Is the Bible hate speech, does it preach genocide?

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



Turbo-Cajun
The Christian God is a God that teaches genocide.

I have a native professor at university that is finishing up on a book with a similar title. He examines the bible and shows all of the verse which advocate actions that conflict with what the commonly held definiton of genocide is. I am not sure exactly which verses he is choosing to use but I found a site with a ton of quotes from the Bible that are promoting hate. I know what kind of thread this is going to end up being like, but I'm hoping that there is going to be some level discussion going at some point. I just want to show some of the quotes and see what you guys think. Is it promoting hate or genocide? How does verses like this conflict with the image that Christians have of themselves?


This is the site:

Is the Bible hate literature?


Just some of the verses:

"I saw that the people were marrying foreigners. Their children were even learning foreign languages. I called down curses on them. I struck them and tore the hair out of their heads and made them swear by god, 'you will not marry foreigners.'" Neh. 13:23 "So I purged them of everything foreign. I drew up regulations defining everyone's duty. Remember me, oh god, for my happiness." Neh. 13:30

"They waged war as god had commanded them and killed every male. But they kept the women as captives and took their wealth as spoil. Moses was enraged. 'So you spared the women? Kill every woman who has had sexual intercourse and kill every little boy, but keep the virgin girls for yourself. Divide them up evenly.'" Num. 31:7, 14

"You must drive all the natives of the land before you. If you do not drive the natives of the country before you then those who remain will become disgusting to your eyes and a thorn in your side. They will harass you in the land where you live, and I will deal with you as I meant to deal with them." Num. 33:51 "Devour the nations the lord your god delivers over to you. Show them no pity."

"Slaves you may possess, but make sure they are foreigners. You may also make slaves of the natives who dwell among you and from their children who are born and reared in your land. You may own them as chattels and leave them to your sons as their heriditary property, making them slaves forever. But you should not lord it over your own countryman, your own kinsmen." Lev. 25:44

Mere words will not keep a slave in order. He may understand, but he will not respond. Pamper a slave and he will be ungrateful. A whip for the horse, a bridle for the donkey, and a rod for the back of a fool." Proverbs "When a man beats a slave so hard that he dies in a day or two, he shall not be punished, for the slave is his property." Ex. 21:20

The list goes on and on...

What do you guys think? Is the Bible is hate literature?

BackFire
Interesting stuff. Just more reasons for me NOT to believe in Christianity.

Turbo-Cajun
Did you check out the link? Theres a ton this stuff in there, and I know that my professor meantioned quotes and passages not listed on that site too. If I remember anything else he said I will try post it.

BackFire
No, didn't have time to check the link unfortunately. I will tommorow for sure. I think this stuff is fascinating.

Ushgarak
Well... I mean yes, the Bible, especially the Old Testament, is chock-a-block full of very unpleasant stuff, that's very simple to see.

I don't think it does to get bogged down in that, though. All that should do is remind you to run a mile when you meet someone who takes a Holy Book literally.

yerssot
T-C, if you have followed some posts in the other religious-tinted threads, you'll see that people also pointed out to some monstrosities as killing (perhaps even genocide?), rape, torture, etc. erm

Turbo-Cajun
I will also post here Article II of the UN Genocide Convention:

ARTICLE II
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group as such:
a. Killing members of the group;
b. Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
c. Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
d. Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
e. Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

The UN Genocide Convention can be viewed in its entirety at UN Genocide Convention

Turbo-Cajun
I know... part of the motivation for starting this was discussion in other threads. I thought that it should be made its own thread where the question is more clear, is the Christian God one that tells its people to commit genocide? I think the answer is yes, according to thier own book their God commands it. I want to know if I am missing something here or do Christians support genocide given the right religious reasons? If there are any good quotes from threads in this forum that aren't somehow covered by the list of quotes in the original post, feel free to post them.

yerssot
oh no, don't get me wrong, it wasn't critisism for starting this topic smile

btw, the answer christians would give would be either:
don't take it litteral
or
lets talk about something else

shaber
no more than in any story erm bear in mind that an indigenous professor has an understandable grudge that has to be vented somehow.

Turbo-Cajun
I understand that he has biases, we all do. But, still in this country, a pre-contact population of from 12 to 20 million indigenous human beings was reduced to 200 thousand by 1920. Their actions were glaring examples of behavior that falls under the definition of genocide. Are you familiar with the massacre of wounded knee? The US Army shot and killed unarmed, unsuspecting men, women, children, and the elderly. Very few people wil dissagree with the fact that Wounded Knee was genocide. What I am asking you, as someone who does not have a native bias is, "Is the Christian God a genocidal one?" I think that the Christians have been historically more violent than most religions. I think a lot of violence is caused by people who instead of understanding the point of Christianity choose to search the Bible for verses that justify such things as killing natives in America, but when those verses are so blantly obvious to me as being hate speech how do I know what the real meassage of Christianity is? Chirstians wrote that but it sounds like Nazis. Instead of viewing this with a Euro-American bias, try to look at this again critically and tell me what you think. Personally I think the natives' distrust and in certain situations, hatred of Christians is well justified based upon their historical realtionship of oppressor vs. the oppressed.

shaber
Yes, and I also know about the land reserves etc and it is far fetched at best to say that this stuff was done for religious reasons! Think of the land man!

Bear in mind this professor may be hostile to you for visible reasons rather than speculative religious ones.

