Is killing for God justifiable?
-
x2Originally posted by sgdiehard:listen to find if anybody got any sensible, logical things to say. -
Is that a common consensus among Christians? To not question?Originally posted by ObiterDicta:I don't think saying that we do not understand is a crappy answer. From a Christian perspective, it is a perfectly legitimate answer, for it acknowledges the fact that as creatures, we are limited in our understanding of God. We think that there exists in this life things which have no answers that we are capable of discovering or apprehending.
So in a sense, you are correct in that such responses do not provide the answer to the question. But to believers, that's an acceptable position, since it reflects the reality that God is the one who has the right to question, not us (see Job chapters 38 to 42).
In the philosophical context, you should not stop at those question. In fact, you should consider further why God bother to create at all, and why he bother to create sentient beings who screwed up his plan big time.
regards,
obiterdicta
Just a personal question. You seem pretty well-spoken and intelligent, don't you find it hard sometimes to just accept and not challenge the present doctrine? -
Nobody can see the wind, but everyone can see its effects if they look hard enough. In the christian bible there are numerous evidences that God works for the good of those that are faithful to him.Originally posted by kaister:Is that a common consensus among Christians? To not question?
Just a personal question. You seem pretty well-spoken and intelligent, don't you find it hard sometimes to just accept and not challenge the present doctrine?
i.e OT God rewarding the Jews when they worship him
NT Jesus curing the Jews that believe in him of sickness etc... -
I think you misunderstand. I was talking about contradictions in the scriptures/doctrines which ObitaDicta brought up.Originally posted by Skibi:Nobody can see the wind, but everyone can see its effects if they look hard enough. In the christian bible there are numerous evidences that God works for the good of those that are faithful to him.
i.e OT God rewarding the Jews when they worship him
NT Jesus curing the Jews that believe in him of sickness etc... -
Is that a common consensus among Christians? To not question?
I find it hard to understand myself... They r left so many questions and doubts yet they r so certain tat it must be right because it must be right. They never really question if the doctrine they r following r right in the first place. For me, I rather believe one less thing than believe in something tat may be wrong because tat can costs me very severe problems in future
Just a personal question. You seem pretty well-spoken and intelligent, don't you find it hard sometimes to just accept and not challenge the present doctrine?Nobody can see the wind, but everyone can see its effects if they look hard enough. In the christian bible there are numerous evidences that God works for the good of those that are faithful to him.
Provided the bible is true in the first place. In quran they reward muslim while punish the others too. -
Actually that is not a correct way to put it.Originally posted by ObiterDicta:So in a sense, you are correct in that such responses do not provide the answer to the question. But to believers, that's an acceptable position, since it reflects the reality that God is the one who has the right to question, not us (see Job chapters 38 to 42).
I quote another account as a counter-challenge:22 The men turned away and went toward Sodom, but Abraham remained standing before the LORD. [e] 23 Then Abraham approached him and said: "Will you sweep away the righteous with the wicked? 24 What if there are fifty righteous people in the city? Will you really sweep it away and not spare [f] the place for the sake of the fifty righteous people in it? 25 Far be it from you to do such a thing—to kill the righteous with the wicked, treating the righteous and the wicked alike. Far be it from you! Will not the Judge [g] of all the earth do right?"
So Abraham did question. This is very surprising because if you remember, all along this Abraham behaved like a goody goody boy - He said yes when God called him, He said ok when Isaac was going to be sacrificed, total submission, no questions at all.
And even more surprising .. Abraham challenged God and won! He bargained until the tolerance becomes 10 righteous people. (we know what happened later, but this doesn't deny the fact that Abraham won the argument)
So there is actually a biblical precedent of someone challenging God and won. In the Jewish tradition, there is even an account of rabbis openly declare their "insubordination" - God's voice boomed down from heaven and the rabbis replied "so what?"
-
No, it is not a common consensus. There are things that we would want to know or understand about the bible as well or about our faith. There are questions we ask others or ask God as well.Originally posted by kaister:Is that a common consensus among Christians? To not question?
Just a personal question. You seem pretty well-spoken and intelligent, don't you find it hard sometimes to just accept and not challenge the present doctrine?
