18 Sep 06
Killed by God, in one day, for premarital sex (1 Corinthians 10:8)
23,000 dead
Killed, at God's behest, for not giving God his due (Exodus 32:26-28)
3,000 dead
Killed for being counted by David (1 Chronicles 21:1-14)
70,000 dead
Killed by God for questioning Moses and Aaron (Numbers 16:35)
14,950 dead
Killed by God, in a plague, for whoring around (Numbers 25:1-9)
24,000 dead
Delivered by God to be killed by Israelites (Judges 3:28-29)
30,000 dead
Killed by God for engaging in homosexual acts (Genesis 19:24-25)
Everything dead in 2 cities
Killed by God after their king made fun of him (Isaiah 37:1-36)
185,000 dead
God threatened to kill for abandoning him (Amos 5:1-3)
90 percent of Israel
Killed by God when he was particularly disgusted (Genesis 6:5-7:22)
Everything dead on earth – except a few on an ark
Comply or spend eternity in hell (Rom. 6:23, Rev. 19:ll-15; 20:8)
CHRISTIAN TERRORISM
18 Sep 06
1 edit
Don't forget an indeterminate number of firstborn Egyptians and their cattle.
Or a lot of Midianites, slain at god's command.
Edit:
the website below has estimated that god has killed 2,270,365 people, which includes many women and children. This only tallies instances where the bible gives an approximate headcount and does not include cases where the total is impossible to determine, such as the firstborn Egyptians, the number of people drowned in the flood, or the ones killed in Sodom and Gomorrah. If those numbers were to be known the total would pass Hitler many times over. So much for a 'loving' god.
http://dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot.com/2006/08/how-many-has-god-killed.html
18 Sep 06
Originally posted by ChristTerrorIgnore or hate God, it is our choice, and as far as lists are concern
Killed by God, in one day, for premarital sex (1 Corinthians 10:8)
23,000 dead
Killed, at God's behest, for not giving God his due (Exodus 32:26-28)
3,000 dead
Killed for being counted by David (1 Chronicles 21:1-14)
70,000 dead
Killed by God for questioning Moses and Aaron (Numbers 16:35)
14,950 dead
Killed by God, in a plague, for whor ...[text shortened]... ark
Comply or spend eternity in hell (Rom. 6:23, Rev. 19:ll-15; 20:8)
CHRISTIAN TERRORISM
in your lists:
Can you list those that were killed by man for sexual reasons?
Can you list those that were killed by man for money?
Can you list those that were killed by man for being the wrong color?
Can you list those that were killed by man for insulting them?
Can you list those that were killed by man for breaking man's law?
If you see a sign that says danger don't touch on a power panel I'd
advise you not to touch it. There are dangers in the universe, you are
in it, and you have to deal with them all.
People are going to go to Hell for the evil they do, the only way they
can hope to miss hell that was prepared for the devil and his angels
is through God's mercy. You want to pick a fight with God over that,
beware, the power there is dangerous.
Kelly
18 Sep 06
Originally posted by KellyJayAll the crimes commited by man do not excuse the crimes commited by god. After all, it is claimed that god is perfect, whereas man clearly is not. But god's behavior in the bible is no better than the worst of men.
Ignore or hate God, it is our choice, and as far as lists are concern
in your lists:
Can you list those that were killed by man for sexual reasons?
Can you list those that were killed by man for money?
Can you list those that were killed by man for being the wrong color?
Can you list those that were killed by man for insulting them?
Can you ...[text shortened]... . You want to pick a fight with God over that,
beware, the power there is dangerous.
Kelly
I have no interest in picking a fight with your hypothetical god. But I'm more than happy to pick a fight with his followers. Followers who are apparently blind to the logical contradictions inherent within the purported attributes of their 'loving' god.
18 Sep 06
5 edits
Originally posted by rwingettGreetings to my fellow seekers,
All the crimes commited by man do not excuse the crimes commited by god. After all, it is claimed that god is perfect, whereas man clearly is not. But god's behavior in the bible is no better than the worst of men.
I have no interest in picking a fight with your hypothetical god. But I'm more than happy to pick a fight with his followers. Followers who ...[text shortened]... o the logical contradictions inherent within the purported attributes of their 'loving' god.
I was not, originally, going to post a reply, but in light of the harsh and hurtful language being used, I will respond once, and then, if you wish, you may PM me if you want to debate further.
This thread raises a sobering issue: one that, I hope, we can approach with maturity and not with flippancy. If one has an issue with a worldview, let us express it, by all means. But, please, in the name of tolerance and of reason, which this board purposes to uphold, let us not descend into behavior that is not worthy of the man or woman who utters it. I beg, in all seriousness, that we approach matters such as this with pathos, concern, and desire for the truth, rather than cruelty and unbounded scorn. I applaud you for being willing to engage the emotions, but let us not descend into emotionalism. We are whole people, my friends. Let us show compassion.