Turbo-Cajun
My professor is not hostile towards me for visible reasons, or otherwise.

I think that there were other reasons for the Europeans to invade the Americas other than religion. However, religion was used to justify a lot of senseless violence. Are you familiar with the Massacre of Wounded Knee?

Wounded Knee Internet Resource

I don't beleive that the end justified the means.

Thier land was stolen from them. Just because they have a few reservations left does not make the fact that we took the rest of their land away any easier for them to accept.

shaber
The primary purpose was expansion cool not religion. Without it we wouldn't have had Canada or Australia either.

Darth Revan
A good part of it (not Wounded Knee specifically, just the situation with the american indians in general) was justified by religion. A teacher I had a few years ago put it well--many of these people believed that it was their duty as Christians to convert the rest of the world (still do, actually) to their religion. And if the people could not be converted, they believed they had the right to kill them in order to prevent the spreading of pagan religions. So yes, the primary purpose WAS expansion, but I think that if you had asked them, they might have justified it at least partially through religion. Besides which, the things they did to the native people were not things that were justified by expansion. We now have a huge piece of land to live on, and here we are trashing it.

Interesting stuff. I don't think most Christians take the Bible that literally, but I know that there have been many Christians in the past who have done horrible things to other ethnic groups. And now nobody can give us any of that "they weren't really Christians" crap, because it says this stuff in the Bible.

shaber
So what happened with Mexico?

Turbo-Cajun
Shaber, do you read my posts even? Do you know what this thread is about?




I agree that we had other reasons for colonizing the Americas.

You said this earlier and I agreed with you. But the question I am asking is does the Bible promote actions that are considered genocidal? I say yes. There is evidence of Christians committing genocide. Maybe the wounded knee isn't the best example I could have used. It shows that Genocide was committed. It does not exactly prove my point yet though. For that I probably need to show you another example

Now, from his base on Haiti, Columbus sent expedition after expedition into the interior. They found no gold fields, but had to fill up the ships returning to Spain with some kind of dividend. In the year 1495, they went on a great slave raid, rounded up fifteen hundred Arawak men, women, and children, put them in pens guarded by Spaniards and dogs, then picked the five hundred best specimens to load onto ships. Of those five hundred, two hundred died en route. The rest arrived alive in Spain and were put up for sale by the archdeacon of the town, who reported that, although the slaves were "naked as the day they were born," they showed "no more embarrassment than animals." Columbus later wrote: "Let us in the name of the Holy Trinity go on sending all the slaves that can be sold." source

Let us in the name of the Holy Trinity go on sending all the slaves that can be sold?

What does that statment mean to you? Is that okay because we own all their land now?

Turbo-Cajun
Mexico was settled by Spaniards, not Anglos. They had a different view on the native population. In America they wanted the native dead, because the white people wanted the land. In Mexico the Spaniards wanted the gold, not the land. They had thier own country and they needed people to bring them the gold. So the indigenous were useful to them. They also tried saving their souls by bringing Catholicism, in America people who advocated teaching natives religion and assimulating them into society were proggressives... people way out on the edge of racial tolerance.

Gregory
Many Christians thought that way--no doubting that. But the New Testimant says that if someone isn't receptive to your teachings, you should knock the dust off your boots and move on (or something like that--don't have my Bible with me), so Jesus himself clearly didn't teach that sort of convert-or-die mentality--it's a Christian thing, not a Jesus thing.

Turbo-Cajun
I guess I can understand what you are saying... I've read that passage before too. But if you guys don't agree with stuff like that why do you have it in your holy book?

Darth Revan
Because the Bible is never revised or edited, even though it was almost completely rewritten by a number of foreign leaders a long time ago...

Turbo-Cajun
So they have a holy book that they beleive was written by people who were divinely inspired by God, with a bunch of stuff in it that they don't beleive in? I guess it doesn't surprise me totally I guess.

Turbo-Cajun
Oh, and Col. John Chivington who lead the troops that were involved in the Wounded Knee Massacre was a preacher before he was a Colnel and was supposedly a very religious man.

Gregory, Are you saying that God did teach people to commit genocide, just that they were supposed to stop after Christ taught us to act peacefully?

Tex
You'd have to run a mile into the ocean here in Ameirca! laughing out loud

Gregory
I'm an atheist, so I'm not saying that God did anything. And how Christians reconsile the Old and New Testimants is entirely their problem. I'm simply pointing out that those who seek to convert others by force are acting contrary to Christ's teachings.

Gregory
I'm checking out the link you provided me even as I speak. But when I actually look the passages up in my Bible, a different picture emerges.

'Levitcus 19:20 "If a man has sex with a slave girl he is not to be punished. She is a slave."'

No. What the Bible says is that he will not be put to death. It is still a bad thing--the Bible calls it a sin and demands that a guilt offering be payed.


""When you go to war against your enemies and you see a beautiful woman and find her desirable, you may take her. If she ceases to please you send her away." Deut. 21:10"

This is technically true, but if you read the passage, you'll realize that it is intended to protect the girl. If you desire a girl, you may take her to her home. After that, you have to leave her alone for a month--so that she can mourn--and then either marry her or let her go free. You absolutely may not sell her; "You must not treat her as a slave, since you have dishonered her."


"The Bible makes clear that rape is only acceptable conduct when practiced against foreigners and slaves. If a rape happens within the country itself, according to the Biblical law, you must stone to death rape victims.

