How "Christian" of him!!

[Imran Siddiqui]

Do you realise the irony of an atheist arguing that natural disasters are divine punishment?

The atheist is asking about it in the context of the Bible and its account.

[Ben Kenobi]

Even sillier!

He's asking us about an account that he believes is a fable.

I really don't see the point of discussing the nature of God's judgment with someone who doesn't believe he exists. Now if Boris does believe that there is a God and that he does judge, then we can get somewhere.

[Imran Siddiqui]

He's asking us about what WE believe and what the book that WE believe is the Word says, you dumbass! It's quite obvious.

[Boris Godunov]

This was the sign of Jonah.

Which, again, doesn't appear to have any relevance to S&G. As near as I can figure, the "sign of Jonah" means a calamity befalling someone that is meant to portend and even greater calamity to come should he not mend his ways, right? If so, that doesn't help, since someone like Robertson could easily say that past Haiti calamities were the "sign of Jonah" for them, and even that the earthquake is yet another, if not the "ultimate" calamity.

Clearly Lot took them to be Angels. Why did they want to spend the night out in the square? To warn Sodom of impending judgment.

Uh, no, it's not clear. Calling them "lords" doesn't mean he thinks they are angels. The entire reason only Lot and his family were saved, IIRC, was that he showed righteousness by offering hospitality to these men even though he did not know they were angels.

There's absolutely no indication the angels revealed their divine nature until they blinded the attackers at the door. You're just inventing this.

The two angels were sent by God to warn Sodom.

No, they were sent to destroy it, as Gen. 19:13 clearly says.

That's exactly why I'm asking you. Do you personally believe they were divine punishments?

As Imran pointed out, no, obviously not. How stupid are you?

Oh, so keeping an entire nation in slavery and resisting their calls for freedom isn't grounds for divine punishment?

The Egyptian children weren't keeping the Hebrews in slavery, that's the ****ing point! They had no control over the situation! They were innocent victims of the divine punishment. I said nothing either way about the punishment against the wicked being just or unjust.

Why can't an omnipotent god punish the wicked without slaughtering innocent children? They weren't even "bystanders," they were deliberately targeted.

If we had decided to lead off our Iraq attack by poisoning Iraqi children, we'd be considered war criminals and monsters.

[Boris Godunov]

Do you realise the irony of an atheist arguing that natural disasters are divine punishment?

Which I didn't, you utter idiot. Anyone with a brain could tell I was arguing that a Christian could conceivably believe that natural disasters were divine punishment, based on Biblical precedent. Can you really not keep track of an argument over more than 2 posts???

Fair enough, but lets not forget that Pharaoh had many, many opportunities to free Israel.

And the story indicates he might very well have done so had God not "hardened his heart."

Regardless, it was pharoah doing these things, not the Egyptian children. They had NO control over it, nor did any of their parents. Yet they are the ones who get killed. Hence the point that killing the innocent to strike at the wicked is immoral and unjust.

[Boris Godunov]

He's asking us about what WE believe and what the book that WE believe is the Word says, you dumbass! It's quite obvious.

I suppose the fault is on us for thinking what BK sees as "obvious" and what the rest of the world sees as "obvious" are the same things.

[Ben Kenobi]

And the story indicates he might very well have done so had God not "hardened his heart."

So you give Pharoah a pass for enslaving an entire nation?

Regardless, it was pharoah doing these things, not the Egyptian children. They had NO control over it, nor did any of their parents. Yet they are the ones who get killed. Hence the point that killing the innocent to strike at the wicked is immoral and unjust.

Why is it unjust? It would be unjust if the Israelites were to do so, but God? They would have no life if God did not give it to them. If they choose to defy God, than God will withdraw the blessings that he has given them.

[DaShi]

Congrats Boris! You just won the arguement! :cheer:

[Ben Kenobi]

Uh, no, it's not clear. Calling them "lords" doesn't mean he thinks they are angels. The entire reason only Lot and his family were saved, IIRC, was that he showed righteousness by offering hospitality to these men even though he did not know they were angels.

