re: Conservative atheists need to accept this truth.

quote:

---

At what point in our country's history do you think we were better off than now?

---

When we were not slaughtering babies at the rate of roughly 4,000 a month. Maybe you could enlighten me as to why slaughtering thousands of babies (and potential workers) is good for our country? I'd be interested in knowing your rationale for this genocide.

quote:

---

At least half of the Ten Commandments are far more utilitarian than religious in nature.

---

As I said before, even from a scriptural standpoint they are what's known as God's Spiritual Law. And as such, they exist on their own with or without the existence of Christianity.

These people need look no farther than the fact that it was a Jewish prophet who relayed them to the people. Not a Christian prophet.

The Christians have no claim on these commandments. And of course they're common sense declarations because they simply outline the ways in which people can coexist without strife. Don't be a murderer, because if you are people are eventually going to get sick of your shite and murder you. Don't sleep with your neighbor's wife, because same as before, your neighbor will seek to retaliate against you. Etc etc etc. There is nothing inherently "Christian" about these mandates. All religions employ them in one way or another. All systems of law in general employ them in one way or another.

Sure, you can call them Christian Values, and that's fine. But you cannot walk away from them. They are immutable. There will never come a time when a government -- any government -- abandons these tennents and says, "you know, we were wrong before. It is now declared that sleeping with your neighbor's wife and murdering people is okay." That's no government at all. That's anarchy.

Is the argument that the decline in the numbers of people claiming Christianity indicating we are moving towards anarchy? That's ridiculous.

quote:

---

Off putting, but apparently not so troublesome as to cause people to seek out and avail themselves of the means of rescue and escape.

---

Christians do not have a monopoly on the truth. I understand that as a Christian you disagree, and that's fine, but the Christians are the ones that are having trouble with growing their flock and again it isn't my job or anyone elses to figure out how to fix it for them.

You can either take the constructive criticism or not. It makes no difference to me. I am not a Christian and I do not fear for even one second what my fate is.

Is Christianity a valid path to this escape you speak of? In my opinion, yes. But it is not the only one.

quote:

---

As I said before, even from a scriptural standpoint they are what's known as God's Spiritual Law. And as such, they exist on their own with or without the existence of Christianity.

---

For all your angst about people not making proper arguments and baseless claims in the other thread, you're going to throw this down and just declare it a necessary truth? That's hilarious.

quote:

---

For all your angst about people not making proper arguments and baseless claims in the other thread, you're going to throw this down and just declare it a necessary truth? That's hilarious

---

What? That's "hilarious?" Do you even understand what you are saying? You're saying that God's law somehow changes?

Paul spoke to this at length in Roman's chapter 7. God's law does not change.

Further, do you realize that there are not just 10 commandments? There are actually 613 of them. It's an entire code. They're found throughout the books of Exodus, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy. The reason I mention it is because if you look at the format for the law, it is indistinguishable from the Suzerain Covenants, which were used by the Hittites, the Egyptians and the Assyrians.

1. Preamble: the parties of the contract are identified (the suzerain and/or his vassals),
2. History: any past relationship between the suzerain and his vassals is described,
3. Stipulations: laws are defined,
4. Sanctions: rewards and penalties are defined.

Those four criteria are the basis for all law. They predate Moses. And Paul confirms, these do not change. The Code of Hammurabi also adheres to this format. But we are concerning ourselves with Mosaic law. So...

1. Preamble: 'Then God spoke all these words . . .' The suzerain is identified,
2. History: 'I am Yahweh your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.' God's (brief) historical relationship with the (newly-forming) nation of Israel is described,
3. Stipulations: 'You shall . . .' The Ten Commandments initiate a series of laws, continuing all the way to Exodus 23 (concluding abruptly with the command not to boil a kid in its mother's milk),
4. Sanctions: God promises reward to Israel for their continued obedience to the angel guiding them, namely, they will be rewarded with entry and settlement in the land of Canaan.

^^ as you can clearly see, the Mosaic Law was in use before Mt. Sinai, and as for Paul's thoughts on the matter see Romans 7 and 8 where he speaks of the commandments no less than six times, proclaiming them to be the very foundation of God's law. He also speaks of the law in Ephesians 6:1-3 and quotes from Exodus while doing so telling us that the commandments must be kept. Which goes without saying because as I said before, they are as immutable as the Law of Gravity and never change.

quote:

---

You are among several contributors that are thoughtful, insightful, and courteous

---

I had to stop here to have a laugh because I am often not courteous as I should be.

But thanks anyways. If it makes any difference I generally try to only speak on matters I have given diligent thought to.

This entire post is incoherent. Maybe it's me and my brain isn't working as well as it could today.

But I do know that I never called anyone a "fricking retard" last night. I suggested that someone's sister in law might be retarded because someone claimed she said some retarded shite, but that wasn't directed at anyone in the thread.

I did however call you a fricking idiot and I tried to not even do that. If you'll remember I tried to give you the benefit of the doubt and you wouldn't take it.

At any rate, I think I made my case that the commandments are God's law. And as such it doesn't change. It will always exist.

I even went an extra step and showed you how the format for the law was in use before Moses penned the words. If you're unsatisfied with my response then we can just agree to disagree.

And I still say it doesn't make any sense whatsoever to claim atheists hate God. Not only is it incoherent, but I would suggest it's morally wrong. Christians, or theists in general, should not seek confrontation with those we disagree with. Part of God's law that we are speaking about now proclaims we should love our neighbors as we love ourselves. I don't see a lot of that around here. I see a lot of so-called "Christians" saying and implying vile things about those they disagree with and I think we should strive to be better than that.

When it is pointed out over and over and over again the error in someone's ways and they continue to engage in shitty behavior, it can be frustrating. Which leads to outbursts like mine towards you last night. So, for what it's worth, I apologize.

quote:

---

At any rate, I think I made my case that the commandments are God's law

---

If by "made my case" you mean you just declared it was so, then yes. You seemed to have a problem with that methodology in the other thread. I guess it's an acceptable method for you, but not for anybody else.

quote:

---

I even went an extra step and showed you how the format for the law was in use before Moses penned the words.

---

I'm familiar with the suzerain/vassal model. All that means is that God used a model the Israelites would be familiar with; it does not mean He was bound by that model. He wouldn't be much of a God if that were the case.

quote:

---

You're proving my point.

---

You don't have a point, you have a claim. And you think just stating that it's so is proof.

I have no problem with that, but you sure seem to when somebody else does it.