"If a man rapes a girl in the city, you must stone him to death, and the woman as well." Deut. 22:24"

Yes, this is true. And it's bad; but if you read the relevant verses, you'll see that there's a reason for it--because the communities are so small, the girl could call out for help and more or less be guaranteed of getting it. Of course, it's stupid--the girl's mouth could be covered, or she could be threatened into silence--but not arbirarily cruel in the way that that passage, taken out of context, suggests.


I'm pretty sure that he's confused about several aspects of Jewish culture--specifically, what being unclean means. He talks about how orgasm is a sin, menstration is a sin, etcetera--no. They make a person unclean, and require ritual purification, but that's not the same as being sinful. Killing people in battle also makes one unclean, but is clearly not views as a sin.


"Surprisingly, while you must not eat 'road kill' yourself you can sell it to foreigners, and it is not a sin.

Dueteronomy 14:21 You shall not eat anything that you find that is dead; you may give it to the stranger who is within your towns, that he may eat it, or you may sell it to a foreigner."

Well, maybe. But my Bible (I'm using the CarperCollins Study Bible, New Revised Standard Edition) translates this as "eat anything that dies of itself." That is, of natural causes. This is religious law. And the reason you can sell it to foreigners, of course, is that since they're not Jews, they don't have to follow Jewish law. Hardly sinister.


I've already said that I'm an atheist. And I think that the Bible has a lot of very bad stuff in it, especially in the Old Testimant. But that page stinks of either bad research or outright dishonesty.

Vash TFA
And even when not converting others by force. There is always that bit about.. if you don't believe in god, then you go to hell and burn forever in a pit of eternal torment. So.. either way.. no matter the method of persuasion involved. There is always pressure applied and threats made. Refusal to worship either met with penalty of death or torture or both, or the instillment of the idea that not worshipping this god and no other meant suffering horrors beyond imagination for all time after death.

Considering everything meantioned in this thread and that which the Bible teaches.. I'd have to say.. God isn't that full of mercy, or love, or justice, doesn't promote peace, doesn't teach equaility of race or sex. But he does threaten, he does demand, though he allows free will he punishes those who'd use that freedom in choosing not to worship him, wants people to enslave eachother, kill eachother, brutalize eachother, rape virgins, kill innocent people, torture unbelievers until they either swear to follow him or die.

God is not a nice guy if that's how he really is.. and if he even exists. And I gotta tell ya.. if he's really teaching people to kill and rape and pillage.. then.. I wouldn't want to go to his "kingdom" his "heaven". I'd rather fade into nothing when I die than grovel at the feet of such a tyrant in the afterlife.

But hey, that's just my opinion.

Turbo-Cajun
Vash, I'm agreeing with you here.



Gregory, none of those verses you point out contradict the idea of a God that supports genocide. Kiddnapping beautiful woman and dividing virgins amongst themselves instead of killing them all does not lead me to think that God is anymore merciful (If he does exist). If that is somehow better I fail to see how. Many victims of rape consider rape a more heinous crime than murder. I think that that those verses supports raping your enemies women. Dividing up virgins amongst yourselves? mmm.... So add that up on top of genocide and you have a holy book that has rules and justifications given by god to commit half the crimes recognized under modern international law.

I didn't really get the thing about not eating things you find dead, but thats okay to give to foriegners as particularly hateful except that it reinforces hatefulness or barriers between "God's people" and everyone else. Maybe giving foreigners roadkill is their idea of "compassionate conservatism"... but then again I don't really understand Christians and how they think that well. I'm just analyzing what I read in the Bible. And yes, some different versions of the Bible use different language. Sometimes this does radically change the meaning of the verse. Yet another reason to challenge the Bible as an absolute source of truth.

Gregory
I wasn't aware that I was trying to contradict anything, other than the validity of some of your link's examples.

Moses, incidently, was probably a great deal less lenient than he might have been with the women because they essentially caused the conflict--another thing you won't see in your link, but which is evident in the actual Biblical passage. I'm not defending his actions--they were abhorent. That doesn't mean, however, that it's okay to take verses out of context and leave out explanatory material in order to make the early Christians seem even worse than they were--that's dishonest.

Mr Zero
Greg is on the money here - those (well known) examples all overstate the case of what most biblical translations actually say. By willfully making the already ridiculous seem even more so you allow your opponents to concentrate on your exaggeration rather than the original point.

I like to call it "Michael Mooreism" - making a good point, badly.

Turbo-Cajun
I checked several different versions of the Bible before posting.
I chose that site because it had a lot of good examples in one, easy to read location.

If you want to analyze different translations of the Bible this is the resource I used.
It doesnt sound much better in any of the other versions.

I don't think that these verses become any less genocidal when written using different wording for the same basic ideas.

shaber
Mr Zero said it (amazing as that seems)

The Mormons had the good idea of making the outmoded medium relevant by constructing a book with an ultra patriotic take smile That's certainly kept living standards up.

Imperial_Samura
There certainly seems to be rather unpleasant overtones in part parts of the bible, and I felt motivated to have a bit of a look. It really does seem, from a historical point of view that it is very much two books. Pre Christ God appeared very war like, and, frankly brutal in what the authors believed he demanded. After Christ the tone changes to the very noble "love they fellow man". Perhaps it has something to do with the times it was written in, and who did the writing, after all, the bible is not actually written by God (if there is a god), but by people, with human flaws, human hates and human desires.

