Victim blaming to save God's character

Argue for and against Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Justin108
Banned
Banned
Posts: 4471
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 5:28 am

Victim blaming to save God's character

Post #1

Post by Justin108 »

2timothy316 wrote:
2timothy316 wrote: Jehovah always disciplines “to the proper degree.� (Jer. 30:11)
You mean like stoning someone to death for picking up sticks on the Sabbath?
This man was obviously a rebel. Only Jehovah knows what was in that man's heart or what other sins he had committed. Again, you are judging only by what you hear but you do not know what kind of person that man was. The surrounding nations burned their children to death. Could that man have been a foreigner that joined the Hebrews that decided that he was going to gather wood to sacrifice one of his children? Perhaps he was a Hebrew who had turned his attention to Molech worship which is who children were sacrificed to. Who knows! Do not jump to the conclusion that God was in the wrong when the Bible says of Jehovah, 'He is perfect in His activity'. (Deuteronomy 32:4)

Are these kinds of assumptions at all justified? If a character in the Bible is judged in seemingly unfair ways, is it fair to just assume that the victim probably did other unmentioned evil actions? Or is this just an example of cognitive dissonance to absolve an apologist's internal conflict of having to worship a seemingly immoral God?

User avatar
ttruscott
Site Supporter
Posts: 11064
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 5:09 pm
Location: West Coast of Canada
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: Victim blaming to save God's character

Post #21

Post by ttruscott »

OnceConvinced wrote:Ok, judging by those posts, you have no problem with stoning as the death penalty. :shock:

So why did God feel the need to have humans perform this act for him?
HE certainly had no need in HIMself to fulfill by having men to this work. Involving them is for their benefit, their education about legal holiness and how important it is to GOD.

Death is death. Ebola is a far worse death than stoning imo. Cancer too. May I again make my contention that no one suffers more than their sins warrant? That all suffering is equal to and directionally proportional to the sins they do that they suffer for?? For both the reprobate and for the sinful elect??? NO gratuitous suffering ever!
PCE Theology as I see it...

We had an existence with a free will in Sheol before the creation of the physical universe. Here we chose to be able to become holy or to be eternally evil in YHWH's sight. Then the physical universe was created and all sinners were sent to earth.

This theology debunks the need to base Christianity upon the blasphemy of creating us in Adam's sin.

User avatar
ttruscott
Site Supporter
Posts: 11064
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 5:09 pm
Location: West Coast of Canada
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: Victim blaming to save God's character

Post #22

Post by ttruscott »

OnceConvinced wrote:
rikuoamero wrote: -----
ted says
Being born human is the declaration to the universe that GOD thinks we are evil.
I wonder what it is that makes you think being human is evil...
I could NEVER look at a newborn and say "Right! Evil! Evil incarnate!"
I know Ted can speak for himself on this, but he has regularly told us that he believes that humans existed pre-birth and that they sinned against God then. They were then sent to Earth kind of as a punishment and also to redeem themselves.

I hope I got it right this time, Ted!

Right you are! Tokens coming to you! But only some can be redeemed.
PCE Theology as I see it...

We had an existence with a free will in Sheol before the creation of the physical universe. Here we chose to be able to become holy or to be eternally evil in YHWH's sight. Then the physical universe was created and all sinners were sent to earth.

This theology debunks the need to base Christianity upon the blasphemy of creating us in Adam's sin.

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 15256
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 975 times
Been thanked: 1801 times
Contact:

Re: Victim blaming to save God's character

Post #23

Post by William »

[Replying to post 18 by ttruscott]
YET in the stories where HE does step up and act for HIMself, hue and cry is raised for HIS personal cruelty, no?
it doesn't matter that a hue and cry is raised. What matters is that he does the dirty work himself. Why?

1: Because he is taking responsibility for his own actions rather than having others do that dirty work.

2: He reveals himself to exist by showing in every instance he is willing to step up and do the dirty work.

In both 1&2 he does away with any confusion related to any corruptible practices which can otherwise be done in his name/by his assumed authority and thus does away with the evil humans do to each other in his name, making it unnecessary for humans to wonder as to which path to take in relation to him. Hiding away and allowing this practice to go on does nothing commendable in relation to trying to understand exactly where this particular idea of GOD is positioned.
If there is no win for HIM, then what does that say about the interpretation HIS detractors offer??
There can be no 'win' for him as he has allowed/otherwise has no ability to stop evil being done in his name and the stories verify this as being the case.
It is bad enough that evil humans do evil to one another (both in the name of GOD and in the name of politics) that a GOD purported to being all-powerful allows for evil to consistently crush the life out of goodness.
IF HE is so evil and hostile, why has anyone survived at all for so long?
Because, without people to worship such a GOD, what has such a GOD got? This idea of GOD requires the living to live in the circumstances they do, without lifting a hand against evil for the sake of goodness.
A Satanic God would have destroyed us, especially believers, a loooooong time ago, for what use are we to him except as sources of cruel pleasure???
Precisely WHY this idea of GOD is more diabolical than anything else. What use to such a GOD are dead humans? The idea is to have them live in the circumstances they do and either believe in him in fear, or not believe in him but either way, living in circumstances which are far from ideal for any.
IF HE is evil then righteousness is sin, right? Why did an evil God allow the holy angels to throw Satan down to the earth???
All such a story does is add to the confusion already surrounding this particular idea of GOD.

