[Liberator]

Dear sweet Jesus!  It's Battle of the Long-Winded Debaters!

Keep it up, Sesq!  I wish I was half as well spoken as you.

[Kazan]

Liberator: long spoken he is, however well spoken he is most certainly not

[Liberator]

You're just ill because he matched you point for point.

[Kazan]

liberator: he did not do any such thing.  He attempted - and he did present acceptable evidence for the Canaanites actually performing ritual sacrifice

however that's the only point he got anywhere on - most of the others he danced around like a balerina

[Ace]

Originally posted by Liberator
Dear sweet Jesus!

Blasphemy! You shall burn in the tartaran wastes for all eternity! :devil:

[Bobboau]

yes as we all know Jesus is actualy quite bitter.

you know I fail to see why the whole "well they were realy bad people" makes up for the fact that they were masacered, all of them. I mean I supose it at least makes the anchent Isaelies seem less evil, but genocide is genocide.

[Ghostavo]

*gets popcorn*

Sesquipedalian, can you explain this part to me? Seems a bit... confusing.

Originally posted by Sesquipedalian
There's a substantial difference there: in your version, if a group of people is killed who collectively form a racial or cultural group, regardless of the intention behind the action, it is a genocide. In Merriam-Webster's version, it is a genocide if the elimination of the group is the purpose.

Wasn't god's intention to wipe out those 2 cities? You can't say it wasn't genocide because by doing it he was trying to accomplish something else, because that way you couldn't say Hitler commited genocide either.

[Liberator]

It's not genocide, you twit, God was the one doing it.  The Creator can unmake his creations at His lesiure.  

From His point of view, Sin(all of it, everything you can think of) is an action with only one penalty, death.

The problem most Aethists and Agnostics run into is they try to give God the same motivations and behaviors as your average human.  God is not human, his mind is beyond our ability to comprehend or question.

[Ghostavo]

So in your opinion a god is above the laws he creates? A creator can destroy his creation? When you create life are you allowed to kill it? If I were to clone someone would I be granted the right to kill him/her?

My dear Liberator, we in this discussion are not giving god any motivations or behaviors... we are merely discussing what he did according to your bible!! If anyone is giving him human motivations and behaviors it is YOU!! We didn't even mention a thing about his mind or any other similar thing, so you can stop making that argument over and over again either it applies or not (which normally doesn't... as in normally = always). And can you people stop calling me a twit? Make arguments, not insults...

[mikhael]

Originally posted by Liberator
It's not genocide, you twit, God was the one doing it.  The Creator can unmake his creations at His lesiure.  

From His point of view, Sin(all of it, everything you can think of) is an action with only one penalty, death.

The problem most Aethists and Agnostics run into is they try to give God the same motivations and behaviors as your average human.  God is not human, his mind is beyond our ability to comprehend or question.

That's one possible interpretation, Lib. Here's another:

God is a human creation, and as such, does have human motivations and behaviors. We like Him that way: it makes him something we can work with. Need proof? Look at the Bible? There's plenty of instances of the Old Man being a petty, crotchety bastard who changes his mind constantly and generally acts like a busy body instead of letting the world, you know, run.

It doesn't take and atheist or an agnostic to ascribe human motivations and behaviors to God. The Bible does it. Every time it says God loves us, its ascribing a human emotion to God. You can claim that its a different sort of emotion or that its figurative all you want, but that's just, you know, your interpretation. There's plenty of people out there who think you're wrong AND are non-atheist/non-agnostics. My own Baptist grandmother and my Presbyterian aunts are among them.

Btw, if a creator can destroy his creation, without penalty, does that mean I get to burn down the house I build on my own land? See, I need someone to stand up for me in court, becasue the police and fire department are calling it arson and want me to go to jail.

[Kazan]

Liberator:  do you ever actually consider what you think, or do you always accept it at face value

[mikhael]

I asked the magic 8-Ball, Kaz. Since your question was combined with a logical OR and the wording implies XOR, I decided to ask the questions of the 8-Ball in order. Here's what it said:

Liberator: do you ever actually consider what you think

Reply: "REPLY HAZY ASK AGAIN"
So I did. The Reply: "ASK AGAIN  LATER"
This is silly. But I did ask again: "DON'T COUNT ON IT"

Well, that answers that. Lib does not consider what he thinks. Now, if I were a lazy sort, I'd call this a short circuit and not even bother with the second test, but since this is a work of dubious comedy, I shall proceed:

or do you always accept it at face value?

Reply: "IT IS DECIDEDLY SO"
Wow, the 8Ball got right to it that time.

Now, I figured that the 8ball might be rigged. Who knows, Kaz could be hiding out on the other side of that webpage feeding me answers. So I decided to ask The Mystical Smoking Head of 'Bob'. As we all know, Mr. Dobbs epitomizes the concept of all that is slack. Bob is pretty neutral and I'm sure we can trust what he says.