Arachnoidfreak
Not just modern law, his OWN law. God has broken, and told other Christians to break the 10 commandments on many occasions.

Laskharis
Got any examples? (Sorry if that sounds spiteful, it isn't meant to...)

Arachnoidfreak
The Ten Commandments

1. Thou shalt have no other gods before me
2. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image.
3. Thou shalt not tak the name of the Lord they God in vain.
4. Remember the sabbath day to keep it holy.
5. Honor thy father and mother.
6. Thou shalt not kill
7. Thou shalt not commit adultery.
8. Thou shalt not steal.
9. Thou shalt not bear false witness against your neighbor.
10. Thou shalt not covet anything that is thy neighbors.

God flooded the earth, killing nearly everyone on the planet, he broke rule number 6.

He destroyed Soddom and Gomorrah, he broke rule 6. Again.

God killed all of the Egyptian first born children...but that wasn't enough! He killed the first born of their cattle as well! Breaking the 6th I see... yet again.

Jealousy is one of the Seven Deadly Sins, is it not? on more than one occasion, God has stated "I am a jealous God, and you shall have no other before me".

Jesus and God are one, correct? That's the whole point of the trinity.

"5.Honor thy mother and they father" Jesus said "Lk.14:26
"If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple."" Telling other to break rule 5 I see...

There are many more contradictions in the Bible. http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/ (Link courtesy of The Omega. Thanks!)

Imperial_Samura
Perhaps God is exempt from his own rules......

Arachnoidfreak
More!
Revelations:
19:11
And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.

19:12
His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.

19:13
And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.

19:14
And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.

19:15
And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.

19:16
And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.

19:17
And I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the fowls that fly in the midst of heaven, Come and gather yourselves together unto the supper of the great God;

19:18
That ye may eat the flesh of kings, and the flesh of captains, and the flesh of mighty men, and the flesh of horses, and of them that sit on them, and the flesh of all men, both free and bond, both small and great.

Apparently Jesus is supposed to make war and EAT HIS ENEMIES. What happened to that "love your enemy" crap he spewed while he was alive?

I suspect the answer I will hear is "you aren't supposed to take Revelations literally! You aren't supposed to take the Old Testament literally! Just believe the love part, because that's the good part!11one!1!"

Imperial_Samura
Most of the earlier religions were based upon two features (in a broad sense). The gods were defenders, meant to hold back the tide of chaos in a literal, bloody war like sense. As such, anybody that was not actually a follower of "order", was chaos, and didn't really count towards the rules, like the killing of a slave not being really murder, as they were seen as property. Also religion served as saying, well, you suffered on earth, things will get better later on.... it is likely all religions today still have a grounding in such traditions. Thats not to say any are wrong, but back then at least Gods needed to be bad it seems. These days its not the same (thank goodness), but remnants of these beliefs will linger....

shaber
The Ten Commandments had not been drafted in the days of the Flood, the destruction of those two cities, the infanticidal spree... smile

Christ's personal philosophy was largely independent of the Old Testament which is alot like the ancient pagan religions which influenced it. Probably you have a slight mistranslation of Christ's verse; it is more likely that he was merely exhorting any possible disciples to leave whatever lifestyle they had previously.

Arachnoidfreak
Ok, my examples were before the Exodus, and the commandments. Did you read the rest of the Bible? The 20+ chapters that come after Exodus?

God got angry when some people complained, so he burned them alive.

Numbers 11:1 "And when the people complained, it displeased the LORD: and the LORD heard it; and his anger was kindled; and the fire of the LORD burnt among them, and consumed them that were in the uttermost parts of the camp."

God tells Moses and his people to break the 6th commandment, because a man picked up sticks on Saturday:

Numbers 15:32 - 15:36
And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day.

And they that found him gathering sticks brought him unto Moses and Aaron, and unto all the congregation.

And they put him in ward, because it was not declared what should be done to him.

And the LORD said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death: all the congregation shall stone him with stones without the camp.

And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the LORD commanded Moses.

God sends an angel to destroy 185,000 that haven't done anything yet:

Isaiah 37:36
Then the angel of the LORD went forth, and smote in the camp of the Assyrians a hundred and fourscore and five thousand(185,000): and when they arose early in the morning, behold, they were all dead corpses.

God created evil:
Isaiah 45:5
I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me:

45:6
That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside me. I am the LORD, and there is none else.

45:7
I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

And there's more. Check the site I posted.

Eöl Moriedhel
Well, the jist of it for me is thus: If you commit ANY sin, you go to Hell, or are to be murdered by those who have been "enlightened" by God. Or he'll command you're father to kill you. stick out tongue

shaber
In the last one He seems to be declaring Himself like the far eastern concept of an Absolute Spirit that is beyond good and evil. Seems uncannier than a weak and envious being!

Fiery Eyes
the OT is old law, when Jesus died on the cross, we are under new law: Grace, is there any place in the NT, where anything like that took place?

Arachnoidfreak
One page back, I quoted Revelations, but would you like more?

God determines who is evil before they even know about it, and then condemns them for being evil!