He thought they were clearly, something beyond him and sent from God. Sigh, I don't really want to get into the hebrew here, but I might have to.

There's absolutely no indication the angels revealed their divine nature until they blinded the attackers at the door. You're just inventing this.

Why then was Lot able to discern their nature?

No, they were sent to destroy it, as Gen. 19:13 clearly says.

Which is after they tried to break Lot's door down.

As Imran pointed out, no, obviously not. How stupid are you?

Then why am I bothering to debate the merits of a text that you regard as false? It's pointless. Regardless of what I say, you have no reason to accept any of the account as true.

The Egyptian children weren't keeping the Hebrews in slavery, that's the ****ing point! They had no control over the situation! They were innocent victims of the divine punishment. I said nothing either way about the punishment against the wicked being just or unjust.

Why do you care? There is no God Boris.

[Boris Godunov]

So you give Pharoah a pass for enslaving an entire nation?

I said nothing either way about the punishment against the wicked being just or unjust.

Any punishment against Pharoah is irrelevant to the argument. Jeezus, how hard is this to grasp? The issue was God killing children who weren't doing anything. That's what it has been all along for this particular topic.

Why is it unjust? It would be unjust if the Israelites were to do so, but God? They would have no life if God did not give it to them. If they choose to defy God, than God will withdraw the blessings that he has given them.

The idea that "I created you, so it's moral for me to destroy you for any reason" is repulsive. By this same logic, parents could kill their children for any reason they so wished. If God is not subject to his own moral edicts about not killing innocent people, then it's not morality at all, it's just the arbitrary whim of a tyrant enacting "Do as I say, not as I do."

Even so, God wasn't withdrawing his blessing of life from those who defied him, he was withdrawing it from children who hadn't done anything wrong.

How can you possibly claim to be moral while making excuses for slaughtering children? This certainly makes any opposition to abortion ring very, very hollow.

However... since you say this:

It would be unjust if the Israelites were to do so, but God?

That would seem to be you admitting that the atrocities committed by the Israelites against their neighbors as described in the Old Testament were therefore moral wrongs, yes? All that slaughtering of entire tribes, dashing babies against rocks, etc?

[Ben Kenobi]

The idea that "I created you, so it's moral for me to destroy you for any reason" is repulsive.

Why? It's backed up by Corinthians. "You are not your own, you were bought for a price."

God has sovereignty over man.

By this same logic, parents could kill their children for any reason they so wished.

So you are against abortion, Boris?

God wasn't withdrawing his blessing of life from those who defied him, he was withdrawing it from children who hadn't done anything wrong

He was withdrawing their blessing of children.

That would seem to be you admitting that the atrocities committed by the Israelites against their neighbors as described in the Old Testament were therefore moral wrongs, yes? All that slaughtering of entire tribes, dashing babies against rocks, etc?

I'll discuss this when you bring up specifics. I'm not going to read your mind and do your homework for you.

Why do you care if God is just or unjust? He's just a fable made up by goatherding Israelites so that they can take comfort that they were the chosen people.

[Boris Godunov]

He thought they were clearly, something beyond him and sent from God. Sigh, I don't really want to get into the hebrew here, but I might have to.

I'm not going to take your word for it, so you'll have to do so. I've looked at dozens of translations and have found nothing indicating that lords means anything other than what it says or that Lot knew they were indeed angels.

Which is after they tried to break Lot's door down.

They clearly say they were sent to destroy it, meaning they had their orders to destroy it before they came. Logically speaking, God would have known in advance what was going to happen and that the city would be destroyed. He's supposed to be omnipotent, remember?

Why do you care? There is no God Boris.

Ah, total cop-out, what a shock.

I thought Christians were supposed to engage with non-believers and try and convince them of the "truth?" In that case, you're once again being a ****ty Christian.

[Boris Godunov]

Ben, quoting the Bible to justify an atrocity in the Bible isn't remotely convincing.

