William Lane Craig Justifies Genocide.

[Antlerman]

"A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another." Jn. 13:34,35

 

After we've wiped the blood off our swords from slaughtering the heathens in God's name first, that is....

 

Maybe Jesus said these things because the Jews had falsely wrote that God was a director of genocide

I would say he said them because people were ready to move forward culturally from the more tribal mentalities that stories like that represent. It's not that they falsely wrote them, but that their perceptions were more primitive, less evolved. I actually do believe that the Jesus movement was popular because of social reasons, an evolving sense of self from that of ethnocentrism expressed in much of the Jew's traditional stories of themselves. "You heard it said an eye for an eye, but I say unto you..." Progress. Fast forward 2000 years... things evolve. Time to progress again.

 

So, Jesus saw the forward movement by Caesar and Rome to move forward philosophically, and so decided to join into this 'school of thought' and preached peace. Was that before they fed prisoners to the lions, or after?

That's silly. I didn't say that. I said nothing about Rome being forward movement. In fact, it was because of Rome, and because of the failure of the Temple-States within that context that the shift to the individual - via the Greek philosopher's became popular. The righteous king, was that of a life lived with personal integrity. This shift was moving away from tribal identities, since those were now a farce with corrupt, puppet rulers in place by Rome who gave a damn about cultural matters, to that of individuality and personal development. So enter the Jesus movement with the Kingdom of God in you... It was a subcultural movement that took hold. All the rest of its myths are just supporting validations of them as social entities...

[Guest end3]

When believers and apologists praise and worship their version of "God", they are really glorifiying their ideas about the object of their worship, which is an indirect way of praising themselves.

It's vanity dressed in a cloak of pious humility.

 

I disagree, my behavior was diametrically opposed to what I worship as God. And let's please not bring up vanity.

Tell us again exactly how God is supposed to be the source of morality and our example for behavior.

 

Through Jesus of course.

 

I don't know that I care to discuss too much Shyone, it just leads to ring around the roses. Deva brings up a good point with Moses. Perhaps God's will was changed through his relationship with his creation i.e. man. And especially as related through His incarnation via Jesus.....my best guess. I can't defend what we would consider as amoral other than an absolute war against evil....'till death. I am ok with what I don't know about those decisions in the past. Many are not.

[Ouroboros]

...

I'm glad that you understand my view.

 

Murder is murder. Death is death. But this is to us as human beings in that we can't see what happens to ones being after they die; but God I would assume has the ability to see the other side. That was my point about the subject.

Okay.

[Deva]

I don't know that I care to discuss too much Shyone, it just leads to ring around the roses. Deva brings up a good point with Moses. Perhaps God's will was changed through his relationship with his creation i.e. man. And especially as related through His incarnation via Jesus.....my best guess. I can't defend what we would consider as amoral other than an absolute war against evil....'till death. I am ok with what I don't know about those decisions in the past. Many are not.

 

Not Moses, Abraham. Abraham was trying to persuade God to spare the people of Sodom. This effort had a limited success, to say the least.

 

My point is simply that we are not the only ones that have had trouble with God's morals.

 

Your idea of separating the Old Testament God from New Testament Jesus is heresy. Orthodox Christianity says same God. After all, there is only supposed to be one God, right? Then again, End, I always knew you had an unconventional understanding of Christianity. You never would have made it in the fundamentalist church.

[Guest end3]

Your idea of separating the Old Testament God from New Testament Jesus is heresy.

 

I don't separate them Ms D......I just have been down this discussion trail before and remember it to be very taxing. But for you , if you would like to discuss the details, I will certainly try.

 

To your first point, I believe that the law that should be written in our hearts is the same as the OT law. But, like some of the things that God did in the OT, I don't have a full understanding of the reasons behind the "rules" or why He took the actions He did.

[Shyone]

 

To your first point, I believe that the law that should be written in our hearts is the same as the OT law.

 

All of these, or just some of these?

 

7. Sanctify yourselves therefore, and be ye holy; for I am Jehovah your God.

8. And ye shall keep my statutes, and do them: I am Jehovah who sanctifieth you.

9. For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall surely be put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him.

10. And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbor's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.

11. And the man that lieth with his father's wife hath uncovered his father's nakedness: both of them shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

12. And if a man lie with his daughter-in-law, both of them shall surely be put to death: they have wrought confusion; their blood shall be upon them.

13. And if a man lie with mankind, as with womankind, both of them have committed abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

14. And if a man take a wife and her mother, it is wickedness: they shall be burnt with fire, both he and they; that there be no wickedness among you.

