Who should we fear A genocide from, christians or radical enviromentalist [total relism] vs [justicar]

**total relism** · April 16, 2012, 04:55 AM

Originally Posted by Justice

Except by bringing up PRATT (Points Repudiated A Thousand Times) in a stream, you drain the will of your opponent to repudiate again, you want to poor out empty ideas and hate filled insanity? Get in the pulpit you would make a perfect pastor call for rape and murder and blind hate (as the bible does) and you would even be an honest one. You want a debate, raise a few clear points (and your points arr by no means clear) and await a response, a wall of text and insulting emotes is (text you didn't even have the decency to write yourself but plagiarised from other sources without giving them credit) an attempt to make me give up in disgust, not have a debate.

That is in hope you might answer

as your answers and worldview are important to our discussion

it is impossible to discus with you as you seem to change your belief over and over and contradict your own beliefs.

The whole second part was mostly a emotional rant I could not take much from, I will say whenever I bring up a objection or argument you ignore

. I repost you get mad

I do want debate but discussion with you is impossible you are unwilling to defend any position you just change around, yet are willing to change your own position. I have made many points on what your attacking you ignore or just say it cant be because your religious beliefs wont allow god to be just and judge you only see him as evil and will only allow info that fits into your worldview. I mean I have no idea and havent for pages what the topic is as you just keep going on new stuff etc. I have over and over asked for a specific topic with you and you dont respond, than make a post above as you have.

I have a question for you, on another thread in religion forum a atheist said that the death of evil people such as Hitler is needed and good sometimes, you say the death of people who child sacrifice after 400 years is not. My question is when is it ok to judge people in your mind? and why are you right and the other atheist wrong?

by the way maybe there is a reason people cant anwser gish they still cant, he has been in over 300 debates for decades evolutist still cant anwser the objections, is that enogh time?

**justicar5** · April 17, 2012, 10:52 AM

Originally Posted by total relism

I have a question for you, on another thread in religion forum a atheist said that the death of evil people such as Hitler is needed and good sometimes, you say the death of people who child sacrifice after 400 years is not. My question is when is it ok to judge people in your mind? and why are you right and the other atheist wrong?

by the way maybe there is a reason people cant anwser gish they still cant, he has been in over 300 debates for decades evolutist still cant anwser the objections, is that enogh time?

The deliberate slaughter of civilians is not justified (collateral damage is regrettable and should be avoided if at all possible.) Also offer proof from a non-biblical source that the Canaanites where doing child sacrifices, you still haven't. Also offer biblical proof that God didn't in fact mean kill everyone, either the bible is the Word of God and utterly true and accurate, or it isn't it can't be accurate in one place and inaccurate in another (the people who wrote it down can ofc lie to make the instructions seem less monstrous, see the Wannsee Conference for people knowing that instructions they are given needf to be 'polished' for consumption by the public)

I am not an Atheist.

Gish has been answered, he just ignores those answers and dumps so many PRATTS on people that they have no chance of addressing them all (to be ignored again) in the time allowed. (Oh and 'we do not know yet' is a valid answer in science, especially if it is about specific mechanisms of an event, we do have theories, and a working mechanism for how it could have happened (Abiogenesis in this case) but we don't know which possibility it is, or if another method was used)

Age of the earth issues? Yea we can prove the earth is far older than the bible (or any other creation myth I know off) says it is, and the Universe is certainly orders of magnitude older. The speed of light issue flat out confirms it (before you go into 'variable light speed' that lovely dodge...erm it doesn't work, alter the speed of light and you alter the fundamental nature of matter, and make stars burn far, far hotter for instance. )

**total relism** · April 18, 2012, 12:35 PM

I will ask that we stop this discussion for a few reasons, one you cant answer the most basic simple questions about your belief or worldview. This makes discussion impossible with you, you seem willing to change what you believe to attack the bible with, you understand i think your own arguments make no sense within your own belief and/or refute your own arguments. Whenever i try to dig into discussion you ignore post and move on to some new subject. I have tried many times to nail you down to a topic you refuse and move on or you ignore all evidence that wont fit your worldview.

Originally Posted by Justice

The deliberate slaughter of civilians is not justified (collateral damage is regrettable and should be avoided if at all possible.)
)

I agree 100% however as i have shown on thread civilians were not targeted only the military post of people guilty of sacrificing first borns for 400 years and other sins that would not make peace move or stop.

I will copy paste more of what you ignore

Here is were we differ alot, you see any death as evil I do as well death is bad in itself, but i dont see the soldiers of ww2 for America or england as guilty of genocide thoe the killed millions. I see genocide as killing a group of people for financial race greed power etc God never does this, in fact he is willing to kill the creation he died for to stop this, I dont think the god of the bible could be any more against this. God is judge of all and must judge, he never does so out of malice as those guilty of genocide do. I was just listing on radio today, there is A guy in Africa who kills abducts and forces slavery sex and murder and forces young boys into military on a very large scale, that is evil and genocide he does so for power. 100 secret forces men from America are hunting him in 3 Africa countries trying to kill him, they are not guilty of genocide in my view but are worthy of praise I wish I could help.

I had A question for you,what course of action would you take if a part of your town was sacrificing all first born babies and doing all kinds of sin, know it has been going on generation after generation and you have tried to talk with them and show there ways to be wrong. You have asked them to stop,to leave there ways and come live in your part of town, or to move away from you or to just make peace and not attack you or try to convert your population to this kind of behavior.
Nothing has worked and they are set on spreading this kind of behavior what would you do?

know tell me what kind of loving god could not judge his creation and allow what happens to go on? what of all those babies being burned alive, if we saw this today going on would we not be just and loving to stop it? would you call ajudge who orders a death sentence against a serial killer A murdered?