If you accept the premise that God has every right to kill innocent people on whatever whim he chooses, then you can't possibly object to Robertson's statements.

So you are against abortion, Boris?

No, but we're talking children, not fetuses or embryos or blastocysts or what have you. We will not agree on those all being the same thing, so you'll get nowhere here. But YOU clearly do believe they're all children, so you've not got any grounds to criticize abortion now.

He was withdrawing their blessing of children.

Aaaaaaand that circles right back around to the argument that it's immoral to punish wicked people by killing the innocent. Already mentioned... you really can't keep track of arguments, can you?

I'll discuss this when you bring up specifics. I'm not going to read your mind and do your homework for you.

You know exactly what I'm talking about, don't play dumb. It is, however, a tangent, and I'm not going to get into yet another sidetrack. I'm already satisfied that you've got no grounds to complain about what Robertson said, as his suggesting that a disaster might be divine punishment is in no way in conflict with anything brought forth here. We've been reduced to picking nits now.

I don't care if the Hebrew God myth is just or unjust in and of itself, no. But when I see religious fanatics claiming that their god can kill whoever he wants whenever he wants, and that by his command it's righteous to slaughter "infidels" and even innocent children, I do begin to get concerned that said religious nuts are but mere steps away from becoming Scott Roeders, Deanna Laneys or Eric Rudolphs. It's clear they would be all too willing to murder people if they believed God wanted them to do so.

[Ben Kenobi]

I thought Christians were supposed to engage with non-believers and try and convince them of the "truth?" In that case, you're once again being a ****ty Christian.

Why should I bother? You aren't sincere. You're firmly ensconced in your bastion of pretend atheism which is why you are striking out against the bible because you hate it.

I'm more then willing to discuss it all the way through with you, if and only if, you promise to convert if convinced. Deal?

Ben, quoting the Bible to justify an atrocity in the Bible isn't remotely convincing.

Why then are we discussing a book that you believe is completely falsified?

If you accept the premise that God has every right to kill innocent people on whatever whim he chooses, then you can't possibly object to Robertson's statements.

I object to Robertson's statement that it was truly God who judged Haiti. What evidence does he have for this? Yes, God could have judged them, but did he? I don't know. I'm not going off and blaming God for everything bad in the world like atheists do.

No, but we're talking children, not fetuses or embryos or blastocysts or what have you.

So it's ok for people to kill other people then, so long as they are less developed? Interesting theology, Boris. Why is it not ok to kill fully grown people, but it is ok to kill less developed people?

We will not agree on those all being the same thing, so you'll get nowhere here. But YOU clearly do believe they're all children, so you've not got any grounds to criticize abortion now.

Except that I believe children are a gift from God and not property from their parents. Ergo, it's wrong for their parents to kill them, because they are not the property of their parents.

Aaaaaaand that circles right back around to the argument that it's immoral to punish wicked people by killing the innocent. Already mentioned... you really can't keep track of arguments, can you?

Why is it wrong Boris? There is no God, remember. God didn't kill them. It's just a fable.

You know exactly what I'm talking about, don't play dumb.

Look, if you are convinced that scripture is right about these things, why are you accepting Scripture as true here and false elsewhere?

I don't care if the Hebrew God myth is just or unjust in and of itself, no.

Clearly you do. You've over and over sought to claim that God is evil.

But when I see religious fanatics claiming that their god can kill whoever he wants whenever he wants, and that by his command it's righteous to slaughter "infidels" and even innocent children, I do begin to get concerned that said religious nuts are but mere steps away from becoming Scott Roeders, Deanna Laneys or Eric Rudolphs. It's clear they would be all too willing to murder people if they believed God wanted them to do so.

Again, did you miss the part where I said that God is sovereign not man? I have no right to kill God's creation.

I'm not sure you are an atheist Boris. You are your garden-variety ex-christian.

[DaShi]

Pretend atheism?

A: I don't believe in God!

B: Yes, you do!