The Old Testament

[chrisuk_sw 0]

It was the people that were being immoral. Of course we probably agree on capital punishment as well, which is what this particular debate will turn in to. Saddam deserves to be killed. He tortured, raped, and murder many people... so he deserves death. Likewise, the people of Earth ignored God and rebelled against him... so they also deserved death.

Where is God's morality? He wishes he'd never made mankind, then kills everyone because of the evil in our heart. Then he promises not to kill everyone because there is evil in our heart. Isn't that, I don't know, psychotic?

The Bible clearly shows that people knew what God expected. See: Cain kills Abel. The people moved farther and farther from God and his requirements, and so he justly killed them.

WHERE in the Bible does it show what God expected of mankind? Here's every verse in Genesis 4Genesis 4:1-4:3 Adam & Eve have two children, Cain & Abel. Abel is a shepherd, Cain is a farmerGenesis 4:4-4:5 Cain gives fruit and vegetables as an offering to God. Abel gives meat. God is pleased with Abel, and displeased with CainGenesis 4:6-4:7 God tells Cain if he does well that he will be accepted, but if he does not do well, he will be consumed by sinGenesis 4:8 Cain kills AbelGenesis 4:9-4:12 As punishment, God exiles Cain and tells him he will be a fugitive and a vagabondGenesis 4:13-4:14 Cain tells God that everyone who sees him will kill himGenesis 4:15 God tells Cain that anyone who harms Cain will incur God's vengeance sevenfoldGenesis 4:17-4:22 Cain has a son, builds a city and has many generations of decendentsGenesis 4:23-4:24 One of Cain's descendents, Lamech, kills a man. He then says anyone who harms him will incur God's vengeance seventy sevenfoldGenesis 4:25-4:26 Adam and Eve have another son, Seth, who has a son and spreads the word of GodThat's the whole story. If there's anything I've missed, please quote the Bible (not your own thoughts) that says any different, or explains the morality behind the following:Why does Cain's offering offend God? There is no given reason.Why does God only exile Cain?Why would God curse anyone who would harm Cain?Why does Lamech say that he can get away with murder too?Where in the Bible does it justify God killing everyone in the flood? The reason given (6:5-6:7) is the same reason that God gives for not doing it again (8:21)Why does God drown all the animals?Why does Noah, God's one just man, curse his own grandson who was innocent?Why does Lot offer his daughers up to be raped by the mob in Sodom?Why does God kill Lot's wife? Sure, the angels said don't look back, but they also said don't stay in the valley, and Lot and his family did that without harmAbritrariness. Inconsistency. Intolerance. Immorality. Injustice. Mass Murder.This book should not be given to children.

[Zealous Donkey 0]

I listed the every single verse at the start of the Bible! Every single one! How can that possibly be out of context?I know I could have used much better examples (the OT is that nasty) but I chose the start precisely so I could put it in its correct context.

It is out of the context of the whole Bible. You called God immoral when what he was doing was stemming the tide of immorality by taking the actions he took. Just because you started at beginning of the Bible doesn't excuse the fact that you ignore learning about the true nature of God by studying the rest of the Bible including the New Testament.

[chrisuk_sw 0]

It is out of the context of the whole Bible. You called God immoral when what he was doing was stemming the tide of immorality by taking the actions he took. Just because you started at beginning of the Bible doesn't excuse the fact that you ignore learning about the true nature of God by studying the rest of the Bible including the New Testament.

GOD: Mankind is wicked. I will kill everything that lives because I wish I had never made mankindGOD: (kills everything)GOD: I will not kill everything again because mankind is wickedGod's reasoning is insane. Where is the context that shows anything else? It's certainly not out of context with the rest of Genesis. I am studying this book very very carefully and coming to the conclusion that it is very very horrible. You are simply not reading the Bible! Read it!Why are you ignoring the content of these stories? They are immoral and disgusting.

[crowTrobot 2]

Just because you started at beginning of the Bible doesn't excuse the fact that you ignore learning about the true nature of God by studying the rest of the Bible including the New Testament.

i have. all god's "true nature" as revealed in the NT does is highlight the immorality of his actions in the OT.

[brvheart 1,752]

has nothing to do with capital punishment, since if all of humanity turned away from god, it is logically god's fault. there is no crime involved.

