Genocide in the Bible
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 4 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
28-08-2013, 02:47 PM
RE: Genocide in the Bible
Quote:PJ your examples imply someone did something wrong, and then paid the price. Not sure I agree, but it is understandable. So what did the babies do that they deserved killing?

Nothing. Babies are innocents. What did Adam and Eve do that anyone deserves to not be immortal?

Quote:I was also thinking about "context" , why would God need context? He supposedly has been alive forever, knows the future, and could write or speech to text accordingly. He would already know the problems that people would have with the stories, and spell it out to avoid confusion.

Are you aware the Bible says God causes confusion intentionally? Two examples: Babel and languages and the parables of Jesus. And? Can you think of a reason God would do that which is out of the “god’s a jerk!” box? I can.

Quote:Also, as he knew the future, why did he create all men, and then make the Israelites the chosen, and then tell the chosen to slaughter the others? Did he not love them? Could he not show himself to them like he did the Israelites to show them the way?

Maybe he did. What was their response? Maybe he showed himself to you and to me? Why was my response different than yours? Is it just to judge someone for not knowing something? No. Is it just to judge someone for the way they respond to you?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-08-2013, 02:51 PM
RE: Genocide in the Bible
There is NO context where "people should be systematically killed merely because they do something you don't like". That is the characteristic of a kid throwing a fit . . . and having the power to act out on it. If this is your apologetic response, then you can have your twisted immoral god person. But it is a monster, no matter how you try to spin it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-08-2013, 03:02 PM
RE: Genocide in the Bible
(28-08-2013 12:56 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Not even close to what I said re: Noah. What I wrote was how the people who died in a great flood died of natural causes! Calling it genocide is typical bunk. All people NOT “taken by god or free will” die of natural causes. Does god genocide everyone? Every animal and every plant? If that is so, how come when YOU kill an animal or plant that isn’t part of a larger genocide? You’re being ridiculous.

I'm pretty sure that's genocide. Since it involved killing everyone on purpose. A hanged man dies of asphyxiation and a decapitated man dies of trauma; guess those're natural causes!

If one wants to extend the definition of genocide to cover plant and animal species (this is, of course, something only you have brought up), then you may indeed accuse me of complicity in same, as soon as - and not before! - I partake with express intent of general extermination. I can foresee no circumstances in which such a ludicrous irrelevancy might have any bearing whatsoever, but sure. If that happens I'll be guilty. So there you go.

(28-08-2013 12:56 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  They were wicked in Canaan but it still wasn’t genocide. They had chariots, fortified cities and giants. The people were naturally afraid and wandered forty years as a consequence. If even the Nazis (dear godwin!) waited forty years to attack the Jewish people and then fought them in a series of battles and wars because they had a LARGER armament than the Nazis, and for FORTY MORE YEARS under Joshua, we’d still hate their racial doctrine, but it wouldn’t be a genocide, and if you say it would be, you’ve completely lost it, dude.

So... it wasn't genocide because they had to work at it? I'm pretty sure I covered that.

What was the intent? To wipe a people out. What was the result? To wipe a people out. Way to Godwin, though. You really love trying that. If the Nazis had defeated the Soviets it would indeed have resulted in genocide. Having to fight a war first (because - and I do know you're aware of this - most people don't want to be exterminated, particularly) doesn't make it not genocide.

(28-08-2013 12:56 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  If you cannot parse genocide from armed combat where both sides bear arms, please don’t ever be a diplomat or other government civil servant. I beg you!

If first you fight a war with the intent of wiping out your enemies if you beat them, and then you beat them, and then you wipe them out... that is genocide.

Is it not murder, if the victim tries and fails to defend themselves?

If you cannot parse legal definitions, please don't ever be a diplomat or other government civil servant. I beg you!

(28-08-2013 12:56 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  No, rather you’re uncomfortable discussing hypotheticals and real-world situations without putting emotionalism and hyperbole into the mix. And you have the idea to place a moral judgment on the Christian worldview that cannot be justified from a naturalist’s viewpoint, which is an inconsistent worldview. On the other hand, I’m comfortable with a just god.

It sounds further like you are uncomfortable in the marketplace of ideas without adding emotions to the mix. Please refrain. After all, we are discussing alleged genocide 3,500 years ago, in a book you said you don’t believe in to any extent. Would you ALL CAPS at me if we were discussing Lord of the Rings or Star Trek ideas? (I’ll be at DragonCon next week, maybe we can meet there.)

CAPS LOCK IS CRUISE CONTROL FOR COOL. Try as I might, I can't evince typography while speaking.

The easy answer would have been for you to say it was genocide, but that it was justified. You come so close to admitting that! We could then have disagreed as to the morality of wholesale extermination.