Jude 1:4
For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.
Whoa, what happens to free will here??
----------------------------------------------------



Ephesians
1:4
According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:

1:5
Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will

Here it clearly says that we are without blame before him in love...but they don't mean "we", they only mean Christians, don't they? Arrogant ****ers.
----------------------------------------------------

Here, Jesus himself says that you ARE to follow the Old Testament, and that he has NOT come to change the laws. (Guess you are practicing Chritianity a little wrongly, huh?)

Matthew
5:17
Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

5:18
For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

5:19
Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

shaber
It's the Calvinist doctrine. It's the only explanation with an omnipotent God.

The Omega

Fiery Eyes
first of all I didn't see any scriptures on rev and these scripture you just gave, do NOT show where God, Or Jesus said to kill .

Fiery Eyes
The OT is GREAT, has wonderful stories and experiences, and we can learn ALOT from the OT, I never said, it didn't count, what I said was WE are under GRACE now.

Turbo-Cajun
Its the same God who once commanded genocide that suposedly still rules the world today. Its easy to see why people can justify genocide with christianity. If there are Christians can understand this:

Numbers 31:7
So they made war against Midian, just as the LORD had commanded Moses, and they killed every male. (New American Standard Version)

they can jusify other "unchristian" actions when put in a similar situation. Many early christians viewed America as the promised land "a land flowing with milk and honey," putting them in the same situation as Moses' people in the old testament story of the exodus.

If they learned this from the OT, doesn't mean that the Bible spreads the idea of genocide as an acceptable way to protect God's people? What do you learn from that story then? How is that story supposed to be interpretted by a "good" christian?

Fiery Eyes
There was sin, people making other idols and worshiping them, adultry, sorrcery ect., people were warned but took no heed to the warning, just like today, people are warned what the end of time will bring but most don't listen, don't believe it's true and go on as if there is no God.

Gregory
So you think it's okay to commit genocide as long as the people you're murdering aren't Christian?

Eöl Moriedhel
There isn't in my mind. We have no purpose.

Fiery Eyes
I wasn't saying there was we shld do that, i was giving an explanation for what happened at that time. We are under Grace now, no where in the NT will you find that, if you can plz let me know.

Eöl Moriedhel
Does it really matter? People need to set aside religious differences, and party....

Turbo-Cajun

Eöl Moriedhel
hysterical
Cheers!

Fiery Eyes
I take it you can't find anything in the NT?

Imperial_Samura
Hmmm, the real change of tone occurred after Jesus came and died.... perhaps the earlier version of God was "out of touch", with humanity,as quite frankly, we must all be quite different in thought and actions to a supremely powerful God, perhaps Jesus humanised him, added humanity to him, so he went from being a being that was prepared to destroy, to one that had, through the son, assimilated human values............................ the creator being remade by the creation?

finti
so I take it that the ten commandments is old law too then?

shaber
The indigenous american fiasco was a kill or be killed situation the colonists got themselves into erm People in continental Europe had constantly warred amongst themselves when everyone was Christian. If the scriptures were used as an excuse, it was just that, an excuse.

Gregory
Originally posted by Fiery Eyes
I take it you can't find anything in the NT?

Obviously, Jesus never preached genocide. But the people who claim that Jesus somehow replaced the old law are presumably missing the passage where he says that he has not come to destroy the old law, and that anybody who disobeys even the least of them will be least in the Kingdom of Heaven.

Laskharis
You can't blame western atrocities on Christianity; horrible expansionist disasters would have happened reguardless of whether the English and so on worshipped Jesus, Mithras or Astarte.
The message of love, grace and strength preached by the NT was twisted into a tool of oppression; justification for terrible deeds. And yet it still has the power to transform, in a good way, the lives of millions...

finti
but now the truth is they happen to be christians, and they forced their religion upon multiple cultures which led to the destruction of many of those.

Imperial_Samura
True, but then it was misguided people who made religion a tool, opposed to what God might have intended (if one believes), and just as often purely earthan motivations and desires have destroyed culture and life. Some times religion is used to mask that, but just as often it doesn't.

The Omega
Thessalonians

1:7
And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,
1:8
In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.


Looks like the good Jesus is gonna mass-murderer anyone who "know not God".
And since ee are predestined by God to go to either heaven or hell, none of our thoughts, words, or actions can affect the final outcome. (Ephesians).
So god and your Jesus has alreday condemned some of us to Hell. Great, eh?

Btw: Are crippled people sinners?

Laskharis
That whole predestination thing is slightly wobbly, a lot of people take it to mean that either a) it's beyond our ability to understand, or that b) the non-predistened are those who would never accept God in the first place, so the cause and effect of it all is slightly weird.
And sorry, could you explain the cripple statement a bit more please...

finti
the christians cant squirm away the fact that the head of the churches aimed for more land and to forcefully spreading the gospel. that they try to run away from the responsibility today say more of the mind of christians than anything else

shaber
I think you're making the mistake of judging history with artificial contemporary standards. As Finti said somewhere, it is an animals instinct to kill in order to survive. Genocide as a crime and all the double standards and recriminations thereof is relatively recent.

Samurai Guy
The Bible is many things, but if you focus on the negative all the time, everything can be seen in such darkness.

The Bible, in my opinion, is often misconstrude and twisted. I choose to look at the Old Testiment as the Lords frustration with Human Kind. And the New Testiment as Gods way of showing that he will be more compationate. God gave us free-will, and was mistempered with the was we misused it.

However, he gave us the Son to take away our sins. Jesus, in turn, is our scapegoat.

finti
if he took away the sin by giving his son, why do people still have to beg for forgivness

Samurai Guy
There is no begging. There is asking. However, there is a penence that must be paid.