*Bill Lumberg voice* I'm gonna hafta... disagree with you there. Noah's family was still obeying God, so not every human had fallen into sin. So change your classroom example to everyone failed but one guy, who got a 99%. Just because the teacher has high standards, doesn't mean that the students care or are paying attention. Everyone is responsible for their own 'grade'. Bad students are not 'victims' of bad teaching.

that's a stretch linking god punishing cain to knowledge of god's requirements for all of humanity.

It's not a stretch at all. The problem is is that to me 'all humanity' is in a very close proximity to each other, and knew God personally and in the flesh. For you, the entire account is ridiculous and doesn't matter either way. But within the guidelines of the Bible it makes perfect sense.

Where is God's morality? He wishes he'd never made mankind, then kills everyone because of the evil in our heart. Then he promises not to kill everyone because there is evil in our heart. Isn't that, I don't know, psychotic?WHERE in the Bible does it show what God expected of mankind? Here's every verse in Genesis 4Genesis 4:1-4:3 Adam & Eve have two children, Cain & Abel. Abel is a shepherd, Cain is a farmerGenesis 4:4-4:5 Cain gives fruit and vegetables as an offering to God. Abel gives meat. God is pleased with Abel, and displeased with CainGenesis 4:6-4:7 God tells Cain if he does well that he will be accepted, but if he does not do well, he will be consumed by sinGenesis 4:8 Cain kills AbelGenesis 4:9-4:12 As punishment, God exiles Cain and tells him he will be a fugitive and a vagabondGenesis 4:13-4:14 Cain tells God that everyone who sees him will kill himGenesis 4:15 God tells Cain that anyone who harms Cain will incur God's vengeance sevenfoldGenesis 4:17-4:22 Cain has a son, builds a city and has many generations of decendentsGenesis 4:23-4:24 One of Cain's descendents, Lamech, kills a man. He then says anyone who harms him will incur God's vengeance seventy sevenfoldGenesis 4:25-4:26 Adam and Eve have another son, Seth, who has a son and spreads the word of GodThat's the whole story. If there's anything I've missed, please quote the Bible (not your own thoughts) that says any different, or explains the morality behind the following:Why does Cain's offering offend God? There is no given reason.Why does God only exile Cain?Why would God curse anyone who would harm Cain?Why does Lamech say that he can get away with murder too?Where in the Bible does it justify God killing everyone in the flood? The reason given (6:5-6:7) is the same reason that God gives for not doing it again (8:21)Why does God drown all the animals?Why does Noah, God's one just man, curse his own grandson who was innocent?Why does Lot offer his daughers up to be raped by the mob in Sodom?Why does God kill Lot's wife? Sure, the angels said don't look back, but they also said don't stay in the valley, and Lot and his family did that without harmAbritrariness. Inconsistency. Intolerance. Immorality. Injustice. Mass Murder.This book should not be given to children.

If you actually post the verses I will show you. I surprisingly prefer what the Bible actually says to your arbitrary paraphrasing of groups of verses.

[chrisuk_sw 0]

If you actually post the verses I will show you. I surprisingly prefer what the Bible actually says to your arbitrary paraphasing of groups of verses.

Here is Genesis 4 - the story of Cain and Abel. Compare the verses with my paraphrasing above. I was careful not to omit anything or to interpret anything arbitrarily.Nothing happens in Genesis 5, its just a list of the descendents of AdamHere is Genesis 6 - the start of the story of Noah. God decides to kill everything in 6:5, he tells Noah this in 6:13, and in Genesis 7, after Noah has boarded the ark, the mass murder occurs in 7:21-7:22

[DerekTah 0]

I can help with some of these. Others I leave blankWhy does Cain's offering offend God? There is no given reason.My only guess is that it may of been easier to gather fruit than to hunt. God may of felt Cain lazy. But it is pure speculationWhy does God only exile Cain?For killing Able. I'm not clear why should God exile anyone elseWhy would God curse anyone who would harm Cain?Could be mercy? Could be because God knows a decentant of Cain is important.Why does Lamech say that he can get away with murder too?He doesn't. He talks about getting attacked and defending himself. Whether his boast of "77 deaths to my killer" is true or not is questionable (the Bible doesn't seem to state more on the subject)Where in the Bible does it justify God killing everyone in the flood? The reason given (6:5-6:7) is the same reason that God gives for not doing it again (8:21)Heres the problem, you either believe God has the right to kill who God wants to or you don't. According to the bible there was great evil going on (but no specification on what the great evil was) so you either belief or no. There is one issue here. Is the bible chronological or not. If not chronological, they may have been breaking the commandment sent down by Moses. Why does God drown all the animals?Why does Noah, God's one just man, curse his own grandson who was innocent?Are you talking about the grandson who went to see him, found Noah naked and told his brothers. The argument I believe has to do with the idea that the grandson should of clothed Noah immediatly. Why does Lot offer his daughers up to be raped by the mob in Sodom?The bible suggests that one should treat the lord better than family. Also when you add in the view of woman at the time. Add in the third fact that Lot is not the best father in the world (don't confusing favoring for actual rightousness).Why does God kill Lot's wife? Sure, the angels said don't look back, but they also said don't stay in the valley, and Lot and his family did that without harmCan I have a verse on the valley (I'm thinking this is something said to Abram, not Lot). On Lot's wife, it has to do with were the survivors willing to leave their sinfull lives. Sodom embodied sin, were they willing to move on or look back on it.

