Conscience

[sana8410]

Whenever I seek to verify something from Scripture, I am sooner or later successful.  It is historically accurate, for example.

In addition, it can be tested.  People's lives are changed in a powerful way in trusting in the risen Jesus that does not happen for those who do not trust.
Conscience is evidence that there is a Creator. Unless you are saying right and wrong are subjective.

Of course this is subjective.It was right to stone adultresses to death once.Do we still think this is the right thing to do? What is also subjective is how you arrived at that conclusion. You could just as easily say, "Conscience is evidence that Mickey Mouse is real" and it be the "truth".

So, how do you determine if conscience is proof of anything?

[1714141138]

1714141138

[1714141138]

1714141138

[1714141138]

1714141138

[Mr.Bitty]

Whenever I seek to verify something from Scripture, I am sooner or later successful.  It is historically accurate, for example.

In addition, it can be tested.  People's lives are changed in a powerful way in trusting in the risen Jesus that does not happen for those who do not trust.
Conscience is evidence that there is a Creator. Unless you are saying right and wrong are subjective.

Of course this is subjective.It was right to stone adultresses to death once.Do we still think this is the right thing to do? What is also subjective is how you arrived at that conclusion. You could just as easily say, "Conscience is evidence that Mickey Mouse is real" and it be the "truth".

So, how do you determine if conscience is proof of anything?

So, you are saying when it was acceptable, it was right, and when it is not acceptable, it is wrong?So, if it becomes acceptable, it becomes right again?If someone was to ask you why stealing is wrong, or rape, you would tell them what?

[Decksperiment]

Wrong is right. Sensations of the mind. The ultimate seduction. The realm.

[sana8410]

Whenever I seek to verify something from Scripture, I am sooner or later successful.  It is historically accurate, for example.

In addition, it can be tested.  People's lives are changed in a powerful way in trusting in the risen Jesus that does not happen for those who do not trust.
Conscience is evidence that there is a Creator. Unless you are saying right and wrong are subjective.

Of course this is subjective.It was right to stone adultresses to death once.Do we still think this is the right thing to do? What is also subjective is how you arrived at that conclusion. You could just as easily say, "Conscience is evidence that Mickey Mouse is real" and it be the "truth".

So, how do you determine if conscience is proof of anything?

So, you are saying when it was acceptable, it was right, and when it is not acceptable, it is wrong?So, if it becomes acceptable, it becomes right again?If someone was to ask you why stealing is wrong, or rape, you would tell them what?

When it was acceptable it was considered to be right by the god squad at the time.

I assume the present god squad frowns on such behaviour today.

Which rather begs the question: was god right when he thought stoning adulterers was right and moral?  Or is god right now that he has changed his mind and now thinks stoning adulterers is wrong?

You answer this directly, don't counter with some silly question, don't obfuscate, just tell me when god got this matter right?  Now or in the past?

[Mr.Bitty]

Actually, did not my questions come first?

But, to answer, biblically, adultery is always wrong.  And, it is deserving of death.  It is not ok now, if that is what you think changed.  What God chooses to do about may have - and there are still consequences to adultery, even if no one else knows but the two involved.

 

Your turn.

[Rigon]

Whenever I seek to verify something from Scripture, I am sooner or later successful.  It is historically accurate, for example.

In addition, it can be tested.  People's lives are changed in a powerful way in trusting in the risen Jesus that does not happen for those who do not trust.
Conscience is evidence that there is a Creator. Unless you are saying right and wrong are subjective.

Apparently not. If there were a "creator" then it would have "created" everything/everyone equal.
The fact that most people ( certainly not all!) have a conscience and the ability to distinguish between right and wrong, but disagree about the existance of this "creator" is evidence of nothing at all.

[BADecker]

Whenever I seek to verify something from Scripture, I am sooner or later successful.  It is historically accurate, for example.

In addition, it can be tested.  People's lives are changed in a powerful way in trusting in the risen Jesus that does not happen for those who do not trust.
Conscience is evidence that there is a Creator. Unless you are saying right and wrong are subjective.

