Replying to this comment by TXStorm to Joshua:
Out of curiosity, since you put yourself up as one who knows what god *really* said, upon what do you base your belief that the xn bible is in error and your claims are correct?
Indeed.
If you believe that the Bible is the word of God, then you must believe in all of it. If you accept that some parts of it are merely the prejudices of primitive men, instead of being inspired by God, then how can you tell which are which? If you choose the more “tasteful” parts as God-inspired, then in effect you are creating your own religion, according to what you already believe (for instance, if you’re a sexist male, you’ll accept the sexist parts; if you’re not, you won’t.)
And how can anyone tell, objectively, which parts are inspired by God? Nobody can. Rationally, either you accept all of it, or none of it; if you accept that only some parts of the Bible are God-inspired, then what prevents you - or anyone - from basing their beliefs on the wrong parts, and letting those guide your actions? Nothing. Suppose, then, that God exists, but you are offending him because you’re obeying the wrong parts of the Bible? Nope. Bad idea. Too dangerous. Logically, then, it’s all or nothing.
On the other hand, without the Bible, what remains, then? For instance, take Jesus. Unless you’ve had some visions, dreams, or something like that (which I wouldn’t exactly call trustworthy - people dream of the most incredible things all the time), the only source of information about Jesus’s life, his teachings, his supposed resurrection and divinity is the Bible. There’s nothing else. No historical documents, from his time, mention him at all. Whatever he did (if he did exist), was too small, too localized, to be mentioned by historians at the time - it happened in a remote, non-important part of the Roman Empire.
So, without the Bible, what do you - or anyone - know about Jesus? Nothing. Either you trust in the Bible, or you have no reason to believe a guy called Jesus ever existed - never mind whether he was the son of God. If you do trust that part of the Bible, again, you have to take the rest of it with it. It makes no sense at all to say “this part is true, that part is false”.
In short, being a “Christian” without accepting the Bible - the whole of it - is absurd. Basically, you’re just making up stuff by yourself, deciding what you will believe in.
If you don’t accept any “holy books”, then something like Deism might make some sense (though atheism is still more rational, because you’re not adding more entities to the universe.) Normal theism, however, including Christianity, makes no sense whatsoever.
Not that I think theism with the Bible is more correct, of course, but at least it’s a little more coherent to believe in Jesus because the Bible says so, than to believe in him just because you felt like it.
Related posts:
Subscribe to this blog
I, too, have thought about how Christians believe everything in the Bible, but rarely look into the history of the Bible (or their religion, for that matter). I especially wonder about the modernist’s cherry-picking only certain passages that ARE positive, and DO preach about good values. As you said, you can either accept the whole book or none at all, but the majority of people will believe in certain parts of the Bible.
Certain parts? Let’s think about this approach. In order to be a Christian you must first accept the club rules, and even their foundations are being picked based on what one “agrees with.” God is often agreed upon as being all-knowing, all-loving, and perfect. He is everywhere at once, but many believe that he exists “outside of the universe.” It is the idea that God is perfect that needs to be examined. If God is perfect, and the Bible is THE word of God–or even inspired by–then why would anyone not believe in ALL the scriptures? God is perfect, he has clearly laid out what he finds acceptable and expected of his fan club, then isn’t the modernist’s approach a DISBELIEF in their perfect God. You can disagree with a lot in the book, but in disagreeing with (any) of the Bible would also be a disagreeance with God’s word. He’s perfect, but I don’t agree with this whole homosexuality or not eating pork idea of his… that takes some balls.
It’s a big book, and it’s not that easy to read so most of the faithful don’t read it. They hear what someone who does read it has to say, and that’s good enough. A movie would be better, but the minister’s word will suffice for most.
What has always puzzled me is that faith is such a personal issue, and the idea of not believing makes no sense to them. But how many of them ask to themselves why SHOULD they believe in their religion? So many people out there blindly follow their faith and cast away anyone who believes in a different imaginary friend.
I inspired a post! Im honored
As to what can be taken as the word’s of God and what should be taken as history, I covered on the comment board that inspired this post. This is an argument that is usually brought up by those who have not read the Bible in its entirety. Unfortunately, it is also (usually) defended by people who have not fully read it either (don’t accuse me of this! haha. I will always cite scriptural reference when speaking for the Bible). I am open to hearing any scriptural references.
