It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Substitutionary sacrifical atonement: Is it moral?

page: 4
4
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 09:34 PM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 



There is no word for eternal in the Old Testament


The eternal God is thy refuge, and underneath are the everlasting arms: and he shall thrust out the enemy from before thee; and shall say, Destroy them.


Isn't that from the OT?





posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 09:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Hydroman
 



It also says that someone who claims time is an illusion seems to have ignored special relativity and general relativity....


Ugggggggghhhhh!!!!!


It's not an illusion FOR US, we live in the 4th dimension. In the grand scheme of things, and relevant to this argument it's an illusion, there is no time in eternity. There is no time in the 5th - 10th dimensions, you need mass, gravity, and velocity for there to be time.

Time isn't uniform. If you wish to Google then Google this:

"Gravitational Time Dilation 2 astronauts"


edit on 12-4-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 09:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Bond servants chose to serve out of love for the family. It was a position of rank in the household. They were considered adopted sons into the family. And what don't you grasp about this concept that in that culture freedom for some folks meant freedom to starve to death? How was a person to grow food without land? How were they to eat if they couldn't hunt or fish?
They were considered adopted sons into the family? Yet, they had masters whom they had to obey. It is our moral obligation to help people out in their time of need, not make them your servant in order to do so. Don't you see this? If I see a family starving, to help them should I make them my servants? Or, should we as a community help them out? Which is more moral?



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 09:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by jmdewey60
 



There is no word for eternal in the Old Testament


The eternal God is thy refuge, and underneath are the everlasting arms: and he shall thrust out the enemy from before thee; and shall say, Destroy them.


Isn't that from the OT?

What does the Hebrew say?



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 09:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
It's not an illusion FOR US, we live in the 4th dimension. In the grand scheme of things, and relevant to this argument it's an illusion, there is no time in eternity. There is no time in the 5th - 10th dimensions, you need mass, gravity, and velocity for there to be time.

See, I was talking about time in our reality this whole time. I'm not talking about time in those other dimensions. I'm talking about in our reality. How did we get on this anyway?



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 09:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hydroman

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Bond servants chose to serve out of love for the family. It was a position of rank in the household. They were considered adopted sons into the family. And what don't you grasp about this concept that in that culture freedom for some folks meant freedom to starve to death? How was a person to grow food without land? How were they to eat if they couldn't hunt or fish?
They were considered adopted sons into the family? Yet, they had masters whom they had to obey. It is our moral obligation to help people out in their time of need, not make them your servant in order to do so. Don't you see this? If I see a family starving, to help them should I make them my servants? Or, should we as a community help them out? Which is more moral?



No they didn't, a bond servant served freely, it was an honor to be one. An adopted son with all the rights and privileges a son would have. Look up what a "doulos" is.

I've already said the model you're thinking of is immoral and not permitted Biblically. Why are you still arguing with me?



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 09:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
"Gravitational Time Dilation 2 astronauts"
That's why I said time exists, it just depends on the reference point.



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 09:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hydroman

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
It's not an illusion FOR US, we live in the 4th dimension. In the grand scheme of things, and relevant to this argument it's an illusion, there is no time in eternity. There is no time in the 5th - 10th dimensions, you need mass, gravity, and velocity for there to be time.

See, I was talking about time in our reality this whole time. I'm not talking about time in those other dimensions. I'm talking about in our reality. How did we get on this anyway?


It's still a physical property here, it's not uniform. Even here it's not a constant, outside the 4th dimension it's non-existant.



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 09:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hydroman

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
"Gravitational Time Dilation 2 astronauts"
That's why I said time exists, it just depends on the reference point.


Good God, whatever dude.

What's your question?



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 09:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
No they didn't, a bond servant served freely, it was an honor to be one. An adopted son with all the rights and privileges a son would have. Look up what a "doulos" is.

I've already said the model you're thinking of is immoral and not permitted Biblically. Why are you still arguing with me?
No they didn't what? The bible says "Servants, obey your Masters," does it not? Next, you still haven't answered my question on beating your servant. It clearly states it in the bible that as long as they don't die after two days from the beating, it's ok. Do you deny this? You STILL have not answered that.
edit on 12-4-2012 by Hydroman because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 09:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Hydroman
 

So someone who claims time is an illusion or isn't fundamental seems to have ignored or dismissed SR and GR, and did so without any explanation.
Or get their "physics" from a YouTube video religion guru.



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 09:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
What's your question?
My original question? It was "Is it moral to allow the sacrifice of an innocent creature to atone for your wrong doings?"



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 09:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by jmdewey60
 



There is no word for eternal in the Old Testament


The eternal God is thy refuge, and underneath are the everlasting arms: and he shall thrust out the enemy from before thee; and shall say, Destroy them.


Isn't that from the OT?



Dude, don't even bother, 9.9 times out of 10 when he says a word isn't in the Bible you can guarantee there are a minimum of 4 places it exists there.

Then he won't say "Golly darn, I suppose you're right." He'll just ask some other irrelevant question, when you answer that one, repeat.



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 09:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
It's still a physical property here, it's not uniform. Even here it's not a constant, outside the 4th dimension it's non-existant.
I agree with that, if there is anything outside the 4th dimension. But, it does exist depending on the reference point. Wherever I am in this dimension, when I wave my hand so much time has passed. It is relative to my location.

Now that I think about it, when your god spoke and created, how did he know it had been a day?
edit on 12-4-2012 by Hydroman because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 09:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hydroman

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
What's your question?
My original question? It was "Is it moral to allow the sacrifice of an innocent creature to atone for your wrong doings?"


Since I cannot appeal to the Bible and must appeal to my own immorality, I'm disqualified from answering because Moral Relativism is a self-refuting fallacy.

Next question?



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 09:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Since I cannot appeal to the Bible and must appeal to my own immorality, I'm disqualified from answering because Moral Relativism is a self-refuting fallacy.

Next question?

At least you're honest. You can't decide what is moral or immoral without your ancient book. Again, I am glad you live in our day and TIME so that you have some kind of guide.


P.S. Please don't misplace your bible because you might accidentally kill someone when you forget what's right and wrong.
edit on 12-4-2012 by Hydroman because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 09:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hydroman

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
It's still a physical property here, it's not uniform. Even here it's not a constant, outside the 4th dimension it's non-existant.
I agree with that, if there is anything outside the 4th dimension. But, it does exist depending on the reference point. Wherever I am in this dimension, when I wave my hand so much time has passed. It is relative to my location.


One last time before I leave.

No, it appears time has passed, it's an illusion. It appears to you time has passed, in reality of reality of absolute realities (which is an illusion too, we live in a digital simulation, Planck's Lenth) it has not, it's an illusion. You are tricked into thinking time has passed because you are bound in the 4th dimension and exist in 10.

That's the only other way I can try and explain it.



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 09:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 

The eternal God is thy refuge, and underneath are the everlasting arms: and he shall thrust out the enemy from before thee; and shall say, Destroy them.
The literal meaning of the Hebrew word is, from of a former age.



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 09:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Next question?
If your daughter gets raped, is it ok to make her marry the person who raped her? What does your bible say?



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 09:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Hydroman
 



You can't decide what is moral or immoral without your ancient book.


That's dishonest, I didn't say that. I said if I cannot appeal to an authority higher than mankind (God) I must then appeal to myself and Moral Relativism is a self-refuting fallacy of logic.

So is the idea of claiming there is a "middle ground" and the Bible is biased, that idea is a bias itself thus makes the entire idea self-refuting.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join