Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given 2 the profane masses is another useful idiot 4 Jesuit machinations
Jesuitical; pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuit Order completely altered the education system 2 suit their Evo-Hoax Agenda to discredit the Bible
Papal Rome cant have their Counter Reformation 2nd Dark Age DESPOTISM until Bible is destroyed
Did you notice how you showed that God is genocidal. You tell us how in the Bible God commands his followers to kill all the Canaanites, doesn't matter if God had a reason for it or not it's still genocide. And really an all knowing, all power Gods best solution for the Canaanites is to have them all killed. He couldn't go down and show them that they were wrong and he was the "One True God." He could of saved a bunch of people.
So Dawkins DOES believe in God then, even though he doesn't sound as if he likes Him. After what he stated, I don't expect God likes Dawkins much either, I know whose side I would rather be on. Another good video.
@gillettsibert1 So were from that did you get that Richard Dawkins believes in God. The passage he reads from his book he clearly states that God is a fictional character and if it's the "yeah" at the end of his clip, he most likely meant "Yeah that is what I think of this fictional character." It would be same if you said how much you hated the The Joker and I asked "Is that what you think of him" and you replied "Yeah" at any point did you say The Joker is real, answer: NEVER.
@gillettsibert1 Well in an interview Richard Dawkins talked about a scale of atheism, 1-7, 1 being 100% belief that there is a god, 7 being 100% there is no god and 4 being there is a 50% chance there is a god and 50% chance there isn't a god, Dawkins put himself at 6.999, so no he doesn't believe in a god. You also said that both Dawkins and I have no idea what we are saying, could you please tell me were you think him and I are mistaken, I'd like to know.
There are no calculated chances that God exists or doesn't exist. In other words He exists 100% or He doesn't 100%. Dawkins sets out to completely destroy the "integrity" of God by abusing Him with pure hatred, as evidenced by the opening passage in his book, that implies that he "believes" in God, even though he states He is a fictional character. Just listen to the way he describes God. I can't see how you can hate someone so much, that doesn't exist, with so much venom....
Whether you believe or not doesn't make any difference to God if He exists, so Dawkins is playing a very dangerous game. If God exists, then so does satan, and what Dawkins states is exactly what satan would say. And even the devil believes in God. God exists 100% in my view, but it seems you are defending Dawkins, who will oneday have to give account of his description of his Creator to His face. I am entitled to have my view, Dawkins has no right to persecute those who believe.
@gillettsibert1 First, the scale of belief was on what the chances someone thinks a god exists not if there is one or not, I wasn't very clear on that so I can understand how you miss understood it. My original intent was to figure out why you thought Dawkins believed in God and point out how you were wrong but sure I'll defend Dawkins and his ideas. So just because Dawkins has some passion about what he writes means he believes in it, many fiction writers write there stories with a passion...
@gillettsibert1 ...does that mean they believe in everything they write. Or is it that Dawkings knows what is in the Bible in that case every fictional book you've read you now belive is true. God is more then normal fictional character, because millions of people belief he exists and some are willing to kill because of this beleif, so a bit of passion is needed to hopefully get though to these people.
@gillettsibert1 ...As far as the "integrity" of god, have you read the bible? If not you should. If you have please re-read Deuteronomy 22: 29-29, for starters. I can't speak for but I don't hate God, it's really difficult to hate something that you don't believe exists. And how exactly is Dawkins persecuting you, or other Christians?
Maybe I've missed the point here, but I don't see what this passage Deuteronomy 22: 29, has to do with the integrity of God. Perhaps "persecute" is a bit strong but Dawkins is an outspoken atheist, and on many occasions his insults to those that put their faith in God, borders on persecution, as he would eliminate all these beliefs if he could. I agree belief in God should not be an excuse to kill, but atheistical regimes throughout history have been responsible for many......
...atrocities too, not that I'm justifying anything here. It seems that atheists quite often use that argument about those that believe in God, that so many have died because of religions, and while I agree that there are millions who will use that as an excuse, it is no excuse. Dawkins, as far as I'm concerned is running scared, and he wants many to follow him, and many do and will continue to do so, because without God's existence...you can do what you want.