But, that's not what you've done here. For whatever reason you refuse to acknowledge the reality of the situation, which is that deliberate extermination of whole groups of people is called genocide. Whether the events happened is immaterial; consideration was of the nature of the events there described.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-08-2013, 08:32 PM
RE: Genocide in the Bible
(28-08-2013 02:47 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
Quote:PJ your examples imply someone did something wrong, and then paid the price. Not sure I agree, but it is understandable. So what did the babies do that they deserved killing?

Nothing. Babies are innocents. What did Adam and Eve do that anyone deserves to not be immortal?

Quote:I was also thinking about "context" , why would God need context? He supposedly has been alive forever, knows the future, and could write or speech to text accordingly. He would already know the problems that people would have with the stories, and spell it out to avoid confusion.

Are you aware the Bible says God causes confusion intentionally? Two examples: Babel and languages and the parables of Jesus. And? Can you think of a reason God would do that which is out of the “god’s a jerk!” box? I can.

Quote:Also, as he knew the future, why did he create all men, and then make the Israelites the chosen, and then tell the chosen to slaughter the others? Did he not love them? Could he not show himself to them like he did the Israelites to show them the way?

Maybe he did. What was their response? Maybe he showed himself to you and to me? Why was my response different than yours? Is it just to judge someone for not knowing something? No. Is it just to judge someone for the way they respond to you?
What does Adam and Eve have to do with God killing the babies. Are you saying it was just for him to do that?

The bible also says God is not the author of confusion. Which is it?

The bible also said he killed people for looking at him. So maybe he did show himself to them. Obviously that wasn't my point. If God has a grand plan, why did he separate the Israelites, choose them over his other children? And then allow the murder of his children? And by the way, not all of them had swords to fight (children, babies,etc.). When a person commits these crimes, do you condone it?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-08-2013, 10:09 AM
RE: Genocide in the Bible
Quote: There is NO context where "people should be systematically killed merely because they do something you don't like". That is the characteristic of a kid throwing a fit . . . and having the power to act out on it. If this is your apologetic response, then you can have your twisted immoral god person. But it is a monster, no matter how you try to spin it.
But there is. I don’t like murder and have no issues with capital punishment per se. I’d not be bothered at all if rapists and paedophiles were killed also, to be frank.

Rehabilitation is an issue for individuals and wonderful. But deterrents affect larger groups. If we killed some rapists women would be safer on the streets.

Additionally, I know you don’t like rape or paedophilia either. So even if you don’t want such persons killed, you abhor what they’ve done and would agree there should a punishment for a moral crime.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-08-2013, 10:26 AM
RE: Genocide in the Bible
Quote: I'm pretty sure that's genocide. Since it involved killing everyone on purpose. A hanged man dies of asphyxiation and a decapitated man dies of trauma; guess those're natural causes!

If one wants to extend the definition of genocide to cover plant and animal species (this is, of course, something only you have brought up), then you may indeed accuse me of complicity in same, as soon as - and not before! - I partake with express intent of general extermination. I can foresee no circumstances in which such a ludicrous irrelevancy might have any bearing whatsoever, but sure. If that happens I'll be guilty. So there you go.

Granted. I’ll agree with you. So please allow me to rephrase. The whole issue of this entire thread lies in the fact that it’s not genocide if it’s a deserved capital punishment OR a just war, if those two things can be allowed into the discussion. And those are loaded terms.

Quote: So... it wasn't genocide because they had to work at it? I'm pretty sure I covered that.

What was the intent? To wipe a people out. What was the result? To wipe a people out. Way to Godwin, though. You really love trying that. If the Nazis had defeated the Soviets it would indeed have resulted in genocide. Having to fight a war first (because - and I do know you're aware of this - most people don't want to be exterminated, particularly) doesn't make it not genocide.

They had to work at it because a war is not a genocide and a genocide is not a war. The Allies bombed civilian targets in WW II as well as military targets. Was this bombing a genocide? Not according to Wikipedia. We were working to sap the Axis of strength and will to fight rather than killing Axis civilians BECAUSE they were ethnic Germans or Japanese.

In the same vein, the wars for Canann lasted an initial 40 years under Joshua and then continued for centuries after. And the Jews killed Canaanites because they were wicked, a sort of capital punishment, and not because they had racial hatred for their ANE cousins. I know you see the difference.

Quote: If first you fight a war with the intent of wiping out your enemies if you beat them, and then you beat them, and then you wipe them out... that is genocide.

Is it not murder, if the victim tries and fails to defend themselves?

If you cannot parse legal definitions, please don't ever be a diplomat or other government civil servant. I beg you!

Capital punishment isn’t murder and murder isn’t capital punishment. And god knowing via foreknowledge about the horrors of syncretism and the deservedness of capital punishment than killing people (through the agency of the Israelites) and taking the irredeemably wicked adults to Hell and the innocent children to Heaven is appropriate IMHO. If you want to call it genocide and use it as your absolute, final moral standard for rejecting Christianity you have other issues you are ignoring IMHO.