15. And if a man lie with a beast, he shall surely be put to death: and ye shall slay the beast.

16. And if a woman approach unto any beast, and lie down thereto, thou shalt kill the woman, and the beast: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

[Yadda, yadda, yadda...]

 

22. Ye shall therefore keep all my statutes, and all mine ordinances, and do them; that the land, whither I bring you to dwell therein, vomit you not out.

 

And, is this still the right way to sacrifice beasts to the Lord?

 

1. And Jehovah called unto Moses, and spake unto him out of the tent of meeting, saying,

2. Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When any man of you offereth an oblation unto Jehovah, ye shall offer your oblation of the cattle, even of the herd and of the flock.

3. If his oblation be a burnt-offering of the herd, he shall offer it a male without blemish: he shall offer it at the door of the tent of meeting, that he may be accepted before Jehovah.

4. And he shall lay his hand upon the head of the burnt-offering; and it shall be accepted for him to make atonement for him.

5. And he shall kill the bullock before Jehovah: and Aaron's sons, the priests, shall present the blood, and sprinkle the blood round about upon the altar that is at the door of the tent of meeting.

6. And he shall flay the burnt-offering, and cut it into its pieces.

 

Is killing your son for rebelliousness optional, or mandatory?

 

1. And Jehovah called unto Moses, and spake unto him out of the tent of meeting, saying,

2. Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When any man of you offereth an oblation unto Jehovah, ye shall offer your oblation of the cattle, even of the herd and of the flock.

3. If his oblation be a burnt-offering of the herd, he shall offer it a male without blemish: he shall offer it at the door of the tent of meeting, that he may be accepted before Jehovah.

4. And he shall lay his hand upon the head of the burnt-offering; and it shall be accepted for him to make atonement for him.

5. And he shall kill the bullock before Jehovah: and Aaron's sons, the priests, shall present the blood, and sprinkle the blood round about upon the altar that is at the door of the tent of meeting.

6. And he shall flay the burnt-offering, and cut it into its pieces.

 

I have so many more questions, but I'm sure you have all of the answers.

[Guest end3]

 

To your first point, I believe that the law that should be written in our hearts is the same as the OT law.

 

All of these, or just some of these?

 

7. Sanctify yourselves therefore, and be ye holy; for I am Jehovah your God.

8. And ye shall keep my statutes, and do them: I am Jehovah who sanctifieth you.

9. For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall surely be put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him.

10. And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbor's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.

11. And the man that lieth with his father's wife hath uncovered his father's nakedness: both of them shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

12. And if a man lie with his daughter-in-law, both of them shall surely be put to death: they have wrought confusion; their blood shall be upon them.

13. And if a man lie with mankind, as with womankind, both of them have committed abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

14. And if a man take a wife and her mother, it is wickedness: they shall be burnt with fire, both he and they; that there be no wickedness among you.

15. And if a man lie with a beast, he shall surely be put to death: and ye shall slay the beast.

16. And if a woman approach unto any beast, and lie down thereto, thou shalt kill the woman, and the beast: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

[Yadda, yadda, yadda...]

 

22. Ye shall therefore keep all my statutes, and all mine ordinances, and do them; that the land, whither I bring you to dwell therein, vomit you not out.

 

And, is this still the right way to sacrifice beasts to the Lord?

 

1. And Jehovah called unto Moses, and spake unto him out of the tent of meeting, saying,

2. Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When any man of you offereth an oblation unto Jehovah, ye shall offer your oblation of the cattle, even of the herd and of the flock.

3. If his oblation be a burnt-offering of the herd, he shall offer it a male without blemish: he shall offer it at the door of the tent of meeting, that he may be accepted before Jehovah.

4. And he shall lay his hand upon the head of the burnt-offering; and it shall be accepted for him to make atonement for him.

5. And he shall kill the bullock before Jehovah: and Aaron's sons, the priests, shall present the blood, and sprinkle the blood round about upon the altar that is at the door of the tent of meeting.

6. And he shall flay the burnt-offering, and cut it into its pieces.

 

Is killing your son for rebelliousness optional, or mandatory?

 

1. And Jehovah called unto Moses, and spake unto him out of the tent of meeting, saying,

2. Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When any man of you offereth an oblation unto Jehovah, ye shall offer your oblation of the cattle, even of the herd and of the flock.

3. If his oblation be a burnt-offering of the herd, he shall offer it a male without blemish: he shall offer it at the door of the tent of meeting, that he may be accepted before Jehovah.

4. And he shall lay his hand upon the head of the burnt-offering; and it shall be accepted for him to make atonement for him.