What Deuteronomy prescribes for non-Canaanite enemies, enslavement and mass-killing of males in towns that don't surrender, is "mericful" in much the same way that the treatment that Exodus describes the Jews receiving in Egypt is "merciful." It is arguably less "merciful" than the way emperor Augustus tried to rule Judea (before later emperors like Caligula and Nero were invovled in things like destroying the Temple), actually dismissing Herod Archelaus after the people complained about him.
Slightly off-topic: it is an irony to cite "Expelled" while accusing others of poor scholarship.
On-topic, the comparison between the Allied Powers and God is imperfect because the Allies had few options under those circumstances other than bombs, while an omnipotent God would have an unlimited array of options besides genocide for solving problems.
dawkins was talking about godly directives. not wars of men in the past or wars in the present and uttimately in the future. You dont need the bible to justify wars but it certainly a good tool to placate the minds of the warrior that THEY are right and correct in taking part in war.
I know enough to say, that history is filled with terror. Modern world has terror. But how does all this overturn anybody who recognizes how biblical ethics and justice are not ideal in any modern fashion. Dawkins has proven controversial on those points... but we are not going to stone for heresy.
funny that such scripture keeps mentioning other gods. as if he's the youngest sibling and just wants attention. good thing this is all fiction or else this would be even more disturbing.
You forget one thing. God supposedly has unlimited resources & options at his fingertips. Not only did he create the Canaanites, he also had the foreknowledge of the fact that they would become such a scourge on humanity that he would ultimately have to destroy them thus spurring your ridiculous defense of God. Question: What kind of intelligent being would create something only to have to destroy it knowingly before he even created it? Utterly ridiculous.
Heh, as a pre-note, I love it when a church's commercial states that their message never changes.
At first I thought this was just a rather disgusting attempt to apologize Christian genocide as OK when we do it. But then I realized that by providing the Nazi example in the beginning, and then describing Christian justification as EXACTLY THE SAME AS NAZI JUSTIFICATION, the video was just saying that Nazi's and Christians are the same, morally. Awesome subtle satire, or oblivious authors!
So, the order to kill Canaanite children is justified because the Canaanites killed their children? Talk about hypocrisy!
As for being "isolated passages", those passages which incite genocide outnumber those which condemn homosexuality, yet plenty of Christians seem to make a big deal of those.
the video claims that god changed his message to a more peacefull one as time passed. if the makers had actually read the god delusion they might recall an entire chapter on the shifting of society's morals over time. we know this occures in all civilizations, not just the ones who the biblical god chooses to talk to. he actually proves dawkins right and shows his narrow mindedness at the same time, simply laughable.
The comparison between the Allies and god doesn't fit. God (supposedly) has the power to accomplish his goals without having to slaughter innocent children.
However, even if the Allies killed innocent Jews to save lives, it wasn't moral for them to do so. Perhaps good came from it, but that does not negate the injustice of killing an innocent person.
Mm, sure, if the nazi's had gotten away with their crimes and got to write a history about the events I have little doubt they would happily apply the same slander to the people they killed as the isrealites did, post facto, to justify their own land grab related genocides. The same argument used by the romans when they conquered celtic areas, "our motive was to save lives, not to take lands, make slaves of the inhabitants and become wealthy by spilling the blood of our neighbors."
You must try and understand what God was trying to achieve. He needed a clean slate so He could give His Commandments to the people. This involved getting rid of any negative or persuasive opposition, so that His teachings would not be interfered with.
Also it is Gods will alone how the people killed by His cleansing will be judged, just because He physically had them removed does not mean they were judged harshly. Of course they may have also been judged harshly.
the Nazis would use similar arguments. Remember the Aryan race of Hitler. Anyway, Dawkins talks about a research done in Israel with school children. The people doing the research asked what the Israelites was wrong. Most of them said no. With another group of children in Israel they had the same scenario that all life was destroyed in that area but replaced the people killing and people being killed. This was in a non-judeochristian religious context. Most of them said that it was wrong.
