Stronger without a God

@ghost-of-a-duke said
God has you seek justifiable causes for the unjustifiable.

They were wicked people. They were debauched. God was justified in annihilating them,....and their animals.

You assume unjustifiable, and if it is?

@ghost-of-a-duke said
God has you seek justifiable causes for the unjustifiable.

They were wicked people. They were debauched. God was justified in annihilating them,....and their animals.

After the Great Flood, God reduced the life span.

Before the flood men lived up to around 1000 years, but after only 120.

And considering the wickedness that mounted up with those long life spans I think it was a good idea.

After all, can you imagine someone like Hitler living a thousand years? He only lived 50 and he had the whole world at war.

But by all means, go back to the narrative of what a monster God is by limiting the life span of people like that.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
You've just demonstrated my point sonship (albeit unwittingly).

A well adjusted moral chap will abhor genocide wherever they find it. Introduce religion and he will suddenly ask questions like, "Why was it not good for God to terminate these civilizations?"

A point that is being missed here is the resurrection. This is a promise made by Jehovah.
So when you think of the children that lost their life's in those horrible civilizations by the hand of God, and ones that you have no idea what their world could have been like as you were not there. We've seen on the earth today children living in such hell holes with parents who farm them out for prostitution and where suicide is a common daily thing and one that many would prefer over the nightmare they live in.
Do you not understand what God has seen since the beginning of man? Then when you throw in the sick and perverted world of the demons and with
their influence over humans for thousands of years, maybe you should start to think of those kids. Yes death is not what we would want for anyone but my gosh think of the wickedness that millions of children have had to live with for thousands of years.
So even if you don't believe it, they will be resurrected to a perfect planet in the future.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
You realize that statement validates my point right?

No it doesn't it.

@kellyjay said
The context

There is no context where genocide is a cool thing.

@kellyjay said
No it doesn't it.

Sonship pointed out that Jesus didn't condemn the Father for any wrongdoing in the Old Testament. This absolutely validates my point that the NT doesn't negate the horrors of the OT. The God of the NT, for example, is the very same God who sent bears to rip a group of unruly youths apart for daring to mock the baldness of one of His prophets.

@Ghost-of-a-Duke

Sonship pointed out that Jesus didn't condemn the Father for any wrongdoing in the Old Testament. This absolutely validates my point that the NT doesn't negate the horrors of the OT. The God of the NT, for example, is the very same God who sent bears to rip a group of unruly youths apart for daring to mock the baldness of one of His prophets.

I do not imagine too easily that they were little boys.
Roving gangs of delinquents can be dangerous.

1. First of all, they weren't "little kids"!

"'Little children' is an unfortunate translation. The Hebrew expression neurim qetannim is best rendered 'young lads' or 'young men.' From numerous examples where ages are specified in the Old Testament, we know that these were boys from twelve to thirty years old. One of these words described Isaac at his sacrifice in Genesis 22:12, when he was easily in his early twenties. It described Joseph in Genesis 37:2 when he was seventeen years old. In fact, the same word described army men in 1 Kings 20:14-15...these are young men ages between twelve and thirty." [HSOBX]

christianthinktank.com

Another popular imagination is that Elisha was an OLD bald headed man then.

2. Elisha wasn't "old"--he was the same age as they were!
"But was Elisha an old man short on patience and a sense of humor? This charge is also distorted, for Elisha can hardly have been more than twenty-five when this incident happened. He lived nearly sixty years after this..." [HSOBX]

It was wicked of this roving gang to showed disregard for a mercy filled ministry of Elisha.

3. Elisha had JUST FINISHED doing a mercy-miracle for the entire city of nearby Jericho!!!!
"The chapter closes with two miracles of Elisha. These immediately established the character of his ministry--his would be a helping ministry to those in need, but one that would brook no disrespect for God and his earthly representatives. In the case of Jericho, though the city had been rebuilt (with difficulty) in the days of Ahab (1 Kings 16:34, q.v.), it had remained unproductive. Apparently the water still lay under Joshua's curse (cf. Josh 6:26), so that both citizenry and land suffered greatly (v. 19). Elisha's miracle fully removed the age-old judgment, thus allowing a new era to dawn on this area (vv. 20-22). Interestingly Elisha wrought the cure through means supplied by the people of Jericho so that their faith might be strengthened through submission and active participation in God's cleansing work. (EBCOT)

Roving gangs of delinquents disregarding the critical presence of a prophet of God could be a hazard to the nation. That God made an example of them one time, is not unrighteous of Him.

There may have been elements of public safety involved:
"A careful study of this incident in context shows that it was far more serious than a "mild personal offense." It was a situation of serious public danger, quite as grave as the large youth gangs that roam the ghetto sections of our modern American cities. If these young hoodlums were ranging about in packs of fifty or more, derisive towards respectable adults and ready to mock even a well-known man of God, there is no telling what violence they might have inflicted on the citizenry of the religious center of the kingdom of Israel (as Bethel was), had they been allowed to continue their riotous course. " [EBD]

The event took place in around cult city whose apostasy threatened the theocratic nation.

