5 you shall not bow down to them or worship them; for i the lord your god am a jealous god, punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and the fourth generation of those who reject me!.
wtf !
so if your grandparents screw up god will punish future generations.
The source of this morality is the same even if the names are not.
On this, we could be closer to agreement.
Having a source of morality though is much different then portraying an enforcer of morality. History shows only man has enforced morality, often in the name of god, but always in the manifest absence of god.
5 you shall not bow down to them or worship them; for i the lord your god am a jealous god, punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and the fourth generation of those who reject me!.
wtf !
so if your grandparents screw up god will punish future generations.
I have been following this with interest, and fall on the side of the anti bible crowd. I don't mean to pick on Perry, as I disagree with all bible apologists, but I use one of his quotes below as a springboard for my views.
Regarding the video: Assuming there is a God, should he not punish wrong doers? The video assumes that people are innocent and that punishment is wrongly applied (stemming from Adam). That is not what the bible claims and not what reality is. So the bottom line question for atheists is: who should do the punishing...if anyone? And once they choose someone and give him the authority to punish others; how would an atheist know whether or not someone had done right or wrong?
I have no comment on the video, just the (typical) logic that I believe to be flawed. That is, we, mankind, are sinful before god, offensive to god, and worthy of destruction, or at least punishment, because mankind is not capable or given the ability to decide right and wrong.
Logic has been applied by several posters to this, using the bible and asking relevant questions. My point isn't to rehash these. I think that those who read this, as usual, can make up their own minds, if they haven't already staked out a side.
What is most disturbing to me about the apologists and their arguments on this topic are the outstanding leaps of logic in defending a god who holds the unborn responsible for the actions of generations past. Semantics aside, there is no logical, just argument that can smooth over the bible's portrayal of god in these passages.
To all of the apologists, I have to ask, what if god has found your grandparents, or great grandparents offensive, people that perhaps you have never met, and he is determined to punish their family "to the 3rd and 4th generation". How does that make you feel? Is that really just?
A reasonable person, theist or otherwise, would have to answer no.
The issue isn't who decides what is right or wrong. The fact that Christian theists maintain that, in the absence of their moral code as they understand, anarchy would exist, is directly proven wrong by the laws and ethical/moral standards that exist in most societies and cultures of the world today. Societies and cultures I might add, that are not Christian.
If a Christian theist would dare step out of their Christian world view and try to see the world through the eyes of a Buddhist, a Jainist, a Chinese or Korean (North or South), then one would readily concede that this argument of the Christian god providing ethics, morals, and laws is moot, as the gods of all of these people effectively accomplish the same thing.
Is their god the more correct one? What evidence do we have? Happiness? Would anyone here presume that people who aren't Christian are unhappy? Or merely, not "saved"? That is a metaphysical judgment without evidence. Without this Christian way of looking at people (i.e. saved or not saved, believers and non believers) there is no basis for the Christian apologists argument on this score.
American justice, as an aside, has evolved through the careful separation of church and state, something that was very purposefully done by the founding fathers. To put this another way, YHWH would be in jail today, and rightly so, if he punished to the 3rd and 4th generation. This American justice is much superior to the OT version, don't you think?
At the very least, one must hope that their grandparents didn't piss off YHWH!
Oh yeah, and Tombstone...
This is from "Beautiful Girls" one of my favorite movies for some reason.... Warning, there is a fair amount of cursing by Rosie in this scene, but it is truly one of the funniest rants I have ever heard. With that, here is one scene for your consideration.
it was brought to my attention,how jehovah's is blessing the new arrangement.
of re-assigning of bethel family members (more like fired members).ex.
a single sister,jessica,visited her assignment and spent two futile weeks looking for housing.. the day before she was to return to bethel to pack her things,she was overjoyed when a local.
This is called propaganda. There is another side of this story, which is the absolute disloyalty the GB showed to those who gave up their entire youth to serve at Bethel and who are now being downsized. Thats a story, and these dismissed ones DO feel betrayed.
But rather then acknowledge real human emotions, the GB would rather trot out absolute garbage like this.
i have no evidence to back up what i am about to say.
i have no paperwork, no recordings, no photos, no nothing.
and yet this nags at me.. i have this sneaky feeling that soon the wbts is going to broaden their view of "apostasy" and begin to include people who don't currently fit into their apostate views.. i have this itch that's telling me that, basically, if you present anything negative concerning the truth, you are at risk of being hauled before an elder body and punished for this somehow (disfellowshipping, reproof?)..
From my memory, they have bitched about apostasy all the time.
I don't think they can really add to it. The only thing they can do is ask you directly if you believe all the BS. If you say no, watch out!
you didn't even have to live during his term to pick him on this thread.
.
still, i'm going with clinton..
Well bring on the butter! Wait...............nm
I hear its better with Polaner All Fruit......
you didn't even have to live during his term to pick him on this thread.
.
still, i'm going with clinton..
I just figured Washington had an affliction I was unaware of. Altrusistic, does it hurt??
Yes, because computer keyboards back then didn't have spell check. Also, they were made of wood.....
Altrusistic: "a cyst that occurs when trying to do good for others without thinking of the advantages or disadvantages to oneself. Usually manifests itself in an outbreak of corns....."
you didn't even have to live during his term to pick him on this thread.
.
still, i'm going with clinton..
Oops!!!
George Washington (great because he probably was the only truly altrusistic President.)
I know how to spell altruistic!!!! See????
I just can't type....
i believe there are 500 or so official members of the watchtower bible & tract society.
these are the ones who attend the annual meeting of the watchtower society.
they appear to be like company shareholders.. who are these individuals and why are they apparently anonymous?
Just because you get tickets doesn't mean you sit in the main auditorium. Most are tied in through the TV, and the invited ones often sit in the 3 bethel cafeteria's.