All your particular belief system does is state that we are all 'Satan' as we all exist on this planet Earth. Thus we are the ones cast down from heaven by these angels and if that be the case, we should at least learn from that, that something is very amiss in this particular idea of GOD...perhaps it is fair to say that this particular idea of GOD is Satan playing at being GOD, and therefore is NOT GOD at all, as some beliefs certainly state.

One particular comprehensive data about that theory is that this universe is a creation of an evil inter dimensional species which has preyed upon a less knowledgeable species (humans) in order to enslave them within a hologram which they cannot tell for certain is real or not, but assume that it is.

The species is called the Annunaki and the king of the species is called Anu.

Now you might scoff at such data, but what makes it any more or less true than the bible accounts?

The point being, mainly, that even by the standards of your own professed beliefs on this message board, evil is less able to be seen for what it is by those who are themselves evil.

Your desire to be part of the 'Bride of Christ' is specific to this idea that one can turn a blind eye to the evil that this GOD has purportedly done, in order to find a special place in his heart for your salvation.

Something is most definitely amiss, and even a tentatively righteous person would not turn from the opportunity to question the motives of such an idea of a GOD, or the motives of those who follow unquestionably after him.

User avatar
JehovahsWitness
Savant
Posts: 22885
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
Has thanked: 899 times
Been thanked: 1338 times
Contact:

Re: Victim blaming to save God's character

Post #24

Post by JehovahsWitness »

OnceConvinced wrote: Ok, judging by those posts, you have no problem with stoning as the death penalty.
Within the context of the discussion, that would be correct.
OnceConvinced wrote:So why did God feel the need to have humans perform this act for him?
That God allowed human executioners is not necessarily indicative of "feeling a need"; indeed judges rarely leave the court to actually execute guilty parties personally, even though of course they are usually capable of "pulling the switch" themselves if they and their respective constitutions, permit.

In scripture there are plenty of instances where God personally judged and executed people, and others where he used a human agent. The bible does not always disclose why He decided on one means rather than the other, but it does not seem unreasonable to conclude He could have executed people personally if He had so wished. We can only speculate on why he did not.


QUESTION: Why would God authoritize a legal system that permitted human agents to execute criminals for certain crimes?

By charging the community itself with the application of Divine law, God would have been empowering that community to self regulate. It would have impressed on them the value of the law and responsibilized them as to its application. In short when we are obliged to play a personal role in the application of something, we better appreciate its value and mature in our view of that thing.

To illustrate, we can look at the fact that under that same Mosaic Law, for certain crimes, the chief witnesses in the case was told to "cast the first stone"* if the individual was found guilty, followed by the rest of the community. This discouraged bearing false witness as well as hightened awareness of the seriousness of the crime committed for everyone.

In scripture, it seems evident that God directly intervened prior to the establishment (Lot's wife), or after the abolishment (Ananias, and Sapphira) of the Mosaic Law itself or when justice would have been better served by his personally judging the case. In general, having inspired the law, He seemed to have let that law run its course through duly appointed human agents at least for those under said law.


*Casting the "first stone"
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 111#813111



RELATED POSTS
Was God injuste to exterminate the Amelekites?
viewtopic.php?p=1032398#p1032398

Why would God use a human agent to carry out divine executions?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 19#p861919

Why does the bible include accounts of military exploits and divine executions? [this thread]
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 09#p990309

Why did God destroy the Canaanites?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 58#p906458

Why did God command the destruction of the MIDIANITES?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 42#p359442
To learn more please go to other posts related to ....

WAR, VIOLENCE and .... THE "BAD" GOD
Last edited by JehovahsWitness on Tue May 11, 2021 3:28 pm, edited 2 times in total.
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681


"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" -
Romans 14:8

Justin108
Banned
Banned
Posts: 4471
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 5:28 am

Re: Victim blaming to save God's character

Post #25

Post by Justin108 »

