How "Christian" of him!!

[DaShi]

I believe that it's ok to kill people. But since you don't believe that, you can't criticize me for it. :crazy:

[Jon Miller]

I don't want to argue where Ben is on my side, and haven't here. But Boris, you don't understand much.

As an example, the sign of Jonah is found in the Bible at:

29As the crowds increased, Jesus said, "This is a wicked generation. It asks for a miraculous sign, but none will be given it except the sign of Jonah. 30For as Jonah was a sign to the Ninevites, so also will the Son of Man be to this generation. 31The Queen of the South will rise at the judgment with the men of this generation and condemn them; for she came from the ends of the earth to listen to Solomon's wisdom, and now one[a] greater than Solomon is here.

3and in the morning, 'Today it will be stormy, for the sky is red and overcast.' You know how to interpret the appearance of the sky, but you cannot interpret the signs of the times. 4A wicked and adulterous generation looks for a miraculous sign, but none will be given it except the sign of Jonah." Jesus then left them and went away.

38Then some of the Pharisees and teachers of the law said to him, "Teacher, we want to see a miraculous sign from you."
39He answered, "A wicked and adulterous generation asks for a miraculous sign! But none will be given it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. 40For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. 41The men of Nineveh will stand up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it; for they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and now one[e] greater than Jonah is here. 42The Queen of the South will rise at the judgment with this generation and condemn it; for she came from the ends of the earth to listen to Solomon's wisdom, and now one greater than Solomon is here.

It is quite obvious that the sign of Jonah is that Jonah was in the belly of the fish for 3 days while Christ was in the belly of the earth for 3 days. Christ was fortelling His death and resurrection.

Of course, I think Robertson is causing serious problems and is not following God well.

Jon Miller

[Kidlicious]

Only if he repents.

We've already gone through this. A lot of people don't repent.

[Kidlicious]

Why should they? We are the dogs whom Christ saw fit to make a spot for us at the table.

You are so twisted it's not even worth talking to you.

[Kidlicious]

I believe that it's ok to kill people. But since you don't believe that, you can't criticize me for it. :crazy:

I think the point Ben might be trying to make is that we've been all given the free gift of life, and what we think really doesn't matter if it isn't what God thinks. You can complain all you want about injustice, but if God doesn't consider it an injustice it isn't.

[DaShi]

Then where is free will?

[Kidlicious]

Then where is free will?

Did you think free will gets you into heaven? Free will is a gift too.

[DaShi]

Fine, I'll just believe in a god that is a bit more accommodating.

[Boris Godunov]

The problem is that Ben is once again twisting the argument and completely failing to address what it's really about. He knows he can't provide adequate answers that don't make the Biblical god look like an immoral dick, so he has to resort to claiming that I'm some sort of closet theist who hates god to try and distract from the issue at hand. Of course it's nonsense, since it's predicated on the notion that in order to question the beliefs of others, one has to secretly believe what they believe. What kind of stupid idea is that? This is because he knows he can't win, and decides to make the argument about *me* instead of the issue at hand.

To summarize, the point of this entire argument was this: Ben called "unChristian," based on the idea that Robertson was supposedly stating that he knew that Haiti was suffering divine punishment for it's alleged devil pact long ago. However, this is a mischaracterization of what Robertson said, as Robertson did NOT claim to know that was the reason. He threw the story out there, but never actually made the connection that the calamities were definitely a result of divine terror. Now he may very well have intended the viewers to make that connection, but he was crafty enough not to say it so he could have plausible deniability.

My contention was, given what Robertson really said, it couldn't be called "unChristian." To simply speculate that a disaster might have been divine punishment does not violate any rule, nor does it contradict the Bible, in which God visits disasters on peoples on several occasions. Ben's argument was that these biblical disasters came with warning, so Haiti somehow doesn't apply. However, I haven't seen any convincing evidence that the Bible says anyone was warned about the Flood or Sodom and Gomorrah beyond the few people god intended to save. Even if those do count, at this point Christians couldn't be certain someone in Haiti wasn't warned and they just hadn't heard about it yet. Likewise, they could also believe that Haiti's past calamities were a sort of warning. Ergo even with the warning argument, it stands that the earthquake could, to a Christian, be interpreted as possible divine judgment, given Biblical precedent.