Liberator: do you ever actually consider what you think

Reply: "OUTLOOK NOT SO GOOD"
Well, you know, Bob, I didn't ask about mail clients. So I asked again: "CONCENTRATE AND ASK AGAIN"
Now we're getting somewhere: "DON'T COUNT ON IT"
Interesting. Better ask the second half, just in case though:

or do you always accept it at face value?

Reply:  "YES DEFINATELY"
Bob got right to the point on the second half too.

So, there you have it. Bob AND the Magic 8Ball agree. And if you can't trust a giant pool ball and a three eyed man smoking a pipe, really, who can you trust?

I will use this method of question resolution from now on. It seems to work pretty well.

[Liberator]

You two are just ill because I don't happen to agree with you and are not as well spoken or thorough in my speech as Sesq.

8-Ball to :"Are Kazan and mikhael overintellectual buggers with no real concept of how the world works?"

8-Ball, first try: "Better not tell you now"

But I want to know

8-Ball, 2nd try: "Outlook Good"

mik's Smoking Head says:

"Cannot predict now"

no matter how many times I ask it's always the same.

However, It is probably aligned with you so I'll discount it for now.

[ionia23]

I'm still trying to wrap my mind around the idea that if one embraces the teachings of the Bible, one endorses genocide.

And, facts be facts, the extermination of Sodom and Gomorrah was not genocide.

[mikhael]

Lib: You would certainly be more fun if you could debate like Sesq. The key word is "debate". I have no doubt you believe whole heartedly in God and the religion you espouse, but, well, it doesn't matter. I only have fun in useful debate, not continuous restating of dogma. You would be EVEN LESS fun if you agreed with me. If you agreed with me, we would never have any meaningful discourse. What's the point in that?
The most important thing, though, is that the Magic Eight ball and the Smoking Head of Bob agree, and since they're pretty much non-deterministic and unbiased, they're might fun.
Fun. That's what its about for me, Lib. Nothing more, nothing less. I really don't want to convert anyone, and I won't be converted, but I do enjoy debating stuff.

Ionia: i thought we were on about the Canaanites, not Sodom and Gommorah. S&G wouldn't be genocide, naturally. It was the destruction of a pair of cities and all within them regardless of ethnicity. The Canaanites were teh destruction of a specific ethnic group. Now, as Sesq pointed out, its more like a case of mass murder or mass execution, not genocide. Call it first degree mass murder and third degree genocide (the intent wasn't genocide, but it was a side effect).

[ionia23]

Originally posted by mikhael

Ionia: i thought we were on about the Canaanites, not Sodom and Gommorah. S&G wouldn't be genocide, naturally. It was the destruction of a pair of cities and all within them regardless of ethnicity. The Canaanites were teh destruction of a specific ethnic group. Now, as Sesq pointed out, its more like a case of mass murder or mass execution, not genocide. Call it first degree mass murder and third degree genocide (the intent wasn't genocide, but it was a side effect).

That's what I get for posting before my first cup of coffee.  Thank you for clearing that up.

Still, it leaves the point open.  How does accepting Christianity/Judaism mean one must endorse genocide? (general question)

[01010]

Mik: Thank you for one of the funniest things I've read all week. The 8-ball stuff really made me laugh.

[Jiggyhound]

whats all this assumption that god destroyed soddam and co? They found evidence a while ago that there were earthquakes in the area they are supposed to be located, and the land shifted into the sea as a giant landside. Plus with the natural methane pockets underground, these igniting when the gas was let out by the landslide explain the "fire from the sky" crap. Its just an example of how an event, unexplainable at the time, was attributed to "God". I beleive if it exists, it is either A) not all poweful uber guy in the sky or B) doesnt need to interfere with his creations - its planned out our destiny from the beggining (whatever that was).

[ionia23]

Originally posted by Jiggyhound
whats all this assumption that god destroyed soddam and co? They found evidence a while ago that there were earthquakes in the area they are supposed to be located, and the land shifted into the sea as a giant landside. Plus with the natural methane pockets underground, these igniting when the gas was let out by the landslide explain the "fire from the sky" crap. Its just an example of how an event, unexplainable at the time, was attributed to "God". I beleive if it exists, it is either A) not all poweful uber guy in the sky or B) doesnt need to interfere with his creations - its planned out our destiny from the beggining (whatever that was).

If cosmoligists can entertain the theory of a "Grand Designer", I don't see what makes it such a ludicrous idea.

[mikhael]

Originally posted by ionia23
Still, it leaves the point open.  How does accepting Christianity/Judaism mean one must endorse genocide? (general question)

Accepting the dogma of the Book (no matter which of the three branches you subscribe to) does not imply endorsing genocide.  Liberator has stated the case: God can destroy, or cause to be destroyed, any of His creations. Its His prerogative as Creator.

There's a distinction between ENDORSING something and ACCEPTING something. There's also a distinction between a secular act of genocide/mass-murder and a Divinely inspired act of genocide/mass-murder.