Who Should We Fear a Genocide From, Christians or Radical Enviromentalist [total relism] vs [justicar] - Commentary

[Admiral Piett]

Welcome to the commentary thread for the current debate. I'm sure this will be another terrific debate from these two.

[Hellf0rg3r]

I think a genocide as Christians would be ALOT scarier than genocide by environmentalists. As a rule environmentalists try to not mess up the environment which in war ro genocide really provides limitations in this day and age where most weapons do so. Also, if the Crusades are anything to go by, if the Christian or "Christian" populations are ever riled up to actually fight for something like that again, then a Crusade with modern technology would be even worse than before. If Christians actually chose to go into a genocide in this age where everyone fears killing someone on purpose due to what people will think of them (depending on your own beliefs and mindsets of course) than the fervor would be higher and the second crusade (which is probably what it would take the form of or be related to) would porbably be as good as the first in the "new" crusades which would ensue.

[Hellf0rg3r]

By the way I AM a Christian so not hating, just giving my opinion...

[Cahoma]

Normally, you write your own posts instead of copy/pasting from answersingenesis. Like TR did here:

This is inconsistent with an evolutionary worldview in which there is no logical basis for "good" or "bad." By making such a statement, the evolutionist is actually borrowing morals from the Christian worldview and the Bible in order to claim something is "trickery."
Within a naturalistic, evolutionary worldview, morality is merely a matter of subjective opinion. So, whether something such as trickery or deception is wrong depends on each person—because it’s merely the result of chemical reactions in our brains.
I could just as easily say that this email we received is deceptive and full of wishful thinking. And if I get a big enough group together, we can decide that your definition of trickery is wrong. The combined random chemical reactions in our brains form the majority, which makes you wrong—at least until another majority comes along. Without any ultimate standard, we could go back and forth all day saying this is right or that is right.
As silly as this scenario sounds, it is one of the only arguments evolutionists have for anything that resembles morality. Absolute morals only make sense in a Christian worldview—they come from the One who knows what is good because He is the standard for good. The only One who fits that description is the God of the Bible, the Creator of the universe.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/arti...ng-the-obvious

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

This is inconsistent with an evolutionary worldview in which there is no logical basis for “good” or “bad.” By making such a statement, the evolutionist is actually borrowing morals from the Christian worldview and the Bible in order to claim something is “trickery.” Within a naturalistic, evolutionary worldview, morality is merely a matter of subjective opinion. So, whether something such as trickery or deception is wrong depends on each person—because it’s merely the result of chemical reactions in our brains.
I could just as easily say that this email we received is deceptive and full of wishful thinking. And if I get a big enough group together, we can decide that your definition of trickery is wrong. The combined random chemical reactions in our brains form the majority, which makes you wrong—at least until another majority comes along. Without any ultimate standard, we could go back and forth all day saying this is right or that is right.
As silly as this scenario sounds, it is one of the only arguments evolutionists have for anything that resembles morality. Absolute morals only make sense in a Christian worldview—they come from the One who knows what is good because He is the standard for good. The only One who fits that description is the God of the Bible, the Creator of the universe.

[MathiasOfAthens]

Well if the spelling is correct and there are no grammatical errors then the odds are he copy pasted.

But seriously? Genocide? Why such a fantastical debate topic?

[hellheaven1987]

How about we throw both groups into concentration camps?

[Veliky Kaiser Theos]

Is it just me, or do none of the environmentalist quotes have anything to do with the killing off of an individual race?

[MathiasOfAthens]

I didnt even bother to read his block of quotes.

[John ''True Grit'' Wayne]

We had crusades and jihads so i think religious leaders should not have nukes.But people who like trees and flowers and nature are usually not the type to use nukes.And are too stoned to even bother going to war.

[MathiasOfAthens]

So to Justicars bite size post:

I showed you exactly where god does state all unbelievers must die in my first post. And your canaanite 'defence' which amounts to 'we spread black propaganda about them then raped and murdered our way across there land'. So you support the Holocaust? The nazis made it clear that it was there land, and that all jews should leave. Which by the standards as you apply them is all you need to do before genocide and rape become ok. You also issued no rebutal of the duty to rape.
And the thread is about: Is Genocide still, or has it ever been the religious duty of the Abrahamic faiths, if so should they ever be forgiven, or should they be pariahs as the perpetrators of the holocaust are.

TR is able to respond with a book full of copy-pasta... nearly an entire page to such a small post.

[Mortality]

Woah, Total relism is back?



Time to open the Second Front. Hurrah! Hurrah!

Anyway, blimey, this is just ridiculous, then again, what did I expect from TR?

[justicar5]

Well if the spelling is correct and there are no grammatical errors then the odds are he copy pasted.

But seriously? Genocide? Why such a fantastical debate topic?

Total wrote the title, it wasn't what he'd asked to debate.

But why genocide? Simple. There is a biblical duty to genocide, laid out in Leviticus and Deuteronomy, Which begged the question in my view 1) do those rules still apply? (And the NT appears to say they do) and 2) Even if they do not why should Yahweh who orders them be forgiven? Mao, Stalin, Hitler. All ordered Genocide, all are rightly viewed as monsters, why is Yahweh any different?

My posts are unlikely to be huge, as just raising a few examples should suffice to make the point, (with additional references if necessary)

[Veliky Kaiser Theos]

But why genocide? Simple. There is a biblical duty to genocide, laid out in Leviticus and Deuteronomy, Which begged the question in my view 1) do those rules still apply? (And the NT appears to say they do) and 2) Even if they do not why should Yahweh who orders them be forgiven? Mao, Stalin, Hitler. All ordered Genocide, all are rightly viewed as monsters, why is Yahweh any different?

It's a good idea to forgive someone who might torture you for an eternity if you don't. That of course is assuming he or she is real.

[justicar5]

It's a good idea to forgive someone who might torture you for an eternity if you don't. That of course is assuming he or she is real.

That is submitting to tyranny, not forgiving. If anything the threat makes it worse.

[MathiasOfAthens]

I dont think TR directly answered your question in your last post. Instead he posts a page full of quotes. You asked why should yahweh be forgiven for genocide when Stalin isnt. TR literally ignores it. Or its somewhere in his quote block.

[Rebel Jeb]

I dont think TR directly answered your question in your last post. Instead he posts a page full of quotes. You asked why should yahweh be forgiven for genocide when Stalin isnt. TR literally ignores it. Or its somewhere in his quote block.

Because one is a man and one is God.

[Veliky Kaiser Theos]

That is submitting to tyranny, not forgiving. If anything the threat makes it worse.

Well that depends. If you genuinely believe that the submission is forgiveness, then is it?

Because one is a man and one is God.

That doesn't answer the question. Why does a god deserve forgiveness?

Normally, you write your own posts instead of copy/pasting from answersingenesis. Like TR did here:

http://www.answersingenesis.org/arti...ng-the-obvious

You don't really need to search for something to find whether it was copied. Grammar is a good enough indicator.

[MathiasOfAthens]

Beauty with Google is that you can search for sentences and your find the site it matches. I wouldnt be surprised if Cahoma just copy pasted that quote from TRs post into google and discovered the link on the first return.

[justicar5]

he has just posted walls of text, mostly from AiG (that nest of murderous vipers)

[Magicman2051]

I imagine this is a result of some hyperbolic overreaction to an overpopulation discussion.