tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7583674511519808833.post8467674058594726137..comments2024-03-27T00:26:19.644+00:00Comments on Rosa Rubicondior: Theists for GenocideRosa Rubicondiorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06063268216781988588noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7583674511519808833.post-39662685488319008512012-07-24T00:27:29.333+01:002012-07-24T00:27:29.333+01:00Yes!
Haughty John Haught, avoiding the issue ...Yes!<br /> Haughty John Haught, avoiding the issue of such egregious passages, assures his sheep that not morality but hope runs all through that execrable anthology! Some Yeshua-addicts prattle about a progressive revelation of morality, unwilling to see that no, we ourselves refine our evolved moral sense. They desire to toss that refinement aside as to toss aside the real natural causes for their superstitious one of mystery!<br /> "Logic is the bane of theists." Fr. Griggs<br /> Ignostic Morgan Inquiring Lynn Skeptic Griggsy [also Naturalist G. and Rationalist G and Fr. and Rabbi Griggs amongst others for <br /> Morgan-lynnGriggs Lamberth, that super blogger and poster world-wideIgnostic Morganhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04697923350781112334noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7583674511519808833.post-22872452772682935922012-07-15T08:59:39.549+01:002012-07-15T08:59:39.549+01:00Absolutely!
What Christians are saying when they ...Absolutely!<br /><br />What Christians are saying when they make that claim is that, so long as they can blame the Bible, they can do what they like, and their morality is placed off limits as a subject for discussion.<br /><br />It's what religion does for them and why they cling to it. It provides excuses for otherwise unacceptable behaviour, attitudes and opinions.Rosa Rubicondiorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06063268216781988588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7583674511519808833.post-11636736586774657532012-07-15T01:38:40.677+01:002012-07-15T01:38:40.677+01:00Yet another reason I find it absurd when Christian...Yet another reason I find it absurd when Christians claim to be morally superior because they have a source of "Objective Morality" (the Bible) whereas atheists do not.Buffyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09328034026300036704noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7583674511519808833.post-86969728309395852802012-03-04T12:13:51.273+00:002012-03-04T12:13:51.273+00:00Thanks for that. I may well use it.Thanks for that. I may well use it.Rosa Rubicondiorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06063268216781988588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7583674511519808833.post-83230276721816765972012-03-04T09:25:12.565+00:002012-03-04T09:25:12.565+00:00Here's an example of something rather more rec...Here's an example of something rather more recent than the genocide ordered to be inflicted on the Canaanites. This happened in the Crusades. The quote is from Wikipedia (I'm too lazy to go to the primary sources, but this tells it like I remember reading about it originally):<br /><br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catharism#Massacre<br /><br />"The crusader army came under the command, both spiritually and militarily, of the papal legate Arnaud-Amaury, Abbot of Cîteaux. In the first significant engagement of the war, the town of Béziers was besieged on 22 July 1209. The Catholic inhabitants of the city were granted the freedom to leave unharmed, but many refused and opted to stay and fight alongside the Cathars.<br /><br />"The Cathars spent much of 1209 fending off the crusaders. The leader of the crusaders, Simon de Montfort, resorted to primitive psychological warfare. He ordered his troops to gouge out the eyes of 100 prisoners, cut off their noses and lips, then send them back to the towers led by a prisoner with one remaining eye. This only served to harden the resolve of the Cathars.<br /><br />"The Béziers army attempted a sortie but was quickly defeated, then pursued by the crusaders back through the gates and into the city. Arnaud, the Cistercian abbot-commander, is supposed to have been asked how to tell Cathars from Catholics. His reply, recalled by Caesar of Heisterbach, a fellow Cistercian, thirty years later was "Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius."—"Kill them all, the Lord will recognise His own." The doors of the church of St Mary Magdalene were broken down and the refugees dragged out and slaughtered. Reportedly, 7,000 people died there. Elsewhere in the town many more thousands were mutilated and killed. Prisoners were blinded, dragged behind horses, and used for target practice. What remained of the city was razed by fire. Arnaud wrote to Pope Innocent III, "Today your Holiness, twenty thousand heretics were put to the sword, regardless of rank, age, or sex." The permanent population of Béziers at that time was then probably no more than 5,000, but local refugees seeking shelter within the city walls could conceivably have increased the number to 20,000."<br /><br />There you go. In the name of God, not only are the ungodly massacred, but also those who <i>worship God in the wrong way</i>.<br /><br />This piece of casual genocide within a mere 10 lifetimes of our own time was the final nail in the coffin that made me hate, despise and hold in utter contempt the concept of God as understood by xtians (and by extension muzzlelimbs and jooz). Drat him to heck.Matt Westwoodhttp://www.proofwiki.orgnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7583674511519808833.post-14686218128286967352012-01-10T18:03:34.400+00:002012-01-10T18:03:34.400+00:00Tosin.