For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. For every wrong-doing, a consequence.

Imperial_Samura
I agree to a point, really, genocide is a human concept, and it is people who carried it out for most likely human purposes. The world was indeed different thousands of years ago, and while genocide is to us terrible, to people of those times it was probably seen as a neccestiy. Is it right? No. Of course this brings in God, does he advocate it? It might indeed seem like that, but it has to be, perhaps, put in context.

Samurai Guy
Man has free will to kill off whomsoever we want. It is so easy to pick up a gun and start firing.

finti
same difference

Samurai Guy
No it is not.

shaber
Who drafts most (at least) of the stuff that is perportedly divine? Humans do. Most religions and all political creeds are quite brutal really because that is bestial nature.

finti
if you get on your knees folding your hands, or go to confession YOU BEG

shaber
Mankind is guilty of driving the Neanserthal Man to extinction.

Imperial_Samura
Not always, it can be a sign of respect, of acknowledging your better, or contemplation, and a sign of innocence, the removal of pride. Yes, it technically puts you at the mercy of those standing over you, but you choose to lower yourself to such a posistion out of respect.

finti
that is merly a thory more than it is a fact

yeah begging

Samurai Guy
Merely Christian tradition to Genuflect, Pray on your knees, etc. etc. etc.

I have said many times that the Christian/Catholic/all the other offshoots of said faith are far too archaic and need updating, like, five years ago.

Showing respects is not necessarily a bad thing, but you do not need an intermediary to speek to God. There are far too many flaws in Holy Mothers church to show respect to it. Showing respects to God, Jesus, and the other Catholic idols is one thing, respecting the institution that are supposed to be foundations of it is a complete and total other.

Laskharis
It isn't begging. You ask for forgiveness knowing full well that the Son of God, creator of the universe/s and most powerful being in all existence, was crucified so that you might have freedom. That's pretty inspiring.

finti
never believed in any god, to me god is of non importance just as it is with this sacrificial crusifixtion. So I dont need to ask, pray, beg or submit to any kind of divine being

Imperial_Samura
Its different for everyone, of course if you don't believe it would seem wrong to bow down before a God you don't believe in, but I would say it isn't begging. In Japan it is a sign of respect for a younger person to bow far deeper before an elder, the traditional marriage proposal is delivered on bent knee, a knight was knighted bowed before the monarch, none of this is begging, it is saying "I recognize and respect you, and as such put myself at your mercy", begging must be accompanied by, I feel, emotions such as fear and the like, it can't be begging if all you feel is hope and happiness and respect.

WindDancer
My first observation. The guy that runs that website sure has a LOT of things to say. Not only does he criticize the war in Iraq, but also questions the pictures taken by Osama Bin Laden. Now, whoever is running that awitness.org sure cares more about being controversial than to be reasonable. Why I'm I saying this? Simple, is quite obvious he is taking verses from the bible and turning them into a genocide argument.

I got news for that guy! The Taliban uses verses from the Koran and twisted them to support their own war. He is doing something similar! He is taking verses from the Bible and twisted them to use them as anti-religious arguments. Also I'm sure that if that guy (not your teacher TC) writes a book he is going to get some good amount of money...why? simple....controversy sells! As for the content of the verses...I'd much rather consult with a Theologian or a Scholar (that's right ppl that study the Bible in a academic method) than to just read some mumble jumble from the internet.

Samurai Guy
It is easy to twist any document to show and more or less encourage your actions if you wish.

Look at the song Helter Skelter and the events that arose from it.

WindDancer
You da man Samurai Guy! big grin thumb up

Imperial_Samura
True, true.

Samurai Guy
The Bible preaches what THE READER wants to hear.





blushing

Oh, you!

lil bitchiness
I know next to nothing about the Bible, but if Ush is correct, if Bible is full of unpleasent stuff especially in the old testament, than isnt it Judeism as well as Christinaity thats preaching genocide?

Samurai Guy
The Bible is not a book that can be taken literally... especailly the Old Testament. The Bible asks one thing of the reader....

"Take a LEAP OF FAITH!"




Very true. big grin smart <-- Milla

lil bitchiness
Dont patronise me. cry

Samurai Guy
I never said I was! I agree with you.

In the Old Testament, God was vengeful and hot tempered. Look at Job.

finti
The Bible is not a book that can be taken literally... especailly the Old Testament. QUOTE] I would say shouldnt be taken seriously

Samurai Guy
Actually, I meant CANNOT be taken literally.

finti
kind of got what you ment in your previous post

Vash TFA
Really, you can't take it litterally or seriously. If you take it litterally, then you'd be saying that the devil is real and he can influence your actions and thoughts, put evil ideas in your head and possess you. That he can affect the world and do horrible things and or influence men to do such horrible things. If people really took the bible litterally, any criminal could make a plea before a judge in court of "the devil made me do it".

Now in court, this would never fly. But still.. in court you are made to swear an oath before god to tell the truth. I don't see why part of a religion can be taken seriously.. and another not. Some parts ignored and yet still printed in their holy book and we're told not to pay attention to those parts.. even though they are said to be god's own words and laws (talking about the Old Testament of course).