The Egyptian children massacre was a wholly separate argument, and given Ben's latest attempt a response ("uhh... you must not really be an atheist!"), I'm satisfied he has no answers to why it's moral for a god to kill innocent children while it's supposedly wrong for anyone else to do so. If your god's morals don't apply to himself, then they aren't morals at all, just arbitrary dictates that he's free to violate on a whim.

Now you'd have to be dishonest or a total moron to think that my stating any of the above requires me personally to believe any of it is true. It's pretty obvious I'm just engaging in hypothetical reasoning to get at certain religious beliefs of other people. How anyone cannot grasp that is beyond me. I suppose I could add the words "alleged" and "supposed" before every point I make, but that would be tiresome and should be wholly unnecessary for any thinking person to need.

Jon Miller: You don't seem to understand the issue at hand, again. If the "sign of Jonah" is only referring to signs of the resurrection of Jesus, then it's not relevant to the Biblical disasters mentioned.

[Boris Godunov]

You can complain all you want about injustice, but if God doesn't consider it an injustice it isn't.

That may suffice for other believers, but it's side-stepping the issue for us nonbelievers. You can't believe that answer is going to be remotely satisfying to someone who does not accept the concept of divine autocracy.

Even so, one could argue that if a god gave human beings the power to reason and make moral judgments, then even that god is subject to such judgments for his actions. A dictator may make the law of a country, but that doesn't mean the peasants can't question him when he violates his own laws, or if his laws are irrational. Sure, the dictator can kill them or lock them in a torture chamber for the rest of their lives, but that doesn't magically make his actions moral or just.

[MrFun]

The Egyptian children massacre was a wholly separate argument, and given Ben's latest attempt a response ("uhh... you must not really be an atheist!"), I'm satisfied he has no answers to why it's moral for a god to kill innocent children while it's supposedly wrong for anyone else to do so. If your god's morals don't apply to himself, then they aren't morals at all, just arbitrary dictates that he's free to violate on a whim.

I'm still trying to better understand why God did not intervene to save the babies who were killed in the Slaughter of the Innocents shortly after the birth of Jesus.

[Ben Kenobi]

A lot of people don't repent.

Then they go to hell.

You are so twisted it's not even worth talking to you.

It appears in two Gospels. Obviously you consider the Gospels twisted.

Leaving that place, Jesus withdrew to the region of Tyre and Sidon. A Canaanite woman from that vicinity came to him, crying out, “Lord, Son of David, have mercy on me! My daughter is suffering terribly from demon-possession.”

Jesus did not answer a word. So his disciples came to him and urged him, “Send her away, for she keeps crying out after us.”

He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.”

The woman came and knelt before him. “Lord, help me!” she said.

He replied, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to their dogs.”

“Yes, Lord,” she said, “but even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their masters’ table.”

Then Jesus answered, “Woman, you have great faith! Your request is granted.” And her daughter was healed from that very hour.

[Ben Kenobi]

I don't want to argue where Ben is on my side

Jon, throwing his brothers and sisters under the bus yet again.

What are you afraid of? People hating you?

[Ben Kenobi]

You can't believe that answer is going to be remotely satisfying to someone who does not accept the concept of divine autocracy.

Well sure. If Man is God that means we can kill each other at will.

Even so, one could argue that if a god gave human beings the power to reason and make moral judgments, then even that God is subject to such judgments for his actions.

If he is the source of reason then he's not subject to it, he is sovereign.

A dictator may make the law of a country, but that doesn't mean the peasants can't question him

Again, a dictator is just another man. He isn't divine.

when he violates his own laws, or if his laws are irrational. Sure, the dictator can kill them or lock them in a torture chamber for the rest of their lives, but that doesn't magically make his actions moral or just.

Again, Dictators are not God. Was Bush a God? No.

[DaShi]

I think Boris' argument is too complicated for Ben to understand.