Apparently not. If there were a "creator" then it would have "created" everything/everyone equal.
The fact that most people ( certainly not all!) have a conscience and the ability to distinguish between right and wrong, but disagree about the existance of this "creator" is evidence of nothing at all.

Why? Because you say so? Yet the Preamble for the Constitution of the United States indicates this.

[sana8410]

Actually, did not my questions come first?

But, to answer, biblically, adultery is always wrong.  And, it is deserving of death.  It is not ok now, if that is what you think changed.  What God chooses to do about may have - and there are still consequences to adultery, even if no one else knows but the two involved.

 

Your turn.

I want to know whether the original penalty was right or not. So in your god's eyes it is always moral to stone adulterers?

[Rigon]

Actually, did not my questions come first?

But, to answer, biblically, adultery is always wrong.  And, it is deserving of death.  It is not ok now, if that is what you think changed.  What God chooses to do about may have - and there are still consequences to adultery, even if no one else knows but the two involved.

 

Your turn.

I want to know whether the original penalty was right or not. So in your god's eyes it is always moral to stone adulterers?

Jesus said, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.".
Obviously he is demonstrating he doesn't know his ass from his elbow....  no one would cast a stone because the mob was equally guilty of "sin" (generic).

[Mr.Bitty]

Actually, did not my questions come first?

But, to answer, biblically, adultery is always wrong.  And, it is deserving of death.  It is not ok now, if that is what you think changed.  What God chooses to do about may have - and there are still consequences to adultery, even if no one else knows but the two involved.

 

Your turn.

I want to know whether the original penalty was right or not. So in your god's eyes it is always moral to stone adulterers?

So, you are asking about the penalty, not whether the right or wrong of adultery has changed.

The penalty was just.  Actually, if you and I were to get what we deserve, according to the Bible, it would be alot worse.

But, there is mercy and grace in Jesus.

[noviapriani]

Actually, did not my questions come first?

But, to answer, biblically, adultery is always wrong.  And, it is deserving of death.  It is not ok now, if that is what you think changed.  What God chooses to do about may have - and there are still consequences to adultery, even if no one else knows but the two involved.

 

Your turn.

I want to know whether the original penalty was right or not. So in your god's eyes it is always moral to stone adulterers?

So, you are asking about the penalty, not whether the right or wrong of adultery has changed.

The penalty was just.  Actually, if you and I were to get what we deserve, according to the Bible, it would be alot worse.

But, there is mercy and grace in Jesus.

Allegedly that same "god", who passed the Ten Commandments; who told the Israelites..."Thou Shalt Not Kill.".......commanded them to commit genocide on a massive scale (according to their unverified history).

[Mr.Bitty]

Actually, did not my questions come first?

But, to answer, biblically, adultery is always wrong.  And, it is deserving of death.  It is not ok now, if that is what you think changed.  What God chooses to do about may have - and there are still consequences to adultery, even if no one else knows but the two involved.

 

Your turn.

I want to know whether the original penalty was right or not. So in your god's eyes it is always moral to stone adulterers?

Jesus said, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.".
Obviously he is demonstrating he doesn't know his ass from his elbow....  no one would cast a stone because the mob was equally guilty of "sin" (generic).

Not necessarily.  How God chooses to handle evil has varied.

Look.  We have different type of laws, yes?  Which side of the road to drive on - does it matter?   What matters is that we obey the law.  The principle behind the law is the same - the law exists to protect lives.

Adultery is always wrong.  It does not fit into the 'which side of the road to drive'.  Neither does murder.

[BADecker]

Actually, did not my questions come first?

But, to answer, biblically, adultery is always wrong.  And, it is deserving of death.  It is not ok now, if that is what you think changed.  What God chooses to do about may have - and there are still consequences to adultery, even if no one else knows but the two involved.

 

Your turn.

I want to know whether the original penalty was right or not. So in your god's eyes it is always moral to stone adulterers?