This video is sickening me. The slaughter on Canaanites can in NO WAY be justified and I find it pathetic and horrific that this video even attempts to do so. So because they were sacrificing little children it was okay to invade the land and slaughter and kill everyone except female virgins? So in order to save those children and women from death and rape you should... kill them? And forcibly marry them (rape)?
Thanks for doing everything you can to emblazon the only rational line of thought, into the minds of the people, that god was created by man, not the other way around.
So... why did god order to kill little boys, and to have the little girls be "taken [by the soldiers] for themselves"? Whatever the crimes of the parents, the children didn't do anything wrong.
no puppetry since man was created with FREE WILL / choice ! so there IS no PUPPETMASTERING
to say such is ... ridiculous ... to not the what the bible says ... words words just babbled out from Dawkins and others that are truly unbiblically educated
And let's not forget that genocide only happened because God admittedly HARDENED the Pharao's heart. God wanted an excuse to kill off all the first borns. Disgusting.
Oh dear. See, there's no archaelogical evidence supporting the Exodus story; as such, it's quite possible that the Jews were doing this too. The most likely explanation is, the Hebrew religion demonized the Canaanites (Baal za'bar -> Baal Zebub and such.) In this demonization, the canaanites are blamed for all this badness, creating a dichotomy that stops the Hebrews from doing it anymore.
(Although the group sex probably was canaanite; fertility rituals.)
7By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men. 8But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. 9The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.
2 Kings 24:4 (The destruction of Judah)... "this came upon Judah, to remove them from His sight because of the sins of Manasseh, according to all that he had done, and because of the INNOCENT BLOOD that he had shed; for he had filled Jerusalem with INNOCENT BLOOD, which the Lord would not pardon."
The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully."
You didn't get it did you. Do you have any original thought? If it wasnt for the God of the old testament You might have been sacrificed to the Sun as a child!
What does that have to do WITH GOD BEING OMNIPOTENT? I'm asking you a question about the nature of divine being, not me being sacrificed to the sun. This is purely an epistemological statement that I'm trying to make. I'd say it's quite a simply question. IS GOD OMNIPOTENT: YES OR NO?
Actually Omnipotent means all powerful. Romans 7 deals with anyone questioning God. It doesn't matter if we like it or not. God is God and He is right and His will is for the best. Our finite mans can't grasp all His infinite plans.
Actually we sit back, stand, jump, run, walk, wait, or whatever God commands through His word the Bible. Nobody who has a relationship with God through His Son Jesus Christ sees God's commands as "absurd". Sometimes beyond our grasp to understand, and often we choose to sinfully not follow them as well as we are still in a body of sin. However they are never absurd, and are always profitable to Him and thus as He is our perfect and loving Father, for us as well. You as well if you choose Him.
"And I heard as it were the voice of a great multitude, and as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of mighty thunderings, saying, Alleluia: for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth."
God translated from Elohim which means judge Did you know Elohim was translated Judge five times in the bible. Exodus 7:1 Moses was called a God which means a judge. Psalms 82 many men are called Gods. Psalms 8:4 all Angels are called Gods. God is not a name.
Exodus 7:1 "See, I have made you like God to Pharaoh," Sorry but "Like a God" is not calling Moses God. The angels are called Gods but are never equated with Jehovah Elohim. the Hebrew term Elohim is more correctly translated as "spirit being" it.
"nâthan Elohim " My point has nothing to do with the word "like" and everything to do with "to Pharaoh"! The context is clearly that it was in the eyes of Pharaoh not that God transformed Moses into a God. This verse speaks of Pharaohs perception - Moses was not transformed.
Then drop the foolishness of "Like a God". My point is clear what ever Moses was to pharaoh that is what a God is! The definition of the Title Elohim is a Judge nothing more!
Yah told Moses he was made a God to Pharaoh and that is exactly what he was
No I have read Hebrew language scholar Dr Michael Heriser's thesis on the the word Elohim it means "spirit being". If you read the chapter that verse clearly speaks of Pharohs perception of Moses. All the miracles were done by God the father not Moses.