I used to think that wrath was unworthy of God. Isn't God love? Shouldn't divine love be beyond wrath? ?God is love,and God loves every person and every creature. That's exactly why God is wrathful against some of them. My last resistance to the idea of God's wrath was a casualty of the war in the former Yugoslavia, a region from which I come. According to some estimates, 200,000 people were killed, and over 3,000,000 were displaced. My villages and cities were destroyed, my people shelled day in and day out, some of them brutalize beyond imagination, and I could not imagine God not being angry. Or think of Rwanda in the last decade of the past century, where 800,000 people were hacked to death in one hundred days! How did God react to the carnage? By doting on the perpetrators in a grandfatherly fashion? By refusing to condemn the bloodbath but instead affirming th perpetrators' basic goodness? Wasn't God fiercely angry with them? Though I used to complain about the indecency of the idea of God's wrath, I cam to thin that I would have to rebel against a God who wasn't wrathful at the sight of the world' evil. God isn't wrathful in spite of being love. God is wrathful because God is love (Miroslav Volf as quoted in Is God a Moral Monster? by Paul Copan, 192).

notice the reason why god at times kills
Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made man.
gen 9.6

its because of the worth of man

proclaiming, "The LORD, the LORD, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness, 7 maintaining love to thousands, and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin. Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished
exodus 34 6-7

for more on why civilians were not killed and it was not genocide read post 22 or the about dozen others you ignore.

Originally Posted by justicar5

Also offer proof from a non-biblical source that the Canaanites where doing child sacrifices, you still haven't.
)

showing you never read source

not to mention as I have said over and over if the bible is wrong on this account than its not gods word and its not from god so your whole god is unjust argument fails

only the 10th or so time i have had to point this out.

Originally Posted by justicar5

Also offer biblical proof that God didn't in fact mean kill everyone, either the bible is the Word of God and utterly true and accurate, or it isn't it can't be accurate in one place and inaccurate in another (the people who wrote it down can ofc lie to make the instructions seem less monstrous, see the Wannsee Conference for people knowing that instructions they are given needf to be 'polished' for consumption by the public)
)

I have no idea what your saying for most of this, the bible is 100% true maybe if you were to read any of my many responses titled genocide yo would find your answer. do you know how to unspoiler/

Originally Posted by justicar5

I am not an Atheist.
)

does not matter ignoring easy question.

Originally Posted by justicar5

Gish has been answered, he just ignores those answers and dumps so many PRATTS on people that they have no chance of addressing them all (to be ignored again) in the time allowed.
)

im guessing you have never seen any of his debates tell me what are some of his arguments?quick goggle a atheist website,however they will ignore his points and try to attack him for to much problems with evolution not enough time we need more than decades

Originally Posted by Justice

(Oh and 'we do not know yet' is a valid answer in science,
)

were did life come from? what produced the big bang? how do we evolve to greator complexity? how does hydrogen gas turn into people? also please tell me were Gish said this?

Originally Posted by justicar5

especially if it is about specific mechanisms of an event, we do have theories, and a working mechanism for how it could have happened (Abiogenesis in this case) but we don't know which possibility it is, or if another method was used)
)

again so its OK for your religion to say we dont yet no but not for Gish

no worldview effect here.

Originally Posted by justicar5

Age of the earth issues? Yea we can prove the earth is far older than the bible (or any other creation myth I know off) says it is, and the Universe is certainly orders of magnitude older. The speed of light issue flat out confirms it (before you go into 'variable light speed' that lovely dodge...erm it doesn't work, alter the speed of light and you alter the fundamental nature of matter, and make stars burn far, far hotter for instance. )

I thought you were not atheist

so why I'm confused alot. I like the "lovely dodge" as you say for speed of light, because evolutes use this to explain the horizon problem

. Recent scientific American went though history of it and attempts to explain it away. Its the evolutionist distant starlight problem of there own, my guess you wont stop believing in big bang because of it or stop being atheist, yet this what you see as a problem for young earth suposivly refutes a young universe

. that damn worldview of yours. I have given many responces to this on this forum as well and will agin in main forum thread ill be doing soon. know this happens to be my fav subject and topic of my next thread in main forum so I do not wish to start here on age of earth etc. but if you keep it up I shall respons, at least we will have a topic

.

**justicar5** · April 19, 2012, 10:36 AM

Originally Posted by total relism

I will ask that we stop this discussion for a few reasons, one you cant answer the most basic simple questions about your belief or worldview. This makes discussion impossible with you, you seem willing to change what you believe to attack the bible with, you understand i think your own arguments make no sense within your own belief and/or refute your own arguments. Whenever i try to dig into discussion you ignore post and move on to some new subject. I have tried many times to nail you down to a topic you refuse and move on or you ignore all evidence that wont fit your worldview.

I agree 100% however as i have shown on thread civilians were not targeted only the military post of people guilty of sacrificing first borns for 400 years and other sins that would not make peace move or stop.

I will copy paste more of what you ignore

Here is were we differ alot, you see any death as evil I do as well death is bad in itself, but i dont see the soldiers of ww2 for America or england as guilty of genocide thoe the killed millions. I see genocide as killing a group of people for financial race greed power etc God never does this, in fact he is willing to kill the creation he died for to stop this, I dont think the god of the bible could be any more against this. God is judge of all and must judge, he never does so out of malice as those guilty of genocide do. I was just listing on radio today, there is A guy in Africa who kills abducts and forces slavery sex and murder and forces young boys into military on a very large scale, that is evil and genocide he does so for power. 100 secret forces men from America are hunting him in 3 Africa countries trying to kill him, they are not guilty of genocide in my view but are worthy of praise I wish I could help.

I had A question for you,what course of action would you take if a part of your town was sacrificing all first born babies and doing all kinds of sin, know it has been going on generation after generation and you have tried to talk with them and show there ways to be wrong. You have asked them to stop,to leave there ways and come live in your part of town, or to move away from you or to just make peace and not attack you or try to convert your population to this kind of behavior.
Nothing has worked and they are set on spreading this kind of behavior what would you do?

know tell me what kind of loving god could not judge his creation and allow what happens to go on? what of all those babies being burned alive, if we saw this today going on would we not be just and loving to stop it? would you call ajudge who orders a death sentence against a serial killer A murdered?