Jesus said, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.".
Obviously he is demonstrating he doesn't know his ass from his elbow....  no one would cast a stone because the mob was equally guilty of "sin" (generic).

They didn't care what Jesus said. All they cared about was how they looked in the eyes of the people.

[sana8410]

I think stoning anyone to death for any reason is wrong.So I think your god is evil if it demands such punishment,or your the one who's gona throw the stone first?

[Mr.Bitty]

Actually, did not my questions come first?

But, to answer, biblically, adultery is always wrong.  And, it is deserving of death.  It is not ok now, if that is what you think changed.  What God chooses to do about may have - and there are still consequences to adultery, even if no one else knows but the two involved.

 

Your turn.

I want to know whether the original penalty was right or not. So in your god's eyes it is always moral to stone adulterers?

So, you are asking about the penalty, not whether the right or wrong of adultery has changed.

The penalty was just.  Actually, if you and I were to get what we deserve, according to the Bible, it would be alot worse.

But, there is mercy and grace in Jesus.

Allegedly that same "god", who passed the Ten Commandments; who told the Israelites..."Thou Shalt Not Kill.".......commanded them to commit genocide on a massive scale (according to their unverified history).

But, showing mercy has its place.  Even Joseph, thinking Mary had committed adultery, did not seek to have her stoned.  But, God is making it clear, it is a sin worthy of death.  He lists others also.  In the laws given to Moses, we see how holy God is.   Now, when the women caught in adultery came before Jesus, it is interesting that He did not say that it was wrong to stone her.  But, he saw motive also.  He recognized that they did not care that she was caught in adultery (notice that the man she was with was not brought before him).  They knew the law, but not the heart of God.


But, clear or not - are you saying that one cannot absolutely say anything is wrong?

[BADecker]

I think stoning anyone to death for any reason is wrong.So I think your god is evil if it demands such punishment,or your the one who's gona throw the stone first?

It's nice to be in the USA or one of the common law countries. We have the freedom to express our opinions and beliefs.

[BADecker]

Actually, did not my questions come first?

But, to answer, biblically, adultery is always wrong.  And, it is deserving of death.  It is not ok now, if that is what you think changed.  What God chooses to do about may have - and there are still consequences to adultery, even if no one else knows but the two involved.

 

Your turn.

I want to know whether the original penalty was right or not. So in your god's eyes it is always moral to stone adulterers?

So, you are asking about the penalty, not whether the right or wrong of adultery has changed.

The penalty was just.  Actually, if you and I were to get what we deserve, according to the Bible, it would be alot worse.

But, there is mercy and grace in Jesus.

Allegedly that same "god", who passed the Ten Commandments; who told the Israelites..."Thou Shalt Not Kill.".......commanded them to commit genocide on a massive scale (according to their unverified history).

But, showing mercy has its place.  Even Joseph, thinking Mary had committed adultery, did not seek to have her stoned.  But, God is making it clear, it is a sin worthy of death.  He lists others also.  In the laws given to Moses, we see how holy God is.   Now, when the women caught in adultery came before Jesus, it is interesting that He did not say that it was wrong to stone her.  But, he saw motive also.  He recognized that they did not care that she was caught in adultery (notice that the man she was with was not brought before him).  They knew the law, but not the heart of God.


But, clear or not - are you saying that one cannot absolutely say anything is wrong?

The peoples that God ordered Israel to destroy, were nations that had been granted much opportunity to do what was right, namely believe in the ONE God rather than the many gods. By destroying them, they were stopped from having any more kids that they would teach their shameful ways, who would go to hell just like their parents were going to. So, there was great justification in what God ordered Israel to do.

[Mr.Bitty]

I think stoning anyone to death for any reason is wrong.So I think your god is evil if it demands such punishment,or your the one who's gona throw the stone first?

But, since you think you opinion on this is totally subjective, what does it matter?  If subjective, even saying 'god is evil' means nothing.  All you are saying is that you object to it in the same way someone might object to a flavor of ice cream that he does not like.