This is your problem you have no original thought. Noah Webster stated in his dictionary of English Psalm 82 was referring to Man! This is why anyone can pick up an concord Nance and look up Elohim and see it can refer to men! Dr Michael Heriser's was wrong if he excluded man as Elohim.
"For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:
I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.
Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit. "
And you cannot argue against Gods omnipotence without denying Scripture as I just quoted Revelation 19:6 which explicitly makes that claim.
The fact that God has allowed Satan to rule over the earth since man sinned is not evidence that he is not all powerful. Just that he is patient in allowing many to come to repentance.
Omnipotence is translated from the word pantokratōr which mean all ruling. Alexander the great would be called this as well. It does not mean what you are using it for.
Don't misunderstand me Yah is the only source of Power and the possessor of it. However he is not half the things people imagine him to be.
He's infinitely more than a mere human is capable of imagining. You are making the error of anthropomorphizing God. The reason you are able to play semantics games to minimize Gods glory is that human language fails to describe him .
God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?
First of all, even if the phrase "Son of Man" is a reference to Jesus' humanity, it is not a denial of His deity. By becoming a man, Jesus did not cease being God. The incarnation of Christ did not involve the subtraction of deity, but the addition of humanity. Jesus clearly claimed to be God on many occasions (Matthew 16:16,17; John 8:58; 10:30).
++no person has caused a genocide in the name of atheism++
You're right it's even worse. An atheist has no moral standards to live up to. Atheists kill when it suits their purposes. The survival of the fittest. And they're good at mass murdering people even better than all religions combined.
Stalin, Hitler, Pol pot, Mao, Kim Jong I and II, etc......
at which point have atheists generally killed for "survival of the fittest" ?also ,when has the fear of god ,ever stopped religious followers from killing in acts of war and terrorism?
jassi stop believing what you are fed via media! rather talk to indiviuals ... if you do not have the chance to talk to others from outside your own country, then take moneymaking "news" and public "education" with a BUCKET of salt
Excellent media. The sheer amount of evil of those who work to deny God and teach others to do so never ceases to astound me. Anyone who calls themselves an atheist lives a life of denail in seeking to disassociate themselves from the long history of atheists, idoleters, and peagans who have been the purveyors of such acts.
This video neither fully quotes nor address Dawkins' aforementioned arguments. The video would do equally well to just mention the passage in Matthew about lilies of the field as proof of the morality of Christianity.
Any scripture that praises blind loyalty and promises an eternity of painful retribution for the slightest transgressions is fundamentally flawed, for such passages have always and will continue to encourage the vengeful to cloak their personal fury with righteous indignation.
this vid is a big pile of bull plop. the quote at 1:57 is absolutely evil. its both implies evil and directly command evil acts, all done in the name of the lord.
Def a better video, at first I didnt think anything of the last video, but this is def. a better presentation... sometimes it hard to accept criticism but kudos on being mature enough to handle it, God Bless!
You seem to be missing the point that God is omnipotent. Would Jewish leaders have asked for the camps to be bombed if they instead had the power to simply liberate all the prisoners, and make all the buildings vanish?
typical apologetic crap.Dawkins presented no strawman,his description was accurate.you efforts to excuse the evil of the bible is the only dishonesty here.
that's what we call justice, that's what the military and the police are fighting for, they are stopping criminals and killers to avoid that you and your family be killed, but I guess the brain of Atheists can't handle to much information as an evolved ape ...
that is most certainly not what we call justice.police and military are not allowed to target and kill children.god specifically commanded his servants to do so.when the military accidentally kills civilian children it is regrettable and unavoidable collateral damage,with god it has bean a military objective.comments like yours make me sick
The military objective was to totally eliminate the threat for their safety, God by definition is omniscient, if he gave such order it's because he knows that in the future that practice could come again.
That's interresting to read the Atheist negationism ...
if god thinks infants are a threat his omniscience is on the fritz.the Israelites committed tribal genocide in the name of an imaginary being,like all the others that have ever committed tribal genocide in the name of their gods.the only difference between the Israelites and everybody else that did it,is they have people like you around to make bad excuses for them.
"if god thinks infants are a threat his omniscience is on the fritz."
What ????