I used to think that wrath was unworthy of God. Isn't God love? Shouldn't divine love be beyond wrath? ?God is love,and God loves every person and every creature. That's exactly why God is wrathful against some of them. My last resistance to the idea of God's wrath was a casualty of the war in the former Yugoslavia, a region from which I come. According to some estimates, 200,000 people were killed, and over 3,000,000 were displaced. My villages and cities were destroyed, my people shelled day in and day out, some of them brutalize beyond imagination, and I could not imagine God not being angry. Or think of Rwanda in the last decade of the past century, where 800,000 people were hacked to death in one hundred days! How did God react to the carnage? By doting on the perpetrators in a grandfatherly fashion? By refusing to condemn the bloodbath but instead affirming th perpetrators' basic goodness? Wasn't God fiercely angry with them? Though I used to complain about the indecency of the idea of God's wrath, I cam to thin that I would have to rebel against a God who wasn't wrathful at the sight of the world' evil. God isn't wrathful in spite of being love. God is wrathful because God is love (Miroslav Volf as quoted in Is God a Moral Monster? by Paul Copan, 192).

notice the reason why god at times kills
Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made man.
gen 9.6

its because of the worth of man

proclaiming, "The LORD, the LORD, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness, 7 maintaining love to thousands, and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin. Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished
exodus 34 6-7

for more on why civilians were not killed and it was not genocide read post 22 or the about dozen others you ignore.

showing you never read source

not to mention as I have said over and over if the bible is wrong on this account than its not gods word and its not from god so your whole god is unjust argument fails

only the 10th or so time i have had to point this out.

I have no idea what your saying for most of this, the bible is 100% true maybe if you were to read any of my many responses titled genocide yo would find your answer. do you know how to unspoiler/

does not matter ignoring easy question.

im guessing you have never seen any of his debates tell me what are some of his arguments?quick goggle a atheist website,however they will ignore his points and try to attack him for to much problems with evolution not enough time we need more than decades

were did life come from? what produced the big bang? how do we evolve to greator complexity? how does hydrogen gas turn into people? also please tell me were Gish said this?

again so its OK for your religion to say we dont yet no but not for Gish

no worldview effect here.

I thought you were not atheist

so why I'm confused alot. I like the "lovely dodge" as you say for speed of light, because evolutes use this to explain the horizon problem

. Recent scientific American went though history of it and attempts to explain it away. Its the evolutionist distant starlight problem of there own, my guess you wont stop believing in big bang because of it or stop being atheist, yet this what you see as a problem for young earth suposivly refutes a young universe

. that damn worldview of yours. I have given many responces to this on this forum as well and will agin in main forum thread ill be doing soon. know this happens to be my fav subject and topic of my next thread in main forum so I do not wish to start here on age of earth etc. but if you keep it up I shall respons, at least we will have a topic

.

are you even speaking english? Seriously this makes no sense. I mean apart form the uncredited copy pastes (probably from yet another hate/rape/murder site aka AiG or other fundie sites)

**total relism** · October 28, 2012, 09:10 AM

Ahh that is better, it is so good to be back. I have missed twc, no were do I find so many liberals in one place thinking themselves to be correct. I have been on many other forums in my 6 month vacation, the moderators gave me. [or was it a ban they called it] To many people agree with me and dont want to argue. Only here am I outnumbered greatly, that is the way I like it.

So justicar5 sorry for delay in post. I reread a little our discussion and have noticed a few things. One is, you chose not to debate the bible or god of the bible. What you have done for yourself is created a image of god in your mind a idol. A false god that is evil etc and you than reject that idol rightfully so as would I. But you ignore anything in bible etc that would refute your idol, so when you read passages and create a idol of a evil god, than have passages exspaling who god is and showing the passages you have made a idol with, false or wrong. You outright reject the true image of god, reject what the bible says as unreliable etc and just keep your own created image of god you have. So debate on this subject is impossible with you, you want to debate that the idol you have created such as evil god etc is evil detestable etc I agree. But I only want to debate the god of bible. You want your idol. So unless we move to creation/evolution and I dont think you want that, we may very well have to end this debate. not to mention you do not have a constant worldview, it has changed maybe 4-5 times in the few pages we have talked.

21For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles [idols].
romans 1 21-22

**total relism** · November 16, 2012, 04:06 AM

Well I have PM's justicar a couple times with no response. If a moderator sees this, please pm him to see if he wants it closed. Thanks.

**justicar5** · November 16, 2012, 09:13 AM

Originally Posted by total relism

Well I have PM's justicar a couple times with no response. If a moderator sees this, please pm him to see if he wants it closed. Thanks.

only just got the PM today. . I don't see how my world view has changed, but whatever on that one.

What I thought this debate was about, when I agreed to it, was: Does the Bible Command Genocide and condone rape? The answer to those questions appears in Deuteronomy and is a clear yes, that then leads to the question, do those commands still apply, and I cannot find any passage in which Jesus says they don't, as you can easily interpret the NT as applying only to other believers (as some have done so with the ten commandments for instance), given that clarity on one had: Murder is duty, and ambiguity on the other: Love thy neighbour (with a possible but only if he is also a believer) we have a major issue: does OT law still apply? If it doesn't, does that mean it is now immoral? If so, that means that a (Supposedly) morally perfect being has engaged in moral relativism, that being, what was once a moral act given it's time and place, is not a moral act in]another society, that leads to yet another problem how can we possibly know (given that YHWH has changed his mind, previously, and even in the NT encouraged behaviours [such as slavery] we now find abhorrent with our supposedly god given moral sense), what does God find moral now?

Either Genocide and forced marriage are fine (and by extension rape), have always been fine and remain so ( God having a consistent moral view) or they aren't, and Deuteronomy and Leviticus are mistaken in the laws they lay out, if 1) is true then how can it claim moral supremacy if 2) is true what else is wrong, as these are the same books that lay out the laws on homosexuality, (for a very pertinent instance), which lays open yet another question: Why if the commands to genocide, forced marriage, slavery etc, don't apply any more, if the dietry laws no longer apply, does the one about homosexuality, out of pretty much all of those laws, what makes that one special?

Please respond clearly anmd consicely, rather than posting (as previously occured) a huge wall of barely relevant (or totally irrelevant) quotes and questions (for instance why did abiogenesis come up?)

**total relism** · November 16, 2012, 10:53 AM

Originally Posted by justicar5

only just got the PM today. . I don't see how my world view has changed, but whatever on that one.

