God commands child sacrifice (not Isaac story)

[Tea Earl Grey Hot]

Yep, I was right. You didn't read what I posted! This is a command from God to the Israelites!. It's in Exodus!

I didn't look, because I know the only thing close to human sacerfice is what went down between isac and Aberham

Your quote in exo 22 hinges on the word "Give" to mean Human sacerfice. The word in the Hebrew is: נתן/nathan. It means to dedicate or promise to. http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexi...5414&t=KJV
Actually it can mean a varity of things, however none of which have anything t do with Human sacerfice.

You're ignoring the context. The very next sentence talks about "giving" animals. It's clearly sacrifice.

Your second arguement looks like it was constructed from a hasty google search. here is what the text looks like when properly placed in context:
http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm...JV#conc/26

It seems to have a completely different meaning than how you orginally thought.

Nope the context supports my argument. The chapter is talking about the early Israelites and the way God dealt with them. And even in the KJV translation that you quoted (serious Christians shouldn't be using that shoddy translation) it's still plainly talking about child sacrifice. The "fire" was a method of human sacrifice back then.

Wherefore I gave them also statutes [that were] not good, and judgments whereby they should not live;
Eze 20:26 And I polluted them in their own gifts, in that they caused to pass through [the fire] all that openeth the womb, that I might make them desolate, to the end that they might know that I [am] the LORD.

(I used the RSV which is a far better translation in my OP.) The verse is a reference to the command given in Exodus.

---

I forgot to say...I can't find anything that says that "dedicate or promise to" is the primary meaning of "nathan." You're merely cherry picking possible meanings to give a more favorable reading.