Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You haven't provided any information to show that he was tormented. Isaac even states the following:
Gen 22:7 And Isaac spake unto Abraham his father, and said, My father: and he said, Here am I, my son. And he said, Behold the fire and the wood: but where is the lamb for a burnt offering?
Doesn't appear the son is tortured at all. And then later when he is obviously being bound there is no record of him attempting to escape or fight with his father. No evidence at all. Consider that the son is a grown man by most analysts at this point. Some believe him to be the very age at which Jesus was when he was sacrificed.
I think what you posted is the exact opposite of what you are saying. Sounds like Isaac was assuming it was supposed to be a lamb. So now what? How do you think he felt when he found out he was to be the offering?
It's not moral. God has never said those things are moral.
No. But you said that God is the source of morality. Would not the source be moral as well? If yes, since God did these things, he must consider these actions as moral and is therefore not a reasonable guide to morality or morality is not absolute since it has changed since these events.
Genesis 6. God saw that the world was evil and decided to execute all living creatures, save a few that he picked.
Yes, those evil babies and fetuses. They don't deserve to live.
He created the world--he can decide to do with it what he wants.
So, morality and justice are not really attributes of your God I see. Just remember this in future posts when claiming your god is loving and just.
Romans 9:20-21
"On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, “Why did you make me like this,” will it?
21 Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use? "
God never endorsed slavery. God recognized that people would do it anyway, though...so he required them to treat them better than the nations around them.
So, morality IS relative. We get it now.
If the alternative is to kill them in war (as was common at the time, this is actually pretty good treatment).
I can't believe that many of your Christian cohorts will agree with you here. But, I could be wrong. Regardless, you've demonstrated that even your god's morals are relative and cannot be the source for any absolute morality.
If you believe that Isaac was not tortured by thinking he was going to be killed by his own father, bound and suurounded by wood to be burnt, I really do wonder what Christians are all about.
I guess you've never heard of or understood Occam's razor.
There is nothing to suggest that he thought he was going to be killed by his own father. I have to stick to the facts. If you provide facts otherwise, then I'll change and conform to those. But so far your charges are a figment of your imagination.
I think what you posted is the exact opposite of what you are saying. Sounds like Isaac was assuming it was supposed to be a lamb. So now what? How do you think he felt when he found out he was to be the offering?
Again, what facts do you have to show that he was tortured? None. That is the point here. Bring up facts and well debate accordintgly. So far nothing but a fallacy has been put forward.
Again, what facts do you have to show that he was tortured? None. That is the point here. Bring up facts and well debate accordintgly. So far nothing but a fallacy has been put forward.
So what do you think he was thinking as he was being bound?
If you believe that Isaac was not tortured by thinking he was going to be killed by his own father, bound and suurounded by wood to be burnt, I really do wonder what Christians are all about.
I guess you've never heard of or understood Occam's razor.
Honestly, you have no idea what you are talking about.
You speak of speculation and human behavior. Mr. Occam theorized that the simplest explanation might be the correct choice. Which would be: the facts presented in the narrative.
The narrative has no indication that Issac was scared. You speculate that he was. Evidence? You have none beyond the narrative.
Please don't toss out terms and assume people will be in awe of your "superior" grasp of things.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cupper3
Occam's razor is being studiously avoided.
Typical.
Maybe cuz it doesn't apply in this discussion???
Read up.
While you're at it might as well toss in Pascal's wager and the "No true Scotsman" argument.
You keep saying that, but I don't think you are. You are ignoring all the data that would logically lead you to believe he knew he was about to be killed and how that would make him feel.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