5. And he shall kill the bullock before Jehovah: and Aaron's sons, the priests, shall present the blood, and sprinkle the blood round about upon the altar that is at the door of the tent of meeting.

6. And he shall flay the burnt-offering, and cut it into its pieces.

 

I have so many more questions, but I'm sure you have all of the answers.

 

You are a very bright person Shyone, so what was it in my explanation that didn't make sense.

[Shyone]

 

You are a very bright person Shyone, so what was it in my explanation that didn't make sense.

All of my life I have heard the explanation that Jesus changed everything. God was now nice and he didn't kill anymore. Turn the other cheek. Eat pork. Fuck the acolytes.

 

Oh, sorry, that was a later addition.

 

The point is that the OT "law" is gruesome, barbaric, and totally ignored by Christians. Yet Jesus, and YOU, claim that the law is the law and the law should be obeyed Mat. 5:18.

 

But it isn't. But it should, except you shouldn't really - I mean, not kill you kids... But obey the law of the OT because it's God's law. But if it says to something stupid, then feel free to ignore it. (Romans 7!)

 

Oh, the excuses. That was of the flesh! Now we're different! No more circumcision, and if you can find that ark thingy, you can play catch with it and not get harmed!

 

I call bullshit.

[Guest end3]

The point is that the OT "law" is gruesome, barbaric, and totally ignored by Christians. Yet Jesus, and YOU, claim that the law is the law and the law should be obeyed Mat. 5:18.

 

Yes, summed up in the love your neighbor scripture....

 

But it isn't. But it should, except you shouldn't really - I mean, not kill you kids... But obey the law of the OT because it's God's law. But if it says to something stupid, then feel free to ignore it. (Romans 7!)

 

Oh, the excuses. That was of the flesh! Now we're different! No more circumcision, and if you can find that ark thingy, you can play catch with it and not get harmed!

 

I call bullshit.

 

The point I was trying to make is I don't understand the relationships between the OT laws and the new covenant. I can see Christ in "type" in some of the OT laws, but explaining every one would be impossible for me. Perhaps a Rabbi? Maybe.

 

I choose faith in God that at sometime I will be knowledgeable about the relationship(s) between the two.

 

You said bullshit.....many folks do....sorry you are frustrated. I battle with doubt on occasion myself.

[Franko47]

That was always something that bothered me when I was a Christian. The lack of "continuity" between the OT and the New. Almost like two different religions, almost like the "hijacking" of Pharisaic Judaism to create a new one.

 

 

Jesus seemed to treat the Pharisees in much the same way as a "progressive" Christian prophet might treat today's "fundamentalists".

 

"C'mon, guys. Time to join the first century. Can't be stoning hookers any more. Gotta start focusing on the "personal relationship" instead of the "tribal thing". (Kudos to Antlerman a few posts back)

 

I've always been impressed by Sermon On The Mount for this reason; it's a "method" that Jesus talks about that nullifies the need for organized religion, complex doctrine, and most of the redundant dogma of the past. It's almost rebellion, it's certainly anti-clerical.

 

Of course, Paul would eventually fix that.

[RationalOkie]

That was always something that bothered me when I was a Christian. The lack of "continuity" between the OT and the New. Almost like two different religions, almost like the "hijacking" of Pharisaic Judaism to create a new one.

 

In my mind they are two different religions. Look at the Jewish argument:

When the promised Messiah comes, he will bring a kingdom of peace and justice on the earth (Is. 2:4). Jesus proclaimed that the kingdom of God had come with His arrival (Matt. 12:28; Lu. 4:21). The kingdom of God is not here. For 2,000 years since Jesus' coming, the genocides and rapes have not ended.

 

Minus the stoning people to death stuff the Jews are still the old school religion. What we have in America is a toooooootally different religion. It's simple really, the Old Testament God is a dick and the New Testament God is a fraud.

[NotBlinded]

 

So, you are calling me abnormal? Maybe so in your Christian, puritan mindset Abi, yet we have all seen the damage done by thinking that way. Pregnant 13 year old daughters of preachers, etc. I will never believe that hiding things from children of that nature does any good at all.

 

Another thing, do you think as yourself as a child before your God? This is why he shouldn't tell you things?

 

Back at ya:

 

Maybe it just depends on the area and all, but I have seen the state called about a child's hair not looking combed.

Abi, sorry to bring this up again, but I just wanted to apologize for the way I spoke. I still feel the same, but I could have communicated that differently without the bitchiness and defensiveness.

[Deva]

Your idea of separating the Old Testament God from New Testament Jesus is heresy.

 

I don't separate them Ms D......I just have been down this discussion trail before and remember it to be very taxing. But for you , if you would like to discuss the details, I will certainly try.