But what’s really bothering you and prompted this thread is that the children died. Here comes Godwin but it’s really needed this time:

The whole context of the “Does foreknowledge of Hitler’s actions justify using a time machine to kill the infant Hitler?” discussion is that people have great difficulty making a decision here (most people) because they don’t have foreknowledge of every action, every choice, every possibility for Hitler’s redemption or every ramification (like there being a leader worse than Hitler to fill the gap in the same time frame). In other words, people know this question means they’re playing god.

Guess what? The issue here isn’t Jewish genocide of Canaanites. It’s that god does get to play god and told the Jews to kill the Canaanites. I also acknowledge that god created the family structure, government, self-defense, and capital punishment. He really does get to say, “Kill the infant Hitler”.

Your issue isn’t moral outrage over genocide, something that’s actually indefensible if you are a Social Darwinist. Your issue is (surprise!) religious fanaticism.

But if the biblical god is real than killing the Canaanites was fine AND god knew all the outcomes and all the dangers he warned the Jews about including syncretism which they fell party to in the pre-exilic period.

Quote: CAPS LOCK IS CRUISE CONTROL FOR COOL. Try as I might, I can't evince typography while speaking.

I understand. I sometimes have trouble employing italics on this forum myself and must resort to ALL CAPS. Of course, most people take it for shouting. Sorry I didn’t feel your vibe before.

Quote:The easy answer would have been for you to say it was genocide, but that it was justified. You come so close to admitting that! We could then have disagreed as to the morality of wholesale extermination.

See above. I just all but admitted it!

Quote:But, that's not what you've done here. For whatever reason you refuse to acknowledge the reality of the situation, which is that deliberate extermination of whole groups of people is called genocide. Whether the events happened is immaterial; consideration was of the nature of the events there described.

Well, we’re almost there. If you want to also consider whether SOME elements of the “genocide” included just war, the opportunity for those they opposed to repent of great sin, the hearing of the Canaanites about the cataclysms that befell the Egyptians (my “resistance is futile” so why fight argument), etc.

Consider Islam. Now those jihads aren’t justified. But they (usually) don’t kill everyone because you can become a Muslim and not die. That’s why scholars are reluctant to call certain “efforts” of the Muslims genocide.

When you consider how abysmally the Jews failed to kill all the Canaanites it wasn’t genocide in the dictionary sense. But why quibble with words?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-08-2013, 10:28 AM
RE: Genocide in the Bible
(29-08-2013 10:09 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  But there is. I don’t like murder and have no issues with capital punishment per se. I’d not be bothered at all if rapists and paedophiles were killed also, to be frank.

Rehabilitation is an issue for individuals and wonderful. But deterrents affect larger groups. If we killed some rapists women would be safer on the streets.

Additionally, I know you don’t like rape or paedophilia either. So even if you don’t want such persons killed, you abhor what they’ve done and would agree there should a punishment for a moral crime.

What moral crime do you feel the women and children committed?

...it would rather be a man... [who] plunges into scientific questions with which he has no real acquaintance, only to obscure them with aimless rhetoric, and distract the attention of his hearers from the real point at issue by eloquent digressions and skilled appeals to religious prejudice.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-08-2013, 10:32 AM
RE: Genocide in the Bible
Quote: What does Adam and Eve have to do with God killing the babies. Are you saying it was just for him to do that?

Are you saying it is unjust for god to play god? After all when people talk about killing babies or capital punishment, we’re talking about playing god. God killed my baby when my child miscarried. And? I have a child in Heaven and am not on forums saying I’m pissed at god and Christians as a result. So what is the difference between you and me if not anger over the same occurrence where I feel peace? Please explain more here.

Quote:The bible also says God is not the author of confusion. Which is it?

I’m sure you’ve personally given clear, understandable instruction before and had someone else misunderstand it, because they weren’t paying attention, or perhaps deliberately! Which is it in your case with the Bible which god has authored and which is clear if one reads it all in the proper historical context (the very thing BB is always extolling)? That you’re still seeking to learn or that you’re deliberately misunderstanding?

Quote:The bible also said he killed people for looking at him. So maybe he did show himself to them. Obviously that wasn't my point. If God has a grand plan, why did he separate the Israelites, choose them over his other children? And then allow the murder of his children? And by the way, not all of them had swords to fight (children, babies,etc.). When a person commits these crimes, do you condone it?

God explained why he chose the Israelites over the others in the scriptures. Check it out and you’ll have some good insight even on this matter of the Canaanites.

The Bible says Israel are the sons of god and that the sons of god are also others to whom the word of god came. Where in the Bible does it say the Canaanites are god’s children?