That having been said, let us examine the allegations. I believe these can be boiled down into three main objections:
* Punishment of disobedience of God's law.
* Punishment for offending God's ego.
* Capital punishment with no chance of restitution.
First of all, let us examine the nature of sin (which, for further reference, has been addressed in another thread). Sin, by definition, whether one believes in its existence or not, is a violent rupturing, a willful act of rebellion that deserves death because it a direct assault on God's holiness (i.e., His seperateness and righteousness) and a deliberate violence against the intimate communion God desires with and for every human.
Secondly, let us consider the nature of God Himself (whether one believes in Him or not). God, by definition, is an infinite and absolute being, who is described as being in "eternity," which is to say, not governed by time. Thus, He experiences all time as the "present" unlike humans who must experience reality successively. This does not mean so much that He "ordains" the future, but that he is already in the future, cooperating actively with all humans' free will simultaneously. We, on the other hand, cannot know the future. We cannot say "if the man or woman said he or she was sorry, God would have spared them." We cannot say that for we do not know if they would have repented. Only He does and that makes Him the only rightful judge as to who shall live and who shall not. And as for the infants who perished, Christian theology also mentions that babes are under what is commonly known as the "age of accountability," i.e. they know no better and cannot be held responsible for their actions. Such deaths amount to direct admittance into bliss in Heaven.
Also it is worth considering that the Bible speaks of God as the author of all life. If this is true, then if the author of life takes my life, has He really taken it when He has the power to restore it? The reason we are forbidden to murder is that the lives we have taken do not belong to us. We cannot restore them. C.S. Lewis said that, at least at the present stage in history, God regards human birth chiefly as the prerequisite for human death; and regards human death as the chief qualification for the "other kind of life," i.e. the life in eternity. It is an ineradicably true statement that the Bible regards this life as a tenuous vapor that is here for a moment and passes away. The Christian perspective is that eternity is more important than this temporal life and that this physical universe is not all that there is. Death is not the end, merely a gateway. If Hell enters the equation, we need only refer to the issue of repentance (addressed immediately above).
As to God having an ego, this is an unnecesary anthropomorphism. The Old Testament states "God is not a man that He should change His mind," which is to say that God is not swayed by our insults or our praises. If we insult, His will is unchaged. If we praise, the same remains true (praise is meant for our benefit, not His). If God mentions that His anger "burns" against someone, that is only to help us understand His level of hatred for that which is evil, i.e. that which severs all ties with the source of goodness and makes imperfect mankind the author of reality, a place which man cannot and must not possess for the sake of reality itself.
At this point the skeptic may ask, "Aren't these a lot of hoops to jump through? Isn't it simpler to just say that either God does not exist or that He exists and is evil?" This is where another aspect of our being comes into play, namely the Will. I believe it is far simpler to put faith in a loving God. That is my perspective, and I don't believe I'm jumping through any hoops. I could easily deliver similar objections to the skeptic.
I believe I would be right in saying that there is intellectual material for both sides of the God debate. In the final analysis, one must make the transition from debate to decision. This takes faith. Not blind unreasoning faith, but what the Bible defines as faith ("pistis" in the Greek), a judicial term that denotes a sober conclusion based on evidence (the abscence of Descarte's rational certainty notwithstanding) from the chosen perspective; atheist, thesit, pantheist, or otherwise.
I realize that this post of mine will not convince the hard-nosed skeptic, and it is not designed to do so. I merely present a counterperspective. I beg all to believe me that I write in a most serious frame of mind. No flippancy is intended.
I do not wish to list comparative body counts, so I shall not do so. Let us not descend into the Vietnam syndrome where good and evil are determined by statistics and surveys. Instead, let truth be our goal.
The warmest regards possible,
R
P.S.: Forgive the number of edits, I just wanted to make sure that I said exactly what I wished to communicate. Thanks again in advance for your patience.
18 Sep 06
Originally posted by RistarWhen god drowned almost the entire population of the earth in the great flood, what percentage of them were sinners? If sin is a wilfull act of rebellion, then were all the newborn infants sinners? If everyone is inherently a sinner, then was anything accomplished by this act? Did god thereby bring about this so called 'intimate communion' he supposedly desires? Were the people after the flood equally as sinful as the ones who were drowned? If god knew beforehand that he was going to drown them all, even as he was creating them, then why did he do it? Does he enjoy drowning people en masse? Will he drown us all again? Can't he come up with a better and more efficient way to reach his goals than mass extinction?
Greetings to my fellow seekers,
I was not, originally, going to post a reply, but in light of the harsh and hurtful language being used, I will respond once, and then, if you wish, you may PM me if you want to debate further.
