God is love

[Gary Childress]

So if God didn't like the Amalekites because they were evil, why did God get the Israelites to do his dirty work for him? God couldn't just send a flood to get rid of the Amalekites? Better yet, God couldn't materialize before them and tell them to stop doing it?

[Greatest I am]

Is God not the creator of both love and hate?

The Bible is clear that God creates both good and evil for his pleasure.

Are you suggesting that Satan creates evil?

Women are the root of all evil, but given the worth, quite forgivable.

Hate is quite important to us and has a place.

I use mine as often as I can, in the nicest way I can. Love hurts when it has it's hate side up. I love moral thinking a lot, and am hard on poor ideas and morals.

[Walker]

So if God didn't like the Amalekites because they were evil, why did God get the Israelites to do his dirty work for him? God couldn't just send a flood to get rid of the Amalekites? Better yet, God couldn't materialize before them and tell them to stop doing it?

Interesting.

If God's love is as conditional as you view it to be, then what's all that talk about unconditional love that folks like to throw around? Does unconditional love have anything to do with God, or is that a new age conjecture?

[Immanuel Can]

So if God didn't like the Amalekites because they were evil, why did God get the Israelites to do his dirty work for him? God couldn't just send a flood to get rid of the Amalekites? Better yet, God couldn't materialize before them and tell them to stop doing it?

Are we supposed to understand that you're deeply concerned about the final disposition of the ancient Amalekites? Or are we to be understanding that you want to use the case of the Amalekites to supply you with an indicator you hope to apply to deny the ultimate goodness of God today?

Which question do you really care about, Gary?

If it's the former, here's your answer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wM1D6hqmf18 But it probably isn't -- I really can't imagine you even caring, and it would be odd if you did -- so I doubt you'll even want to bother.

However, having now dispensed with the Amalekites, why don't you just say what you really want to say?

[Gary Childress]

So if God didn't like the Amalekites because they were evil, why did God get the Israelites to do his dirty work for him? God couldn't just send a flood to get rid of the Amalekites? Better yet, God couldn't materialize before them and tell them to stop doing it?

Are we supposed to understand that you're deeply concerned about the final disposition of the ancient Amalekites? Or are we to be understanding that you want to use the case of the Amalekites to supply you with an indicator you hope to apply to deny the ultimate goodness of God today?

Which question do you really care about, Gary?

If it's the former, here's your answer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wM1D6hqmf18 But it probably isn't -- I really can't imagine you even caring, and it would be odd if you did -- so I doubt you'll even want to bother.

However, having now dispensed with the Amalekites, why don't you just say what you really want to say?

Why do you post replies. If you think so little of "blasphemers" then maybe you should find somewhere else to post. Are you afraid that if you don't defend God, then God will disfavor you? Do you get more brownie points this way?

[Immanuel Can]

So if God didn't like the Amalekites because they were evil, why did God get the Israelites to do his dirty work for him? God couldn't just send a flood to get rid of the Amalekites? Better yet, God couldn't materialize before them and tell them to stop doing it?

Are we supposed to understand that you're deeply concerned about the final disposition of the ancient Amalekites? Or are we to be understanding that you want to use the case of the Amalekites to supply you with an indicator you hope to apply to deny the ultimate goodness of God today?

Which question do you really care about, Gary?

If it's the former, here's your answer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wM1D6hqmf18 But it probably isn't -- I really can't imagine you even caring, and it would be odd if you did -- so I doubt you'll even want to bother.

However, having now dispensed with the Amalekites, why don't you just say what you really want to say?

Why do you post replies.

Because you post questions, of course.

This is a public forum. Why shouldn't anybody comment?

[Gary Childress]

Are we supposed to understand that you're deeply concerned about the final disposition of the ancient Amalekites? Or are we to be understanding that you want to use the case of the Amalekites to supply you with an indicator you hope to apply to deny the ultimate goodness of God today?

Which question do you really care about, Gary?

If it's the former, here's your answer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wM1D6hqmf18 But it probably isn't -- I really can't imagine you even caring, and it would be odd if you did -- so I doubt you'll even want to bother.

However, having now dispensed with the Amalekites, why don't you just say what you really want to say?

Why do you post replies.

Because you post questions, of course.