Is omniscience is absolute like is being, those infants are a threat because they would commit abomination.
What genocide are you talking about ?
Listen to the video.
You are the kind of people who would refuse to fight Nazism or any awful thing and you believe that your freedom of speech is a magic gift that came free.
Total moral relativism and lack of historical background.
what,were they genetically hardwired to commit evil by god?they certainly could not have been predestined to do so since god all ready knew he was going to have them killed before they could ever make those decisions.the truth remains that they were innocent children killed in an act of tribal genocide common to the times.everything else is humans using religion as an excuse for their evil,some habits never go out of style.i watched the video,it was crap.
"what,were they genetically hardwired to commit evil by god?"
???What it have to do with genetic ?
If their custom and their practice would have survived their children would have commit the same atrocities.
"they certainly could not have been predestined to do so"
For God there is no past, present, future what He knows what they would do in an absolute way and he decreed to kill them, except if you are omniscient yourself, you have absolutely no argument.
"whats it have to do with genetics?"well i am hard pressed to imagine how the infants and young children could all be expected to be innately a threat unless they had some sort of "evil monster genetic coding".the isrealites could have adopted them and raised them as their own.there is no good excuse for targeting and killing children.the"they would have all grown up to be evil"argument is just rubbish.
"You are the kind of people who would refuse to fight Nazism or any awful thing and you believe that your freedom of speech is a magic gift that came free.
Total moral relativism and lack of historical background."impressive load of crap assumptions to pull out of your backside.
i think they are monsters.the adults they killed may have well been as monstrous as the isrealites themselves,but there is no excuse for killing infants and children.and in killing infants and children they clearly showed they were monsters.
++when the military accidentally kills civilian children it is regrettable++
It's funny though that the ONLY reason why you think this is regrettable is because of the judeo/Christian background you were raised in. Your(and mine) european(romans, celts, germans, etc.) weren't that fine tuned....
Even Hitler stated once:
"Conscience is a Jewish invention. It is a blemish, like circumcision.
++when the military accidentally kills civilian children it is regrettable++
It's funny though that the ONLY reason why you think this is regrettable is because of the judeo/Christian background you were raised in. Your(and mine) european(romans, celts, germans, etc.) ancestors weren't that fine tuned....
Even Hitler stated once:
"Conscience is a Jewish invention. It is a blemish, like circumcision.
no.the only reason i think it is regrettable is that i have the capacity for reason and empathy.both of which are not limited to your religious tradition.what is not funny,but certainly sad,is those that defend this evil do in fact do so only because their Judeo/Christian background.
"That's ONLY because the Living GOD created the human conscience."an easy claim to make,but one that has no supporting evidence.and considering that your god is ok with the mass slaughter of children,and i am not,i would say that if anything it is clear that your god has nothing to do with the crafting of my conscience.your religion has genocide and slavery in it's history,it clearly has no authoritative moral source.
it dumped almost all it's supposedly god given rule in order to become more appealing to the Romans,then attached it's self to their political power structure.
If someone kills my child I get to kill theirs, is that what your talking about? Ultimately the Israelites did not need to kill them, they could have simply taken them in and that's what makes this so hypocritical, kill children to protect children. Those children had no understanding, no ability to make decisions and were punished in a brutal fashion for something they didn't do. If our military did anything similar I hope you would stand against it. Stop trying to justify your gods atrocities
Strange how I didn't mention slavery but if your god said take them into slavery you would argue for that too. The point is what is the justification for killing children that could not defend themselves or make any type of decisions and if the motive as stated in the video was to stop pagans from killing children why kill their children, isn't that hypocritical.
Are you kidding me? Since when does police kill children and burn down entire towns in order to "save" children from being killed?? You must be smoking something.