This thread raises a sobering issue: one that, I hope, we can approach with maturity and not with flippancy. If one has an issue ...[text shortened]... Instead, let truth be our goal.
The warmest regards possible,
R
It sounds like an incredible number of hoops for you to jump through to bury the heavenly butcher bill under the rug.
18 Sep 06
3 edits
Originally posted by rwingettSorry, my friend. My edits seemed not to have outpaced your reading speed. Please refer to the newly added passage on infants. Once again my apologies.
When god drowned almost the entire population of the earth in the great flood, what percentage of them were sinners? If sin is a wilfull act of rebellion, then were all the newborn infants sinners? If everyone is inherently a sinner, then was anything accomplished by this act? Did god thereby bring about this so called 'intimate communion' he supposedly des ible number of hoops for you to jump through to bury the heavenly butcher bill under the rug.
Also, the Bible speaks to God's motives for the Flood and that Noah found favor in His eyes. That is why he was spared. Please refer to Genesis for more info.
As for why God placed the rainbow as a covenant and promise that he would not destroy the earth again by water, He did mention that a new destruction, this time by fire, would come eventually. This, of course, would refer to the second coming and the old older being burned away to be replaced by a good and benevolent kingdom.
"I take no pleasure in the destruction of the wicked," says God in the Bible. I seriously doubt that He enjoyed the flood or killing of any kind for that matter.
As the intimate communion, that's a superb question. It would take a book to explain it, because it's so wonderful! Suffice it say for now that it's a lot better than any kind of human relationship! PM me if you want to know more.
Also, as to the hoop jumping, I don't feel it's a lot of hoops at all, just common sense (again, please refer to the passage in my last post that speaks to this).
Sorry again, I know I said that the previous post would be my last; I just realized I had made lots of mistakes and wanted to correct them. Thanks, Rwingett, I appreciate your thoroughness, truly.
Once again, please feel free to PM me for more info. I'm afraid I'm becoming a bit too busy in my job and other things at home to post as often as I once did. But I'll try my best to answer honest questions if those questions are posed in the spirit of truth-finding.
Warm regards,
R
18 Sep 06
Originally posted by RistarCommon sense? If you wanted some 'common sense' you'd read Thomas Paine instead of the bible. Then you'd recognize a hoop for what it was.
Sorry, my friend. My edits seemed not to have outpaced your reading speed. Please refer to the newly added passage on infants. Once again my apologies.
Also, the Bible speaks to God's motives for the Flood and that Noah found favor in His eyes. That is why he was spared. Please refer to Genesis for more info.
As for why God placed the rainbow as a ...[text shortened]... questions if those questions are posed in the spirit of truth-finding.
Warm regards,
R
18 Sep 06
1 edit
Also it is worth considering that the Bible speaks of God as the author of all life. If this is true, then if the author of life takes my life, has He really taken it when He has the power to restore it? The reason we are forbidden to murder is that the lives we have taken do not belong to us. We cannot restore them.
ew...ever heard of sexual intercourse?
18 Sep 06
There is an 'old testament' and a 'new testament'.
There are TWO 'words of god'.
Which one should we ignore ?
Shall we ignore both in case there's an 'even newer testament' ?
And if we've had a bible full of Christian terrorism, why can't we be more understanding of the teachings of other religions ?
And wouldn't the next step be to work at all levels to get to know each other better, negotiate, compromise and accept ?
Shouldn't we be patient and persistent with this ?
- Joined
- 15 Sep 04
- Moves
- 7051
18 Sep 06
Originally posted by ChristTerrorPoor exegesis of biblical texts.
Killed by God, in one day, for premarital sex (1 Corinthians 10:8)
23,000 dead
Killed, at God's behest, for not giving God his due (Exodus 32:26-28)
3,000 dead
Killed for being counted by David (1 Chronicles 21:1-14)
70,000 dead
Killed by God for questioning Moses and Aaron (Numbers 16:35)
14,950 dead
Killed by God, in a plague, for whor ...[text shortened]... ark
Comply or spend eternity in hell (Rom. 6:23, Rev. 19:ll-15; 20:8)
CHRISTIAN TERRORISM
It was custom at the time to attribute any victory in warfare to God. The Hebrews overthrow Canaan; it was God. The Hebrews defeat the Philistines; it was God. One tribe purges another of evil practises; God at work. The deaths listed in biblical texts should be very loosely interpreted.
19 Sep 06
Originally posted by rwingettGod does not commit crimes, god/gods maybe.
All the crimes commited by man do not excuse the crimes commited by god. After all, it is claimed that god is perfect, whereas man clearly is not. But god's behavior in the bible is no better than the worst of men.
I have no interest in picking a fight with your hypothetical god. But I'm more than happy to pick a fight with his followers. Followers who ...[text shortened]... o the logical contradictions inherent within the purported attributes of their 'loving' god.
Kelly