JehovahsWitness wrote: Yes, I believe they are.
Just to clarify, when I said "these assumptions" I was referring to 2timothy316's assumptions that gathering sticks probably meant that the man was about to sacrifice a child. Is that assumption justified?
JehovahsWitness wrote: The only thing we do know is he broke the law, we can reasonably suppose he was fully aware of the law, the Sabbath law was first orally pronounced and agreed upon by the nation as a whole
It was agreed upon at one point by the nation as a whole, but that does not mean that later generations would agree. If this man personally agreed to uphold the Sabbath, then that's one thing. But if he was born in a nation that kills people for simply working then that justification of "well he agreed upon it" falls away. Being born in Israel does not mean you automatically agree with its laws.
JehovahsWitness wrote: It seems fair to say it was therefore a deliberate act of rebellion.
You could essentially look at basically any law breaking as "an act of rebellion". So going by your logic, breaking a law, no matter how petty, would justify death. Do you agree? Would parking in a no-parking zone deserve a death sentence? Would littering deserve a death sentence?
JehovahsWitness wrote: In any case, he that breaks the law must pay the price. We don't usually call such people "victims" the word is "criminal"
In Pakistan, those who blaspheme against Allah or Muhammad may be sentenced to death. In Iran, those caught practicing homosexuality may be sentenced to death. Both of these instances are legal death sentences for crimes committed. I personally would call these people victims. If you insist on calling them criminals deserving of death then I guess that's up to you.

Justin108
Banned
Banned
Posts: 4471
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 5:28 am

Post #26

Post by Justin108 »

ttruscott wrote: They wrongly put their sinful nature on Adam as his fault rather than on themselves as having chosen to be evil in GOD's sight by their own free will decisions pre-earth (pre-their birth)
Please support this claim

Justin108
Banned
Banned
Posts: 4471
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 5:28 am

Re: Victim blaming to save God's character

Post #27

Post by Justin108 »

ttruscott wrote:
William wrote:Where the argument fails is in the GOD making human beings mediators to his justice, rather than to do the killing himself.
YET in the stories where HE does step up and act for HIMself, hue and cry is raised for HIS personal cruelty, no?
As someone who usually complains about this myself, I would consider it a lesser evil for God to do the killing, if only to spare the people of Israel the vile act of needing to kill one of their own for such a petty crime.
ttruscott wrote: HE certainly had no need in HIMself to fulfill by having men to this work. Involving them is for their benefit, their education about legal holiness and how important it is to GOD.
All I can say is thank God Ted wasn't born in a Muslim family, or he would probably have joined ISIS by now
ttruscott wrote: Death is death. Ebola is a far worse death than stoning imo. Cancer too. May I again make my contention that no one suffers more than their sins warrant? That all suffering is equal to and directionally proportional to the sins they do that they suffer for?? For both the reprobate and for the sinful elect??? NO gratuitous suffering ever!
So basically any child who has suffered and died from cancer or any other slow and painful death is more evil than Hitler who died from a quick shot to the head. I'll repeat that. A child dying a slow and painful death from cancer is automatically more evil than Hitler. Let that sink in

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 15256
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 975 times
Been thanked: 1801 times
Contact:

Re: Victim blaming to save God's character

Post #28

Post by William »

rikuoamero wrote: [Replying to post 11 by William]
Such stupid appearing laws still exist today, although death by stoning - while an ugly way to go is still not as harsh as prison time,
Stoning...is NOT as harsh as prison time? :shock:
Such stupid appearing laws still exist today, although death by stoning - while an ugly way to go is still not as harsh as prison time, which is by far the more painful physically, mentally and emotionally. But *shrugs*

Justin108
Banned
Banned
Posts: 4471
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 5:28 am

Re: Victim blaming to save God's character

Post #29

Post by Justin108 »

JehovahsWitness wrote: That God allowed human executioners..
I know this term often confuses you but God didn't just "allow" it, he commanded it. There is a distinct difference.
JehovahsWitness wrote: The bible does not always disclose why He decided on one means rather than the other
My guess is that these arbitrary laws were not divine but instead barbaric laws made by ancient people. Of course relying on divine intervention whenever these barbaric laws are broken would not work as no such divine intervention existed. In short, the Jews had to kill their own people for their own barbaric laws because no one else would.

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 15256
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 975 times
Been thanked: 1801 times
Contact:

Re: Victim blaming to save God's character

Post #30

Post by William »

OnceConvinced wrote:
rikuoamero wrote: [Replying to post 11 by William]
Such stupid appearing laws still exist today, although death by stoning - while an ugly way to go is still not as harsh as prison time,
Stoning...is NOT as harsh as prison time? :shock:

I actually liked William's overall post as he said some good things, but yeah I would have to disagree with his statement here. I would much rather be locked up in a prison for the rest of my life than go through the horrors of being stoned. In fact I'm gonna start a thread on this one and poll people to see what people think would be worse.

viewtopic.php?t=32363&sid=08b12338b3fba ... 079323bb96
Such stupid appearing laws still exist today, although death by stoning - while an ugly way to go is still not as harsh as prison time, which is by far the more painful physically, mentally and emotionally. But *shrugs*.

Post Reply