You appear to have overlooked a key verse ...Tosin.<br /><br />You appear to have overlooked a key verse in the Bible:<br /><br />Matthew 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.<br /><br />But, if, as you seem to now be saying, the OT was wrong then it was wrong about original sin, Heaven and Hell and just about everything else fundamental to Christianity.<br /><br />And of course a god which got things so badly wrong that it had to send Jesus to put things right, could not have been omniscient.<br /><br />But then we only get the notion of this god from the Bible which you've explained was wrong...<br /><br />BTW, I might have been more convinced had you actually withdrawn your obvious equation of human beings with a disease and of genocide with the cure even if they DID live over 2000 years ago.<br /><br />Personally, I have a higher regard for my fellow man which is why I don't need an excuse like a primitive Bronze Age superstition for holding otherwise repugnant and inhuman views.<br /><br />Thank you for showing the casual barbaric cruelty which masquerades as 'love' under the thin guise of religion.Rosa Rubicondiorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06063268216781988588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7583674511519808833.post-51543379763572224762012-01-10T17:42:12.108+00:002012-01-10T17:42:12.108+00:00On her blog (http://www.tosinsbibleblog.com/blog/2...On her blog (http://www.tosinsbibleblog.com/blog/2012/gods-love-and-genocide-additions/#comment-452) on 10 January 2012<br /><br />'Tosin' claims to have posted the following comment here:<br /><br />---------------------------------------------------<br />In case my comment does not get printed, here it is:<br /><br />Hello Rosa, this is Tosin from Tosin’s Bible Blog. Please note the correct spelling of my name. Please also note that I am a woman, as would be visible from the comments posted in response to the “Love of God and Genocide” article referenced above. I would like to clarify a few points that you have made above. My post does not in any way give anyone the permission to commit genocide. My point was that in the Old Testament God killed many people and authorised genocide as a reflection of His supreme holiness, people who had committed sins that offended His holiness. That was in the Old Testament. That was a few cases in the Old Testament. This only applied to those cases of genocide which God commanded in the Old Testament. The sacrifice of Jesus for all humanity have now satisfied God’s righteous demands for all time. So since that time God has never, and will never again command genocide in any way, and His commands to us are to love other people, including our enemies. So I in no way justified the Holocaust or described the victims of the Holocaust as suffering from a disease. The people that the disease referred to were the that God killed directly in the flood of Genesis Chapters 6-8 and the people that God commanded the Israelites to kill in those passages of the Old Testament. Now this is strictly isolated to the Old Testament. It last happened more than 2000 years ago. So absolutely nothing that has happened since could in any way be attributed to God’s commands. Since then, God has commanded us to love our enemies. The sacrifice of Christ satisfies God’s holy demands, so that is why He does not require people to go around committing genocide or killing others these days. Prior to your post, I had never heard of William Lane Craig in my life. So to emphasise my points again, I am not condoning genocide. I am not endorsing or explaining the Holocaust. As I made clear in my article (you commented on this) the Holocaust was the result of the atheistic regime of the Nazi’s. My article was written only to explain those passages in the Old Testament where God commands His people to commit genocide. These passages seem to be completely contradictory to the rest of Christianity where God commands only love and forgiveness and I wrote the article to explain this inconsistency. Christianity does not in any way promote or encourage genocide. I wrote the article to explain how these passages of genocide could be in the Bible of love. I trust that I have made my point, if you have any further comments, then please let me know. However, I would be unhappy to have my arguments twisted. I invite your readers to read my article in context.<br />------------------------------------------------------Rosa Rubicondiorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06063268216781988588noreply@blogger.com