CARM Christian Needs your Help!

[treeplanter]

Not in the slightest.

As long as you're inexplicably hating on what you think is imaginary

Why the fake sympathy, expressed 7,647 times over last few years, for the alleged "needless harm" caused to babies many centuries ago? You admitted that like all of us, you cried at birth. You concluded, when pressed, that it was because of "needless harm." Why not ditch the tired old drowning...

forums.carm.org

How long before you try and deny that you ever said that you don't care about God's moral character?

 

[treeplanter]

ABSOLUTELY!!

How about ALL PEOPLE, Bob?

When God told Noah that He would be putting an end to all people {minus Noah & co} - did He mean ALL PEOPLE?

 

[treeplanter]

All people? What was Noah? A lemur? A chimpanzee?

Rerun
NWRT

 

[treeplanter]

Was salvation possible for these half breeds? That's up for debate.

Lets say it was...if that be the case then the death of the babies resulted in them going to Paradise. This would be considered as a good thing so to speak...because if they lived and grew up...they would have eventually sinned and lost their place with God.

Yes, let's say that salvation WAS possible for these babies

And yes, being saved from a fallen world and resurrected to a better one most certainly WOULD be considered a good thing

The point, however, is that God consciously and purposefully chose to save and resurrect these babies by a harmful means
God chose to save and resurrect them by means of drowning them

God didn't have to drown babies in order to save and resurrect them
God could have saved and resurrected babies by non-harmful means

God needlessly chose to save and resurrect by harmful means

To consciously and purposefully inflict needless harm is immoral



Can I ask you a question, Crow?

Do you care about God's moral character?

 

[CrowCross]

Yes, let's say that salvation WAS possible for these babies

And yes, being saved from a fallen world and resurrected to a better one most certainly WOULD be considered a good thing

The point, however, is that God consciously and purposefully chose to save and resurrect these babies by a harmful means

What's next?? You gonna condem the Father for having Jesus die a horrible death on a cross?

God chose to save and resurrect them by means of drowning them

God didn't have to drown babies in order to save and resurrect them
God could have saved and resurrected babies by non-harmful means

Would you have preferred God raptured the babies?

God needlessly chose to save and resurrect by harmful means

To consciously and purposefully inflict needless harm is immoral



Can I ask you a question, Crow?

Do you care about God's moral character?

I don't think Gods moral character has even been in question.

I don't have all the answers...and neither do you. What I do know is that there is more to this life than our simple 3 dimensions + time. What I do know is mankind fell and we're currently dealing with the consequences. I also know that creation will be made new.

 

[treeplanter]

What's next?? You gonna condem the Father for having Jesus die a horrible death on a cross?

Yes, of course!

God needlessly decided that He cannot / will not deign to offer forgiveness and salvation unless and until an innocent man be made to suffer an unimaginably horrific death upon the cross

God consciously and purposefully inflicted needless harm and to consciously and purposefully inflict needless harm is immoral

Would you have preferred God raptured the babies?

Yes, of course!

I don't think Gods moral character has even been in question.

I am questioning God's moral character right now

Do you care about God's moral character?

I'm trying to trick you into anything, Crow...
You can believe {as I'm sure you do} that God has never, ever done anything wrong
You can believe {as I'm sure you do} that everything God does is always good and just

I'm just curious if this is something that you value?
Do you care about His moral character?

I don't have all the answers...and neither do you.

Agreed

One thing I do know is that it is immoral to consciously and purposefully inflict harm upon another
Do you agree with me?

 

[stiggy wiggy]

How long before you try and deny that you ever said that you don't care about God's moral character?

Why should I have any concerns whatsoever about the moral character of the perfect Author through Whom all morality is derived?

 

[treeplanter]

Why should I have any concerns whatsoever about the moral character of the perfect Author through Whom all morality is derived?

Like I said to Crow

You can believe {as I'm sure you do} that God has never, ever done anything wrong
You can believe {as I'm sure you do} that everything God does is always good and just

I'm just curious if this is something that you value?

It sounds now like you do care, stiggy... "perfect author through whom all morality is derived" and what not?

I'll ask you again:
Do you care about God's moral character?

 

[stiggy wiggy]

Like I said to Crow

You can believe {as I'm sure you do} that God has never, ever done anything wrong
You can believe {as I'm sure you do} that everything God does is always good and just

Don't need your permission to believe that.

Do you care about God's moral character?

Not in the slightest. Why should I have any concerns whatsoever about the moral character of the perfect Author through Whom all morality is derived?

 

[Eightcrackers]

Not in the slightest. Why should I have any concerns whatsoever about the moral character of the perfect Author through Whom all morality is derived?

By what standard is he perfect?
Yours? Who are you to judge him?

If I were going to base my morality around the character of another entity, I would consider it prudent to make sure said entity's character is a suitable standard, wouldn't you?

 

[treeplanter]

Don't need your permission to believe that.



Not in the slightest. Why should I have any concerns whatsoever about the moral character of the perfect Author through Whom all morality is derived?

I didn't ask you if you had concerns about God's moral character

I asked you if you care about it?
I asked you if you value it?

That you make a point of describing God's moral character as both perfect and the ultimate source of all morality itself suggests that you do care

Care to revise your assertion that you care not in the slightest?

 

[stiggy wiggy]

By what standard is he perfect?
Yours? Who are you to judge him?

I would never judge Him. He judges me.

 

[stiggy wiggy]

I didn't ask you if you had concerns about God's moral character

I asked you if you care about it?

I don't.

I asked you if you value it?

I value Him.

 

[treeplanter]

I value Him.

What, if not His moral character, would make you value Him?

 

[stiggy wiggy]

What, if not His moral character, would make you value Him?

His love.

 

[Eightcrackers]

I would never judge Him. He judges me.

Calling him "good" is no less a judgement than calling him "bad".

 

[stiggy wiggy]

Calling him "good" is no less a judgement than calling him "bad".

Wrong. Judges determine guilty (bad) or not guilty (neutral); never innocent (good). God never declares me good.

 

[Eightcrackers]

Wrong. Judges determine guilty (bad) or not guilty (neutral); not innocent (good).

That's a criminal judgement, not a moral one.
"My god is good" is no less a moral judgement than is "your god is evil."

 

[treeplanter]

His love.

So you value anyone and everyone who loves you - regardless of their moral character?
Or just God?

 

[stiggy wiggy]

So you value anyone and everyone who loves you

Yes. As well as those who don't.

- regardless of their moral character?

That's their business, not mine. Unless they are my kids.