When a person commits murder, of course I don’t condone it and neither do you. When a government executes capital punishment on the murderer, however, my guess is I agree and you don’t agree. You might even call the capital punishment murder.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-08-2013, 10:40 AM
RE: Genocide in the Bible
Quote:What moral crime do you feel the women and children committed?

We are both familiar with the Bible’s own apologetic that as a nation, the Canaanites were due to have a just war visit them. I adhere to the concept of a just war.

However, should god tell someone to “drop the big one” and use a person as his agent just as the Bible states he uses government for, even to bearing the sword—the very issue at hand—then it’s up to god to play god. Capisci?

Now since you’re a freethinker I’ll make an educated guess that you don’t believe in capital punishment. So if you’re not understanding why god would kill a serial killer, how can I ask you to “understand” why god would send a flood or an army to kill “innocents” who the Bible says are to ALL die someday?

But you’re not alone here. Isn’t much of the Bible a record of how the prophets and poets were shocked that god called for a sword and diaspora against the Israelites themselves? And when this unique event in religion occurred (god told the leaders to write in their scriptures that the leaders themselves were cast off) it was because of the wickedness of the Israelites…

So this genocide talk is all about saying the perpetrators are the sinners, not the “victims”. We are horrified that the Japanese slaughtered Allied soldiers in death marches. Do you think any of the Allied soldiers they killed off were rapists or baby killers? C’mon, think outside the box, bro.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-08-2013, 11:06 AM
RE: Genocide in the Bible
(29-08-2013 10:40 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  We are both familiar with the Bible’s own apologetic that as a nation, the Canaanites were due to have a just war visit them. I adhere to the concept of a just war.

A just war does not require the complete extermination of a people. When the enemy leadership and infrastructure have been destroyed, the war is over. The general consensus of civilized society is that soldiers are the targets, not women and children. I can see a barbaric society acting as described in the bible. I cannot see a loving, wise god doing the same. I do not see your angle here...

(29-08-2013 10:40 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  However, should god tell someone to “drop the big one” and use a person as his agent just as the Bible states he uses government for, even to bearing the sword—the very issue at hand—then it’s up to god to play god. Capisci?

Are you using a "that's just god being god" argument?

(29-08-2013 10:40 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Now since you’re a freethinker I’ll make an educated guess that you don’t believe in capital punishment. So if you’re not understanding why god would kill a serial killer, how can I ask you to “understand” why god would send a flood or an army to kill “innocents” who the Bible says are to ALL die someday?

I do believe in capital punishment. Atheists don't believe in gods. We're quite diverse beyond that.

What I see your argument saying is that, since the women and children will all die someday, it's just to kill them all now. We are all just 'walking dead.' Is that a correct interpretation?

(29-08-2013 10:40 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  But you’re not alone here. Isn’t much of the Bible a record of how the prophets and poets were shocked that god called for a sword and diaspora against the Israelites themselves? And when this unique event in religion occurred (god told the leaders to write in their scriptures that the leaders themselves were cast off) it was because of the wickedness of the Israelites…

You're bouncing back and forth between individuals and groups. On one hand you advocate punishing the immoral individual (as do I). Then you jump to guilt by association and advocate the punishment of a group, regardless of the individuals. Do you accept both as reasonable approaches to justice? I don't.

(29-08-2013 10:40 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  So this genocide talk is all about saying the perpetrators are the sinners, not the “victims”. We are horrified that the Japanese slaughtered Allied soldiers in death marches. Do you think any of the Allied soldiers they killed off were rapists or baby killers? C’mon, think outside the box, bro.

Do you think all of them were? And was that even the purpose of the death march? To kill off an entire group in hopes that you'd nail a few rapists and baby killers? That's not why they were marched. Any small amount of due justice dolled out by the Japanese through the random killing of an unknown rapist is unbalanced when weighed against the other deaths.

How hard is it, really, for an omnipotent god to target the evil and preserve the innocent? The biblical god is wielding a sawed-off shotgun, not a precision laser. The justice system after death is supposedly perfect. Each individual person, child, infant, etc. is given a fair trial (if they've heard about Jesus, that is). How is it, then, that things are so sloppy here on Earth? Why do I keep hearing of this incredible god with all these powers, yet when I read of his acts on Earth, they're complete slaughter-fests? The actions define the man. God is a warmonger, violent, indiscriminate and unforgiving. I find stories of love and compassion in the bible to be the more rare events. In fact, without salvation (which was added to Christianity as a late upgrade... maybe to sweeten the pot for the PR machine), god is more like the devil, a bringer of chaos, misery, and deception.

...it would rather be a man... [who] plunges into scientific questions with which he has no real acquaintance, only to obscure them with aimless rhetoric, and distract the attention of his hearers from the real point at issue by eloquent digressions and skilled appeals to religious prejudice.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: