Psalm 137:9

[Minimalist]

Example are those who practiced human sacrifice which God repeatedly says is wicked.

So, why didn't your 'god' kill Jeptha after he fried his daughter for him?

[chi pan]

Example are those who practiced human sacrifice which God repeatedly says is wicked.

So, why didn't your 'god' kill Jeptha after he fried his daughter for him?

I covered this on another thread. Jephthah did not kill his daughter.
http://scottthong.wordpress.com/2008/02/...ce-to-god/
Please read this page before you respond.

[The Grand Nudger]

Fairy tale.

Got any evidence?

[chi pan]

Fairy tale.

Got any evidence?

The question minimalist asked was not about evidence, it was about the story.

[Forsaken]

I covered this on another thread. Jephthah did not kill his daughter.
http://scottthong.wordpress.com/2008/02/...ce-to-god/
Please read this page before you respond.

Cherry picking...sugar coating. What is the evidence that Jephthah did not kill his daughter? Or more specifically, what is your evidence? Just because someone wrote in his blog does not mean you have to take it as the absolute proof.

[chi pan]

I covered this on another thread. Jephthah did not kill his daughter.
http://scottthong.wordpress.com/2008/02/...ce-to-god/
Please read this page before you respond.

Cherry picking...sugar coating. What is the evidence that Jephthah did not kill his daughter? Or more specifically, what is your evidence? Just because someone wrote in his blog does not mean you have to take it as the absolute proof.

Did you not read it? It explains the passage. I'll just quote myself off another thread.

Ok, so I decided to do some deep searching into this passage and I found your answer. First, the term burnt offering he used was not a literal meaning. It refers to offering Something to God. Burnt meaning ascension. This term is used like this in 1 kings 10:5 and Ezekiel 40:26 as well (original Hebrew). When he said vow, he used the same word as was used in Leviticus 27 where it speaks of offering servents to the lord. What's other evidence of this? Well it's important to know that the vow was made in public, which means her daughter would catch word of this. What? She knew? Yes, so why would she do this? Because it wasn't refering to human sacrifice. And in judges 11:36-37 she knew what she must do to fulfill this. So back to the question of why. When someone is a sacrifice to God, they are considered sacred and cannot do work. One of the main jobs of women was to give birth and raise children. So she did this so she could remain a lifetime virgin living with her father and receive his inheritance. Interesting story.

[Phil]

I covered this on another thread. Jephthah did not kill his daughter.
http://scottthong.wordpress.com/2008/02/...ce-to-god/
Please read this page before you respond.

Cherry picking...sugar coating. What is the evidence that Jephthah did not kill his daughter? Or more specifically, what is your evidence? Just because someone wrote in his blog does not mean you have to take it as the absolute proof.

Did you not read it? It explains the passage. I'll just quote myself off another thread.

Ok, so I decided to do some deep searching into this passage and I found your answer. First, the term burnt offering he used was not a literal meaning. It refers to offering Something to God. Burnt meaning ascension. This term is used like this in 1 kings 10:5 and Ezekiel 40:26 as well (original Hebrew). When he said vow, he used the same word as was used in Leviticus 27 where it speaks of offering servents to the lord. What's other evidence of this? Well it's important to know that the vow was made in public, which means her daughter would catch word of this. What? She knew? Yes, so why would she do this? Because it wasn't refering to human sacrifice. And in judges 11:36-37 she knew what she must do to fulfill this. So back to the question of why. When someone is a sacrifice to God, they are considered sacred and cannot do work. One of the main jobs of women was to give birth and raise children. So she did this so she could remain a lifetime virgin living with her father and receive his inheritance. Interesting story.

Spin Ubu spin!

[LastPoet]

And spin while bending over backwards

[Minimalist]

Fairy tale.

Got any evidence?

The question minimalist asked was not about evidence, it was about the story.

No, the question was why didn't your fucking god kill Jeptha for frying his daughter which, and I really hate to break this to you, is what he did...if the story had happened at all, which it didn't, of course.

Again we see the apologetic mind which is capable of infinite self-delusion.

Jeptha vows to fry whatever comes out his door.

His daughter comes out the door.

He gives her two months to go run in the hills and then,

After the two months, she returned to her father, and he did to her as he had vowed. And she was a virgin.

There is no other "vow" in the story, son.


I really want to make this clear. Just because YOU make up some lame excuse for the plain language of your barbaric stories does not mean that normal people are going to be fooled by it. You are far too deeply invested in this holy horseshit. You need to get a life and find out why you are so fucking gullible.

[Mister Agenda]

God kept His word about punishing the nation of Israel and the suffering it would cause them

So much for a kind, loving god.

So any parent that punishes their child is not loving or kind by your definition. God warned the Israelites for years and they would not repent, if He had not punished them they would have never believed Him. The same for a child, if a parent tells them they will punish him/her and then does not the child will believe they have the upper hand.

I will go out on a limb and state that any parent that punishes their child by killing them is not loving or kind by any nondelusional definition. And God is limited to analogies of human parenting techniques? Really?

---

Having read the thread, I see Christians believe God has all kinds of limits, like not being able to think of a way to accomplish his ends without killing people.

But here's the scoop: The ancient Hebrews had no concept of a God that is forgiving, temperate, loving, or kind. They may have given those ideas lip service in their writings, but it was for the same reasons Celts would call wicked faeries 'the good folk'...it was flattery to avoid provoking supernatural powers. The God the Hebrews really believed in was a potentate with super powers: arbitrary, vengeful, mercurial, unpredictable, devastating, and terrifying. Reconciling Yahweh with the softer, gentler Father of Jesus is half of the source of Christian cognitive dissonance. The smart thing to do would be to chuck the OT altogether. What lessons does it have that are worth learning that aren't in the NT?