This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
Questions for a Catholic
Return to board index
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
Since God made an unreasonable law that means that God is not governed by pure reason which violates that thought that he is omniscient. That is my point, stop playing dumb and prove how these laws are not unreasonable.
I don't respond to
ad hominem
s in this thread.
It is actually "Thou shall not MURDER", another little tweak that has occurred along with the term "Hell" that can be found in the Bible.
תִּֿרְצָֽח׃
is Hebrew for murder; I'm not sure what else you want from me.
Post by
184848
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
165617
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
The same way I'd explain that in America soldiers kill despite the fact that there are laws against killing.
So explain it. Why is it moral to kill someone in the battlefield? If morality is objective, then the fact two men meet at war should have no effect on the morality of their actions (killing one another).
By saying that their situation was different, you're being morally subjective. Meaning the morality of this action is justified by your thinking that it was the moral thing to do in this situation.
Is war moral, then?
Answers.
Exodus doesn't say anything about putting to death. (If they were being put to death there wouldn't be and 3rd and 4th generations).
Really? It says so pretty explicitly where I'm reading it.
He said he'll visit their fathers' iniquity upon them. No mention of death.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
Since God made an unreasonable law that means that God is not governed by pure reason which violates that thought that he is omniscient. That is my point, stop playing dumb and prove how these laws are not unreasonable.
I don't respond to
ad hominem
s in this thread.
Actually, its a perfectly sound argument.
I was referring to his last sentence. You'll noticed I replied to the passage you were clarifying.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
About the murder vs kill issue- Ivokk said that since that is incorrect, how do we know there are not more issues with the Bible.
I still don't see what you're getting at. I quoted the Hebrew for you.
Post by
184848
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
I don't respond to
ad hominem
s in this thread.
This thread is about your beliefs, so we're arguing against you using your beliefs. No fallacy in his argument as far as I can see. Care to explain it or will you keep demanding explanations from us with you providing none?
stop playing dumb
Now leave this issue.
Post by
165617
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
Why should I drop my argument, you never gave me a rational answer and now when I back you into a corner you say, drop it. I would like a answer.
I've answered all your "unreasonable" laws. Without a premise, you can't get to your conclusion.
Post by
184848
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
165617
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
184848
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
Answers.
I'd love to find a day you get by thinking on your own rather than repeating what other people have written.
I have. I spent 4 years studying Aquinas and his arguments, and I I can vouch that the article I linked is philosophically sound.
It's not my fault I was born several thousand years into human intellectual thought.
He said he'll visit their fathers' iniquity upon them. No mention of death.
Really?
We may be looking at different versions, but in any case it is still saying to pass the punishment down to the children.
I can't get you link to work, but
this
is better anyways. No version mentions death from what I can see, and neither does the Hebrew.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
My premise is that if God created unreasonable laws, he too is unreasonable.
You need two premises for an argument. Your second is that "He did create unreasonable laws."
As I said, you haven't demonstrated that yet.
Post by
184848
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
I can't get you link to work, but
this
is better anyways. No version mentions death from what I can see, and neither does the Hebrew.
The argument had nothing to do with death; it had to do with punishing the children for their father's actions.
Anyhoo, goodnight for reals now.
Exodus 20:5 --- You shall not bow down to them or worship them;
for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me
,
Deuteronomy 24:16 --- The fathers shall not be put to death for the children,
neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers
: every man shall be put to death for his own sin.
Did you not remember your own argument?
Post by
165617
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
No matter what I say here you are going to ignoring it and say that I need to elaborate even more and add to my original post. I would like you to show me how these laws in particular are reasonable and not all of God's laws ie, you must address how cursing your parents deserves the death penalty,
not that because it is from God
etc etc.
Because it's from God.
You call down hellfire on someone, God is in his right to do it to you.
Post by
165617
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post Reply
This topic is locked. You cannot post a reply.