Atheists are Intolerant

[genkaus]

Ok then. Fair enough. Name a few...

Murder, rape, robbery, slavery, genocide and a ban on shellfish.

[Aegrus]

Or this. . .
"A priest's daughter who loses her honor by committing fornication and thereby dishonors her father also, shall be burned to death." (Leviticus 21:9 NAB)

Or this, since you say that slavery in the bible is nothing like more recent slavery . . .

"When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property." (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)

---

All of those quotes I listed are clearly written as orders. They are not technically commandments, but the bible is clearly directing its readers on how to behave.

[Abishalom]

What do you think the commandment is teaching? You giving a verse of some men raping women is not the bible condoning the action. On one of those verse it clearly said "there was no king in those days so they did what they saw right in their eyes". That is in no way condoning that behavior.

"If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives." (Leviticus 20:13 NAB)

Is the bible not condoing the murder of homosexuals?

What about this?

All who curse their father or mother must be put to death. They are guilty of a capital offense. (Leviticus 20:9 NLT)

Well if that was the law then it's not murder? Obviously this law would affect a homosexual and not a heterosexual. It's kind of hard to comprehend a law like this, when you consider how society is now. But TBH homosexuality was not very common back then. So I doubt many people were found guilty of this charge.

If you loved your neighbor like you love yourself would you then disrespect your parents?

---

Ok then. Fair enough. Name a few...

Murder, rape, robbery, slavery, genocide and a ban on shellfish.

Where are the commandments for the first 5 things you listed? I am aware of the dietary laws (eat fish with scales and fins), so you do not have to quote anything for shellfish.

[Nine]

I call bullshit on the claim "Atheist are intolerant" Seems that from all the atheists I the large majority have no prejudice against any group. If intolerance is voicing opinion and asking the law is equal for all then sure..

If we are talking intolerance surely atheists compared to any religious group comes out smelling of roses.





Yes how intolerant atheists are..

[Abishalom]

Or this. . .
"A priest's daughter who loses her honor by committing fornication and thereby dishonors her father also, shall be burned to death." (Leviticus 21:9 NAB)

Or this, since you say that slavery in the bible is nothing like more recent slavery . . .

"When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property." (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)

---

All of those quotes I listed are clearly written as orders. They are not technically commandments, but the bible is clearly directing its readers on how to behave.

To your first one here is the Hebrew interlinear...
"And the daughter of any priest, if she profane herself by playing the whore, she profaneth her father: she shall be burnt with fire"

It doesn't actually say "burned to death" or even how she is to be burned to be fair. But I not verse din Hebrew to really break it down.

To your second point...it basically says if a man strike his 'slave" and the slave dies he shall be avenged (Hebrew interlinear). What happened in America when if a slave master killed a slave...buy a new one? Also keep in mind if a slave was injured in any way, he could have his freedom. Did America operate like that? Nope.

[Aegrus]

Well if that was the law then it's not murder? Obviously this law would affect a homosexual and not a heterosexual. It's kind of hard to comprehend a law like this, when you consider how society is now. But TBH homosexuality was not very common back then. So I doubt many people were found guilty of this charge.

If you loved your neighbor like you love yourself would you then disrespect your parents?

HOLY FUCKING SHIT! Did you just say that if law condones a killing, it's not murder? That's just. . . wow. I want to tear my hair out right now.

And it doesn't matter if NO homosexuals were killed because of the bible, it still tells Christians to kill homosexuals! That still isn't morally right, and it's definitely not tolerant!

[Abishalom]

Well if that was the law then it's not murder? Obviously this law would affect a homosexual and not a heterosexual. It's kind of hard to comprehend a law like this, when you consider how society is now. But TBH homosexuality was not very common back then. So I doubt many people were found guilty of this charge.

If you loved your neighbor like you love yourself would you then disrespect your parents?

HOLY FUCKING SHIT! Did you just say that if law condones a killing, it's not murder? That's just. . . wow. I want to tear my hair out right now.

And it doesn't matter if NO homosexuals were killed because of the bible, it still tells Christians to kill homosexuals! That still isn't morally right, and it's definitely not tolerant!

No it doesn't tell Christians to "murder homosexuals". This is your perversion. I just said if this were the law it would not be murder. If you are told do not lay with a man like he were a woman or face punishment of dearth would you lay with a man like he were a woman? That might not be a good example, considering there are plenty of murderers on death row.

It's not like somebody could catch 2 homosexuals in the act and kill them. You have to go on trial (sound familiar). You have to have AT LEAST 2 witness to be convicted. (Deuteronomy 17:6)
[6] At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses, shall he that is worthy of death be put to death; [but] at the mouth of one witness he shall not be put to death.

Are you going to follow around 2 homosexuals to find out if they broke that law? I know I'm not. And they damn sure ain't telling on themselves. Plus you'll need a friend to spy on their activity with you, since there must be 2 witnesses. Oh and keep in mind do not bear false witness.

[ElDinero]

It doesn't make a difference, you dolt. The law is there, no matter how hard it is to gain a conviction. How are you not understanding this?

Look, answer it this way. Do you believe that if three men catch two men in the act of sex, that they should be killed, or indeed that they EVER should have been killed? Is it right, or is it wrong?

[Abishalom]

It doesn't make a difference, you dolt. The law is there, no matter how hard it is to gain a conviction. How are you not understanding this?

Look, answer it this way. Do you believe that if three men catch two men in the act of sex, that they should be killed, or indeed that they EVER should have been killed? Is it right, or is it wrong?

Logically why would 3 men be catching 2 homosexuals in the act? Unless you like that kind of stuff. People do have homes (what are you doing?). In that case I doubt you'll tell on yourself.

[ElDinero]

Look, if the answer to my very simple hypothetical is going to make you look like a bigot, maybe you should reconsider your view instead of trying to sidestep it in that way, which is what you are doing.

However, for the purposes of pushing you into an answer, the two men were having sex in a hotel room. Somebody overheard them through the door and rushed to get the hotel management. The manager, the assistant manager and the complainant break the door down and catch them. There we go, it happened. Now, care to answer my question? Or do you want to have a go at finding another way to skirt the issue?