So all and only people who have not read the xn bible in its entirety ask you upon what grounds you place your own claims about what “god” *really* said over that of the xn bible?
Hm.. I see several problems with this new claim, not the least of which is that it is a red herring which avoids answering the question.
First it is insulting as well as false. I have read the xn bible in its entirety, and as I have already noted in the previous thread your claims are patently false. I asked for your basis for claiming to be a higher authority on the “word of god” and your response is to engage in ad hominem attack… This is quite telling.
So, why avoid reason, evidence, civility, and honesty? Why avoid answering the question? What makes your claims which are directly contrary to the xn bible, superior to the xn bible? How is it that you are granted special knowledge not available to any other being?
Oh, btw you should be able to pick up on a number of fallacies in your arguments to which I have alluded, albeit somewhat subtly.. (appeal to private/special “knowledge”, unfalsifiability, appeal to (false) authority, red herring, ad hominem, to name but a few… )
Though I fear offering more citations will distract you from the questions you have yet to answer, the apologies you have yet to make, and the false claims you have yet to abandon here are a few more tidbits:
Noah, a man of the soil, was the first to plant a vineyard. He drank some of the wine and became drunk, and he lay uncovered in his tent. And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brothers outside. Then Shem and Japheth took a garment, laid it on both their shoulders, and walked backward and covered the nakedness of their father; their faces were turned away, and they did not see their father’s nakedness. When Noah awoke from his wine and knew what his youngest son had done to him, he said, “Cursed be Canaan; lowest of slaves shall he be to his brothers.” He also said, “Blessed by the Lord my God be Shem; and let Canaan be his slave. May God make space for Japheth, and let him live in the tents of Shem; and let Canaan be his slave.” (Genesis 9:20-27 NRSV)
Then Zimri, who commanded half of the royal chariots, made plans to kill him. One day in Tirzah, Elah was getting drunk at the home of Arza, the supervisor of the palace. Zimri walked in and struck him down and killed him. This happened in the twenty-seventh year of King Asa’s reign in Judah. Then Zimri became the next king. Zimri immediately killed the entire royal family of Baasha, and he did not leave a single male child. He even destroyed distant relatives and friends. So Zimri destroyed the dynasty of Baasha as the LORD had promised through the prophet Jehu. This happened because of the sins of Baasha and his son Elah and because of all the sins they led Israel to commit, arousing the anger of the LORD, the God of Israel, with their idols. (1 Kings 16:9-13 NLT)
You must destroy all the nations the LORD your God hands over to you. Show them no mercy and do not worship their gods. If you do, they will trap you. Perhaps you will think to yourselves, ‘How can we ever conquer these nations that are so much more powerful than we are?’ But don’t be afraid of them! Just remember what the LORD your God did to Pharaoh and to all the land of Egypt. Remember the great terrors the LORD your God sent against them. You saw it all with your own eyes! And remember the miraculous signs and wonders, and the amazing power he used when he brought you out of Egypt. The LORD your God will use this same power against the people you fear. And then the LORD your God will send hornets to drive out the few survivors still hiding from you! “No, do not be afraid of those nations, for the LORD your God is among you, and he is a great and awesome God. The LORD your God will drive those nations out ahead of you little by little. You will not clear them away all at once, for if you did, the wild animals would multiply too quickly for you. But the LORD your God will hand them over to you. He will throw them into complete confusion until they are destroyed. He will put their kings in your power, and you will erase their names from the face of the earth. No one will be able to stand against you, and you will destroy them all. (Deuteronomy 7:16-24 NLT)
If a man still prophesies, his parents, father and mother, shall say to him, “You shall not live, because you have spoken a lie in the name of the Lord.” When he prophesies, his parents, father and mother, shall thrust him through. (Zechariah 13:3 NAB)
A lovely bit of condoned mass rape: (Judges 21:10-24 NLT)
Another lovely bit of rape of virgins whoolly approved by “god” and moses (only after the murders of innocent boys is done of course.. One has to take care of business before getting down to raping small young girls..): (Numbers 31:7-18 NLT)
They attacked Midian just as the LORD had commanded Moses, and they killed all the men. All five of the Midianite kings – Evi, Rekem, Zur, Hur, and Reba – died in the battle. They also killed Balaam son of Beor with the sword. Then the Israelite army captured the Midianite women and children and seized their cattle and flocks and all their wealth as plunder. They burned all the towns and villages where the Midianites had lived. After they had gathered the plunder and captives, both people and animals, they brought them all to Moses and Eleazar the priest, and to the whole community of Israel, which was camped on the plains of Moab beside the Jordan River, across from Jericho.
