Why I don't believe the story of the Great Flood...

[_Franktalk]

Frank,
didn't we have this discussion the other day? You know, where errors in the Gregorian calendar blew your fulfillment of the Daniel math prophecy all to hell?

Where you see proof I saw nothing. If you wish to see errors all over the place so be it. So do I. I see them in different places than you do. Where you place your trust I do not.

[_malkie]

I may be wrong, but I think that there are likely only 2 kinds of people who would act on the say-so of a voice in their head that told them to kill someone:

1. seriously mentally ill
2. seriously religious

In both cases the problem is the refusal or the inability to realize that there is something wrong in what the voice-in-the-head is telling them.

[_Franktalk]

I very seriously doubt that the people who do not see this as bad truly number in the billions. There is not much hope for humanity if that is true. But yes, I do think it takes a kind of mental or moral illness to not see that as bad.

There are billions of Muslims and Catholics. Currently the leadership of the Muslims have no problem with strapping bombs on children. At one time the Catholics had leaders that tortured people to death. Over time many groups have had their turn in this upside down world. Need I mention Germany? My use of billions is very appropriate. I see all humanity as a whole including back in time.

[_Tobin]

I may be wrong, but I think that there are likely only 2 kinds of people who would act on the say-so of a voice in their head that told them to kill someone:

1. seriously mentally ill
2. seriously religious

In both cases the problem is the refusal or the inability to realize that there is something wrong in what the voice-in-the-head is telling them.

Or if someone were physically threatening to kill or harm someone and a voice told me to kill the perpetrator in order to defend them from such harm - I wouldn't question it. I don't suspect that a jury in the land would convict me for defending another person either. So it would seem malkie that circumstances makes all the difference here doesn't it?

[_malkie]

I may be wrong, but I think that there are likely only 2 kinds of people who would act on the say-so of a voice in their head that told them to kill someone:

1. seriously mentally ill
2. seriously religious

In both cases the problem is the refusal or the inability to realize that there is something wrong in what the voice-in-the-head is telling them.

Or if someone were physically threatening to kill or harm someone and a voice told me to kill the perpetrator in order to defend them from such harm - I wouldn't question it. I don't suspect that a jury in the land would convict me for defending another person either. So it would seem malkie that circumstances makes all the difference here doesn't it?

Did I really need to be so explicit as to say that I was talking about the "no immediate threat of death or harm" case?

[_subgenius]

I may be wrong, but I think that there are likely only 2 kinds of people who would act on the say-so of a voice in their head that told them to kill someone:

1. seriously mentally ill
2. seriously religious

In both cases the problem is the refusal or the inability to realize that there is something wrong in what the voice-in-the-head is telling them.

i think you are both right and wrong...right about if it is a "voice inside your head" other than your own...but wrong on the notion of God...don't believe, nor is there reason to believe, that God is a "voice inside one's head".

That being said, killing someone is obviously not always right nor always wrong (by your own admission)...so, the prompting of a "voice inside your head" or by God is hardly conclusive whether one is seriously religious or seriously ill, or seriously patriotic or seriously idiotic,etc..
You seem to hold that the circumstances as viewed by a third-party actually determine "right" or "wrong" or even "mentally ill". I think that such a position is careless in that relies on even more subjective factors than what surrounded the action in the first place.

[_Tobin]

Did I really need to be so explicit as to say that I was talking about the "no immediate threat of death or harm" case?

My point is malkie that you aren't giving God the same benefit of understanding the circumstances. Now, I do not personally believe a flood covered the whole Earth so far as there really is no scientific evidence of such an event. However, be that as it may, if such a calamity were to happen and God knew about it and went so far as to warn people about it, caught up an entire city to save those that would listen and had those that remained build an ark to preserve themselves - is it really God's fault they died? If they were unwilling to listen and didn't believe God, despite his warnings, it is their fault since it was going to happen no matter what.

[_malkie]

I may be wrong, but I think that there are likely only 2 kinds of people who would act on the say-so of a voice in their head that told them to kill someone:

1. seriously mentally ill
2. seriously religious

In both cases the problem is the refusal or the inability to realize that there is something wrong in what the voice-in-the-head is telling them.

i think you are both right and wrong...right about if it is a "voice inside your head" other than your own...but wrong on the notion of God...don't believe, nor is there reason to believe, that God is a "voice inside one's head".

That being said, killing someone is obviously not always right nor always wrong (by your own admission)...so, the prompting of a "voice inside your head" or by God is hardly conclusive whether one is seriously religious or seriously ill, or seriously patriotic or seriously idiotic,etc..
You seem to hold that the circumstances as viewed by a third-party actually determine "right" or "wrong" or even "mentally ill". I think that such a position is careless in that relies on even more subjective factors than what surrounded the action in the first place.

My concern is with the people who are willing to override their (and society's) sense of right and wrong because they believe that a private communication from a god is telling them to kill.

As to what I "seem to hold", as long as we live in a society of any sort, there will be a third party whose views on right and wrong count. Note that I am NOT saying that any such third party should be granted unquestioned authority on this point.

[_malkie]

Did I really need to be so explicit as to say that I was talking about the "no immediate threat of death or harm" case?

My point is malkie that you aren't giving God the same benefit of understanding the circumstances. Now, I do not personally believe a flood covered the whole Earth so far as there really is no scientific evidence of such an event. However, be that as it may, if such a calamity were to happen and God knew about it and went so far as to warn people about it, caught up an entire city to save those that would listen and had those that remained build an ark to preserve themselves - is it really God's fault they died? If they were unwilling to listen and didn't believe God, despite his warnings, it is their fault since it was going to happen no matter what.

As a non-believer I have no need to give any god any benefit of anything.

I'm concerned with people who are not apparently mentally ill and who are willing to abdicate their moral sense to a being who appears as a voice in the head telling them to do things that are clearly wrong - e.g., murdering a 15-month-old child.

[_Tobin]

As a non-believer I have no need to give any god any benefit of anything.

I'm concerned with people who are not apparently mentally ill and who are willing to abdicate their moral sense to a being who appears as a voice in the head telling them to do things that are clearly wrong - e.g., murdering a 15-month-old child.

I really don't see how that has anything to do with the topic at hand (or God for that matter). For example, I personally believe in exterrestrial life and I think a compelling case can be argued for its existence. If someone, who is insane, started doing things like that and said aliens made them do it - would it be reasonable to blame exterrestrial life for it? The same is true here. Your "concern" about crazy people doing "crazy" things is noted, but has nothing to do with the existence of God, aliens, or anything else for that matter.