If you speak and pray to god, then you're a good person, but if god speaks back.. you're crazy? What about all those people he spoke to in the book.. were they all crazy too? If so, shouldn't everyone just ignore the book as it would have to of been written by crazy people who thought god spoke to them.. but as we all know anyone who claims these days to of spoken with god is a nutcase.

Where's the sense in any of this?

Samurai Guy
You make an excellent point. To attempt to answer/form a rebuttle... I offer this.

Yes, there are some aspects of the "Good Book" that carry out into everyday lives. I have said this many of times, and will say it once more.

The Bible is a code of conduct by which a good, honest person should carry out their lives. If you gather anything from the Bible, you will learn that it can be summarizes into one line.

"Do onto others as you would have them do unto you."

That is it.

Also, I said this once more in this thread... "The Catholic/Christian/all other offshoots of said faith are archiac and need updating."

amity75
At Sunday school as a kid it disturbed me when we got all these bible stories about God wiping out entire armies for no particular reason. It's hard for me to relate to a mass murderer.

Nienna
They were usually evil people and often power hungry eek!

They deserved G-d's wrath no expression

Eöl Moriedhel
shifty
Melkor's not evil.....evil face

amity75
So why doesn't he come and deal with the evil power-hungry people of today?

Nienna
I believe He has already.

He never himself wiped out an entire people (besides the cities, Sodom and Gomorrah), His people did it.

This doesn't mean that the Jewish people have to destroy all of the "evil" people today. Hell, what even is evil? Today's representation of evil is Christians. Demons are okay, self-worship is okay, sex is okay, divorce is okay.....all of the things that used to be not okay now are.

I think G-d stills deals with evil people today, like how America finished off Hussein's terror.

shaber
In 20 years Europe will be under Sharya Happy Dance

Turbo-Cajun
There were people who were saying that earlier in this thread...

Turbo-Cajun
You think America is doing God's work in the world by being in Iraq?

laughing

Nienna I think you are beyond hope... I am truely sorry for you.

WhiteEagle
The better of two evils? Time will tell...shifty

Turbo-Cajun
I hope im still alive to see it... I'm drafting age you know?

shaber
The drafting age doesn't have to be consistent!

Turbo-Cajun
what? Im 19, in the US you can get drafted between 18-26... ill be eligible for the draft for a while.

shaber
In Islamic states you can be drafted at 7!

Turbo-Cajun
Did you pull that number out of your ass or did you get it from a credible source? If its a credible source I'd like a link...




and no, your ass is not a credible source.

shaber
Do you really know nothing of the Iran-Iraq war... What the f**k?

gives a mention here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_use_of_children

Turbo-Cajun
I know that there have been many conflicts where children have been exploited for the purpose of war. The Iran/Iraq war is not famous for this. I know the US had intelligence officers working both sides... not too familiar with Islamic Child Soldiers. A better example of this was the civil war between the rebels and the government of Sierra Leone or the use of children during the Vietnam war... children running up to soldiers with grenades etc. The Iran/Iraq war was much better known because of the use of chemical/nerve agents due to the Iraqis being armed with them by the US.

Turbo-Cajun
Anyways your taking this off topic... I was mearly stating I hope the US president doesn't do any more stupid shit that ends up getting me killed overseas and that I hope I get to see the end of it. I hope things turn out alright for the Iraqis. I just dont feel the need to fight in that war for them.

And that site didnt say anything about Iran or Iraq having a draft age of 7... using kids to clean mine fields is a low and shitty thing to do, but I think you misunderstand the difference between a conscript army and using kids to run over mines... I personally plan to avoid doing either option.

WhiteEagle
I wasn't aware there was a draft in the US. Does that mean mandatory service or just a request? If it's mandatory what would happen if you simply told them where to shove it?

Turbo-Cajun
There are some people, myself included, who think that GW has plans to reinstate the mandatory military draft. Right now the military is an all volunteer force, they wish to keep it that way. But realistically we are stretched as it is, using a lot of guard and reserve units etc. with a lot of people who have had to go over seas already. If there is more large scale military actions in the next 3 or 4 years, which if GW got reelected is quite possible, the military would be in a situation where we may be over committed to too many different fights where it may be longer and more drawn out than overwhelming them with numbers. The united states has had mandatory military service before when they've had recruiting troubles and manpower shortages. I think that it is a legitimate concern to have. They have tried to paint this picture that it won't happen but realistically they are making preparations for it. I heard that they are renegotiating extradition treaties with other countries concerning returning draft dodging citizens. If wish to avoid service you must either A) go to another country and hide B) fight in a war you dont believe in or C) go to jail for the duration of the conflict. Even if they were considering it though, do you think they would say anything about it until after the election? probably not.

shaber
Jail sounds most likely! You'd just have to hope for a one bunk Hilton naughty

Nienna
I. It's just an example, I don't exactly believe in that war, but I really did not like Hussein.

II. Yes, I am beyond hope, I don't deny it. Feel sorry for me if you wish, I'm just an 8th grader with too much algebra homework...erm

Fiery Eyes
That is talking about the end of time, which plainly states in the bible what is going to happen in the end of times. God is giving EVERYONE warnings now, rather you take heed to them or not is strictly up to you. Jesus is coming back for his people, there will be 7 years of tribulation.....it's not going to be a fun time there.

and are crippled people sinners, ummm I don't know, did they ask for forgiveness? did they accept Jesus as their Lord and savior? You tell me, are they?

finti
always 7 years huh

Turbo-Cajun
I get to used too beating on people my own age... if you are in 8th grade there may still be hope for you. But you need to realize that there is more going on in Iraq than just removing a bad person from power... there is oil, there were supposedly WMD's everywhere... mobile labs, mobile launchers etc. that didnt really exist. The American people were lied to to fight a war we didnt need to fight. All of this had nothing to do with Saddams actions... it was part of the neo-conservative political agenda to put a US-friendly government in Iraq for trading oil. So while it was just an example, it was a bad example... we just traded one kind of evil for another.

shaber
It's very obfuscated!