Moses, Eleazar the priest, and all the leaders of the people went to meet them outside the camp. But Moses was furious with all the military commanders who had returned from the battle. “Why have you let all the women live?” he demanded. “These are the very ones who followed Balaam’s advice and caused the people of Israel to rebel against the LORD at Mount Peor. They are the ones who caused the plague to strike the LORD’s people. Now kill all the boys and all the women who have slept with a man. Only the young girls who are virgins may live; you may keep them for yourselves.
Ah.. a trifecta Murder, Rape, and Slavery: (Deuteronomy 20:10-14)
As you approach a town to attack it, first offer its people terms for peace. If they accept your terms and open the gates to you, then all the people inside will serve you in forced labor. But if they refuse to make peace and prepare to fight, you must attack the town. When the LORD your God hands it over to you, kill every man in the town. But you may keep for yourselves all the women, children, livestock, and other plunder. You may enjoy the spoils of your enemies that the LORD your God has given you.
Rape and torture.. nice.. : (Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT)
If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.
You get the idea. But please don’t be distracted from the questions already asked, such as upon what is your private special “knowledge” in direct contradiction with the xn bible based?
(Deuteronomy 13:6-10)
I think the above is quite explicit. So… how many Buddhists, Muslims (*), Hindus and such (atheists are apparently excluded; they couldn’t imagine that someone would ever say that there are no gods at all) have you personally stoned to death?
Maybe you’ll say that this can’t be interpreted in this way, that “put to death” and “stone him to death” mean something like exile or excommunication, not physical death. And maybe oral sex isn’t actually “sex”.
Maybe you’ll reply that this is one of the parts that didn’t come from God. But then you can you trust any of the rest? Maybe the part about Jesus coming back from the dead is false as well (after all, the Gospels were written decades after Jesus’ death, by people who weren’t there). Maybe Jews are right after all, and Christians are wrong. Who knows?
(*)Yes, one could say that Muslims worship the same god (though he’s pictured quite differently, and they don’t believe Jesus was divine). Or that Buddhists don’t really worship any gods. One could even say that it’s the Christians who should be stoned - after all, the author of Deuteronomy didn’t worship Jesus. But you get my meaning, anyway, right?
[quote post="155"]You get the idea. But please don’t be distracted from the questions already asked, such as upon what is your private special “knowledge” in direct contradiction with the xn bible based?[/quote]
Through science, the belief that we can understand natural phenomena through natural means. Religion does the exact same thing, but continually use “magic” as reason. Before men had the technology to study nature and the universe, the natural occurances were considered magic. This goes all the way back to Shamanism, which led to religion.
[quote post="155"]First it is insulting as well as false. I have read the xn bible in its entirety, and as I have already noted in the previous thread your claims are patently false. I asked for your basis for claiming to be a higher authority on the “word of god” and your response is to engage in ad hominem attack… This is quite telling.
So, why avoid reason, evidence, civility, and honesty? Why avoid answering the question? What makes your claims which are directly contrary to the xn bible, superior to the xn bible? How is it that you are granted special knowledge not available to any other being?
Oh, btw you should be able to pick up on a number of fallacies in your arguments to which I have alluded, albeit somewhat subtly.. (appeal to private/special “knowledge”, unfalsifiability, appeal to (false) authority, red herring, ad hominem, to name but a few… )[/quote]
Indeed, why avoud reason, evidence, civility, and honesty? If this book offers those ideas that you can agree with, great! Which claims are directly contarty to the bible shouldn’t be the argument. You can find many passages in the bible to support either side of any issue. How our perception, which does not see the bible as a source for reason, civility, morality, etc. is contrary to the idea that there is a man in the clouds watching everything you do. The supernatural is not natural (that’s what makes it super!) and be alluding (constantly) to this idea of there is a being somewhere who knows what’s right and what’s wrong is a silly idea.
How is it that you are granted special knowledge not available to any other being?
