Why did God kill children?

by brotherdan 185 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  PSacramento

  Psac, have you ever noticed the parallel between the WT Society and the Bible? Both focus on controlling the masses. Both are very good at what they do. Neither should be questioned, lest you fall victim to pride. How that stifles logic and reason, eh?

  The bible is a book, it doesn't do ANYTHING, it just lays there and collects dust.

  A book can no more control a person as any other inanaimate object.

  I'm sorry you didn't reach the more likely conclusion when you realized how inhumane it would be for a God of love to supposedly kill children. Why demand answers from a supposedly omniscient, benevolent being... before conducting an unbiased study of the contradictions and asking how you know your source of information about God is even accurate?

  You are assuming I didn't and you are incorrect in that regard.

  I probably have more books on atheisim and "against" God than I have on theology and books "for" God.
• 

  snowbird

  What doubts did you entertain, Syl? I'm curious.

  Doubts about the teaching that the whole human race was condemned by God due to the actions of the first couple.

  If we look at it from a purely human perspective, it does seem twisted.

  However, there's no getting around the fact that we all die.

  All of us.

  If I can accept that fact, then, imo, death's solution is just as acceptable.

  Syl
• 

  caliber

  Character 1: "You are a man who likes to have the last word." Character 2: "It is immaterial who has the last word." (exchange of words) Character 1: "That man never gives up."
  ha ha ha !! LOL ...
• 

  SweetBabyCheezits

  A book can no more control a person as any other inanaimate object.

  Psac, didn't we go through this in another thread? I don't mean that disrespectfully, just that I seem to remember a similar discussion.

  I'm sorry, I thought this part was understood. -> Holy books instruct the reader to do this and not do that, right?

  In that respect, people who take a literal view of the Koran obey it's rules. It controls them. Same goes for the Bible. For example, some folks don't question Yahweh's actions in the OT because the Bible tells them that pride comes before a fall. Ergo, it affects, influences, controls their thinking to some extent.

  You are assuming I didn't and you are incorrect in that regard.

  You said this in reference to my comment that you called God out on his child slayings before you questioned the authenticity, accuracy, and divinity of the bible.

  If you did conduct an unbiased investigation of the facts before accepting the bible and only later demanded God answer for his atrocious acts, well I apologize for making that assumption. I was wrong.

  However, I would like to state that simply having books on atheism doesn't preclude a person from holding onto bias when reading them. I'm not saying you did or didn't. Just clarifying, since I know many Christians who have books on atheism and many atheists who have books on religion.
• 

  brotherdan

  I fucking hate this disagreement. We all know nothing. And we all claim to know it all. The ones that claim the argument AGAINST God have prayed and not had their prayers answered... or at least not acknowledged that God DID answer their prayers.

  But those that prayed and DID receieve an answer...they are not believed by others are are thought of as being fanatical.

  We are all idiots.
• 

  SweetBabyCheezits

  Character 1: "You are a man who likes to have the last word." Character 2: "It is immaterial who has the last word." (exchange of words) Character 1: "That man never gives up."

  My arguments are suppressed by my "in" family so I do tend to be more outspoken on here. It's an outlet and since I've got freedom of speech and thought, if I see what I think is fallacious reasoning, especially if I clutched similar faulty logic before, then I try to expose those faults to help others get another perspective. I hope nobody takes my remarks personally.

  Also, I enjoy a discussion of logic and I welcome evidence that proves I'm holding onto a biased or skewed perspective.
• 

  streets76

  The 3D monster is right there, hiding in the picture. Just look! Concentrate!
• 

  SweetBabyCheezits

  We all know nothing.

  True!

  And we all claim to know it all.

  False. Strong faith asks you to KNOW (relative sense) what you cannot prove. Some of us are preaching DOUBT and I DON'T KNOW, but those who preach certainty based on something as subjective as faith are the ones I argue with. I mean, we both refuse to accept self-contradicting beliefs from the WT, Islam, etc... anything else that lacks evidence, such as a young earth (fundies).

  Again, I have never said that God doesn't exist. I don't know. Maybe a supernatural realm does exist. I think it's improbable but I can't use logic or evidence to prove otherwise. Deism, for now, doesn't sound like a totally illogical possibility to me. But I wouldn't presume to know for sure.

  An unknown creator is one thing. The way billions of people would have us picture him is another And just as you might (if given the circumstances) expose the flaws of every other belief system, holy book, and god out there, I will, too. In this case, yours is not immune.

  Dan, you asked why God killed children. Surely you knew what you were getting into.

  We are all idiots.

  Nowwww we're getting somewhere!!! That's what I like to hear! The following pie chart applies to ALL of us. (Which, again, is why I preach against certainty.)

  
• 

  SweetBabyCheezits

  But those that prayed and DID receieve an answer...they are not believed by others are are thought of as being fanatical.

  Do you think Muslim prayers are answered by Allah? If they think their prayers are answered, do you think they're fanatical?

  I ask my parents difficult questions about their JW faith and it makes them uncomfortable and they refuse to answer. Why? In one last attempt, I put it to my father that he believes so strongly due to a very old presupposition that is rooted in his mind and he will not acknowledge it, he will not even think about it.

  Why eliminate the possibilty that presupposition has so much to do with how you believe? And if you can acknowledge that it does, why not force your mind to examine things without that presupposition?

  I think it's not easy unless you start down that path on your own, much like leaving the WT Society. When someone else tries to show it to you, the defenses go up.

  Having said that, it's just my own hypothesis. I could be wrong.
• 

  Chalam

  I am sure Richard Dawkings could use a nice pie chart like this :)

  

  We could easily factor "faith" as one of the slices but I am sure Dawkins would prefer the current labelling ;)

  Blessings,

  Stephen