This has been flagged as spam show
Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given 2 the profane masses is another useful idiot 4 Jesuit machinations
Jesuitical; pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuit Order completely altered the education system 2 suit their Evo-Hoax Agenda to discredit the Bible
Papal Rome cant have their Counter Reformation 2nd Dark Age DESPOTISM until Bible is destroyed
SpencerBenedict2nd 4 months ago
It's funny that this video accuses Dawkins of strawmanning the Bible, when the Bible itself is strawmanning the Canaanites.
coltharpnicholas 11 months ago
@coltharpnicholas well said!!!
thoughtpattern0 8 months ago
Did you notice how you showed that God is genocidal. You tell us how in the Bible God commands his followers to kill all the Canaanites, doesn't matter if God had a reason for it or not it's still genocide. And really an all knowing, all power Gods best solution for the Canaanites is to have them all killed. He couldn't go down and show them that they were wrong and he was the "One True God." He could of saved a bunch of people.
num1otori143 1 year ago
So Dawkins DOES believe in God then, even though he doesn't sound as if he likes Him. After what he stated, I don't expect God likes Dawkins much either, I know whose side I would rather be on. Another good video.
gillettsibert1 1 year ago
@gillettsibert1 So were from that did you get that Richard Dawkins believes in God. The passage he reads from his book he clearly states that God is a fictional character and if it's the "yeah" at the end of his clip, he most likely meant "Yeah that is what I think of this fictional character." It would be same if you said how much you hated the The Joker and I asked "Is that what you think of him" and you replied "Yeah" at any point did you say The Joker is real, answer: NEVER.
num1otori143 1 year ago
@num1otori143
I knew exactly what Dawkins was saying, but he clearly has no idea of what he is saying himself, bit like you really.
gillettsibert1 1 year ago
@gillettsibert1 Well in an interview Richard Dawkins talked about a scale of atheism, 1-7, 1 being 100% belief that there is a god, 7 being 100% there is no god and 4 being there is a 50% chance there is a god and 50% chance there isn't a god, Dawkins put himself at 6.999, so no he doesn't believe in a god. You also said that both Dawkins and I have no idea what we are saying, could you please tell me were you think him and I are mistaken, I'd like to know.
num1otori143 1 year ago
Comment removed
gillettsibert1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@num1otori143
There are no calculated chances that God exists or doesn't exist. In other words He exists 100% or He doesn't 100%. Dawkins sets out to completely destroy the "integrity" of God by abusing Him with pure hatred, as evidenced by the opening passage in his book, that implies that he "believes" in God, even though he states He is a fictional character. Just listen to the way he describes God. I can't see how you can hate someone so much, that doesn't exist, with so much venom....
gillettsibert1 1 year ago
@num1otori143
Whether you believe or not doesn't make any difference to God if He exists, so Dawkins is playing a very dangerous game. If God exists, then so does satan, and what Dawkins states is exactly what satan would say. And even the devil believes in God. God exists 100% in my view, but it seems you are defending Dawkins, who will oneday have to give account of his description of his Creator to His face. I am entitled to have my view, Dawkins has no right to persecute those who believe.
gillettsibert1 1 year ago
@gillettsibert1 First, the scale of belief was on what the chances someone thinks a god exists not if there is one or not, I wasn't very clear on that so I can understand how you miss understood it. My original intent was to figure out why you thought Dawkins believed in God and point out how you were wrong but sure I'll defend Dawkins and his ideas. So just because Dawkins has some passion about what he writes means he believes in it, many fiction writers write there stories with a passion...
num1otori143 1 year ago
@gillettsibert1 ...does that mean they believe in everything they write. Or is it that Dawkings knows what is in the Bible in that case every fictional book you've read you now belive is true. God is more then normal fictional character, because millions of people belief he exists and some are willing to kill because of this beleif, so a bit of passion is needed to hopefully get though to these people.
num1otori143 1 year ago
@gillettsibert1 ...As far as the "integrity" of god, have you read the bible? If not you should. If you have please re-read Deuteronomy 22: 29-29, for starters. I can't speak for but I don't hate God, it's really difficult to hate something that you don't believe exists. And how exactly is Dawkins persecuting you, or other Christians?
num1otori143 1 year ago
@num1otori143
Maybe I've missed the point here, but I don't see what this passage Deuteronomy 22: 29, has to do with the integrity of God. Perhaps "persecute" is a bit strong but Dawkins is an outspoken atheist, and on many occasions his insults to those that put their faith in God, borders on persecution, as he would eliminate all these beliefs if he could. I agree belief in God should not be an excuse to kill, but atheistical regimes throughout history have been responsible for many......