This event took place around a cult city (somewhere between Bethel and Jericho, a distance of aproximately 10 miles), a center of anti-YHWH worship:
"Elisha's sweet memories of Jericho received a souring touch at Bethel (v. 23). The public insult against Elisha was aimed ultimately at the God whom he represented. Indeed Elisha's whole prophetic ministry was in jeopardy; therefore the taunt had to be dealt with decisively. The sudden arrival of the two bears who mauled forty-two youths to death would serve as both an awful sentence on unbelievers--and thus, too, on Jeroboam's cult city--and a published reminder that blasphemy against the true God and his program would be met with swift and certain consequences (v. 24)." [EBCOT]

Further study found at Christian Think Tank compliments of Glen Miller.
www.christianthinktank.com

Use search engine on word "baldhead".

@ghost-of-a-duke said
There is no context where genocide is a cool thing.

There is no cool thing without a point of reference, there is no good or bad without one either. Any death is bad, but only if death isn't more valuable than life, otherwise it would be like having a taste test contest held by people with no taste buds.

@sonship said
@Ghost-of-a-Duke

[quote] Sonship pointed out that Jesus didn't condemn the Father for any wrongdoing in the Old Testament. This absolutely validates my point that the NT doesn't negate the horrors of the OT. The God of the NT, for example, is the very same God who sent bears to rip a group of unruly youths apart for daring to mock the baldness of one of His prophets. [/quo ...[text shortened]... nk compliments of Glen Miller.
www.christianthinktank.com

Use search engine on word "baldhead".

'Roving gangs of delinquents disregarding the critical presence of a prophet of God could be a hazard to the nation. That God made an example of them one time, is not unrighteous of Him.'


The above is a good demonstration sonship of how a religiously indoctrinated brain will seek to make the sending of bears to rip delinquent youths to pieces as something wholly compatible with a righteous God.

@kellyjay said
There is no cool thing without a point of reference, there is no good or bad without one either. Any death is bad, but only if death isn't more valuable than life, otherwise it would be like having a taste test contest held by people with no taste buds.

Human morality, born of social cooperation and developed through group living, is the point of reference for judging genocide as a bad thing. And it is this human morality (our human morality) that is weakened by ancient concepts of right and wrong frozen for all time in a dusty book.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Sonship pointed out that Jesus didn't condemn the Father for any wrongdoing in the Old Testament. This absolutely validates my point that the NT doesn't negate the horrors of the OT. The God of the NT, for example, is the very same God who sent bears to rip a group of unruly youths apart for daring to mock the baldness of one of His prophets.

It demonstrates that the Father and Jesus are one in harmony, not that Jesus was in disagreement with His Father. Jesus didn't come to earth to be a man on His own; the Father sent Him. When Jesus tells us why the Father sent Him, He refences the serpent being lifted as an example of God's love which is the Old Testament. Moreover, when the early church started sharing about the gospel, it was exclusively all OT. The New Testament was being written as it was being lived out. The Old Testament was the foundation of the New, and we only grasp the truth in the New Testament due to the Old; they are not two Gods in two different Testaments.

God, unlike man, knows the difference between good and evil and has to teach us for our enlightenment and protection. A doctor knows all about the disease, but the patient understanding comes from experiencing it. Our knowledge of good and evil comes by doing both and suffering the consequences of both.

John 3 (ESV)
No one has ascended into heaven except he who descended from heaven, the Son of Man. And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in him may have eternal life.

Numbers 21 (ESV)
And the Lord said to Moses, “Make a fiery serpent and set it on a pole, and everyone who is bitten, when he sees it, shall live.” So Moses made a bronze serpent and set it on a pole. And if a serpent bit anyone, he would look at the bronze serpent and live.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Human morality, born of social cooperation and developed through group living, is the point of reference for judging genocide as a bad thing. And it is this human morality (our human morality) that is weakened by ancient concepts of right and wrong frozen for all time in a dusty book.

Human morality is self-referencing, that changes between humans throughout time. Some humans even now are practicing genocide while it is being done through the cooperation of many.

A standard that is true and absolute would not be so fickle.

@kellyjay said
Human morality is self-referencing, that changes between humans throughout time. Some humans even now are practicing genocide while it is being done through the cooperation of many.

A standard that is true and absolute would not be so fickle.

That's because there are no absolutes when it comes to morality. (Though there does tend to be an alignment on things like 'murder is wrong' etc). As humans, the best we can do is speak for our particular society and moral framework. It is this specific moral framework that enables me, for example, to say that genocide is never justifiable. If I were a Christian and accepted the accounts of the OT, I would be unable to say that. (My stance on genocide would be weakened).

@ghost-of-a-duke said
That's because there are no absolutes when it comes to morality. (Though there does tend to be an alignment on things like 'murder is wrong' etc). As humans, the best we can do is speak for our particular society and moral framework. It is this specific moral framework that enables me, for example, to say that genocide is never justifiable. If I were a Christian and a ...[text shortened]... ed the accounts of the OT, I would be unable to say that. (My stance on genocide would be weakened).

You think your stance on genocide is relative? If so why are you concerned that at some time, some where else others do not agree with you, and it concerns you, that your stance could be weakened?

@kellyjay said
You think your stance on genocide is relative? If so why are you concerned that at some time, some where else others do not agree with you, and it concerns you, that your stance could be weakened?

As I said, 'there does tend to be an alignment on things like 'murder is wrong' etc.' (That includes genocide).