First, let me say that you are not SUPPOSED to do anything for "my" God... that you don't WANT to do. That is one major difference between the Law covenant... and the New Covenant. And even if you ACTED like you wanted to do something (which a lot of folks do), the truth of your heart is not hidden from Him so that if you didn't REALLY want to do it, He's knows that, too. I give you Ananias and Sapphira.
So I have complete free will, but if I don't behave in a certain way, I'll be destroyed. and even if I do kowtow to such blackmail, I'll still be destroyed for not doing so willingly? Can't you see how utterly amoral such a system is?
1. Either God does not exist, and so could not/did not kill the child... and yet is blamed; or2. He does and did, and yet puny earthling man deigns to stand up and challenge Him... as if they can and will get away safe for doing so.
I don't believe your god exists as you've probably gathered, but unfortunately his followers do. As one of them, you refuse to exercise independent thought when it comes to morality. Your way of determining right from wrong is simply to check what you think it says in the old book. The reason people criticise your god is so that if/when you eventually realise that he behaves like the god of a tribe of primitive goatherds, you'll realise that's all he is.
And for what, perhaps the last 100 years or so? Yet, the 'law' of the sons paying for the sins of the father was changed by God almost 3 millenniums ago.
It was instituted by him in the first place! And isn't he unchanging? And isn't he still punishing us for Adam and Eve's sin?
The ONLY reasons the laws have changed in the MODERN world ... is because too many INNOCENT PEOPLE ... were being killed
Exactly! Modern lawmakers consider human life to be valuable. Laws that devalued human life have been changed. Surely that's a good thing? Maybe some day your god will do the same.
Personally, I don't know. You would have to ask God. But my common sense says that if people treat "illegitmate" children as they do now... and particularly in this country (and even worse in other countries)... then 3,000 years ago it would have been the CHILD that would have suffered as a result of David's acts, simply by means of the self-righteous 'altitude' of Israel. Everyone would have known it was not Uriah's child; he had been away at war and then refused to sleep with Bathsheba. Folks knew she had been seeing David while Uriah was gone. Do you think they would say anything to or in front of the King? Bathsheba? Do people say anything to the parents of "illegitimate" children today? Or is it the child they taunt? Who, then, would have SUFFERED the most as a result of David's acts?
Are you serious? You think that killing a baby is better than having him go through life, occasionally being called a bastard? Please tell me I'm reading that wrong.
Sorry, FunkyD, but I am not 'righteous' or 'good'... and have never professed to be. I just tend to think that IF some parents thought their children would be held accountable they MIGHT think twice. I also have enough good sense to know that while indeed perhaps some would... some, perhaps most, still wouldn't.
You're right. It probably would work on a lot of people. If I was a parent and you threatened my children, I'd do anything you asked - if I was somehow incapable of tearing you limb from limb - but it would still be unjust. The ends do not justify the means.
We 'see' this one differently, FunkyD. Sorry.
The way I see it: something is wrong
if and only if it violates someone's rights.
The way (I think) you see it: Something is wrong
if and only if your god says it is wrong.
--
But if you pray all your sins are hooked upon the sky
Pray and the heathen lie will disappear
Prayers they hide the saddest view
(Believing the strangest things, loving the alien)
-- David Bowie, Loving The Alien