the so fallible Bible

[Drich]

Drich, I am quite sure that you understand in your heart that it is wrong and evil to cut a baby's throat.

Depends on the baby. For instance if you had the oppertunity to cut baby hitler's throat would you, or would you let millions die? Now from God's vantage point, He can not only see the indivisuals like hitler, but also whole races of people who would prey on and destroy everyone else. Wouldn't god now be obligated to stop such a people from existing?

If you want to insult your own intelligence by claiming that it used to be OK when a god commanded it, I will not waste my time debating with you.

Good then maybe you'll learn something about the selfrighteousness it takes to judge God to be in the wrong here.

Fore again from the perspective of a general or a power hungry man like hitler, he only has his or his country's intrest at heart, and not the good of everyone else. If God knows that a given race of people will spawn generation after generation of Hitler/Osama type of people, then it is on Him to do something about it. Having Israel destroy those people served two purposes. One it eliminated the threat and two it established the power and fear of God to the other people in a give region.

That was said AFTER I left the church. However, I revised my opinion still further when I read the kind of biblical scholarship they kept away from us in my seminary, and I learned that the supposed massacres of Israel's enemies were nothing but propaganda written hundreds of years after the supposed events.

Do you have 'proof' or is this a faith based belief?

Right. The genocide of the Native Americans was terrible and despicable. And weren't those Christian Americans who killed them off?

I don't believe 'religion' was a prerequsite for killing the indiginous americans. Not as it was with the Jews. Not to mention History records that they were European first, religious belief was not the motivating factor.. Resources, cotton tobacco, gold silver. these were the primary drivers. If one killed for these things then that person does not follow the teachings of Christ, so whether they were Christians or not is for Christ to decide.
This is not limited to what happened in the US, but Canada, mexico, central and south america as well. We all have the same kind of blood on our hands. The entire western hemisphere was discovered settled and thrives off the same principles in the bible you are condemning. If you can not see this not only are you a hypocrite, but a selectivly blind one as well.

[John V]

Your an asshole because your dancing around the fact that your god choses not to do anything when it wouldn't cost him NOTHING to end it.I don't have the ability to reduce suffering because can barely get by on what little i have.Besides iam not a Divine being who supposdly created everything, so it actually isnt ur responsiblity to save everyone.

Hey, if you really don't care about those starving children, that's OK by me. But, if you go on about the Amelekites or slaves or whatever as if you do care about the fortunes of people you've never met, then my argument is fair.

---

So you think it is wrong to have pleasure as well? It really tells. I suspect this will be a debate where you disagree with me based on the fact I do not think as you do.

No, I don't think it's wrong to have pleasure. I do think it's hypocritical to devote resources to pleasure while also claiming that it's monstrous to allow suffering.

No, I'm not. I'm saying there are multiple 'outs', and multiple methodologies that can be employed. simply throwing money at an issue with no attempt to remedy the context of said issue is not solving the issue. In fact in many times it's exacerbating it.

This is what's known as basic logic. If you simply cut back the leaves of a weed without cutting it out at the root, it will continue to grow. Same applies to poverty. You look at a person and they are starving. You then feed that man, and the next day he is starving, and he has told his friend you can give food. Now you have two men in the same situation, and you have doubled the logistical problems of continuing the methodology employed.

Far better to examine the root causes of the issue. Which are almost always sociological, political, economical, and often, religious (though not exclusively, naturally).

No dichotomy.

So people who agree with you, and who think it monstrous to allow suffering, can give their excess to such research and programs. Otherwise they're hypocrites.

[Searching4truth]

I could care less whether you're a human or a god, promoting the massacre of m and women and especially children is sadistic. And the fact that anyone would justify or try to justify presents an equal amount of sadism. I would not trust my family around a Christian who claims to hear the voice of god. All that voice is is your inner persona-whether good or bad

[Chas]

Was the Enola Gay pilot justified in killing more people in Hiroshima than any soldier in Joshua's war against the Canaanites?
If the Nazis had been determined to fight to the very last man, woman and child, would their total annihilation by the Allies have been a necessary evil?
If Al Qaeda was a genetically discreet group/culture of people, would it be attempted genocide to wipe them out in a war on terror?

