http://www.reddit.com/r/Christianity/comments/18ws61/great_response_to_the_question_what_if_god_told/
lonevoiceofreason
This isnot a response at all. This is avoiding answering the question entirely.
For alone voice of reason, he doesn’t exhibit much reason.
superdillin
Holylong walk for a short cop-out, batman.
Thequestion isn't, "if you thought god were telling you to kill someone,would you do it". It's , "assuming god is absolutely real, and 100%obviously instructing you to kill someone, will you do it."
i)Actually, the question is typically framed in just those terms: “if you thoughtgod were telling you to kill someone, would you do it”?
I didn’tmake that up. I got that from reading atheists.
ii) Butwhat about his alternative: “assuming god is absolutely real, and 100%obviously instructing you to kill someone, will you do it.”
If theatheist is stipulating the actual existence of Yahweh, as well as unmistakableknowledge of his command, then why wouldn’t you do what Yahweh commanded you?
SupposeI answer that hypothetical in the affirmative. How can the atheist object?After all, his hypothetical grants the reality of God commanding me to killsomeone. That’s the set up.
He can’tturn around and say that just goes to show how dangerous religion is. That justgoes to show why we should reject religion.
For hishypothetical assumes the actual existence of God–a God who really did issuethis command. In that event, it’s not religion or religiosity that’s dangerous,but God. A God who really says and does these things.
He can’tvery well say, God exists–therefore, don’t believe in God. He can’tvery well postulate God’s existence for hypothetical purposes, then complainabout the real world consequences if we answer him on the terms of thehypothetical. Either beconsistently hypothetical or be consistently realistic.
joecool42
i) Noit's not a trick question. There are commands to kill all over the oldtestament supposedly commanded by God, why should we not ask what you would do?
a)That’s ambiguous. Is he asking, “What would I do if I were living under the Mosaiccovenant?” If that’s the question, then I should do what Yahweh commands.
b) Is heasking, “What would I do if I were living under the new covenant?” If that’sthe question, then the cultic purity codes which underlie herem don’t apply. Soif I heard a voice telling me to kill someone, I should disregard it.
By thesame token, I’m not Abraham. God hasn’t made me a federal head. And the timefor that is past.
ii) Thepoint for me isn't to call religion dangerous, it's to get people to think ofhow would they know who God is commanding to kill others.
I’vealready thought about that. Next question?
If youdon't believe Muslim extremists, why would all the tribes in the old testamentbelieve the supposed chosen people of God?
Thatposits an analogy without a supporting argument. There are many reasons todisbelieve Islam. For one thing, we’re under the new covenant. There’s nosubsequent covenant after the new covenant. There’s no room for Muhammad.
Not tomention that Muhammad disqualified himself by making the Bible the standard ofcomparison.
Likewise,there’s no positive evidence that Muhammad was a genuine prophet. Noprophecies. No miracles. No nothing.
I couldgo on, but why bother?
iv) Thisisn't just about psychotics. People say God speaks to them in a variety ofmeans, and what if any of those means leads to the command to kill others?Certainly there is a movement of Christians in the armed forced that believeGod is commanding them to fight. They aren't schizo.
Where ishe getting his information?
v)People like Sam Harris already bring up these issues. This way of thinkingleads to less vengeance on those who commit crimes and more understanding and adrive to learn how to practically solve the problems and reduce crime. I thinkit's a good step forward.
In thatcase, why is joecool so hot and bothered by Muslim terrorists? We shouldn’tfight them. We should try to understand them. Apply the Swedish model. If theycommit mass murder, send them to a deluxe rehabilitation center.
vi) I'mtotally lost on what he was saying... no idea what point he was trying to make.
Anotherfreethinker who can’t think.
vii) I'msure Abraham thought he had no reason to think God would command him to killhis son too.
We’re ata very different stage of redemptive history.
You're basically just admitting you willfollow what YOU think God is like as described by the bible over what an actualthing claiming to be God says.
The factthat an “actual thing” claims to be God creates no presumption that it is whatit claims to be.
That just changes the hypothetical towould you follow the commands of God if he proved to you he was God and thebible was incorrect and he actually wants you to kill person x.
Accordingto the revised hypothetical, I wouldn’t have much choice in the situation.Neither would joecool.
It’slike asking, “If Zeus were real, and he ordered you to kill someone, would youdo it?”
Well, ina world where Zeus is real, and Yahweh is not, then you have to adapt if youwish to survive. What would Zeus do to you if you disobeyed him?
BTW, wecan easily create a secular parallel: What if there is no God, and a sadisticdictator forces you to choose between shooting your best friend to save yourwife and kids? If you refuse, he will have all of them shot. As an atheist,what would you do in that situation?
joecool42
For somepeople it has to do with religion. Right now, nobody is forced to serve in themilitary. There are groups that think they are called by God to defend Americanand kill the terrorists. Whether you want to say they are using their religionto justify what they want to do or not is your prerogative, but it looks thesame from my perspective.
Ifterrorists pose a threat to your friends and relatives, why shouldn’t you signup to kill them? Does joecool think lethal force to repel violent aggression isintrinsically evil?
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder