Posted on 07/29/2009 2:46:30 PM PDT by MarianoApologeticus
Large portions of evilbible.com have been considered, dissected and declared fallacious on very many levels.
Two examples of this fact are as follows:
Whilst besmirching the Bible for allegedly commanding rape evilbible.com, for some odd reason, neglects to mention the most relevant biblical text related to the biblical view of and law about rape. Why this omission? Who knows, but it would certainly have gotten in the way of a good session of emotive expression of prejudice—it would have discredited evilbible.com to reference this most important text. Indeed, those annoying little facts have an annoying way of getting in the way of good fallacious assertions.
Whilst besmirching the Bible for allegedly commanding human sacrifice evilbible.com, for some odd reason, neglects to mention that the Bible does not command but condemns human sacrifice. Evilbible.com, for some odd reason, neglects to mention that when the Bible reports that human sacrifices did take place they were carried out by Gentile Pagans who were not worshiping the God of the Bible but various false gods. When “Jews” were performing human sacrifices it was only when they turned away from the God of the Bible and joined Gentile Pagans in worshiping various false gods. Yet, in typical militant activist atheist fashion, evilbible.com does not condemn Gentile Pagans but only condemns the Jews.
Some of the resources provided in the original post are as follows:
Atheism, the Bible, Rape and EvilBible.com
Atheism, EvilBible.com, “Theists Suck” and Christians are Hypocrites
Atheism, EvilBible.com and Jesus Lied
Atheism, Ritual Human Sacrifice in the Bible, and EvilBible.com
ADDENDUM TO: Atheism, Ritual Human Sacrifice in the Bible, and EvilBible.com
(Excerpt) Read more at atheismisdead.blogspot.com ...
I have never heard of this — I assume it is the virulent anti-Christians’ misquoting The Bible to prove some evil point?
Since objective evil cannot exist in the absence of the Creator of the Universe (Who is alone competent to define it), then to deny G-d while labeling something--anything--"evil" is to engage in self-contradiction on a grand scale.
That's fine, but the title of your post Evilbible is dead is misleading. Evilbible.com site is alive and fucntioning well.
Whilst besmirching the Bible for allegedly commanding rape evilbible.com, for some odd reason, neglects to mention the most relevant biblical text related to the biblical view of and law about rape
What does Evilbible.com say about rape in the Bible and what is the most relevant biblical text related to the biblical view of rape? Why not post them so the readers can get the picture instead of taking your word for it?
***Since objective evil cannot exist in the absence of the Creator of the Universe ***
Would not evil be more or less defined as the absence of God?
No. The (chas veshalom!) "absence of G-d" would mean . . . nothing. Not empty space, but . . . nothing.
G-d and evil are rooted in G-d's nature and decrees. There is no independent morality or ethics based on any other consideration.
It is not Theists who have a "problem of evil" to solve (since G-d is absolutely necessary to objective evil to exist). It is atheists who insist that even in a self-existent universe devoid of all meaning, some things are still objectively "evil."
An absurd position utterly demolished by Plato's Euthyphro.
***Would not evil be more or less defined as the absence of God?
No. The (chas veshalom!) “absence of G-d” would mean . . . nothing. Not empty space, but . . . nothing.
G-d and evil are rooted in G-d’s nature and decrees. There is no independent morality or ethics based on any other consideration. ***
Interesting. If satan is an angel in opposition to God, then is satan an agent of God according to your understanding?
***It is not Theists who have a “problem of evil” to solve (since G-d is absolutely necessary to objective evil to exist). It is atheists who insist that even in a self-existent universe devoid of all meaning, some things are still objectively “evil.”***
Can you expand upon this?
Which is why the Maccabees fought the Greeks . . . pagan "philosophy."
Absolutely. And he's only doing his job. You must remember that there is no evil fallen angel warring against G-d in Torah.
***It is not Theists who have a “problem of evil” to solve (since G-d is absolutely necessary to objective evil to exist). It is atheists who insist that even in a self-existent universe devoid of all meaning, some things are still objectively “evil.”***
Can you expand upon this?
Sure. The whole point of morality/ethics is subjection and obedience to the Divine Will. Without a Divine Will to submit to all you have are subjective "hang-ups." Plus obedience and disobedience of G-d unleash spiritual forces (food in the case of the former, bad in the latter). In other words, to put it vulgarly, "mojo." If there is no G-d and all "morality" or "ethics" is based on "being nice to other people" (nice defined by whom, btw?) then obviously no spiritual forces are involved at all. Human beings are just pulling the whole thing out of their rears.
Zionist Conspirator: Absolutely. And he's only doing his job. You must remember that there is no evil fallen angel warring against G-d in Torah.
Mark, the concept of an independent and rebellious evil and the "conflict" between good and evil is a post-Babylonian, Persian import which made its way into messianic Judaism, and represents corruption of traditional Judaism. Jews do not believe that an angel, being created an obligate servant, can rebel against God.
The add insult to injury the Church added to this sectarian Jewish cult pagan Greek (Platonic) philosophy and created a new religion. In Judaism, man is in no need for salvation and ha-satan is a loyal servant (and son of) God, as all his angels are.
Most Christians are not aware of how the Jews interpret their own scripture. Instead, Christians treat Judaism as an apostate "corruption," and offer the New Testament as a "correction." The Church even states clearly that we interpret everything, including the Old Testament, through the prism of the New Testament, and the New Testament through the prism of the Gospels.
In doing so, Christianity is to a Jew what Mormonism is to a Christian. When the Christians say they are the "extended" Israel" it is like the Mormons saying they are the "true Christians." When we offer the New Testament to a Jew as scripture, it is like LDS offering their Book of Mormon to a Christian.
When American evangelists speak of "Judeo-Christian" culture, it is as if we were speaking of a Mormon-Christian culture. It is an oxymoron. A Jew can even be an atheist and still be a Jew, and even acceptable to God, but he cannot be a Christian and still be considered a Jew. You cannot be Cathoic and a Mormon, but you can be a non-practicing Catholic if you have been properly baptized.
Most Christians do not realize the true width of the chasm that exists. Much of it has to do with the fact that Christians adopted Jewish scriptures and Christianized it, so we feel it's partial "ours." Trouble is, the way we read it and the way the Jews read it is like night and day.
If you want to imagine how a Jew feels in a Christian world, imagine a Catholic/Orthodox living in a Mormon world...
ZC, your thoughts?
Plato's Euthyphro demolishes nothing.
The two options presented in first premise of the modernized Euthyphro dilemma are intended to be logically exhaustive so that if divine command theory is true then one of the options must be the case.
If the two alternatives presented are not the only alternatives then what is being presented as only two options is a false dilemna. If the first premise is false the argument is invalid.
There is a third alternative.
Euthyphro's Dilemma
Gregory Koukl
Cordially,
kosta50,
Yes, Evilbible.com site is alive and functioning well—yet, their content has been proven to be saturated with misunderstandings, misinterpretations, misapplications, misleading and omissions of texts that are problematic to their points and thus, they are functionally dead.
As far as your claims that I am merely making assertions: this is the very reason for providing the hyperlinks in the original post above. You do not have to take my word for anything as the Bible teaches in Acts 17:11 but can consider the evidence for yourself. The link entitled “Atheism, the Bible, Rape and EvilBible.com” is the one that deals with atheism, the Bible, rape and Evilbible.com
John Locke,
Is something good because an atheist proclaims it good or does an atheist proclaim something good because it is good?
What is your authoritative source for a mythical, pre-Babylonian, Persian"traditional" Judaism which was corrupted by some variant "cult" of "messianic" Judaism?
Most Christians are not aware of how the Jews interpret their own scripture.
The question seems to presume a monolithic Jewish interpretation of Scripture which does not comport with your characterization of Jewish history above. Messianic Jews for thousands of years would certainly take exception to such a characterization of messianic Judaism as a corruption of some earlier, authentic Judaism.
Cordially,
Wow . . . for someone I’ve quarreled with so violently in the past and someone whose on worldview is so far from mine, I don’t think I’ve ever read a lovelier post on this forum. Thank you, honorable adversary!
***Interesting. If satan is an angel in opposition to God, then is satan an agent of God according to your understanding?
Absolutely. And he’s only doing his job. You must remember that there is no evil fallen angel warring against G-d in Torah. ***
I see. satan is a tempter and rabble rouser, who then accuses mankind before God. Job is a case in point. According to my sources, satan works for God and has to get permission before engaging in any activity. Is that how you understand it?
***Can you expand upon this?
Sure. The whole point of morality/ethics is subjection and obedience to the Divine Will. Without a Divine Will to submit to all you have are subjective “hang-ups.” Plus obedience and disobedience of G-d unleash spiritual forces (food in the case of the former, bad in the latter). In other words, to put it vulgarly, “mojo.” If there is no G-d and all “morality” or “ethics” is based on “being nice to other people” (nice defined by whom, btw?) then obviously no spiritual forces are involved at all. Human beings are just pulling the whole thing out of their rears.***
Would you say that sin is active or passive disobedience to God, then?
***Most Christians do not realize the true width of the chasm that exists. Much of it has to do with the fact that Christians adopted Jewish scriptures and Christianized it, so we feel it’s partial “ours.” Trouble is, the way we read it and the way the Jews read it is like night and day.
If you want to imagine how a Jew feels in a Christian world, imagine a Catholic/Orthodox living in a Mormon world...***
Hmm. I knew this, but have never really thought about it in depth.
If I understand you correctly, yes.
Would you say that sin is active or passive disobedience to God, then?
There are sins of omission and sins of commission.
That's exactly what they say about Bible believers. They support their claims with scripural (OT) verses.
You site Act 17:11 (about Bereans checking the scriputres). It has nothing to do with rape and the way the OT treats rape.
I am not defending Evilbible.com, but if you are just interested in throwing undocumented mud on them you have succeeded. If you want to be taken seriously, then provide some scriptural support that shows their verses are not what they say they are.
they are functionally dead
Perhaps form your point of view, which so far doesn't account for much.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.