Some Christians' Flexible Morality

Originally posted by divegeester
Do you think it is morally acceptable to burn people alive for what they do or don't believe?

No, I do not. But if I did, I wouldn't describe my morality as 'flexible'.

Originally posted by twhitehead
No, I do not. But if I did, I wouldn't describe my morality as 'flexible'.

If you considered one person doing as morally acceptable and another person doing it as morally unacceptable, would the word flexible work then? I'm happy for you to come up with better word as I'm not happy with flexible myself. However the juxtaposition of the acceptability in one instance and unacceptability in another remains, whatever adjective is used to describe it.

Originally posted by Rajk999
Whodey gave a couple examples.

I didn't ask for examples. I asked what your meaning was.

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
Let us look at those 2 quotes side by side, and then tell me we are discussing the same God:

'The Lord our God is merciful and forgiving, even though we have rebelled against him.'

'A jealous and avenging God is the LORD; The LORD is avenging and wrathful. The LORD takes vengeance on His adversaries, And He reserves wrath for His enemies. The L ...[text shortened]... slow to anger and great in power, And the LORD will by no means leave the guilty unpunished...'

You don't believe in the God of the Holy Bible, so I doubt anything I could say would make any difference to the way you think. However, I see that God has a moral right to destroy His creation, if He is not happy with it for any reason, because He made it.

If I did not believe God had the moral right to bring a worldwide flood to destroy all those that were thinking evil contiually, while saving only eight humans alive, then I could not be a Christian.

So I can't see anyone that claims he is a Christian faulting Jesus, the creator, as being immoral for punishing those that do not please Him by casting them into the eternal fire.

HalleluYaHshua Praise the LORD

Originally posted by whodey
Lock them away for eternity? Ok.

Of course, you ask an important question. Will the madness end?

This brings us to Adam. We were told that his sin brought sin into the world, that later transformed itself into the murderous people that God sought to destroy with the Great Flood and those we see today that I have pointed out.

So is it enough to jus ...[text shortened]... e of certain sins or should we instead focus on sin itself that eventually breeds this behavior?

Is Adam burning in Hell as we speak?

What about that "Yoko Ono woman" he was with?

Originally posted by RJHinds
So I can't see anyone that claims he is a Christian faulting Jesus, the creator, as being immoral for punishing those that do not please Him by casting them into the eternal fire.

No one is faulting Jesus; what is being challenged is your (and others) willingness to firmly hold to a particular interpretation of some rather strange scriptures despite the overwhelming evidence and common sense that that interpretation is completely wrong, morally abhorrent and logically incoherent even from a theist perspective. You having to admit that there are circumstances where it is morally acceptable to burn someone alive because of what they do or don't believe, is an example of the bleak, dark mindset you have adopted in order to maintain this perspective of your version of God.

Originally posted by divegeester
If you considered one person doing as morally acceptable and another person doing it as morally unacceptable, would the word flexible work then?

No. 'Flexible' implies that my morality changes depending on circumstances. But if my morality has certain specifications for when it is or is not acceptable, then my morality isn't changing, and 'flexible' is an inappropriate term to use to describe it.

However the juxtaposition of the acceptability in one instance and unacceptability in another remains, whatever adjective is used to describe it.
Try 'conditional'. Suppose for example someone says that 'a person who believes in committing genocide deserves to burn in hell, but a person who believes in world peace does not.' Their moral rules are conditional but not flexible.

Originally posted by twhitehead
No. 'Flexible' implies that my morality changes depending on circumstances. But if my morality has certain specifications for when it is or is not acceptable, then my morality isn't changing, and 'flexible' is an inappropriate term to use to describe it.

[b]However the juxtaposition of the acceptability in one instance and unacceptability in another re ...[text shortened]... erson who believes in world peace does not.' Their moral rules are conditional but not flexible.

I see what you are saying but my premise is:

Person A finds atrocity B morally unacceptable if committed by Person C, however if atrocity B is committed by deity D, then person A finds it morally acceptable. There are no conditions as such, merely a flexing of Person A's moral values.

Agree?

Originally posted by Great King Rat
... said the Muslim, before beheading some children. "Who am I to question God?"

Only if God is doing the beheading Sherlock.

God put us here and he will escort us out as he sees fit.

Originally posted by divegeester
I see what you are saying but my premise is:

Person A finds atrocity B morally unacceptable if committed by Person C, however if atrocity B is committed by deity D, then person A finds it morally acceptable. There are no conditions as such, merely a flexing of Person A's moral values.

Agree?

The problem here is that deity D is entirely different from persons A to C and arguably can’t be judged the same way.

For instance, you wouldn’t think of keeping a human being in a cage in your living room, but you may very well do so with a guinea pig.

Likewise, you wouldn’t think of killing a person when he’s being annoying (RJHinds comes to mind), yet you probably have an electrical fly swapper at home with which you roasty-toasty flies every now and then.

Originally posted by whodey
Only if God is doing the beheading Sherlock.

God put us here and he will escort us out as he sees fit.

You're against the death penalty?

Originally posted by whodey
Only if God is doing the beheading Sherlock.

God put us here and he will escort us out as he sees fit.

So if God actually appeared in front of you and told you to kill me, you would decline?

Did you participate in Rank Outsider's hypothetical recently?

Originally posted by Great King Rat
So if God actually appeared in front of you and told you to kill me, you would decline?

Did you participate in Rank Outsider's hypothetical recently?

It depends. I suppose I would be tempted with that smart mouth of yours.

😛

Originally posted by Great King Rat
So if God actually appeared in front of you and told you to kill me, you would decline?

Did you participate in Rank Outsider's hypothetical recently?

I have a better question.

If you could press a button that would destroy religion and all those who practice it would you push the button?

Originally posted by Great King Rat
You're against the death penalty?

Actually no.

I'm reminded of that scene in Shindler's list as Russian soldiers entered a concentration camp. After they peered into the ovens of death they just started grabbing Germans and hanging them on the spot.

What really else is there to do? What questions need asking?