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 still aren't understanding here pneuma. If all you want to do is say, "The story says it was a sacrifice so therefore it was a sacrifice", then what are we talking about? You aren't really interested if there was a sacrifice or not, you are only interested in whether or not the story SAID there was. There is no point in taking it any further if that is all you are wanting to do.
Actually I do understand SB. We can debate the merits of the story, but what cannot be debated is the story itself, it says what it says. And I think therein lies the problem, we are both looking at this from a different perspective. You and Noss and maybe a few others are looking at the story from the merit side and I am looking at the story itself. And that is what I have been trying to get you guys to look at, the story in and of itself.
So let me ask this again, does the story in and of itself portray a sacrifice?
When I asked this earlier everyone started viewing the story based on the merits of the story which is why I have said that they have been basing the story on their opinion of the story. And we can all debate the merits of the story but we cannot debate what the story says in and of itself.
It says what it says.
I have tried my best to leave opinion, religious belief, philosophy and everything else out of the debate and stick to the story in and of itself.
So again for the last time, does the story in and of itself portray a sacrifice?
This being in that book where a lot of it is false, but not the parts you agree with? If all God did was drop us here and say, "See you guys in a few millennia!" Then he is not a god of love, but a god of indifference, as he doesn't really care to know what is going on, or to help in any measurable way.
Ya many see it that way SB, but sometimes in the course of life children have to learn to mature and take responsibility for their own actions and stop letting their parents deal with all the problems they created.
So why not claim God is barbaric? ... if that's where we are going here...
Agree. Anyone who threatens to torture people for eternity after they die is barbaric. Anyone who murders millions of children in a flood is barbaric. Etc.
Actually I do understand SB. We can debate the merits of the story, but what cannot be debated is the story itself, it says what it says. And I think therein lies the problem, we are both looking at this from a different perspective. You and Noss and maybe a few others are looking at the story from the merit side and I am looking at the story itself. And that is what I have been trying to get you guys to look at, the story in and of itself.
So let me ask this again, does the story in and of itself portray a sacrifice?
When I asked this earlier everyone started viewing the story based on the merits of the story which is why I have said that they have been basing the story on their opinion of the story. And we can all debate the merits of the story but we cannot debate what the story says in and of itself.
It says what it says.
I have tried my best to leave opinion, religious belief, philosophy and everything else out of the debate and stick to the story in and of itself.
So again for the last time, does the story in and of itself portray a sacrifice?
Got to run, talk again later.
Again, you are arguing wording. If all you want to do is say, "The story says it was a sacrifice so therefore it was a sacrifice", then we have nothing more to talk about.
Ya many see it that way SB, but sometimes in the course of life children have to learn to mature and take responsibility for their own actions and stop letting their parents deal with all the problems they created.
Which is exactly what atheists and agnostics do. Let me ask you a question. I have a son. If he were to go off to college and start getting in trouble, would a good parent just ignore it and say, "Oh well, he is grown, he can take responsibility for his actions," and offer no help? Would a good parent leave their floundering kid to suffer and make mistake after mistake if all it took was a few words and a little help to straighten them out? I don't think so. This is exactly how you portray your god. A parent who had kids, then said screw it when things got tough.
Agree. Anyone who threatens to torture people for eternity after they die is barbaric. Anyone who murders millions of children in a flood is barbaric. Etc.
God always provides a means of escape. If people choose not to take the means of escape - then whose fault is that?
Or is God barbaric simply because torture is one of the outcomes?
God always provides a means of escape. If people choose not to take the means of escape - then whose fault is that?
Or is God barbaric simply because torture is one of the outcomes?
He is God right? He couldn't figure out better ways to do things? He would rather just say, "Nah bro, you didn't believe in me hard enough in the 59 years you lived, so you get to be tortured for eternity."Not much of a god.
Or is God barbaric simply because torture is one of the outcomes?
Well, an omnipotent God would literally have an infinite number of other options, so... Yes, a God that chooses limitless, eternal torture simply for his own pleasure ( an a limitless God can have no other motivation...) could reasonably be classified as barbaric, if not outright evil.
-NoCapo
Again, you are arguing wording. If all you want to do is say, "The story says it was a sacrifice so therefore it was a sacrifice", then we have nothing more to talk about.
No it set up a parameter to discuss the merits. How can one discuss the merits of sacrifice if one does not accept that the story does indeed talk about a sacrifice. If people cannot agree on the meaning of a word used how can they ever hope to have a real debate of any kind.
Just read through the thread SB and see how many time people have tried to redefine the meaning of sacrifice in order to say the story in and of itself does not show a sacrifice. Ya they maybe like you and say they were speaking of the merits of sacrifice but if that is so why did they try to redefine the meaning of the word itself.
If none of you guys can come to grips with the story in and of itself portraying a sacrifice and the meaning of sacrifice is indeed giving up something to gain something greater then no we have nothing to discuss because we cannot agree on the parameters.
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.