No the atomic bombing was not justified because the Japanese regime was already suing for peace, just not accepting unconditional surrender yet and it was not a strong military target. It was on the edge of being justified though, as it was not targeting the women and children.

That's a misleading description.

The Japanese Supreme Council for the Direction of the War was making secret overtures with the Soviet Union for an advantageous end to the war.

There is no evidence this was known to the U.S.

[Doubting Thomas]

No, I don't think it's wrong to have pleasure. I do think it's hypocritical to devote resources to pleasure while also claiming that it's monstrous to allow suffering.

So people who agree with you, and who think it monstrous to allow suffering, can give their excess to such research and programs. Otherwise they're hypocrites.

So are you giving up all your excess wealth like your lord and savior Jesus said to do, or do you claim it's not monstrous to allow suffering?

And again, I am not an all-powerful deity, but if I were I'd end all unnecessary suffering. The fact that your deity doesn't means he is either not all-powerful or else evil.

[max-greece]

Drich, I am quite sure that you understand in your heart that it is wrong and evil to cut a baby's throat.

Depends on the baby. For instance if you had the oppertunity to cut baby hitler's throat would you, or would you let millions die? Now from God's vantage point, He can not only see the indivisuals like hitler, but also whole races of people who would prey on and destroy everyone else. Wouldn't god now be obligated to stop such a people from existing?

And yet God chose not to allow Hitler's throat to be cut as a baby - so if God is obligated to stop such people from existing - where is he?

[Searching4truth]

Or what about the dude who shot up the movie theatre in Colorado or the guy who killed all those kindergarteners and his mom, or the guy who kept those three women hostage for ten years, raped them and repeatedly aborted the babies and then when they finally had a baby, assaulted her too. God didn't care enough about those people and their families. He didn't care about the Jews that Hitler killed or the people Timothy Mcvey killed. or what about the world trade center? What about the children that are abused everyday by their own parents? Or sold into the sex trade? I supposed you think all that if justified because this god of yours felt he didn't have to do anything about it. What a prick.

[xpastor]

No the atomic bombing was not justified because the Japanese regime was already suing for peace, just not accepting unconditional surrender yet and it was not a strong military target. It was on the edge of being justified though, as it was not targeting the women and children.

That's a misleading description.

The Japanese Supreme Council for the Direction of the War was making secret overtures with the Soviet Union for an advantageous end to the war.

There is no evidence this was known to the U.S.

I once read long ago that the US sent a message to the Japanese demanding surrender, and the Japanese responded "Under some conditions," but the reply was mistranslated into English as "Under no conditions." But maybe this is just some pop history. I also read in a book entitled Meeting at Potsdam that Truman decided to drop the bomb partly in order to show Stalin that the US had this mega-weapon and was not afraid to use it. If so, that would make Truman a very evil man.

[John V]

So are you giving up all your excess wealth like your lord and savior Jesus said to do, or do you claim it's not monstrous to allow suffering?

I claim it's not monstrous to allow suffering.

And again, I am not an all-powerful deity, but if I were I'd end all unnecessary suffering.

So you care about suffering, but only if it doesn't really cost you anything. Quite admirable.

The fact that your deity doesn't means he is either not all-powerful or else evil.

Or that he has his own purposes for allowing it. He shouldn't need much of a purpose to get a pass, as many atheists here think getting drunk or high or buying a new video game is an adequate reason to allow suffering.

[Doubting Thomas]

So are you giving up all your excess wealth like your lord and savior Jesus said to do, or do you claim it's not monstrous to allow suffering?

I claim it's not monstrous to allow suffering.

Good to know you're as vile and evil as the monster you worship. At least I'd end suffering if I could, you seem to revel in it and use that as an excuse to not help the poor.

So you care about suffering, but only if it doesn't really cost you anything. Quite admirable. Clap

Where did I say that? And at least I care about it, unlike you.