I hope you do not fall under the assumption that all Christians are mindless/brainwashed/stupid people who are easily influenced into believing everything that is told to them.
You don't just challege everything that comes your way, only what seems questionable. Also, different people would react differently and question different things. One person may object to one thing whereas another person would disagree with something else.
A person who does not object to the same thing as you doesn't mean he's dumber than you or more brainwashed than you.
There is a church I know that attracts its young followers based on its hip factor and hype to be IN that church. Sometimes the members get so caught up with all the hype and happening then they lose the purpose of going church in the first place. These people see no point to the activities in that church so they switch to a church where they can grow more spiritually and not get caught up in meaningless stuff.
Don't know if I make sense, but my point is not to come to the wrong generalistion about all Christians. -
lol .. I think we all know the church you referring to.Originally posted by SumOne:There is a church I know that attracts its young followers based on its hip factor and hype to be IN that church. Sometimes the members get so caught up with all the hype and happening then they lose the purpose of going church in the first place. These people see no point to the activities in that church so they switch to a church where they can grow more spiritually and not get caught up in meaningless stuff.
Don't know if I make sense, but my point is not to come to the wrong generalistion about all Christians.
One thing that irks me is when people from that church try to invite me to their "service". But I feel that their focus is wrong because they advertise the wrong thing, mostly entertainment and the most theological sounding phrase in their advert is 'the speaker is anointed'.
While I'm not a Christian, I believe I know enough to tell the real one from those bullsheet ones.
Yes, your post makes sense. -
I agree with you, the group against abortion is just so wrong.Originally posted by kaister:Yes it's the christian terrorist group mainly against abortion.
All these killings, jihads, crusades are too much... it's just wrong.
It reminds me of a quote by Steven Weinberg, a US physicist who won Nobel prize in 1979:
"Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion."
Seriously, what defines morally correct action nowadays? Why would anyone who kills be rewarded with eternity in heaven or even eternity with 99 virgins (ya I know this is ridiculous but that's how islamic terrorist groups recruit their youths)?
But to just simply blame religion for everything, that is wrong too. I don't assume my muslim neighbours are going to bomb the esplanade. Neither do I assume my Christian American friends will start bombing abortion clinics.
There are fanatics, and there are the moderates.
Not every American is a Beer guzzling, football loving couch potato. -
Yes, you're right about not over generalising everyone. My previous question kinda served as a bait. I needed people to come in and tell me and others that not all Christians accept things the way they are and they DO question.Originally posted by SumOne:No, it is not a common consensus. There are things that we would want to know or understand about the bible as well or about our faith. There are questions we ask others or ask God as well.
I hope you do not fall under the assumption that all Christians are mindless/brainwashed/stupid people who are easily influenced into believing everything that is told to them.
You don't just challege everything that comes your way, only what seems questionable. Also, different people would react differently and question different things. One person may object to one thing whereas another person would disagree with something else.
A person who does not object to the same thing as you doesn't mean he's dumber than you or more brainwashed than you.
There is a church I know that attracts its young followers based on its hip factor and hype to be IN that church. Sometimes the members get so caught up with all the hype and happening then they lose the purpose of going church in the first place. These people see no point to the activities in that church so they switch to a church where they can grow more spiritually and not get caught up in meaningless stuff.
Don't know if I make sense, but my point is not to come to the wrong generalistion about all Christians.
You've done more than enough to prove that not all christians accept their faith blindly. -
I've no good impression about that church too. Unforunately it's attractive nature has drawn many and it has grown quite strong financially too.Originally posted by Icemoon:lol .. I think we all know the church you referring to.
One thing that irks me is when people from that church try to invite me to their "service". But I feel that their focus is wrong because they advertise the wrong thing, mostly entertainment and the most theological sounding phrase in their advert is 'the speaker is anointed'. While I'm not a Christian, I believe I know enough to tell the real one from those bullsheet ones.
Yes, your post makes sense. -
Haha.. I never blame religion for everything. The quote simply suggests that presence of religion complicates the nature of men.Originally posted by SumOne:I agree with you, the group against abortion is just so wrong.