 

To your first point, I believe that the law that should be written in our hearts is the same as the OT law. But, like some of the things that God did in the OT, I don't have a full understanding of the reasons behind the "rules" or why He took the actions He did.

 

Well, End, maybe you are not separating them, but saying that God changes. If you are, I can see that-- except there are some scriptures which suggest he does not change.

 

I am an ex-fundy. I did know my Bible. A lot I admit I have forgotten though but there is a verse in Lamentations, which was my favorite at one time, on how God is changeless and faithful.

 

I still think it is interesting that my favorite verse came from that book, Lamentations. No, End, you don't need to further explain. I am just glad you don't think you have a full understanding of God's motives. I will take whatever crumbs you can throw me.

[chefranden]

How can Christianity turn a reasonable person into a giant tool?

 

1. I'm reading a book that may have the answer: Supersense: Why we believe in the unbelievable

 

2. There are no reasonable people. Well, except for me, but I'm old so it won't be long until there are absolutely no reasonable people.

[Vomit Comet]

In ancient times, when one culture conquered another, they would absorb the conquered culture. Sure, they'd enslave the men and rape the women, but they would sometimes incorporate talented males into their service (as educated slaves) and intermarry with the women, and absorb many of their gods and practices. Even in medieval times, the Mongol Horde was so impressed by the Chinese that they conquered that Kublai Khan decided they would be absorbed by the Chinese rather than the other way around!

 

The Hebrew God knew full well what would happen if the Israelites intermarried and intermingled with the people they conquered. They'd lose their purity because the educated, useful Canaanite men along with the Canaanite women that would be taken as brides would corrupt them and introduce foreign gods and beliefs. That's why the Hebrew God was such an asshole about it.

[chefranden]

Why Groups and Prejudices Form So Easily: Social Identity Theory

 

...People's behaviour in groups is fascinating and frequently disturbing. As soon as humans are bunched together in groups we start to do odd things: copy other members of our group, favour members of own group over others, look for a leader to worship and fight other groups. Just glance at Sherif's Robbers Cave experiment for proof of how easy it is to provoke war between groups...

 

...Tajfel argued that people build their own identities from their group memberships. For example, think of each of the groups you belong to: say at work, or within your family. Part of who you are is probably defined by these groups. Putting it the other way around: the nature of your group memberships define your identity.

 

As our group membership forms our identity, it is only natural for us to want to be part of groups that are both high status and have a positive image. Crucially though, high status groups only have that high status when compared to other groups. In other words: knowing your group is superior requires having a worse group to look down upon...

 

http://www.spring.org.uk/2007/11/why-groups-and-prejudices-form-so.php

[★ Citsonga ★]

If this has already been posted, then I apologize, but I skimmed through the thread and didn't see it. Anyway, here's a video on YouTube that addresses the main topic that may be of interest to some:

 

William Lane Craig & Genocide In The Bible: The Atheist Experience

[Vixentrox]

 

 

And who says it's okay to conquer another people in the first damn place?

 

It's not that conquering another people is okay, but that if you do not conquer another people, they will surely conquer somebody, maybe you. Don't you think that if any country had a chance to conquer the US, live in our lands, rule it, take our nice comfy beds; Do you think they wouldn't?

 

Our freedom is like a poker hand. Nobody knows what the other has, and the cards on the table make everybody think they could get beat. The problem comes of when the person joins the table that doesn't care if they get beat, and they finish the game just to see. The person with the highest set of cards wins. Same with countries, the country with the bigger stick wins, not the most sophisticated, learned, philosophical, religious, etc. The big stick wins.

If god was so powerful why didn't he make an unoccupied promised land for his chosen people? He could have magically had them wander for 40 years and transported them to an unoccupied paradise in the Atlantic that he created for just them. But no, your god is a fraud and a weak one at that.

[Ouroboros]

Vix,

 

That's a good point. Why didn't God just create a new island, taught them how to build an ark (since it was big enough for Noah and all the animals, there would be plenty of room for them), and they would sail out to the new fancy island.

[★ Citsonga ★]

Vix,

 

That's a good point. Why didn't God just create a new island, taught them how to build an ark (since it was big enough for Noah and all the animals, there would be plenty of room for them), and they would sail out to the new fancy island.

 

Because of the edge of the world, of course! How could he create a big island out there when everything drops off?

[Ouroboros]

Because of the edge of the world, of course! How could he create a big island out there when everything drops off?

Good point... but he could have created a huge protruding ledge, going out from the edge. That would have kept them rather safe from the incessantly invading Philistines.