Most of the terrorists who attacked the World Trade Centre were Saudis. Why isn't the US at war with Saudi Arabia ?
And the US can simply walk away and end the violence. it's not their country.
Giving some jobs to the locals, have a new rail line or two to show them... That's a bit better than droning them whenever they feel like it.
A bit of soft diplomacy never hurts. I wonder if Trump recognises that , or if he still believes that the gun is mightier than the yuan.
And the US can simply walk away and end the violence. it's not their country.
As I said it's not about countries, it's about groups. USA is fighting terrorist groups all over the world.Most of the terrorists who attacked the World Trade Centre were Saudis. Why isn't the US at war with Saudi Arabia ?
And it is patently obvious why. They either must condone (as you tried to do) the abhorrent acts of the God of the OT or they must reject the OT in its entirety. However, they can't do the latter as the OT is the basis and justification upon which much of the NT stands. Without the OT, the NT is just a story of another good man and his philosophy. So rather than face that choice, they avoid the issue.
What did the morality of the NT reveal that wasn't already known?
You're not open minded to any possible explanations for the brutality in the OT. Or even Cynic's explanations from what I read in the last few posts that he wrote. I just hope that you can be honest with yourself. Maybe you're really an agnostic but you don't know it.
the Christian morals are too good, seemingly out of this world.
Thankyou for offering your own personal example, of the, all too prevalent, and insidious, practice of the "HolierThanThouism" religion.It's not that I am not open to the explanations. I simply do not accept the explanations, probably because my "imperfect morality" is far superior to the perfect morality that you believe comes with your religion.
I am honest with myself. But I do not think that applies to most Christians. I'll give you an example. Let's say that there was no OT, but someone today discovers some ancient texts that are identical in every way to what is in the OT and further analysis shows those texts belong to some ancient now defunct religion. You can be sure without any doubt that Christians would condemn those texts and say that the people that held that religion followed the wrong God as his actions are more akin to that of Satan. There would be parallels drawn to the atrocities of ISIS. They would highlight how different the God of those texts is to the God that Christians worship. There wouldn't be one Christian, William Lane Craig included, who would try to defend the God of those texts and that God would simply be condemned as a false God and outright evil. If anyone were to suggest that the God of those texts was in fact Jesus, they would be accused of blasphemy and excommunicated.
That is why Christians aren't being honest with themselves. They are hypocritical for not disassociating themselves from the God of the OT. That is why they do not want to talk about the OT. It forces them to confront their own dishonesty.
You willingly enroll in the armed forces without knowing that you may well be asked to take another person's life. Morals are swapped for national ethics.
I often have similar thoughts when encountering ardent anti theists. However, I usually suspect "closet theism" consequent to theistic terror, to be the more likely cause of zealously anti theistic behaviours.Maybe you're really an agnostic but you don't know it.
I've had similar thoughts as well. Back to your medicine example...I often have similar thoughts when encountering ardent anti theists. However, I usually suspect "closet theism" consequent to theistic terror, to be the more likely cause of zealously anti theistic behaviours.
There is a classic teaching, courtesy of the prophet Shakespeare, that is relatable to the observation we are making here:
https://m.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=https://g.co/kgs/aCmJmL
Thankyou for offering your own personal example, of the, all too prevalent, and insidious, practice of the "HolierThanThouism" religion.
I would normally recommend the instructional teachings, from chapter 7 of the gospel according to Saint Matthew, as a useful remedy for the aforementioned malady.
It's not that I am not open to the explanations. I simply do not accept the explanations, probably because my "imperfect morality" is far superior to the perfect morality that you believe comes with your religion.
I am honest with myself. But I do not think that applies to most Christians. I'll give you an example. Let's say that there was no OT, but someone today discovers some ancient texts that are identical in every way to what is in the OT and further analysis shows those texts belong to some ancient now defunct religion. You can be sure without any doubt that Christians would condemn those texts and say that the people that held that religion followed the wrong God as his actions are more akin to that of Satan. There would be parallels drawn to the atrocities of ISIS. They would highlight how different the God of those texts is to the God that Christians worship. There wouldn't be one Christian, William Lane Craig included, who would try to defend the God of those texts and that God would simply be condemned as a false God and outright evil. If anyone were to suggest that the God of those texts was in fact Jesus, they would be accused of blasphemy and excommunicated.
That is why Christians aren't being honest with themselves. They are hypocritical for not disassociating themselves from the God of the OT. That is why they do not want to talk about the OT. It forces them to confront their own dishonesty.
Well I suppose a soldier would have to ask himself if he was in a field somewhere and saw an unarmed woman and child reaping crops or whatever, would he just walk up and shoot them ?
The fact that it happens unseen from an aircraft at 30,000 feet does not alter the morality of the situation at all.
Hiroshima was a minor supply and logistics base for the Japanese military, but it also had large stockpiles of military supplies.[115] The city was also a communications center, a key port for shipping and an assembly area for troops.[76] It was a beehive of war industry, manufacturing parts for planes and boats, for bombs, rifles, and handguns; children were shown how to construct and hurl gasoline bombs and the wheelchair-bound and bedridden were assembling booby traps to be planted in the beaches of Kyushu. A new slogan appeared on the walls of Hiroshima: "FORGET SELF! ALL OUT FOR YOUR COUNTRY!"[116] It was also the second largest city in Japan after Kyoto that was still undamaged by air raids,[117] due to the fact that it lacked the aircraft manufacturing industry that was the XXI Bomber Command's priority target. On July 3, the Joint Chiefs of Staff placed it off limits to bombers, along with Kokura, Niigata and Kyoto.[118]
Another statistic of note.Well I suppose a soldier would have to ask himself if he was in a field somewhere and saw an unarmed woman and child reaping crops or whatever, would he just walk up and shoot them ?
The fact that it happens unseen from an aircraft at 30,000 feet does not alter the morality of the situation at all.
No allied force goes after civilians for the sake of it, the civilians were collateral damage, not the target.
By the way, I do wish to extend you my heartfelt gratitude for not placing me on ignore.Far better you read a book called “How to recognise irony”
a large amount of the “civilians” were also working for the war effort, in factories etc.So, kill one soldier and 10 civilians are collateral damage ? What sort of ratio is acceptable ?
And if you are going to quote something, kindly provide a link so we can decide if it's propaganda or not.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?