How are we granted to do so? I could argue that “God gave us free will” but then we would also have to say that would mean God does not know what we will do, thus breaking his all-knowing foundation. That word “all” has a lot of baggage attached to it.
This shouldn’t be an issue over where one learns about ethics and morals. Whether you look at Aristotle or Allah, you will find a set of ideas they proposed that are suggestions more so than rules. I think the Bible is fiction, and I’m doing quite fine in life. The societies we live in goveren us more so than the holy spirit.
TXStorm,
I never once stated that I have “special knowledge” and that I know what God really meant. These are all silly claims in order to distract from the point. I said that you must read the Bible in context to get the full meaning. This is obvious. It takes no special knowledge to understand what parts of the old testament are history and what parts are “Gods words”. You don’t have to agree with the ideas behind God’s motives, but what is the motivation is making claims that God supports acts like child molesting?
Simply saying, ” your statements are false”, and then later saying things like,”I already pointed out that your statements are false”, are truly absurd and do not, alone, show proof.
You have mostly cited instances of God’s anger. This seems very off topic since we were discussing the authority of the Bible. . . If a God exists than there is both good and evil. Those who do good are rewarded, and those who do bad are punished (assuming god is good). As to the extent of punishment and to whom should be punished is a difficult topic. It would be pointless for me to say that God didn’t condone the killing of specific people since it is stated. All I can do is show the rationale behind it as stated in the Bible:
“16After four generations your (Abraham’s) descendants will return here to this land, when the sin of the Amorites has run its course.” - Gen. 15:16
God didn’t just kill everyone in the “promise land”(the land in which all of the people who were killed in the verses you cited lived) for Abraham. He allowed the people living there time to turn from their sins. There is this idea found often in the Bible that if one constantly sins they reach a “point of no return”, if you will. A place where there is no hope of changing. The Bible refers to this as “sin running its course”. We can observe this in society: When some one acts upon a strong desire to commit a social injustice like rape or murder, often times the person admits to “not being able to stop” themselves. These people become repeat offenders and cannot be able to live in society. This is the purpose of capital punishment. Obviously, the Bible strongly believes in capital punishment, but it is a basis for heated debate. If a “point of no return” does exist than capital punishment must exist. This is the foundation for “God’s Anger”.
According to God, the people of this land had reached that point of no return. Leaving any of them alive would allow their sins to spread.
“This will keep the people of the land from teaching you their detestable customs in the worship of their gods, which would cause you to sin deeply against the LORD your God.” - Dt. 20:18
Concerning the verses you cited:
Noah: Why was Ham in his father’s tent? This was not right. However, lets say he was there for some innocent reason. Why didn’t he cover his own father respectfully? Why did he tell his brothers? Why were they the respectful ones? This passage alludes to a sexual act - or so many biblical scholars believe. This idea would take a bit of interpretation and may be a stretch. At the very least, Ham did not show his father respect as Shem and Japheth did.
Mass rape (Judges 21:14):
All it says is “given to them as wives”. All I can say is that this was the way it was done. This is, as I’m sure you know and enjoy, less of an example of rape and more so of women as property. Unfortunately, in a world where numbers give power, a country must multiply.
Numbers 31:7-18:
You said,”One has to take care of business before getting down to raping small young girls..” grossly and purposefully misinterpreting the verses to make a point. The purpose of the killing falls under capital punishment as already stated. They took the virgins as wives just as in the book of judges. This was a normal practice. Again, this is an example of women as property. Nothing else I can say about this.
Deuteronomy 20:10-14 :
These were specific instructions for ” distant towns, not to the towns of nations nearby.” (DT 20:15). These are similar to modern day war rules. If some one surrenders, don’t kill them. In a world full of war these were “merciful” instructions.
Deuteronomy 22:28-29:
Im not sure why you mentioned this verse since it supports the idea that rape is wrong and compromises your stance that the Bible condones it.
Again, if one accepts that there is a “point of no return”when it comes to doing wrong, God’s actions seem very rational. If this belief is not held, then God surely looks like an ass. I want to point out that I really have no intentions of “converting” others. Im simply stating these things for how I see them.