This is a public forum. Why shouldn't anybody comment?

So when another tribe commits heresy it's OK for the Hebrews to murder the children too? Why do you care so much about the Hebrew God? Who cares about some tribal God from 6,000 years ago? It's a shame that there need to be apologists for Biblical atrocities. But you'll hang on to it no matter what. Fuck off, Satan worshiper!

[Immanuel Can]

Why do you post replies.

Because you post questions, of course.

This is a public forum. Why shouldn't anybody comment?

So when another tribe commits heresy it's OK for the Hebrews to murder the children too?

So you care about the ancient Amalekites? Then watch the video.

Why do you care so much about the Hebrew God?

He's my God.

Who cares about some tribal God from 6,000 years ago?

Anybody who knows what the word "God" means knows that He's a permanent reality, Gary.

Now, let me ask you a question: why are you so infuriated about a God you don't believe exists? You can't be mad at something that you truly believe is not real, so it' can't be that. Could it be you do know God is real? Or are you just feeling gratuitously hateful against people who have different opinions?

Again, you're clearly not saying what you really mean, because nothing you're saying adds up.

[Gary Childress]

Because you post questions, of course.

This is a public forum. Why shouldn't anybody comment?

So when another tribe commits heresy it's OK for the Hebrews to murder the children too?

So you care about the ancient Amalekites? Then watch the video.

Why do you care so much about the Hebrew God?

He's my God.

Who cares about some tribal God from 6,000 years ago?

Anybody who knows what the word "God" means knows that He's a permanent reality, Gary.

Now, let me ask you a question: why are you so infuriated about a God you don't believe exists? You can't be mad at something that you truly believe is not real, so it' can't be that. Could it be you do know God is real? Or are you just feeling gratuitously hateful against people who have different opinions?

Again, you're clearly not saying what you really mean, because nothing you're saying adds up.

I don't know if the Biblical God exists or not. If it does, then it's a sad universe we live in. Not sure why you are so keen on Yahweh, though.

[phyllo]

Not sure why you are so keen on Yahweh, though.

Easy answer.

Yahweh will reward IC and punish his opponents.

[Immanuel Can]

I don't know if the Biblical God exists or not. If it does, then it's a sad universe we live in.

Finally.

You finally said what you really think. And it turns out that once again, it's all about Gary and his struggle with the existence of evil.

Secularists would have to tell you you're imagining things. There's nothing wrong with the way the world is. If you're sad, it's because you're just a sad person.

But I don't tell you that. I tell you that you're right: life is not what it should be. Much of it is hard, and unfair, and sad. And the Bible will tell you exactly the same thing: that this world is out-of-joint with its Creator, and not what it should be...so you're right to feel sad about that.

So who do you think is telling you the truth? Is it the secularist, who has to insist you're delusional, or the Theist who says, "You're darn right, Gary"?

[phyllo]

Is it the secularist, who has to insist you're delusional

Name the secularist who thinks Gary is delusional if Gary is sad about the state of the world.

[Immanuel Can]

Is it the secularist, who has to insist you're delusional

Name the secularist who thinks Gary is delusional if Gary is sad about the state of the world.

The rational secularist.

Of course, not all of them are that. Most are irrational. But the deduction is very straightforward for those who still employ reason: if tragedy is merely the result of time and chance, then it's not really tragic at all. S___ happens, and that's all that can be said. You can't cry about it afterward -- at least, and not be behaving rationally.

[phyllo]

If a tragedy occurs, then a person can be sad if there is a god sitting on a mountain top but a person can't be sad if there is no god sitting on a mountain top?

That's a denial of a person's reaction. It makes the legitimacy of a reaction somehow dependent on an elusive god.

[Immanuel Can]

If a tragedy occurs, then a person can be sad if there is a god sitting on a mountain top but a person can't be sad if there is no god sitting on a mountain top?

You've got mountain tops on the brain, I guess.

No, a person can react any way he/she feels, of course. But it won't be rational, nor will it be related to any cosmic injustice done to them, if secularism were true. It would merely be how things are...end of story.

You can sit and cry if you want. But there won't be any actual tragedy behind your feeling, nor any objective justification for it. It will just be a weird "epiphenomenon" of your confused cognitions.