But to just simply blame religion for everything, that is wrong too. I don't assume my muslim neighbours are going to bomb the esplanade. Neither do I assume my Christian American friends will start bombing abortion clinics.
There are fanatics, and there are the moderates.
Not every American is a Beer guzzling, football loving couch potato.
In fact at this point in time, I've to ask you if you've got any moral guidelines set deep inside you not influenced by religion? There're verses in the bible that are not to be taken literally and many Christians dismiss them as outdated practices (eg, stoning your children).
What is the basis upon which people cherry-pick what they want and what they reject? It is the inner moral guidelines that exist within all of us. Religion only exist to reinforce such beliefs within us. -
There is a limit lah. Personally I don't believe Christianity can withstand those questions .. and you know why.Originally posted by kaister:Yes, you're right about not over generalising everyone. My previous question kinda served as a bait. I needed people to come in and tell me and others that not all Christians accept things the way they are and they DO question.
You've done more than enough to prove that not all christians accept their faith blindly.
Edit: if you're interested go borrow the book "Why Christianity must change or die" by Bishop Shelby Spong. -
Yes it is justifiable...if judge can sentence ppl to die, God has even more right to do so since he can see people's hearts whether they deserve to die or not.
-
It's not about whether God has the right to kill or not. It's about whether a religious person has the right to kill. Who gave him that right? Just because he might be doing for the right cause doesn't mean he's right.Originally posted by Skibi:Yes it is justifiable...if judge can sentence ppl to die, God has even more right to do so since he can see people's hearts whether they deserve to die or not.
Killing for God is not justifiable.
"Thy shalt not kill"? Heard of that? -
Then share with us why God tell abraham to kill his son isaac? And why Judge have to sentence muderer to death?Originally posted by kaister:It's not about whether God has the right to kill or not. It's about whether a religious person has the right to kill. Who gave him that right? Just because he might be doing for the right cause doesn't mean he's right.
Killing for God is not justifiable.
"Thy shalt not kill"? Heard of that? -
What a rubbish example.Originally posted by Skibi:Then share with us why God tell abraham to kill his son isaac? And why Judge have to sentence muderer to death?
The point in the Binding of Isaac is not about God ordering Abraham to kill his innocent son .. instead it is about Faith and the foreshadowing of Jesus Christ.
Abraham knew that the same God who gave him a son through a miracle wouldn't take back his life .. and didn't God promise Abraham his descedants will be as many as the stars?
Abraham, on his part, just need to trust God. It is a covenant remember? God made the promise and how God solve the problem of the sacrifice is God's problem.
For it is written (Heb 11):
17 By faith Abraham, when put to the test, offered up Isaac. He who had received the promises was ready to offer up his only son, 18of whom he had been told, ‘It is through Isaac that descendants shall be named after you.’ -
THOU SHALT NOT KILL! How to make this simpler.......?
-
Thou shalt not Murder
OR
Thou shalt not Kill
Which is intended one in Ten Commandments? -
For the first question, see Icemoon's reply.Originally posted by Skibi:Then share with us why God tell abraham to kill his son isaac? And why Judge have to sentence muderer to death?
For the second, I've never made any statement regarding approval of capital punishment. It is still wrong no matter how you look at it. -
I dunno. Some said thou shalt not murder should be the intended commandment. My knowledge in this is very limited. Maybe someone can shed some light?Originally posted by M©+square:Thou shalt not Murder
OR
Thou shalt not Kill
Which is intended one in Ten Commandments? -
I checked two Jewish sources .. they also say it is murder.Originally posted by kaister:I dunno. Some said thou shalt not murder should be the intended commandment. My knowledge in this is very limited. Maybe someone can shed some light? -
confirm boh?Originally posted by Icemoon:I checked two Jewish sources .. they also say it is murder.
I don't want to accuse people of quoting the Ten Commandments wrongly leh.
Arh neh -
Different versions say different things leh...Originally posted by M©+square:confirm boh?
I don't want to accuse people of quoting the Ten Commandments wrongly leh.
Arh neh -
I know, which is why i asked which is the Intended word for the commandment.Originally posted by kaister:Different versions say different things leh...