Pedro,
Even that verse does not say to stone those who believe in other Gods. Its talking about people who would try to mislead them. At the time this verse was recorded, there were countless cults and religions as there are today. Though, the Bible does state that this idolatry is wrong, it does not call for a “jihad” or “holy war”. However, when these people would try to tempt “his people” to follow as well, then God’s “anger” would be roused. Jesus also talked about this idea when he said, “29So if your eye—even if it is your good eye ◙ —causes you to lust, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. 30And if your hand—even if it is your stronger hand ◙ —causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell.” - Mt. 5:29-30
So even this does not support the idea that if you were a good “christian” you would be killing unbelievers.
Sorry for the slow response time. I have very limited free time and I am neglecting my own site to post here.
No, but it quite explicitly says to stone those who attempt to lead someone from the Israelites’ god, which is almost as bad.
And what about 2 Chronicles 15:13:
Now, I assume from the context that this one still refers only to Israelites; that is, they’re not supposed to kill foreigners because they don’t worship the same god. Just other Israelites. Bad enough, if you ask me… besides, Christians believe in the OT as well, so, logically, that part would apply to them too. Kill those who won’t seek the God of Israel, no matter who they are.
Joshua.
I have requested it before and I request it here again: could you please be honest. You yet again blatantly misrepresent what has been said and offered, simply because you do not want your false belief to be questioned.
As is quite evident from the citations and the sound refutations I have offered I have indeed read the xn bible (as well as a great many religious texts). You simply deny the clear irrefutable support for murder, child molestation, rape, and the like in the xn bible, as the will of this impossible entity, but without any basis or merit.
When the evidence conflicts with your conclusion, as it so very clearly does here, the rational choice is to abandon the false conclusion. Instead you claim that you have special knowledge not available to anyone else (since your premise that one need only read the xn bible to reach your false conclusions, is itself demonstrably false by the examples provided). You deny the xn bible itself where it fails to match your desired vision/illusion which also gives evidence to this position you hold that where your belief and the xn bible conflict, you and only you know what god *really* said or meant.
BTW if this “god” commanded that those who try to mislead should be stoned, then are you obeying that commandment by standing outside of xn churches waiting for the ministers? Do you stone yourself as well?
” They took the virgins as wives just as in the book of judges. This was a normal practice.”
Oh, so as long as the rape and murder are “normal practice” then they are good? Come on… Isn’t your god supposed to be all good? How do you know what he *really* meant?
” . He allowed the people living there time to turn from their sins.”
Ah.. yes.. “believe like me, obey me, and I might let you live” is so much better and certainly clears up the murders… Even if these individual did not choose to obey the xn zealots, there is NO BASIS at all for killing them. This is STILL murder.
This goes for all of your excuses. In no case do you actually refute the instances of murder, rape, child molestation, etc. rather you simply accept them as good BECAUSE your god ordered them. This is circular reasoning and nothing more.
And to think Josh, we have not even begun to address the fact that there are a great many different versions of the xn bile, many revisions done over the years by the xn church for their own gain, and of course no possible way to verify any of your claims about the xn bible and what “god” *really said..
Pedro,
You are right with your interpretation of 2chron. 15:13 as for it being about fellow Israelites. Just before that verse it says,”The LORD will stay with you as long as you stay with him! Whenever you seek him, you will find him. But if you abandon him, he will abandon you.” 15:2
At this point the Israelites where getting tired of getting their asses kicked by other nations so they were pretty set on not allowing worship of other Gods IN THERE COUNTRY. To clarify for others, this was a resolute decision by the people of Israel and not a commandment from God. God had a covenant with the people of Israel as a whole. So as a whole they were to fulfill their promise to be His people. At mount sinai they accepted this covenant; it was not forced on them. It was very clear to them that if they did not “self manage” they would come to ruin.
Christians believe that “love” satisfies the law: “if you love your neighbor, you will fulfill all the requirements of God’s law” - Romans 13:8. So to kill those who do not believe like us is actually not a Christian belief. So the idea that Christians should kill nonbelievers isn’t supported by any verse that I know of.
To be fair, I guess it could be said to stand for Jews since they don’t believe that Jesus was the prophesied messiah. As you said though, this idea still only stands for fellow jews and not “outsiders”. Perhaps this has lead to the stereotype that Jews are often “self-haters”. I have never talked to an orthodox Jew about these things so I’m not exactly sure of there stand.