What I thought this debate was about, when I agreed to it, was: Does the Bible Command Genocide and condone rape? The answer to those questions appears in Deuteronomy and is a clear yes, that then leads to the question, do those commands still apply, and I cannot find any passage in which Jesus says they don't, as you can easily interpret the NT as applying only to other believers (as some have done so with the ten commandments for instance), given that clarity on one had: Murder is duty, and ambiguity on the other: Love thy neighbour (with a possible but only if he is also a believer) we have a major issue: does OT law still apply? If it doesn't, does that mean it is now immoral? If so, that means that a (Supposedly) morally perfect being has engaged in moral relativism, that being, what was once a moral act given it's time and place, is not a moral act in]another society, that leads to yet another problem how can we possibly know (given that YHWH has changed his mind, previously, and even in the NT encouraged behaviours [such as slavery] we now find abhorrent with our supposedly god given moral sense), what does God find moral now?

Either Genocide and forced marriage are fine (and by extension rape), have always been fine and remain so ( God having a consistent moral view) or they aren't, and Deuteronomy and Leviticus are mistaken in the laws they lay out, if 1) is true then how can it claim moral supremacy if 2) is true what else is wrong, as these are the same books that lay out the laws on homosexuality, (for a very pertinent instance), which lays open yet another question: Why if the commands to genocide, forced marriage, slavery etc, don't apply any more, if the dietry laws no longer apply, does the one about homosexuality, out of pretty much all of those laws, what makes that one special?

Please respond clearly anmd consicely, rather than posting (as previously occured) a huge wall of barely relevant (or totally irrelevant) quotes and questions (for instance why did abiogenesis come up?)

Weather or not the OT applies today does not matter, if god is good and moral than he will be for all time, weather in OT or NT. Your whole post relies on two things, that the bible condones genocide [or at one timer ordered it] as well as forced marriage or rape. The bible is clear on both being negative. as I have shown over and over. this is what is meant by post number 65. I have shown you what the bible says on these subjects/passages. But you reject what the bible says, instead creating your own image of god and the bible, to fit your preconceived ideas of who god is what he should be etc. That is why this debate can go nowhere, until you accept what the bible says. Also in original debate topic, you are to defend radical environmentalism as agreed on my green dragon thread. You have not even tried.

**justicar5** · November 16, 2012, 02:44 PM

Originally Posted by total relism

Weather or not the OT applies today does not matter, if god is good and moral than he will be for all time, weather in OT or NT. Your whole post relies on two things, that the bible condones genocide [or at one timer ordered it] as well as forced marriage or rape. The bible is clear on both being negative. as I have shown over and over. this is what is meant by post number 65. I have shown you what the bible says on these subjects/passages. But you reject what the bible says, instead creating your own image of god and the bible, to fit your preconceived ideas of who god is what he should be etc. That is why this debate can go nowhere, until you accept what the bible says. Also in original debate topic, you are to defend radical environmentalism as agreed on my green dragon thread. You have not even tried.

So there passages don't exist:

Deuteronomy 13 “When the Lord your God gives it into your hand, you shall strike all the men in it with the edge of the sword.
14 “Only the women and the children and the animals and all that is in the city, all its spoil, you shall take as booty for yourself; and you shall use the spoil of your enemies which the Lord your God has given you.
15 “Thus you shall do to all the cities that are very far from you, which are not of the cities of these nations nearby.
16 “Only in the cities of these peoples that the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, you shall not leave alive anything that breathes.
17 “But you shall utterly destroy them, the Hittite and the Amorite, the Canaanite and the Perizzite, the Hivite and the Jebusite, as the Lord your God has commanded you,

Clear orders for genocide their, the complete annihilation of the named people (whether successful or not, genocide is mandated). Any otehr civilisation, they are offered enslavement or the annihilation of the male population and the taking of the women as 'booty'.

"If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and RAPES HER and they discovered, he shall pay the girl's father 50 Shekels of silver. He must marry the girl, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives" [Deut 22:28-30]

Forced marriage: Want a bride? Rape her, then she has no choice!

Deuteronomy 21:11-14

New International Version (NIV)

11 if you notice among the captives a beautiful woman and are attracted to her, you may take her as your wife. 12 Bring her into your home and have her shave her head, trim her nails 13 and put aside the clothes she was wearing when captured. After she has lived in your house and mourned her father and mother for a full month, then you may go to her and be her husband and she shall be your wife. 14 If you are not pleased with her, let her go wherever she wishes. You must not sell her or treat her as a slave, since you have dishonored her.

Forced marriage of female captives, again see taken as booty mentioned earlier

So these passages here, laying out genocide and forced marriage (Which is rape, pure and simple) aren't in your copy of the bible?

**total relism** · November 16, 2012, 05:29 PM

Originally Posted by justicar5

So there passages don't exist: Clear orders for genocide their, the complete annihilation of the named people (whether successful or not, genocide is mandated). Any otehr civilisation, they are offered enslavement or the annihilation of the male population and the taking of the women as 'booty'.

Forced marriage: Want a bride? Rape her, then she has no choice!

Forced marriage of female captives, again see taken as booty mentioned earlier

So these passages here, laying out genocide and forced marriage (Which is rape, pure and simple) aren't in your copy of the bible?

This is just what I meant by post 65, you quote a few verse and apply standards that dont fit the bible. You ignore all else the bible has to say about these passages/circumstances and create your own idol of god. I have responded to all these passages [and more] in our debate, you have contently ignored my responses. I will not turn this into a discussion were I just keep copy pasting my previous responses that you ignore time and again on. As this is the reason moderators gave me a ban here. I know you were asking them to ban me in pm's etc during this debate. So I see no reason to allow it to happen again because of you. I have responded to these, if you wish to have a discussion on what the bible has to say on these passages I am all for it. Please respond to my earlier responses. But if you wish to simply ignore the bible and keep your idol I have nothing else to say.

**justicar5** · November 17, 2012, 06:18 AM

Originally Posted by total relism

This is just what I meant by post 65, you quote a few verse and apply standards that dont fit the bible. You ignore all else the bible has to say about these passages/circumstances and create your own idol of god. I have responded to all these passages [and more] in our debate, you have contently ignored my responses. I will not turn this into a discussion were I just keep copy pasting my previous responses that you ignore time and again on. As this is the reason moderators gave me a ban here. I know you were asking them to ban me in pm's etc during this debate. So I see no reason to allow it to happen again because of you. I have responded to these, if you wish to have a discussion on what the bible has to say on these passages I am all for it. Please respond to my earlier responses. But if you wish to simply ignore the bible and keep your idol I have nothing else to say.