gillettsibert1 1 year ago
@num1otori143
...atrocities too, not that I'm justifying anything here. It seems that atheists quite often use that argument about those that believe in God, that so many have died because of religions, and while I agree that there are millions who will use that as an excuse, it is no excuse. Dawkins, as far as I'm concerned is running scared, and he wants many to follow him, and many do and will continue to do so, because without God's existence...you can do what you want.
gillettsibert1 1 year ago
What Deuteronomy prescribes for non-Canaanite enemies, enslavement and mass-killing of males in towns that don't surrender, is "mericful" in much the same way that the treatment that Exodus describes the Jews receiving in Egypt is "merciful." It is arguably less "merciful" than the way emperor Augustus tried to rule Judea (before later emperors like Caligula and Nero were invovled in things like destroying the Temple), actually dismissing Herod Archelaus after the people complained about him.
tifforo1 1 year ago
Slightly off-topic: it is an irony to cite "Expelled" while accusing others of poor scholarship.
On-topic, the comparison between the Allied Powers and God is imperfect because the Allies had few options under those circumstances other than bombs, while an omnipotent God would have an unlimited array of options besides genocide for solving problems.
tifforo1 1 year ago
The "character of God" does not exist other than in verse. There is only dogma.
drumrnva 1 year ago
"Atheists who use the Dawkins fallacy to degenerate the character of God are guilty of poor scholarship."
Christians that agree with the contention of this video are guilty of not reading the Bible.
TheGodlessGuitarist 1 year ago
dawkins was talking about godly directives. not wars of men in the past or wars in the present and uttimately in the future. You dont need the bible to justify wars but it certainly a good tool to placate the minds of the warrior that THEY are right and correct in taking part in war.
TheAmazinCarpathian 1 year ago
I know enough to say, that history is filled with terror. Modern world has terror. But how does all this overturn anybody who recognizes how biblical ethics and justice are not ideal in any modern fashion. Dawkins has proven controversial on those points... but we are not going to stone for heresy.
granddad2002 1 year ago
and you think one evil makes another right?
parents burned their children, so killing the children is ok?
Strikesnake1994 1 year ago
funny that such scripture keeps mentioning other gods. as if he's the youngest sibling and just wants attention. good thing this is all fiction or else this would be even more disturbing.
mistereveready 1 year ago
You forget one thing. God supposedly has unlimited resources & options at his fingertips. Not only did he create the Canaanites, he also had the foreknowledge of the fact that they would become such a scourge on humanity that he would ultimately have to destroy them thus spurring your ridiculous defense of God. Question: What kind of intelligent being would create something only to have to destroy it knowingly before he even created it? Utterly ridiculous.
Celticking36 1 year ago
Heh, as a pre-note, I love it when a church's commercial states that their message never changes.
At first I thought this was just a rather disgusting attempt to apologize Christian genocide as OK when we do it. But then I realized that by providing the Nazi example in the beginning, and then describing Christian justification as EXACTLY THE SAME AS NAZI JUSTIFICATION, the video was just saying that Nazi's and Christians are the same, morally. Awesome subtle satire, or oblivious authors!
spacesergeant101 1 year ago
you people talk of human sacrifice like its a bad thing
your entire religion is based around a human sacrifice....its insanity
you all believe you have a scape goat in jesus....perhaps i can sacrifice someone else to cover my sins hmm?
its fucking sick, you people are disgusting and theres nothing moral about you saddistic assholes
nikolasramsay 2 years ago
So, the order to kill Canaanite children is justified because the Canaanites killed their children? Talk about hypocrisy!
As for being "isolated passages", those passages which incite genocide outnumber those which condemn homosexuality, yet plenty of Christians seem to make a big deal of those.
conradleviston 2 years ago
You just don't understand Christian thinking!
....me niether...
