PDA

View Full Version : Do you think that torturing a baby is ever justified?



Gnostic Bishop
03-07-2015, 01:18 AM
Do you think that torturing a baby is ever justified?

Have you seen this rather well done movie?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dx7irFN2gdI

They end asking about a God who tortures babies as God did to King Davidís baby.
God also killed many innocent babies in his great flood as well as the innocent first born of Egypt.

http://dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot.ca/2010/02/gods-73rd-killing-god-slowly-kills-baby.html

Do you think that torturing a baby is ever justified?

Regards
DL

antichrist
03-07-2015, 09:44 PM
There is that famous story in philosophy how the Yankee/Pommie invaders of America had to kill their own baby when surrounded by naughty terrorists native indians. so that the baby's crying would not give away their hidden position and they all be killed. If killing is worse than torture then you tell me.

MichaelBaron
04-07-2015, 11:35 AM
There is that famous story in philosophy how the Yankee/Pommie invaders of America had to kill their own baby when surrounded by naughty terrorists native indians. so that the baby's crying would not give away their hidden position and they all be killed. If killing is worse than torture then you tell me.

Such dramatic situations are hard to assess unless you are caught in one of them.

Gnostic Bishop
05-07-2015, 03:09 AM
There is that famous story in philosophy how the Yankee/Pommie invaders of America had to kill their own baby when surrounded by naughty terrorists native indians. so that the baby's crying would not give away their hidden position and they all be killed. If killing is worse than torture then you tell me.

I see nothing morally wrong as the needs of the many out-weight the needs of the few, or the one.

You describe a horrible situation where what we would normally call a great evil, is done to prevent what is seen as a greater evil. We do not like to label that good but beside the greater evil it is just that. We would normally call such murder but in your scenario it is sacrifice.

Regards
DL

antichrist
05-07-2015, 08:32 AM
I see nothing morally wrong as the needs of the many out-weight the needs of the few, or the one.

You describe a horrible situation where what we would normally call a great evil, is done to prevent what is seen as a greater evil. We do not like to label that good but beside the greater evil it is just that. We would normally call such murder but in your scenario it is sacrifice.

Regards
DL
But when God the Father sacrificed Jesus on the Cross for the greater good of humanity you are against it

Gnostic Bishop
06-07-2015, 07:21 AM
But when God the Father sacrificed Jesus on the Cross for the greater good of humanity you are against it

Yes. Because it was not necessary as all God had to do was rescind his condemnation.

From my POV, that condemnation was never justified in the first place as we cannot help but be what God created i
us to be.

Note that I do not believe in that God and only analyse the myth in a literal way to change the immoral position theists take.
I have to play in their ball park, so to speak, so that they can hear me.

Regards
DL

Adamski
07-07-2015, 01:13 PM
As detailed in other threads, there is large historical evidence that Jesus died on the Cross. This includes from hostile witnesses like Josephus. See RW's thread on the Historical Evidence for Jesus Christ, e.g. It is not a myth.

Rincewind
07-07-2015, 03:09 PM
As detailed in other threads, there is large historical evidence that Jesus died on the Cross. This includes from hostile witnesses like Josephus. See RW's thread on the Historical Evidence for Jesus Christ, e.g. It is not a myth.

Repeating something you know to be an interpolation by a later scribe does not make it true. There is no incontrovertible evidence that Jesus existed anywhere and certainly the Testimonium Flavianum is agreed by everyone to be corrupted making any conclusions based on that foundation very shaky indeed.

Gnostic Bishop
08-07-2015, 01:35 AM
As detailed in other threads, there is large historical evidence that Jesus died on the Cross. This includes from hostile witnesses like Josephus. See RW's thread on the Historical Evidence for Jesus Christ, e.g. It is not a myth.

Dying is easily acceptable whether true or not.

It is the idiocy of resurrection that is too stupid for words.

God cannot die so cannot resurrect now can he?

If Jesus wanted us to believe in that garbage then he would be here making a case for it.

That is what you would do. Right?

Regards
DL

antichrist
08-07-2015, 02:07 PM
I see nothing morally wrong as the needs of the many out-weight the needs of the few, or the one.

You describe a horrible situation where what we would normally call a great evil, is done to prevent what is seen as a greater evil. We do not like to label that good but beside the greater evil it is just that. We would normally call such murder but in your scenario it is sacrifice.

Regards
DL

There may not be the lesser evil in this case, as the native American indian terrorists may have killed the baby themselves upon hearing it crying. So it may have been a pragmatic decision rather than an evil one??

I just hope it was baptised first.

Gnostic Bishop
08-07-2015, 11:41 PM
There may not be the lesser evil in this case, as the native American indian terrorists may have killed the baby themselves upon hearing it crying. So it may have been a pragmatic decision rather than an evil one??

I just hope it was baptised first.

Really?

Why?

How does a man made social ritual make that babies death easier to take?

Regards
DL

antichrist
09-07-2015, 06:35 AM
Really?

Why?

How does a man made social ritual make that babies death easier to take?

Regards
DL

If the baby was going to die anyway (killed by native terrorists) than there is only benefit if the parents killed it instead and saved their own lives. If Jesus was also going to die it was better he be crucified and save the whole human race.

The baby killing by parents could be easier to take because after escaping from the native terrorists, they could just jump in the cot again, do what they learnt from Adam and Eve, and 9 months later BINGO - even have twins maybe.

Gnostic Bishop
09-07-2015, 06:40 AM
If the baby was going to die anyway (killed by native terrorists) than there is only benefit if the parents killed it instead and saved their own lives. If Jesus was also going to die it was better he be crucified and save the whole human race.

The baby killing by parents could be easier to take because after escaping from the native terrorists, they could just jump in the cot again, do what they learnt from Adam and Eve, and 9 months later BINGO - even have twins maybe.

Easier to take.

You begin to sound like a Christian speaking of God killing Job's children but that being ok and forgivable because they could have more.

You have been listening to foolish Christians for too long my friend.

Regards
DL

antichrist
09-07-2015, 06:45 AM
Are you related to GreatestIam at http://www.debate.org/forums/religion/topic/70314/ - you sort of look the same and utter the same, is GreatestIam an identical twin?

Gnostic Bishop
09-07-2015, 06:51 AM
Are you related to GreatestIam at http://www.debate.org/forums/religion/topic/70314/ - you sort of look the same and utter the same, is GreatestIam an identical twin?

I am that I am. ;-)

Regards
DL

Desmond
09-07-2015, 07:17 AM
Really?

Why?

How does a man made social ritual make that babies death easier to take?

Regards
DLI think it was Hitchens who said (jokingly) that the only reason he might be baptised near the end was that it is better for a christian to die than an atheist. :lol:

Gnostic Bishop
10-07-2015, 03:34 AM
I think it was Hitchens who said (jokingly) that the only reason he might be baptised near the end was that it is better for a christian to die than an atheist. :lol:

Jokingly. I wonder.

Regards
DL

Redmond Barry
16-07-2015, 01:37 AM
Yes.

Gnostic Bishop
16-07-2015, 01:42 AM
Yes.

Explain please.

Regards
DL

Redmond Barry
16-07-2015, 05:41 PM
Explain please.

Regards
DL

Its good to have a hobby.

antichrist
23-07-2015, 10:50 AM
I think it was Hitchens who said (jokingly) that the only reason he might be baptised near the end was that it is better for a christian to die than an atheist. :lol:

But the burial priest would know a fraud upon the prayers when he notices the corpse turning in it's grave. Instead of the last rites it would be the last riots!