I never asked for you to be banned. You continue to ignore that by their very existence these passages (and they don't only apply to set situations, the annihilation of the named tribes does(that being the more extreme everything that breathes), but the kill all the males doesn't, that is biblical laws of war for all other circumstances, and if what the bible says is perfect and unchanging moral law, they must still be perfect moral law now.

**total relism** · November 17, 2012, 01:58 PM

Originally Posted by justicar5

I never asked for you to be banned. You continue to ignore that by their very existence these passages (and they don't only apply to set situations, the annihilation of the named tribes does(that being the more extreme everything that breathes), but the kill all the males doesn't, that is biblical laws of war for all other circumstances, and if what the bible says is perfect and unchanging moral law, they must still be perfect moral law now.

Ok because you actually seem to think you have not posted these, I will respond. I see the fact your internet atheist website was wrong on your original verses in your OP, that does not cause you to question it. I do want to sate the debate topic, who should we fear a genocide from radical environmentalist or christian today. I showed that not only should we fear radical environmentalism causing genocide, they already are. You have not defended that at all. Second the claim, that christian today are called to genocide, is again false as I have shown and will continue to show. So according to your claim please keep post 65 in mind. you claim that these passages [lets assume call for genocide] apply today for christian. You cannot support this idea bionically for many reasons. Is the bible a perfect moral law? well yes and no. genesis chapter 1-2 are perfect, the future is perfect. If people followed the law it would be perfect perhaps. But the law is not a perfect "law" for all people of all time, but for a ancient near eastern society that god meets half way. Why would both the OT and NT say that the law is not perfect?. I will gladly show next post how god does not see the law as perfect if you wish. However god is perfect from all time/place etc. If you disagree,what do you base it on? Nothing but random chemicals in your brain that have no authority or divine knowledge, so you may think god is wrong, but your just random matter why should we think you have correct morals? I want to ask you, when god told noah to build a big boat, does that mean we today are suppose to build a big boat?.When isreal enters the promise land and judgment falls on the cannaites after 400 years of gross sin. Does that mean when I enter isreal? that I should also kill cananites? or attack AI or Jericho? When god gives isreal rest and no more war, and the Israelite understand this and keep within the boundaries given by god. Does that mean I should for some reason reject that and conquest without gods help? something he says not to do?. It is embarrassing for you, to claim that these passages that are for certain place/time apply today to a christian. So as far as our debate these do nothing,as nothing you have presented has, meanwhile you have not defended your side at all.

So on to the passages

Deuteronomy 13 already responded to you, but given you dont read responses I will not leave to much hope for it.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read:

Deuteronomy 21 and 22

Spoiler Alert, click show to read:

So I must say your verses that dont apply today to christian as easily shown, do not at all claim to support the genocide/rape you claim them to be Infact just verses away they refute what you claim. If you believe so,it is only because you wont allow the bible to speak for itself, instead as earlier post said,you chose what to take from passages and ignore all else, you have indeed created a idol.

**justicar5** · November 18, 2012, 07:57 AM

Originally Posted by total relism

Ok because you actually seem to think you have not posted these, I will respond. I see the fact your internet atheist website was wrong on your original verses in your OP, that does not cause you to question it. I do want to sate the debate topic, who should we fear a genocide from radical environmentalist or christian today. I showed that not only should we fear radical environmentalism causing genocide, they already are. You have not defended that at all. Second the claim, that christian today are called to genocide, is again false as I have shown and will continue to show. So according to your claim please keep post 65 in mind. you claim that these passages [lets assume call for genocide] apply today for christian. You cannot support this idea bionically for many reasons. Is the bible a perfect moral law? well yes and no. genesis chapter 1-2 are perfect, the future is perfect. If people followed the law it would be perfect perhaps. But the law is not a perfect "law" for all people of all time, but for a ancient near eastern society that god meets half way. Why would both the OT and NT say that the law is not perfect?. I will gladly show next post how god does not see the law as perfect if you wish. However god is perfect from all time/place etc. If you disagree,what do you base it on? Nothing but random chemicals in your brain that have no authority or divine knowledge, so you may think god is wrong, but your just random matter why should we think you have correct morals? I want to ask you, when god told noah to build a big boat, does that mean we today are suppose to build a big boat?.When isreal enters the promise land and judgment falls on the cannaites after 400 years of gross sin. Does that mean when I enter isreal? that I should also kill cananites? or attack AI or Jericho? When god gives isreal rest and no more war, and the Israelite understand this and keep within the boundaries given by god. Does that mean I should for some reason reject that and conquest without gods help? something he says not to do?. It is embarrassing for you, to claim that these passages that are for certain place/time apply today to a christian. So as far as our debate these do nothing,as nothing you have presented has, meanwhile you have not defended your side at all.

So on to the passages

Deuteronomy 13 already responded to you, but given you dont read responses I will not leave to much hope for it.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read:

Deuteronomy 21 and 22

Spoiler Alert, click show to read:

So I must say your verses that dont apply today to christian as easily shown, do not at all claim to support the genocide/rape you claim them to be Infact just verses away they refute what you claim. If you believe so,it is only because you wont allow the bible to speak for itself, instead as earlier post said,you chose what to take from passages and ignore all else, you have indeed created a idol.

I NEVER AGREED TO DEBATE THE 'RADICAL ENVIRONMENTALIST' STRAW MAN YOU CONSTRUCTED, i HAVE REQUESTED MULTIPLE TIMES FOR YOU TO BE HONEST ABOUT WHAT I ACTUALLY AGREED TO DEBATE: DOES THE BIBLE COMMAND GENOCIDE. IT CLEARLY DOES.

