable. If society is able to craft its own definition of morality, it will inevitably fall under the weight of its own immorality. When Jerusalem fell in 70 A.D., the inhabitants of the city all thought they were good people. As is his wont, God warned the people through the apostles and prophets to tell them otherwise. When they then sought the lives of these apostles, they sealed their own doom. Also, please note that the morals in the present day United States are entirely different than those a hundred years ago. Under God, morality doesn’t change.
.
-
92
How could you justify that God killed all firstborn children in Egypt?
by Mr Fool inwas it necessary for god to kill all innocent firstborn children?
no other way out for the almighty god?.
-
-
Cold Steel
You see, the preciousness of life is not contingent on belief in any particular god, or any god at all. Atheists are no different than any other human in that regard. In fact, I contend there is little basic difference between you and me other than this one main point: I, as an atheist, simply believe in one less god than you do. That's it.
Understood. But about preciousness, I just want you to understand that the preciousness of life is only advantageous to us only if we get something out of it that will benefit us. If death robs us of a way to use life’s lessons to our advantage, then all is for naught. The preciousness of life can only be of use to us if we can apply it to the next. If we held a course in electrical engineering, administer a final exam, then shoot everyone in the class, what does it matter how well they did?
.
.
-
92
How could you justify that God killed all firstborn children in Egypt?
by Mr Fool inwas it necessary for god to kill all innocent firstborn children?
no other way out for the almighty god?.
-
-
Cold Steel
"Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones." -- Marcus Aurelius
There is a great truth in this. One of the most pronounced observations by people who have near death experiences is that they are never asked which church they were members of. The first question asked is, what have you done for your fellow man? Again, when all men are judged, they are judged on the light they had and how they applied it to their lives. Someone once said that in the life to come, men are their own tormentors. They can deceive others, but not themselves, nor God.
True morality is only possible when you get rid of divine law-givers. You believe in morals by divine fiat. This is why you can blithely dismiss genocide as a mere trifle.
If atheists are correct, then genocide is a monumental trifle. Black holes a thousand light years from here have no opinion one way or the other on genocide. It's only important to those sophomoric little humans who have such a grand opinion of themselves. Worlds come and go out of existence throughout time, but the little pink thing on Planet Earth thinks genocide should shake the foundations of the heavens.
You are a shallow thinker, Cofty. That’s why your posts are so incredibly arrogant and foolish. You pop in, ejaculate your opinion and leave, thinking you have left grand thoughts. I don’t know how old you are, but I hope when you get out of high school, you’ll learn that opinions are best stated when they’re backed up with something substantial.
.
-
9
How I Found Jesus!
by berrygerry inby looking at cdn court cases.. i knew i would find him if i persisted.. there is clear evidence, in my view, that beginning some time, probably in early 2010, but perhaps earlier, that mr. jones developed a delusional disorder with a primary religious focus.
mr. jones accounting of the development of his belief that he is jesus christ, is consistent with the known development of psychotic disorders.
mr. jones describes a period of time where he felt that he had some greater purpose or was meant for something important although he was unable to really identify what that was.
-
-
Cold Steel
They should hold a convention for everyone who believes they are Jesus Christ. Put them up in a swanky hotel and hold roundtable discussions. They could make a fortune selling white robes and halos and there could be various lectures on faith and works, baptism by immersion or sprinkling, the existence of hell. Then at the end they could have an autograph sessions. People could buy New Testaments and have them autographed, have photos taken with their favorite messiah.
At the inauguration of President Reagan, Don Rickles greeted many of the guests, including Billy Graham. After acknowledging him, Rickles said, "This arm is bothering me." It was great. Frank Sinatra refused to perform there unless Rickles also performed. You can see it on YouTube.
BTW, it isn't the people who claim to be Jesus Christ that fascinate me, but the people who are their followers.
-
92
How could you justify that God killed all firstborn children in Egypt?
by Mr Fool inwas it necessary for god to kill all innocent firstborn children?
no other way out for the almighty god?.
-
-
Cold Steel
I believe the rationalization was, ‘they would've died someday anyway so what does it matter?’
No. Life is precious; however, it is in the hands of God. Before we came here, we unanimously agreed that we would be under the judgment of God. No one was forced to come to the earth, except those who rebelled, and we knew there would be eternal consequences to our actions once our memories were veiled, but we chose to come here anyway because of benefits and blessings of the Atonement. As Origen noted in his writings, we reach eternal life by various steps or degrees.
Infants who die here receive eternal life by default, due to their innocence. Not being able to sin, they have no need for baptism. They return to God pure. The rest of us die according to His will. But if you’re an atheist, none of that is clear to you. The rationalization you cite was meant as the bottom line argument back at you. If we all go down to an eternal death, I’m simply asking you, what difference does it make when one dies. We all go down into the grave, never to rise again. So, as far as you’re concerned, what difference does it make if you’re an infant or an old man? A billion years from now, we’ll all be dead and in a state of nonexistence (according to atheists). So as far as you’re concerned, Shirl, what difference does it make? If there is no God, there is no right or wrong. There’s no one to set any standards; no one to make laws or administer punishments. The dark side of The Force is as valid as the other. When Hitler, Stalin, Mao and other mass murderers die, they receive the same as the saintliest person who ever lived. So the rationalization was for your benefit. I believe that all men and all animals are immortal, and that their intelligence has no beginning nor does it have an end. A person dies, and they continue on in the spirit. So if God takes an infant, it simply means, to me, that it was spared the hardships and problems of mortality.
…if I was referencing Feguson, I'd certainly know how to spell it.
And if I were calling someone on misspelling Ferguson, I’d make darn sure I knew how to spell it.
But I get the point and you’re right. It was a cheap shot on my part. I apologize.
What you are doing, Cold_Steel, is filling in the Bible story blanks with your own commentary and editorializing...because the accounts written as-is are too indefensible, too disturbing, for any normal, rational person to accept at face value. So, you are forced to make endless excuses for god and justify his actions in order to make it work for you….
Not so much. I’m simply saying that neither you nor I know enough to condemn God. We don’t know what was in His mind. We also don’t know what was in the hearts of the people. We don’t know all the circumstances, nor do we know the context. Is that not so? Wouldn’t you concede that 1) if there is a God; and 2) if He has the attributes the prophets say He has (such as honor, virtue, integrity, omnipotency, all-knowing, all seeing), that He would be the best judge in how to judge all these things? Who are we to set our own standards and then hold God to them? Isn’t that the height of arrogance? Someone has to set the standards. Who better than our Creator? Remember, if He doesn’t exist, then we all get to set our own standards. You may not like the standards someone else sets, but who are you to object to the standards of someone like Richard Kuklinski? He may not agree with your standards, nor would he agree with society’s standards. He would murder anytime he felt he could get away with it!
By the way, you never said whether you were pro-life or not. We live in a society where we murder tens of thousands…millions, even, of infants. Wouldn’t you say that is far more problematic than any of God’s judgments?
.