TXStorm,
I have misrepresented nothing. I simply wont agree with you because you make no satisfactory arguments. I don’t care how many “religious books” you have read if you can’t even understand the simplest of scriptures. You have accepted a view of God that is clearly not present in the Bible. You are free to believe whatever you want, but why come to a conclusion that isn’t supported by anything? You accuse me of having “special knowledge” simply because I read the verses in context. Its obvious that you simply do not want to believe in God. Let it be and be at peace with your conclusion. Don’t justify yourself by misleading others.
It wasn’t just a simple matter as you stated, “believe like me, obey me, and I might let you live”. Atheism wasn’t a known option of the time ( as far as we know). Those who didn’t believe in the God of Israel were probably part of some other religion. Apparently these other religions of the time weren’t exactly “nice”. The Bible states that these other religions promoted evils other than just idolatry:
“24There were even shrine prostitutes throughout the land. The people imitated the detestable practices of the pagan nations the LORD had driven from the land ahead of the Israelites.” - 1kings 14:24
“The Avvites worshiped their gods Nibhaz and Tartak. And the people from Sepharvaim even burned their own children as sacrifices to Adrammelech and Anammelech.” - 2kings 17:31
“5You worship your idols with great passion beneath every green tree. You slaughter your children as human sacrifices down in the valleys, under overhanging rocks. - Isa. 57:5
“Because you have exposed yourself in prostitution to all your lovers, and because you have worshiped detestable idols, and because you have slaughtered your children as sacrifices to your gods,. . . .” - Eze. 16:36
“3They cast lots to decide which of my people would be their slaves. They traded young boys for prostitutes and little girls for enough wine to get drunk.” - Joel 3:3
Many more verses like these can be found. . . .
Although it is a convenient thought for an atheist that God killed people for simply not believing in Him, it is not supported by the Bible. The people of the other local religions were caught up in temple prostitution, molesting young boys and girls, and sacrificing their own children. These things can be considered “evil” even if you don’t believe in a God. So when God said, “their sin has run its course”, He wasn’t just talking about idolatry. This takes me back to my last post in which I explained the idea of “the point of no return” and the need for capital punishment.
Many versions of the Bible. . . yes this is true, but I doubt that they would be so different as to disagree on the nature of God. Why even appeal to this idea unless you feel that your “arguments” don’t stand.
Seriously, I have noticed a lack of comments by others since TXStorm and I began debating. If no one else is enjoying or learning from these posts I would gladly discontinue all of this. I get the feeling that TXStorm and I would disagree on everything in life for all eternity if allowed
So Im not really sure how long we should allow this to go on 
Joshua,
Your last statement may well be the only honest one you have posted. Since you abandon evidence, abaond reason, and stipulate that your beliefs trump all else WITHOUT A SHRED OF EVUDENCE TO SUPPORT YOUR CLAIMS, certainly I and anyone who does not buy into your illusions, that is to say anyone who accepts reality and reason will of course be at odds with your bizarre and ever changing claims.
You were presented with the evidence from your own xn bible. You were unable to refute it in any fashion rather simply accepting as good these instances of murder and the like because you claim your god told you that they are good. This is circular reasoning at its lowest.
Here you make it even worse by adopting the position that it is morally good to kill innocent others as long as they have another religion which YOU PERSONALLY deem to be “worse.”
Out of curiosity are you familiar with the notion of bias? You cite the xn bible, which encourages the slaughter and rape of innocents, as “evidence” that those innocents are not innocent… Surely even you can see the problem here.
As for the soundness of the arguments and refutations provided, I would point out that you have failed to address ANY of them, much less refute them. As I repeatedly point out, you employ logical fallacies, and stipulate that your are right EVEN WHERE YOUR CLAIMS ARE IN DIRECT CONTRADICTION WITH YOUR OWN bible… This necessitates that your posts cannot be themselves refutations, as they fail to be sound or have true premises. (A sound argument is a valid arguument form with all true premises)
Just so that perhaps even you cannot avoid the clear truth let’s look at one of your apologies for the open celebration of rape and ownership of women: “All it says is “given to them as wives”. All I can say is that this was the way it was done. This is, as I’m sure you know and enjoy, less of an example of rape and more so of women as property. Unfortunately, in a world where numbers give power, a country must multiply.”