HockeyHorror
the Old Testament "God" is alot different than the New Testament "God"

hmmm

shifty

Church is hiding alot of shit...

Vash TFA
Indeed

Laskharis
Doesn't really count as "hiding" if it's in the Bible for all to see, hmm?

finti
it aint about the bible, it is all about what the churches doesnt want the public to know

Samurai Guy
If the churches were so God-fearing and the "messengers of God," they shouldn't have to hide anything.

Turbo-Cajun
Mabye they arent really messengers of god, but rather exists to control society and give false hope to people living under oppressive rule.

mmm....

Fiery Eyes
who hides? what are you talking about Samuri Guy?

Turbo-Cajun
read up ahead a few posts...

Scarpa
The bible isnt hate speech you idiots

Jackie Malfoy
The bible is the bible it has nothering to do with hate.Just because some people don't like it does not mean that there is something wrong with it.
In fact I find some parts of the bible interesting.JM

Scarpa
Yet another thing we agree with

finti
it could easily be turned into it by extremist though, and dont call other posters idiots because they dont see it eye to eye with you.

frodo34x
What you must remember, is that all you refrences come from the Old Testament. The old testament which christians share with Muslims and Jews as well.

frodo34x
This argument does not work. In the book of acts, in the new testament (I.E. revised), it says

juggygails
so to anyone that doesnt believe in god. do you then believe we are here from the big bang? because that theory doesn't make sense to me.

debbiejo
Yeah the big bang has hole in that theory also.

Shakyamunison
Short answer is; YES.

Adam_PoE

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Adam_PoE


Hay! Adam_PoE, don't confuse them with facts. stick out tongue

debbiejo
What did the sheep, camel and donkey do?

Whoo...donkey doo.. blink laughing out loud

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by debbiejo
What did the sheep, camel and donkey do?

Whoo...donkey doo.. blink laughing out loud

Did you not get any sleep last night? laughing out loud

debbiejo
Maybe eat

InvisibleAngell
Originally posted by Turbo-Cajun
The Christian God is a God that teaches genocide.

I have a native professor at university that is finishing up on a book with a similar title. He examines the bible and shows all of the verse which advocate actions that conflict with what the commonly held definiton of genocide is. I am not sure exactly which verses he is choosing to use but I found a site with a ton of quotes from the Bible that are promoting hate. I know what kind of thread this is going to end up being like, but I'm hoping that there is going to be some level discussion going at some point. I just want to show some of the quotes and see what you guys think. Is it promoting hate or genocide? How does verses like this conflict with the image that Christians have of themselves?


This is the site:

Is the Bible hate literature?


Just some of the verses:

"I saw that the people were marrying foreigners. Their children were even learning foreign languages. I called down curses on them. I struck them and tore the hair out of their heads and made them swear by god, 'you will not marry foreigners.'" Neh. 13:23 "So I purged them of everything foreign. I drew up regulations defining everyone's duty. Remember me, oh god, for my happiness." Neh. 13:30

"They waged war as god had commanded them and killed every male. But they kept the women as captives and took their wealth as spoil. Moses was enraged. 'So you spared the women? Kill every woman who has had sexual intercourse and kill every little boy, but keep the virgin girls for yourself. Divide them up evenly.'" Num. 31:7, 14

"You must drive all the natives of the land before you. If you do not drive the natives of the country before you then those who remain will become disgusting to your eyes and a thorn in your side. They will harass you in the land where you live, and I will deal with you as I meant to deal with them." Num. 33:51 "Devour the nations the lord your god delivers over to you. Show them no pity."

"Slaves you may possess, but make sure they are foreigners. You may also make slaves of the natives who dwell among you and from their children who are born and reared in your land. You may own them as chattels and leave them to your sons as their heriditary property, making them slaves forever. But you should not lord it over your own countryman, your own kinsmen." Lev. 25:44

Mere words will not keep a slave in order. He may understand, but he will not respond. Pamper a slave and he will be ungrateful. A whip for the horse, a bridle for the donkey, and a rod for the back of a fool." Proverbs "When a man beats a slave so hard that he dies in a day or two, he shall not be punished, for the slave is his property." Ex. 21:20

The list goes on and on...

What do you guys think? Is the Bible is hate literature?



Your professor is not god,he did not create all things,and he is a simple human therefor he doesn't know everything.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by InvisibleAngell
Your professor is not god,he did not create all things,and he is a simple human therefor he doesn't know everything.

But neither do you, or I.

debbiejo
Speaking of a professor in old those who did not have one did not go the eternal bliss according to the faith...Kings were denied one if not cooperating with the Pope of those times..History shows that one king even groveled to be in the Popes favor for fear of eternal death along with physical death put upon by the pope.

Mindship
Bible as Rorschach Test...go figger.

<< THERE IS MORE FROM THIS THREAD HERE >>