Also, where does it say, in the bible. That a woman has any choice at all in who she marries? Not in apologetics, that is just lying to make the bible more palatable, but actually: and the lord said women have a choice

**total relism** · November 18, 2012, 04:32 PM

Originally Posted by justicar5

I NEVER AGREED TO DEBATE THE 'RADICAL ENVIRONMENTALIST' STRAW MAN YOU CONSTRUCTED, i HAVE REQUESTED MULTIPLE TIMES FOR YOU TO BE HONEST ABOUT WHAT I ACTUALLY AGREED TO DEBATE: DOES THE BIBLE COMMAND GENOCIDE. IT CLEARLY DOES.

Also, where does it say, in the bible. That a woman has any choice at all in who she marries? Not in apologetics, that is just lying to make the bible more palatable, but actually: and the lord said women have a choice

The debate topic was agreed on other thread, as you claimed christian were more likely to genocide than radical environmentalist were. When I started/asked for debate on post 228 I believe, I clearley posted topic from our discussion, you defend your claim radical environmentalist, I defend bible. As I have shown,RE do commit genocide and have no reason not to, and have reasons to do so. While christian have many reasons not to, and no positive reason to, in fact they would be going against what the bible says. This is made clear to anyone who accepts what the bible says. You over and over with your idol post 65 say your idol does call for genocide. I dont disagree, but the god of bible does not. So to divert from this, you have gone to all the atheist rape passages. That has nothing to do with topic, not to mention is easily refuted time and again as often just a passages or two away say rape is wrong/punishable by death etc. yet you and your image claim otherwise. Again that is fine, your image calls for rape, the bible however does not as I have shown. So now you claim that the girl has to marry the guy, based on what? Also what does this have to do with genocide? So if you read responses once in awhile you would see my last response also quoted Exodus 22:17 This is were you will find your answer. The girl/father has the right to decide, this is not rape as stated in last response, the girl was willing.

**justicar5** · November 20, 2012, 10:13 AM

Originally Posted by total relism

1)The debate topic was agreed on other thread, as you claimed christian were more likely to genocide than radical environmentalist were. When I started/asked for debate on post 228 I believe, I clearley posted topic from our discussion, you defend your claim radical environmentalist, I defend bible. As I have shown,RE do commit genocide and have no reason not to, and have reasons to do so. While christian have many reasons not to, and no positive reason to, in fact they would be going against what the bible says. This is made clear to anyone who accepts what the bible says. You over and over with your idol post 65 say your idol does call for genocide. I dont disagree, but the god of bible does not. So to divert from this, you have gone to all the atheist rape passages. That has nothing to do with topic, not to mention is easily refuted time and again as often just a passages or two away say rape is wrong/punishable by death etc. yet you and your image claim otherwise. Again that is fine, your image calls for rape, the bible however does not as I have shown. So now you claim that the girl has to marry the guy, based on what? Also what does this have to do with genocide? So if you read responses once in awhile you would see my last response also quoted2) Exodus 22:17 This is were you will find your answer. The girl/father has the right to decide, this is not rape as stated in last response, the girl was willing.

1) You sir are a liar, that is not what you messaged me, not what I asked the topic to be. This is over, your dishonesty is palpable and you endorsement and defence of rape and genocide sickening. (Neither here nor their now really, but that Exodus quote treats the woman as her fathers chattel, her will is never mentioned only his)

**total relism** · November 21, 2012, 01:16 PM

The debate offer is on post 227 of the green dragon thread, clearly for you to defend RE
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...515441&page=12

As I have said for awhile, you are not willing to see what the bible teaches on rape/genocide. Only your idol that you cling onto. But as I pointed out about a dozen times that you could not respond to. As a atheist [or someone who says god is evil] you than have no right to say rape and murder are morally "wrong". I pointed this out many times. Only if people have value and importance created in image of god, is rape/murder wrong. So all your passages you have presented dont support either genocide or rape [not topic of discuion anyways] in fact refute them just passages away. You have not defended that RE have many reasons to genocide, as well as have no reason not to. You have not even responded to my many reasons chirtians should not genocide. and all your claims to support genocide/rape, can only support your idols if you ignore even just passages right next to what you quote, take out of context and apply you bias to the bible. Instead of letting the bible tell you what it means.

**justicar5** · November 23, 2012, 10:22 AM

Originally Posted by total relism

The debate offer is on post 227 of the green dragon thread, clearly for you to defend RE
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...515441&page=12

As I have said for awhile, you are not willing to see what the bible teaches on rape/genocide. Only your idol that you cling onto. But as I pointed out about a dozen times that you could not respond to. As a atheist [or someone who says god is evil] you than have no right to say rape and murder are morally "wrong". I pointed this out many times. Only if people have value and importance created in image of god, is rape/murder wrong. So all your passages you have presented dont support either genocide or rape [not topic of discuion anyways] in fact refute them just passages away. You have not defended that RE have many reasons to genocide, as well as have no reason not to. You have not even responded to my many reasons chirtians should not genocide. and all your claims to support genocide/rape, can only support your idols if you ignore even just passages right next to what you quote, take out of context and apply you bias to the bible. Instead of letting the bible tell you what it means.

Why would I defend a strawman created by Religious Extremists? Green Dragon or whatever the hell they call it is a fairy tale to give zealots and excuse to murder environmentalists along with other 'unbelievers', like Christians have done every time they gain unchecked dominance. If you are going to keep lying about what those passages clearly and unequivocally say, why bother responding?

You claim to be a biblical literalist, yet when it says something you don't like, you claim it is a mistake..yet these are the books that condemn homosexuality, so if you believe them on that front, you HAVE to still apply the rules of war, and the taking of sex slaves and forced brides, the enslaving of unbelievers (if they surrender) or their annihilation (if they resist), you can't be a YEC and pick and choose. Maybe we should apply to Christians the same treatment they gave everyone else, 1500 years of slaughter and oppression. of burnings and invasion, of rape and slavery.

**total relism** · November 23, 2012, 05:37 PM

Originally Posted by justicar5

Why would I defend a strawman created by Religious Extremists? Green Dragon or whatever the hell they call it is a fairy tale to give zealots and excuse to murder environmentalists along with other 'unbelievers', like Christians have done every time they gain unchecked dominance. If you are going to keep lying about what those passages clearly and unequivocally say, why bother responding?

You claim to be a biblical literalist, yet when it says something you don't like, you claim it is a mistake..yet these are the books that condemn homosexuality, so if you believe them on that front, you HAVE to still apply the rules of war, and the taking of sex slaves and forced brides, the enslaving of unbelievers (if they surrender) or their annihilation (if they resist), you can't be a YEC and pick and choose. Maybe we should apply to Christians the same treatment they gave everyone else, 1500 years of slaughter and oppression. of burnings and invasion, of rape and slavery.

Please tell me when christian have gained dominance and done bad things? early america? They created the best nation on earth for awhile. What about when atheist go unchecked? Hitler,stalin,pol pot etc also what is wrong with murder/rape if your atheist? this you cannot and have not explained. What passage have I lied about? I am biblical lietralist, I just read what the bible says,so when you claim it supports rape/genocide. I use the bible to show this is not true. Yes the bible condemns homosexuality,as it does rape/murder/genocide as I showed. As far as your claimed rules of war, I will reference you to my 15 or so post on canninites and the conquest. You cannot claim the bible supports rape/murder by picking and choosing, that is what you have to do as I showed over and over again. Just passages away refutes your claims you have made many times. This entire debate has been you posting a section of bible, applying your own bias what you think it means, than me having to post it in context with more of the bible, we have to look no further than your very first passages for this to show true. Than the rest of debate follows.. Do you really want to turn this into who has killed more atheist governments in 100 years vs all christian governments ever? That would be great topic [for me]. Not to mention i will show you have no right to call murder/rape wrong. Were as us Christians can. But even showing sins of Christians today and past, that just proves the bible
23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,
romans 3.23

**justicar5** · November 24, 2012, 04:58 PM

Originally Posted by total relism

Please tell me when christian have gained dominance and done bad things? early america? They created the best nation on earth for awhile. What about when atheist go unchecked? Hitler,stalin,pol pot etc also what is wrong with murder/rape if your atheist? this you cannot and have not explained. What passage have I lied about? I am biblical lietralist, I just read what the bible says,so when you claim it supports rape/genocide. I use the bible to show this is not true. Yes the bible condemns homosexuality,as it does rape/murder/genocide as I showed. As far as your claimed rules of war, I will reference you to my 15 or so post on canninites and the conquest. You cannot claim the bible supports rape/murder by picking and choosing, that is what you have to do as I showed over and over again. Just passages away refutes your claims you have made many times. This entire debate has been you posting a section of bible, applying your own bias what you think it means, than me having to post it in context with more of the bible, we have to look no further than your very first passages for this to show true. Than the rest of debate follows.. Do you really want to turn this into who has killed more atheist governments in 100 years vs all christian governments ever? That would be great topic [for me]. Not to mention i will show you have no right to call murder/rape wrong. Were as us Christians can. But even showing sins of Christians today and past, that just proves the bible
23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,
romans 3.23

Nope, all theist governments ever might be interesting however , but since I am not an Atheist, as I have repeatadly stated (I am a malthiest, there is a being that calls itself god, and it hates us, and loves us to slaughter each other for it's viewing pleasure, so yes your 'god' is a creature, a monster whose barbarity is laid out, in all it's 'holy' books, the cults of Abraham and the Aztecs, the Chinese and Japanese gods, etc etc) . For the vast slaughter and repression that the Christian faith brings, I direct you to European history, the unremitting slaughter from the dark ages to the early modern period all by Christians, against, originally other faiths then each other, if we go by percentage of population killed, the Wars of Faith win hands down as the bloodiest and longest wars in human history, lasting as they did, on and off for a thousand years. From the first 'conversion by the sword' under Constantine thru the crusades, the 30 years war, the English civil war, the devastation of the westward expansion in america. All blood for your murder god, all in his name under his laws of kill them all.

The reason I asked about homosexuality is that is the only one of these laws you say still applies, murder and rape in gods name? Oh that isn't valid anymore, dietry restrictions? Not valid, locking women up as unclean for their period? Nope doesn't apply. Mixed cloth in clothing? Nope again, invalid. But homosexuality, that one still does...so why is it different? What process makes it, of all the old laws, the only one to still apply?

**total relism** · November 26, 2012, 05:27 AM

Originally Posted by justicar5

Nope, all theist governments ever might be interesting however , but since I am not an Atheist, as I have repeatadly stated (I am a malthiest, there is a being that calls itself god, and it hates us, and loves us to slaughter each other for it's viewing pleasure, so yes your 'god' is a creature, a monster whose barbarity is laid out, in all it's 'holy' books, the cults of Abraham and the Aztecs, the Chinese and Japanese gods, etc etc) . For the vast slaughter and repression that the Christian faith brings, I direct you to European history, the unremitting slaughter from the dark ages to the early modern period all by Christians, against, originally other faiths then each other, if we go by percentage of population killed, the Wars of Faith win hands down as the bloodiest and longest wars in human history, lasting as they did, on and off for a thousand years. From the first 'conversion by the sword' under Constantine thru the crusades, the 30 years war, the English civil war, the devastation of the westward expansion in america. All blood for your murder god, all in his name under his laws of kill them all.

The reason I asked about homosexuality is that is the only one of these laws you say still applies, murder and rape in gods name? Oh that isn't valid anymore, dietry restrictions? Not valid, locking women up as unclean for their period? Nope doesn't apply. Mixed cloth in clothing? Nope again, invalid. But homosexuality, that one still does...so why is it different? What process makes it, of all the old laws, the only one to still apply?

cant help but notice your circular reasoning, you believe god is evil, so therefore he is evil. This fits the entire debate perfect. God is evil allows rape murder etc here is why site passages. I than put them in context tell what the bible says and how it hates murder/rape. you ignore because you believe he is evil, so he must be. So on your beliefs, early you ignored so I shall re post.

This also shows your belief strange because you say god ordered child sacrifice, yet than the bible says it detestable and worthy of judgment, how can the cannanite god also be the god of the bible. . What is morraly wrong here, the child sacrifice, or the god doing justice against child sacrifice?

I also want to ask you how you determine what is good or bad,what is evil or good, you cannot use anything from any religion in the world to base it on as they are all from a evil god and apparently some passages we can trust [the ones you that fit your beliefs] and the rest are unralible. Is it just your opinion on what is good or bad? and how can you say rape is bad? If you were created by a evil god, than how do you know that what you think is evil is really bad? He is evil, most likely created you to think good things are evil and evil things are good, so that you will want or do evil things. So you may claim you belive things are bad rape/murder but you were created by evil god, who because he is evil, prabley created you thinking good was bad and bad was good..

I will say my onion again
My thoghts and I could be wrong, are you dont want to admit to there is a god who judges, because you deep down know you are A sinner and dont want to ask forgivness maybe pride. Or you deep down are evil and like things like childsacrafice rape/murder and dont think god should judge those people

Than I have to say, the idol you have created is indeed evil allows rape etc But I only care about the bible, the bible condemns both of those clearly. I have shown you over and over from the bible, but I wont keep posting as you will just ignore as you have all debate anyways.

You said
" the Wars of Faith win hands down as the bloodiest and longest wars in human history, lasting as they did, on and off for a thousand years. From the first 'conversion by the sword' under Constantine thru the crusades, the 30 years war, the English civil war, the devastation of the westward expansion in america. All blood for your murder god, all in his name under his laws of kill them all. "

Now,could you please back these up with 1] why murder is bad to you. 2] how any of these wars are backed by biblical teachings 3] how these are religious wars [indeed crusades] 4] statistics for killed/population numbers. Otherwise it is just claims. Now I do love to talk on crusades so I hope that comes up.

Atheist in one century

Even adjusting for changes in population size, atheist regimes are responsible for 100 times more death in one century than Christian rulers inflicted over five centuries.
As for the Inquisition, much of the modern stereotype was largely made up by Spain’s political enemies, and later by anti-Christians. The Inquisition only had authority over professing Christians, and the Inquisition trials were often fairer and more lenient than their secular counterparts. Often the only penalty given was some sort of penance such as fasting. Over a period of 350 years, he goes on to show that atheism, not religion, is responsible for mass murders. In fact, ‘atheist regimes have in a single century murdered more than one hundred million people’ (p. 214). However, while it can easily be shown that crimes committed in the name of Christianity are not sanctioned by its teaching, the bloodbaths of the atheist regimes are consistent with an atheist, evolutionary outlook. Indeed, atheists have no moral basis to say that anything is right or wrong

atheist governments killings morality etc
77 million in Communist China, 62 million in the Soviet Gulag State, 21 million non-battle killings by the Nazis, 2 million murdered in the Khmer Rouge killing fields (see also Rummel, R.J., Death by Government, New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction Publishers, 1994).

Hitler exspaies atheistic morality best

“ He who does not wish to fight in this world, where permanent struggle is the law of life, has not the right to exist”.
Hitler A Mein Kampf, english translation by James Murphy, 1939 Fredonia Classics, New York, p266 2003

“The stronger must dominate and not mate with the weaker, which would signify the sacrafice of its own higher nature. Only the born weakling can look upon this principle as cruel,and if he does so it is mearly because he is of a feebler nature and narrower mind for if such a law did not direct the process of evolution
then the higher development of organic life would not be conceivable at all”.
Hitler A Mein Kampf, english translation by James Murphy, 1939 Fredonia Classics, New York, p262 2003

“if nature does not wish that weaker individuals should mate with the stronger, she wishes even less that a superior race should intermingle with an inferior one. Because in such a case all her efforts, throughout hundreds of thousands of years, to establish an evolutionary higher stage of being may thus be rendered futile.”
Hitler A Mein Kampf, english translation by James Murphy, 1939 Fredonia Classics, New York, p263 2003

OT laws apply today?
Great question justicar, I suggest reading here
http://www.jasonlisle.com/2012/01/23...-introduction/
http://www.jasonlisle.com/2012/01/23...new-testament/
http://www.jasonlisle.com/2012/01/23...remonial-laws/
http://www.jasonlisle.com/2012/01/23...w-its-purpose/
http://www.jasonlisle.com/2012/01/23...hat-it-is-not/

I would say the reason murder/rape are not allowed anymore is because christians follow the bible, not your idal post 65.. The bible and OT gives death penalty for both, as i pointed out many times. Those other laws apply to temple worship and all point to jesus in one way or the other. Deep theology not interested to exspalin all the laws to someone who rejects the bible.

Thread: Who should we fear A genocide from, christians or radical enviromentalist [total relism] vs [justicar]

Thread Tools

Search Thread

Display

Re: Who should we fear A genocide from, christians or radical enviromentalist [total relism] vs [justicar]

Re: Who should we fear A genocide from, christians or radical enviromentalist [total relism] vs [justicar]

Re: Who should we fear A genocide from, christians or radical enviromentalist [total relism] vs [justicar]

Re: Who should we fear A genocide from, christians or radical enviromentalist [total relism] vs [justicar]

Re: Who should we fear A genocide from, christians or radical enviromentalist [total relism] vs [justicar]

Re: Who should we fear A genocide from, christians or radical enviromentalist [total relism] vs [justicar]

Re: Who should we fear A genocide from, christians or radical enviromentalist [total relism] vs [justicar]

Re: Who should we fear A genocide from, christians or radical enviromentalist [total relism] vs [justicar]

Re: Who should we fear A genocide from, christians or radical enviromentalist [total relism] vs [justicar]

Re: Who should we fear A genocide from, christians or radical enviromentalist [total relism] vs [justicar]

Re: Who should we fear A genocide from, christians or radical enviromentalist [total relism] vs [justicar]

Re: Who should we fear A genocide from, christians or radical enviromentalist [total relism] vs [justicar]

Re: Who should we fear A genocide from, christians or radical enviromentalist [total relism] vs [justicar]

Re: Who should we fear A genocide from, christians or radical enviromentalist [total relism] vs [justicar]

Re: Who should we fear A genocide from, christians or radical enviromentalist [total relism] vs [justicar]

Re: Who should we fear A genocide from, christians or radical enviromentalist [total relism] vs [justicar]

Re: Who should we fear A genocide from, christians or radical enviromentalist [total relism] vs [justicar]

Re: Who should we fear A genocide from, christians or radical enviromentalist [total relism] vs [justicar]

Re: Who should we fear A genocide from, christians or radical enviromentalist [total relism] vs [justicar]

Re: Who should we fear A genocide from, christians or radical enviromentalist [total relism] vs [justicar]

Posting Permissions