Here you employ a version of the is/ought fallacy, or as is better known to parents with small children as “If everyone is doing it, then it is okay?” You then tack on a supposed justification for mass rape and ownership of women under the excuse that “a country must multiply” (sic). So, if you were ever to have a girlfriend or wife, you would accept any rape of her as long as the intent was to get her pregnant? Your argument necessitates that you accept this conclusion.. so if you recognize that this is an absurd conclusion then we have a fine example of a reductio argument which clearly demonstrates that your own argument is invalid.
“It wasn’t just a simple matter as you stated, “believe like me, obey me, and I might let you live”. Atheism wasn’t a known option of the time ( as far as we know). Those who didn’t believe in the God of Israel were probably part of some other religion. Apparently these other religions of the time weren’t exactly “nice”.”
First off we are not talking about self defense but cold blooded outright murder of innocents including young boys. Secondly, since when is not being nice (which is a far cry from being evil or causing harm) sufficient excuse for murder? By your own reasoning your own murder would be wholly justified as you are uncivil, dishonest, unreasonable, and unwilling to engagein honest discussion (certianly most of those alone would suffice to demonstrate a clear ‘not nice” stance..)
Furthermore your line, your “justification” was: “He allowed the people living there time to turn from their sins.” This is EXACTLY “Believe like me or you die.” and nothing more. This is not a matter of not causing harm, the line says nothing about harm, rather it addresses religious belief.
” The people of the other local religions were caught up in temple prostitution, molesting young boys and girls, and sacrificing their own children. These things can be considered “evil” even if you don’t believe in a God. ”
What a lovely contradiction.. SO it is not merely acceptable for these actions to be taken in the name of the judeo-xn god, but it is wholly good (as your rather pathetic apologies demonstrate is your position) but if anyone who does not believe in the judeo-xn god does them, then they are “considered evil even if you don’t believe in a god..”
You’ve been given all the rope you can handle and more, and the result is that you have managed to hang yourself quite nicely, then mistaken the twictching as life..
As for why I mentioned the many versions, this was because you simply make up your claims and stipulations as you go, pretending that your word is evidence especially when it is directly contrary to your own bible, so I thought to toss yet another wrench into the works to see what way you would jump. Per usual, your approach is to engage in intellectual dishonesty, personal attacks, and outright false assertions.
I strongly recommend familiarizing yourself with the basics of reason if you are going to put yourself forward as an expert on reason. You claim that the perfectly sound arguments offered “don’t stand” but you’ve not shown either false premise, nor invalidity of form. Rather you have simply said that since you don’t like the conclusion, the arguments must not be good. Here again is an example of how you are putting yourself up as an expert, in this case higher than the very bible you claim to be relying upon, such that you have private and unverifiable knowledge of what “god” really meant to say…
TXStorm,
Again, I already stated that it would be pointless for me to refute the fact that God killed specific people. However, you are attempting to generalize the aforementioned verses which applied to a specific people and apply them to every situation.
I mentioned that the only thing I could do is present the rationale behind these actions. You are saying that killing should NEVER be allowed. I understand this idea. As mentioned before, the OT is based on a strong belief of capital punishment.
It is perfectly acceptable to not believe in the Bible. However, it seems pointless to intentionally cloud every detail of the Bible in order to justify your own beliefs. You have only been successful in showing your own intolerance. After this last post of yours I am convinced that your ability to consider openly the views of others is severely lacking. My evidence of this is your utter disregard of my cited motive: “It would be pointless for me to say that God didn’t condone the killing of specific people since it is stated. All I can do is show the rationale behind it as stated in the Bible”.
“So, if you were ever to have a girlfriend or wife, you would accept any rape of her as long as the intent was to get her pregnant? Your argument necessitates that you accept this conclusion.. so if you recognize that this is an absurd conclusion then we have a fine example of a reductio argument which clearly demonstrates that your own argument is invalid.” Aside from this being an absurd comment that intentionally and obviously takes my comments out of context, how can my “argument” be invalid if I have no argument?
Im going to repost here my original statement of my observation of the rationale of the God of the Bible in order to refocus your efforts. If this concept is understood, then the actions of God in the OT are justified. If this concept is not understood, then the opposite applies.
