Originally posted by KellyJay
God does not commit crimes, god/gods maybe.
Kelly

Drowning virtually the entire population of the earth is a crime. Slaying all the firstborn of Egypt is a crime. Ordering the destruction and slaughter of an entire city by your subordinates is a crime.

Your god did all those things and more. He is a criminal in every sense of the word.

Originally posted by Conrau K
Poor exegesis of biblical texts.

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.

Why should they be loosely interpreted? Because you find those particular passages to be embarassing? The bible says the Lord commanded Moses to slay the Midianites. Why should we interpret that loosely? And if we did, what else could it possibly mean?

Originally posted by rwingett
Why should they be loosely interpreted? Because you find those particular passages to be embarassing? The bible says the Lord commanded Moses to slay the Midianites. Why should we interpret that loosely? And if we did, what else could it possibly mean?

And I suppose you think that God wrote that.

Originally posted by rwingett
Drowning virtually the entire population of the earth is a crime. Slaying all the firstborn of Egypt is a crime. Ordering the destruction and slaughter of an entire city by your subordinates is a crime.

Your god did all those things and more. He is a criminal in every sense of the word.

Every death a sin of God in your opinion than throughout all time?
Kelly

Originally posted by Conrau K
Poor exegesis of biblical texts.

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.

As should the idea of virgins in heaven, a holy jihad, etc.

Originally posted by rwingett
Your god did all those things and more. He is a criminal in every sense of the word.

I'd use the word "terrorist" to describe such a god, as also applied to mere humans who respond violently to their countries being oppressed, meddled with and invaded.

Originally posted by ChristTerror
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

Is it wrong to kill in ANY circumstance? If not then which circumstances are justifiable in your humble opinion? If so then we should disarm law inforcement. If that happens may I suggest you buy a gun.

Originally posted by whodey
Is it wrong to kill in ANY circumstance? If not then which circumstances are justifiable in your humble opinion? If so then we should disarm law inforcement. If that happens may I suggest you buy a gun.

I'm not sure what that's got to do with the opening post and did you see these questions ???

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 ?

Originally posted by ChristTerror
I'm not sure what that's got to do with the opening post and did you see these questions ???

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 ?

The original post is pointing out that God has judged sin in the past and done so, at times, by taking human life. It therefore, is questioning the morality of a God that would do such a thing. Therefore the question stands. Is it ever moral or justifiable to take human life? This is the real question. The original post had nothing to do with getting to know one another.

Originally posted by ChristTerror
I'd use the word "terrorist" to describe such a god, as also applied to mere humans who respond violently to their countries being oppressed, meddled with and invaded.

It seems to me that the word "terrorist" can be used any time violence is used to remedy a situation. Is there ever a moral justification for doing so or even a moral obligation? For example, would you call "D Day" in world war 2 an act of terrorism? How do you define terrorist?

Originally posted by whodey
The original post is pointing out that God has judged sin in the past and done so, at times, by taking human life. It therefore, is questioning the morality of a God that would do such a thing. Therefore the question stands. Is it ever moral or justifiable to take human life? This is the real question. The original post had nothing to do with getting to know one another.

The original post was timed relative to the pope's stupid comment, the fanatical muslim response and the self-righteous response to their response.

This is very much about "getting to know each other", as you say.

Originally posted by whodey
It seems to me that the word "terrorist" can be used any time violence is used to remedy a situation. Is there ever a moral justification for doing so or even a moral obligation? For example, would you call "D Day" in world war 2 an act of terrorism? How do you define terrorist?

A definition of "terrorism" could be the mass killing of innocent people with regard to them as little more than "collateral damage".

If one compares 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq, Bush is more of a terrorist than Bin Laden.

Originally posted by ChristTerror
A definition of "terrorism" could be the mass killing of innocent people with regard to them as little more than "collateral damage".

If one compares 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq, Bush is more of a terrorist than Bin Laden.

So if I could prove to you that innocent civilians were killed in large numbers during "D Day" as collateral damage, I could then prove to you that the allies were terrorists?

Originally posted by rwingett
Drowning virtually the entire population of the earth is a crime. Slaying all the firstborn of Egypt is a crime. Ordering the destruction and slaughter of an entire city by your subordinates is a crime.

Your god did all those things and more. He is a criminal in every sense of the word.

Humanity itself is the crime. God paid the price.

Originally posted by ChristTerror
The original post was timed relative to the pope's stupid comment, the fanatical muslim response and the self-righteous response to their response.

This is very much about "getting to know each other", as you say.

I think we do know each other, at least in the terms of insulting or percieved insults toward Muhammad and the Quran. The understanding is not insult either Muhammad or the Quran and people will not die. On the other hand, feel free to ridicule the church and the Bible and have public diplays of blasphemous art such as a crucifix upside down in a jar of urine and all is right with the world. Somehow Muslims do not react violently with insults to Christ as they do Muhammad despite both being veiwed as "prophets" of Allah.