[crowTrobot 2]

There is one issue here. Is the bible chronological or not. If not chronological, they may have been breaking the commandment sent down by Moses.

sure, why not. put the flood after moses. considering there is undisputed documented evidence of an *unbroken* chronology of developing egyptian culture going back 6000+ years it really doesn't matter when you pretend the flood happened.geez you guys. none of you are really morons. please open you eyes. whether you believe jesus was god or not, genesis can't possibly be literal. there was no world-wide flood. duh.

[chrisuk_sw 0]

Thank you for your responses.Ah I get Lamech now. In Genesis 4:23-4:24 says he has killed two people, a man for wounding him and a boy for striking him. So the moral is: if someone attacks you, you can kill them. I don't nessarily agree with that, but understand it now.when I asked "Why did God only exile Cain?", I meant: why not kill him instead? God kills other people for much less... like Lot's wife.Genesis 19:17 When they had brought them outside, one said, "Escape for your life! Do not look behind you, and do not stay anywhere in the valley; escape to the mountains, or you will be swept away."then in 19:18-19:19 Lot asks if they can stay in the nearby town of Zoar instead of going to the mountains, which the angels grant as long as he does not overthrow the town. They hide out there, Lot's wife looks back and BAM pillar of salt. Brutal.In Genesis 11, the first verse says that all mankind has one common language: Now the whole earth used the same language and the same words. The people then said they will build a city with a tower whose top will reach into heaven so.... The LORD said, "Behold, they are one people, and they all have the same language. And this is what they began to do, and now nothing which they purpose to do will be impossible for them.Genesis 11:7Come, let Us go down and there confuse their language, so that they will not understand one another's speech." What is wrong with a tower who's top reachs into heaven? What is wrong with being able to do whatever you have purpose to do? To what end does God confuse our language and scatter man across the world? Isn't that a really divisive thing to do?God does seem very inconsistent (only exiling Cain for murder, killing Lot's wife, killing all of wicked mankind and also killing every animal because of man's wickedness, then not killing us and the animals because man is wicked? ... ) I could go on (Genesis is not the worst OT book), but this God is not nice. He regrets ever creating mankind, and when he does with the killing, then he's cursing and dividing us.

[Loismustdie 0]

Thank you for your responses.Ah I get Lamech now. In Genesis 4:23-4:24 says he has killed two people, a man for wounding him and a boy for striking him. So the moral is: if someone attacks you, you can kill them. I don't nessarily agree with that, but understand it now.when I asked "Why did God only exile Cain?", I meant: why not kill him instead? God kills other people for much less... like Lot's wife.Genesis 19:17 When they had brought them outside, one said, "Escape for your life! Do not look behind you, and do not stay anywhere in the valley; escape to the mountains, or you will be swept away."then in 19:18-19:19 Lot asks if they can stay in the nearby town of Zoar instead of going to the mountains, which the angels grant as long as he does not overthrow the town. They hide out there, Lot's wife looks back and BAM pillar of salt. Brutal.In Genesis 11, the first verse says that all mankind has one common language: Now the whole earth used the same language and the same words. The people then said they will build a city with a tower whose top will reach into heaven so.... The LORD said, "Behold, they are one people, and they all have the same language. And this is what they began to do, and now nothing which they purpose to do will be impossible for them.Genesis 11:7Come, let Us go down and there confuse their language, so that they will not understand one another's speech." What is wrong with a tower who's top reachs into heaven? What is wrong with being able to do whatever you have purpose to do? To what end does God confuse our language and scatter man across the world? Isn't that a really divisive thing to do?God does seem very inconsistent (only exiling Cain for murder, killing Lot's wife, killing all of wicked mankind and also killing every animal because of man's wickedness, then not killing us and the animals because man is wicked? ... ) I could go on (Genesis is not the worst OT book), but this God is not nice. He regrets ever creating mankind, and when he does with the killing, then he's cursing and dividing us.

Enough. I gotta help Braveheart out here, I don't care how much I hate Canada. Alright, attack mode. Which is it exactly? What exactly is the problem- atheists assume that the Old Testament is just fable anyway, and many current "christians" assume the same thing. So, if it's fable- what's the problem exactly? Why even argue? Now, seeing as how I think differently what you guys, most of you are failing to realize is that the world as we know it was completely different, in that it was not civilized, and how EVERYBODY dealt with each other was different than how we do now. Eye for an eye back then meant just that- heck, it meant just that is frontier times. Man has developed quite a bit since then- we now understand much better what makes sense for the greater good. We don't always follow it, but most people realize that if a guy rear ends you, you don't bust a u turn and hit him back. However, in those times that would have been the reaction. So, many times God is just doing things in the terms of the times, in what they understood, what they saw as justice. In these societys if you looked at the king when he didn't want you to he would/could kill you- this applied to his wives as well. So, God was very black and white- run and don't look back. She did, and he turned her into a pillar of salt. Why? Because her heart was back with the sinners, and she was not worthy. God knew her heart, and it manifested itself in her actions. Why did Lot offer his daughters? Because he knew what was going to happen, and made an effort to stave it off. He did not want to see the city destroyed- why else would he do that? Incidentally, haven't read that account in awhile but I don't recall God telling him to do that. Also, he just offered his daughters- in those times that would not constitute rape, as women were possesions, sometimes used as barter. (Please tell me you already know this.) What would be the problem with tower that reached to heaven? First of all, you have completely missed the moral of the story, which is you cannot get one over on God. Man banded together to attempt to do this and he made it to where they could not. End of story. These were largely societies that dealt in brutality- it blows my mind that anyone could think that they would understand anything else. What would have happened if a loving God appeared, all smiles, and said," Hey, fellas, stop it with the homosexuality now. That's no good." They would have laughed in his face, as they did to his angels. As far as him not being fair- really? How many times did he cause his own people to be enslaved? Do you have any idea what he put them through as well? You can love something and deal with it in no uncertain terms as well- even intensly dislike it at times. I love my truck, I hate the payment. And, since we are as ants to God and as a drop in a bucket of water, the truck analogy fits. I even consider taking it out into the desert and burning it occasionally. Fitting since that is how he plans on ending humanity.

[crowTrobot 2]

So, many times God is just doing things in the terms of the times, in what they understood, what they saw as justice.

so god JUST HAPPENS to adapt his morality and corresponding actions so they always exactly match whatever the developing human concepts of morality are at any given time in human history. how conveeeeeeeenient

[chrisuk_sw 0]

Alright, attack mode. Which is it exactly? What exactly is the problem- atheists assume that the Old Testament is just fable anyway, and many current "christians" assume the same thing. So, if it's fable- what's the problem exactly? Why even argue?

Because stories tell us, through allegory, the way in which we perceive the world to be and how to act within it. The stories of the Old Testament have awful meanings.It says clearly in the Bible that God wishes he'd never created humanity. That he hates us so much he wishes to kill us all and everything else that he has made. He then carries out the deed. This is not a good example for children.

[Loismustdie 0]

so god JUST HAPPENS to adapt his morality and corresponding actions so they always exactly match whatever the developing human concepts of morality are at any given time in human history. how conveeeeeeeenient

Or, that makes sense, and now I look stupid. How approoopriate.

Because stories tell us, through allegory, the way in which we perceive the world to be and how to act within it. The stories of the Old Testament have awful meanings.It says clearly in the Bible that God wishes he'd never created humanity. That he hates us so much he wishes to kill us all and everything else that he has made. He then carries out the deed. This is not a good example for children.

It also says that, to paraphrase: " For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son. Whosoever believes shall be saved- he that believeth not is damned." It is up to you whether you fall into a category where God loves you, or one where he could care less about you. Interesting point you made about children- I draw from that that you read the bible yourself, as a child? Otherwise why would it matter? Most children, when read the stories, see that God can be both vengeful and loving depending on how you serve him. Even a child can pick up on that. It takes years to become as you, no child is that "smart". The rest of my argument I assume was right on? You had no qualms with it, so that's what I will assume.

[DerekTah 0]

sure, why not. put the flood after moses. considering there is undisputed documented evidence of an *unbroken* chronology of developing egyptian culture going back 6000+ years it really doesn't matter when you pretend the flood happened.geez you guys. none of you are really morons. please open you eyes. whether you believe jesus was god or not, genesis can't possibly be literal. there was no world-wide flood. duh.

Fine, no world-wide flood. I do believe there could of still been a masive flood in the area where the story developed (could it possibly be the creation of the red sea perhaps). To the people who wrote the flood story, do they know that there is a "rest of the world that wasn't hit by the flood" at the time anyway. Thats not the point, I believe quite a lot of the flood story is closer to fable than literal, I do believe there is meaning in the story though. That the important thing, the meaning of the story that the writer is going for.This thread is basicly, "why don't we think God is evil for drowning people, etc". Here is my answer: look at the time it was written. It was a time when gods basicly had the right to do anything they wanted. The Greek Gods were worshipped dispite the belief that they may come down rape whoever they wanted, strike down whoever angered them, and the people may randomly turn to trees and so forth.The whole idea of "Does God have the right to punish us?" or "Is God punishment too far?" may not of been a concept in the time of the writing.Oh and when I say chronological, obviously the Bible is meant to be chronological. But how were the story's first told. Thats what I am getting it. Was it flood then Moses. Or was the Moses a well known story before the Flood story.

[crowTrobot 2]

Or, that makes sense, and now I look stupid.

except it doesn't make sense. if a god who created the entire universe doesn't bother to transcend the lack of morality in primitive humans he's not much of a god, is he.from an objective viewpoint (which you aren't capable of) it's perfectly clear that the nature of god at any given time in biblical history is due to the stories of his actions being CREATED by people of the cultures and morals of that particular time.

[Loismustdie 0]

sure, why not. put the flood after moses. considering there is undisputed documented evidence of an *unbroken* chronology of developing egyptian culture going back 6000+ years it really doesn't matter when you pretend the flood happened.geez you guys. none of you are really morons. please open you eyes. whether you believe jesus was god or not, genesis can't possibly be literal. there was no world-wide flood. duh.

Excpet that there is evidence for a worldwideflood. It's contested, hotly, and any scientist that would talk of it is ostracized, but it's there. Not that I needed something as biased as science to validate my beliefs in the first place.

[crowTrobot 2]

This thread is basicly, "why don't we think God is evil for drowning people, etc". Here is my answer: look at the time it was written. It was a time when gods basicly had the right to do anything they wanted. The Greek Gods were worshipped dispite the belief that they may come down rape whoever they wanted, strike down whoever angered them, and the people may randomly turn to trees and so forth.

yup, what i just said - the people of that particular time are responsible for the nature of god - because stories of his actions are fables that originated in that particular time.it's simple-minded to think a moral, just god would alter his morality to match the general human concept of "gods" at the time. on the contrary. obviously those concepts *created* the christian god just the same as they created greek gods and all others.

[DerekTah 0]

when I asked "Why did God only exile Cain?", I meant: why not kill him instead? God kills other people for much less... like Lot's wife.Perhaps pity or that there is someone in Cain's line that is important (I wonder if there is more to his son then what is in the Bible?Genesis 19:17 When they had brought them outside, one said, "Escape for your life! Do not look behind you, and do not stay anywhere in the valley; escape to the mountains, or you will be swept away."Ok, thanks I couldn't remember it and I didn't have my bible on me.then in 19:18-19:19 Lot asks if they can stay in the nearby town of Zoar instead of going to the mountains, which the angels grant as long as he does not overthrow the town. They hide out there, Lot's wife looks back and BAM pillar of salt. Brutal.In Genesis 11, the first verse says that all mankind has one common language: Now the whole earth used the same language and the same words. The people then said they will build a city with a tower whose top will reach into heaven so.... The LORD said, "Behold, they are one people, and they all have the same language. And this is what they began to do, and now nothing which they purpose to do will be impossible for them.Genesis 11:7Come, let Us go down and there confuse their language, so that they will not understand one another's speech." What is wrong with a tower who's top reachs into heaven? What is wrong with being able to do whatever you have purpose to do? To what end does God confuse our language and scatter man across the world? Isn't that a really divisive thing to do?The answer is that God and man are suppose to be seperate. Even in the stories where God comes down the person take percausions to not look upon God. The idea that man is on the same level as God is seen as sinful.God does seem very inconsistent (only exiling Cain for murder, killing Lot's wife, killing all of wicked mankind and also killing every animal because of man's wickedness, then not killing us and the animals because man is wicked? ... ) I could go on (Genesis is not the worst OT book), but this God is not nice. He regrets ever creating mankind, and when he does with the killing, then he's cursing and dividing us.Well the people are exactly too great either. Take the exodus story. Moses is able to get the people freed. As the are fleeing, the Pharoh has decided to pursue and kill them. "Have you brought us here to die". Moses then parts the sea, the jews cross the sea closes and everything is alright. What happens next. Well then the jews complain "hey there is no food or water, have you sent us all here to die". Its at moments like that you can understand how fustrated God might be (hell I want to bitchslap them).

[Loismustdie 0]

yup, what i just said - the people of that particular time are responsible for the nature of god - because stories of his actions are fables that originated in that particular time.it's simple-minded to think a moral, just god would alter his morality to match the general human concept of "gods" at the time. on the contrary. obviously those concepts *created* the christian god just the same as they created greek gods and all others.

Or so simple that even a fool cannot ere therein. It makes sense. God allowed what he allowed, and acted as he did, because that is what mankind could handle, that is what they were ready for, he spoke to them in the language of the times if you will. That's not hard to see at all.

[crowTrobot 2]

Excpet that there is evidence for a worldwideflood. It's contested, hotly, and any scientist that would talk of it is ostracized, but it's there. Not that I needed something as biased as science to validate my beliefs in the first place.

it takes a true zealot to claim the bible is right and all of modern science is a conspiracy lol.

Or so simple that even a fool cannot ere therein. It makes sense. God allowed what he allowed, and acted as he did, because that is what mankind could handle, that is what they were ready for, he spoke to them in the language of the times if you will. That's not hard to see at all.

yup, god threw away his superior morality and committed genocide over and over because that was the language of the times. it's not hard to see.

[Canada 0]

Excpet that there is evidence for a worldwideflood. It's contested, hotly, and any scientist that would talk of it is ostracized, but it's there. Not that I needed something as biased as science to validate my beliefs in the first place.

Perhaps you can produce some. To date you never have.All your arguments are always you just banging you head against the screen going "I'm right, you're wrong. I'm right, you're wrong. I'm right, you're wrong."Let me show what a piece of evidence looks like.Noahs flood was supposed to happen 2300-2500 BC according to the Bible.Circa 1960 a tree was discovered that was later dated at a minimum age of 4900 years. Countless sources1960 - 4900 = 2940 BC.Oh dear. Noah's Flood never happened.Or is 2940 a little close to 2500 I mean its only 440 years So maybe we should look at king clone creosote bush aged at 11700 years or the works of Becker, B., B. Kromer and P. Trimborn in 1991 showing an unbroken record in tree rings going back over 11000 years.Or if plants don't rock your boat we still have documented Eqyptian history from the 1st Dynasty starting ~3000BCNow the flood definately didn't happen

[chrisuk_sw 0]

It also says (in addition to God hating the world and killing everyone) that, to paraphrase: " For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son. Whosoever believes shall be saved- he that believeth not is damned." It is up to you whether you fall into a category where God loves you, or one where he could care less about you.

Yes. The Bible is internally contradictory, so has no overriding message or morality.

Interesting point you made about children- I draw from that that you read the bible yourself, as a child? Otherwise why would it matter? Most children, when read the stories, see that God can be both vengeful and loving depending on how you serve him. Even a child can pick up on that. It takes years to become as you, no child is that "smart". The rest of my argument I assume was right on? You had no qualms with it, so that's what I will assume.

I have many qualms with your argument:(paraphrasing) "the world as we know it was completely different, in that it was not civilized, and how EVERYBODY dealt with each other was different than how we do now. Eye for an eye back then meant just that... Man has developed quite a bit since then- we now understand much better what makes sense for the greater good."I agree completely. We should reject the Old Testament morality as having no place in modern society. We're much better judges of what is right and wrong than the Bible.So, many times God is just doing things in the terms of the times, in what they understood, what they saw as justice. In these societys if you looked at the king when he didn't want you to he would/could kill you- this applied to his wives as well. So, God was very black and white- run and don't look back. She did, and he turned her into a pillar of salt.I agree again, God is akin to the kings of ancient times - a barbarian whose ways and views we have long since evolved past.Why did Lot offer his daughters? Because he knew what was going to happen, and made an effort to stave it off. He did not want to see the city destroyed- why else would he do that? Incidentally, haven't read that account in awhile but I don't recall God telling him to do that. Also, he just offered his daughters- in those times that would not constitute rape, as women were possesions, sometimes used as barter. (Please tell me you already know this.)Yes, Lot's actions are morally repugnant as well, along with the common view of women as property. Another thing we have evolved past. Actually Lot tells the mob (Genesis 19:8) that they can do whatever they like with his virgin daughters. What a nice man.What would be the problem with tower that reached to heaven? First of all, you have completely missed the moral of the story, which is you cannot get one over on God. Man banded together to attempt to do this and he made it to where they could not. End of story. I understand. I don't understand why it is so wrong as that reason is not given but given God's murderousness, his making up of arbitrary rules without reason is not surprising.

These were largely societies that dealt in brutality- it blows my mind that anyone could think that they would understand anything else. What would have happened if a loving God appeared, all smiles, and said," Hey, fellas, stop it with the homosexuality now. That's no good." They would have laughed in his face, as they did to his angels.

Given omniscience and omnipotence, I would think that God could have done what he liked and enforced his will however he chose. He chose to kill.This stuff matters, it really does, especially when these stories are told to children. Right from the off, children are bound to pick up this:- God hates us- God is murderous- You may kill if someone attacks you- Women are property- Slavery is fine- Fathers may curse their children to slaveryIt's all in there. Later on, in complete contradiction, there is- Thou shalt not kill- God loves us- God is love- Do unto others as you would have them do unto youetcMaking the whole Bible confused and contradictory. This warped nonsense matters - people believe it and because it is so contradictary, can use it to justify any action whatsoever (and, for that matter, can use it to refute any action)Stories have messages, and inform us to the way we see the world and the way we should treat each other. The Old Testament is ridden with a horrible and hateful value system. That is why I feel it should not be exposed to children.It doesn't matter if there was a flood or wasn't a flood. What matters is the moral of the story, and that the actions of God and his followers in the Old Testament are immoral and unjust. Let's teach children to be good, not to be barbaric. Let's not teach them the horror that is the Old Testament.

[DerekTah 0]

- You may kill if someone attacks youIt's all in there. Later on, in complete contradiction, there is- Thou shalt not kill

Actually on the killing. The translation should read "Thou shalt not murder". The belief is one should not kill out of hate or covetness. Not, that one should never be allowed to defend oneself.This is made very clear when the other commandments (yes there are more than 10) get handed down. God states that it is acceptable if one kills a robber (EX 22-2) and that if a someone murders that they should be put to death (EX 21-12).On slavery, God forbids kidnapping, so it questionable how one is suppose to acquire a slave in the first place. I question whether the translation should say "servant" rather than "slave".It a problem with the english translation, I got a feeling that there is suppose to more emphasis to certain words than the way we think of them today. For instance in the commandment about "dishonoring our parents". Is it "I told you to clean your room and you didn't, death to you" or "you stole our neighbours ox, sold it, and when confronted killed our neighbor."

[chrisuk_sw 0]

Actually on the killing. The translation should read "Thou shalt not murder". The belief is one should not kill out of hate or covetness. Not, that one should never be allowed to defend oneself.This is made very clear when the other commandments (yes there are more than 10) get handed down. God states that it is acceptable if one kills a robber (EX 22-2) and that if a someone murders that they should be put to death (EX 21-12).On slavery, God forbids kidnapping, so it questionable how one is suppose to acquire a slave in the first place. I question whether the translation should say "servant" rather than "slave".It a problem with the english translation, I got a feeling that there is suppose to more emphasis to certain words than the way we think of them today. For instance in the commandment about "dishonoring our parents". Is it "I told you to clean your room and you didn't, death to you" or "you stole our neighbours ox, sold it, and when confronted killed our neighbor."

It's good to take a critical look at Exodus 20 and 21 where God gives Moses the ten commandments and some other rules. Exodus 20Exodus 20:1-20:2 God introduces himselfExodus 20:3 You shall have no other Gods before meExodus 20:4-20:6 Create no idols. Do not worship them or I will punish you and also your children up to 3 or 4 generations away.Exodus 20:7 Do not blaspheme (take God's name in vain) or God will punish youExodus 20:8-20:11 Remember the sabbath, don't work on the seventh dayExodus 20:12 Honor your father and your motherExodus 20:13 Do not kill. (Do not murder in some Bible versions)Exodus 20:14 Do not commit adultery.Exodus 20:15 Do not steal.Exodus 20:16 Do not lie (bear false witness)Exodus 20:17 Do not covet your neighbour's stuffExodus 20:18-20:21 The people see the thunder and lightning on Mt Sinai, Moses kells them not be afraidExodus 20:22-20:26 God tells Moses not to make idols but instead make an altar, and make sacrificesWhat's with the punishing of 3 generations of children? Do the sins of the father carry on to the son?Exodus 21Exodus 21:1 God tells Moses the lawsExodus 21:2-21:3 If you buy a hebrew servant, he works for six years, but goes free on the seventh. If he came with a wife, she goes free tooExodus 21:4 However, if his master got him a wife, and she has children, then the master gets to keep the wife and the children if the servant goes freeExodus 21:5-21:6 If the servant says "I love my master and my wife and children and do not want to be free", take him to the judges, pierce his ear and he is a servant for lifeExodus 21:7 If you sell your daughter to be a servant, she is not free after seven years like the menExodus 21:8 If she has displeased her master, who has married her, she can be redeemed (sold?) but he cannot sell her to foreignersExodus 21:9 If she is to be married to his son, the master must take care of herExodus 21:10-21:11 If the master takes another wife, he must still take care of her. If he doesn't do any of these she is free to goExodus 21:12-21:14 If you kill, you will be put to death. If it was an accident, God will say where you can flee to. If it was deliberate, that person should be executedExodus 21:15 If you attack your parents, you will be executedExodus 21:16 If you steal a man and sell him, you will be executedExodus 21:17 If you curse your parents, you will be executedExodus 21:18-21:19 If you injure someone, you should reimburse them for the time they were injured and ensure they are healedExodus 21:20-21:21 If you strike your slave with a rod and they die, you will be punished. But not if they survive for a day or two, because they are your propertyExodus 21:22-21:23 If men who are fighting hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined according to the husband's and the court's demands.Exodus 21:24-21:25 But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.Exodus 21:26-21:27 If you blind one eye or knock out a tooth of your slave, they are allowed to go freeExodus 21:28-21:31 If your ox gores a man or a woman to death, the ox is destroyed and not eaten. You will be unpunished, unless you have previously been warned, in which case, you will be executed unless you pay a ransomExodus 21:32 If your ox gores a slave, you must pay the slave's master 30 shekels of silver compensation, and the ox is destroyedExodus 21:33-21:34 If you dig an uncovered pit and an ox or donkey falls into it, you must pay compensationExodus 21:35-21:36 If your ox kills another ox, then you split the cost of your ox and the dead one, unless you've been warned, in which case you must give up your oxLet's be honest about the passages in Exodus 21. These laws are not talking about servants, they are clearly talking about slaves. The passages don't even make proper sentences with our understanding of the word "servant". They scan correctly when you replace that word with "slave". God clearly doesn't have a problem with slavery as long as these laws are kept. How do you get a slave? Well, you can buy him as it states in Exodus 21:2-3. It's great if you can get him a wife and children, as if he leaves you get to keep them as slaves too.

[Loismustdie 0]

A fool cannot ere therein. A fool. Think about that.

Perhaps you can produce some. To date you never have.All your arguments are always you just banging you head against the screen going "I'm right, you're wrong. I'm right, you're wrong. I'm right, you're wrong."Let me show what a piece of evidence looks like.Noahs flood was supposed to happen 2300-2500 BC according to the Bible.Circa 1960 a tree was discovered that was later dated at a minimum age of 4900 years. Countless sources1960 - 4900 = 2940 BC.Oh dear. Noah's Flood never happened. Or is 2940 a little close to 2500 I mean its only 440 years So maybe we should look at king clone creosote bush aged at 11700 years or the works of Becker, B., B. Kromer and P. Trimborn in 1991 showing an unbroken record in tree rings going back over 11000 years.Or if plants don't rock your boat we still have documented Eqyptian history from the 1st Dynasty starting ~3000BCNow the flood definately didn't happen

Why would a flood kill trees? In Phoenix, we have a lake- it's called Lake Pleasant. The Lake rises and falls depending on the rainfall each year. Meanwhile, trees that are covered depending on the level of the water- you gotta watch for them when you go boating or jet skiing- well, they continue to live. How much you want to bet that trees made it through? Not all, but some. How that is evidence against the flood I have no idea. Are you saying that all trees would drown if you submerged them in water for 40 days? Somehow, since I see evidence to the contrary, I kind of doubt that.Really, really weak, as usual.