“God didn’t just kill everyone in the “promise land”(the land in which all of the people who were killed in the verses you cited lived) for Abraham. He allowed the people living there time to turn from their sins. There is this idea found often in the Bible that if one constantly sins they reach a “point of no return”, if you will. A place where there is no hope of changing. The Bible refers to this as “sin running its course”. We can observe this in society: When some one acts upon a strong desire to commit a social injustice like rape or murder, often times the person admits to “not being able to stop” themselves. These people become repeat offenders and cannot be able to live in society. This is the purpose of capital punishment. Obviously, the Bible strongly believes in capital punishment, but it is a basis for heated debate. If a “point of no return” does exist than capital punishment must exist. This is the foundation for “God’s Anger”.”
[quote post="155"]Again, I already stated that it would be pointless for me to refute the fact that God killed specific people.[/quote]
Then necessarily you have either conceded the point that this god condones, even celebrates murder, else you are stipulating that killing those who do not believe in this god are not morally worthwhile, therefore can be treated as objects.
[quote post="155"]You are saying that killing should NEVER be allowed.[/quote]
Ah strawman tactics, where would your posts be without them? I have not even so much as hinted at this position. I have called to your attention using specific quotes, more than a single instance as you want to pretend, that MURDER is unjustified (which of course is a tautology). You cannot attack the latter claim by pretending that I am taking the position that all killing is unjustified.
So just to try to pin you down to one position, are you now stating that you believe that it is morally acceptable, even good, to rape, torture, and kill those who do not share your religious views (since this is what is being advocated in the xn bible)?
[quote post="155"]However, it seems pointless to intentionally cloud every detail of the Bible in order to justify your own beliefs.[/quote]
What you dishonestly call “clouding” the rest of the world, at least the rational individuals, call citing evidence. You claimed that no examples of these evils existed in the xn bible, so I and Pedro cited several of the vast number of such instances. Now you are trying to pretend like they do not exist because you don’t like the evidence. So here again we see you taking the position that you are in possession of special knowledge superior to the xn bible as to what this “god” *really* said..
[quote post="155"]You have only been successful in showing your own intolerance. After this last post of yours I am convinced that your ability to consider openly the views of others is severely lacking.[/quote]
Nice example of the ad hominem fallacy. Since your arguments lack validity you choose to attack me as a person in the effort to distract from the lack of logical or factual foundation for your claims and arguments. I am not intolerant. What you are pretending is intolerance is REASON. I understand that you detest reason since it necessitates that your world view is false, but that does not change the fact that fallacious arguments, and false claims do not make your conclusions true. Ask yourself why you feel the need in virtually every post to attack the person rather than address the arguments honestly, civilly, and with REASON.
[quote post="155"]Im going to repost here my original statement of my observation of the rationale of the God of the Bible in order to refocus your efforts.[/quote]
LOL! So even you recognize this particular red herring is in fact a red herring and openly admit that you are employing it as a red herring! Wonderful…
However your claim that you were going to repost your original statement to which I was responding was in error, since you posted a different statement entirely. Recall that you offered the goal of repopulating a country as justification for rape. I asked if you were willing to accept that principle in application and you appealed to what you falsely believe is a justification for capital punishment, a different subject altogether.
So the question remains, since you claim that rape if ordered by “god” is justified (at least if the goal is to increase population, in other words pregnancy) then would you accept that any rape which occurs is justified as long as the rape victim gets pregnant?
Tey not to avoid the questions this time please, as it is impossible to carry on a discussion with someone who continually misrepresents the facts, mischaracterizes the arguments, and will not answer simple straightforward questions as to the necessary consequences of their arguments.
[quote post="155"] “All it says is “given to them as wives”. All I can say is that this was the way it was done. This is, as I’m sure you know and enjoy, less of an example of rape and more so of women as property. Unfortunately, in a world where numbers give power, a country must multiply.”[/quote]
Just to shine a bit of light on your false claim that you have no argument, here is the section relevant to the rape issue, where you acknowledge one of the claims you dispute (women as property condoned by “god”) and then offer a justification for rape as well as women as property (growth of a country).
This IS an argument, whether you understand it or not.
There is a truth that depending how your read the bible will affect your faith. Those who read and take all as is, swing right along. But those who interpret in an investigative way, such as “can all these truths hold to the premise of God, that he is all loving/knowing/perfect/whatever?” I’ve come to understand that most people are like kittens playing with a string when it comes to their faith. They play around, stay amused and content with the strings that hold their religion up. If anyone tries to see how the strings hold themselves up, however, they will be hung by the neck by the very same strings.