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

[total relism]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

[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.

[justicar5]

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]

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]

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]

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.

[total relism]

did you respond to post 80? it says you posted last but I am getting nothing.

[justicar5]

did you respond to post 80? it says you posted last but I am getting nothing.

I did and can see it..odd.

Your haven't answered the question: Why out of all the OT laws in the sections refereed to is Homosexuality the only one that still applies, not the kill them all, not the take slaves, not the dietary laws, not the laws on clothes and cloth, not the confinement of women, only Homosexuality, what makes it special? If Jesus himself says nothing about why have Christians drawn the conclusion that it is the only one that still applies? . The answer to this is crucial, as it illustrates the selective editing that is core to the Christian world view, no where does jesus say that the old laws no longer apply, in fact he endorses them fully.

Oh and the insulting 'all non christians are child molesters' part of your post? Considering statistically the most likely person in any community to be a paedophile is the priest, the correlation is reversed, devout chrisitain belief is an indicator for paedophilia.

[justicar5]

Plewase close this threa it is getting no where.