RONLAST 2 years ago
the video claims that god changed his message to a more peacefull one as time passed. if the makers had actually read the god delusion they might recall an entire chapter on the shifting of society's morals over time. we know this occures in all civilizations, not just the ones who the biblical god chooses to talk to. he actually proves dawkins right and shows his narrow mindedness at the same time, simply laughable.
largegrainsofsalt 3 years ago
The comparison between the Allies and god doesn't fit. God (supposedly) has the power to accomplish his goals without having to slaughter innocent children.
However, even if the Allies killed innocent Jews to save lives, it wasn't moral for them to do so. Perhaps good came from it, but that does not negate the injustice of killing an innocent person.
circlekloser 3 years ago
So, you're trying to make a point about cherry picking the bible by, uhh, cherry picking the bible?
scourfish 3 years ago
Mm, sure, if the nazi's had gotten away with their crimes and got to write a history about the events I have little doubt they would happily apply the same slander to the people they killed as the isrealites did, post facto, to justify their own land grab related genocides. The same argument used by the romans when they conquered celtic areas, "our motive was to save lives, not to take lands, make slaves of the inhabitants and become wealthy by spilling the blood of our neighbors."
corvis74 3 years ago
You must try and understand what God was trying to achieve. He needed a clean slate so He could give His Commandments to the people. This involved getting rid of any negative or persuasive opposition, so that His teachings would not be interfered with.
Also it is Gods will alone how the people killed by His cleansing will be judged, just because He physically had them removed does not mean they were judged harshly. Of course they may have also been judged harshly.
1badfokker 3 years ago
the Nazis would use similar arguments. Remember the Aryan race of Hitler. Anyway, Dawkins talks about a research done in Israel with school children. The people doing the research asked what the Israelites was wrong. Most of them said no. With another group of children in Israel they had the same scenario that all life was destroyed in that area but replaced the people killing and people being killed. This was in a non-judeochristian religious context. Most of them said that it was wrong.
hobbitsarecool 2 years ago
This video is sickening me. The slaughter on Canaanites can in NO WAY be justified and I find it pathetic and horrific that this video even attempts to do so. So because they were sacrificing little children it was okay to invade the land and slaughter and kill everyone except female virgins? So in order to save those children and women from death and rape you should... kill them? And forcibly marry them (rape)?
Bullshit.
SupaAmi 3 years ago
Wow, and Dawkins argument is a strawman?
Thanks for doing everything you can to emblazon the only rational line of thought, into the minds of the people, that god was created by man, not the other way around.
bckilldz 3 years ago
So... why did god order to kill little boys, and to have the little girls be "taken [by the soldiers] for themselves"? Whatever the crimes of the parents, the children didn't do anything wrong.
philip1201 3 years ago
no puppetry since man was created with FREE WILL / choice ! so there IS no PUPPETMASTERING
to say such is ... ridiculous ... to not the what the bible says ... words words just babbled out from Dawkins and others that are truly unbiblically educated
FREE WILL does not equal PUPPETRY
humanedomain 3 years ago
Indeed this is very true... i need to like memorize the links 2 your vids when im in Atheist discussions
JRocka114 3 years ago
I'd also like to see you try and justify the final plague of Egypt. Essentially, it was genocide. Pointless genocide.
PrometheusWithLight 3 years ago
And let's not forget that genocide only happened because God admittedly HARDENED the Pharao's heart. God wanted an excuse to kill off all the first borns. Disgusting.
SupaAmi 3 years ago
Oh dear. See, there's no archaelogical evidence supporting the Exodus story; as such, it's quite possible that the Jews were doing this too. The most likely explanation is, the Hebrew religion demonized the Canaanites (Baal za'bar -> Baal Zebub and such.) In this demonization, the canaanites are blamed for all this badness, creating a dichotomy that stops the Hebrews from doing it anymore.
(Although the group sex probably was canaanite; fertility rituals.)
PrometheusWithLight 3 years ago
2 Peter 3:7-9
7By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men. 8But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. 9The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.
bigwhammyRocks 3 years ago
Modern child sacrifice/infanticide = abortion.
Obama = Manasseh
2 Kings 24:4 (The destruction of Judah)... "this came upon Judah, to remove them from His sight because of the sins of Manasseh, according to all that he had done, and because of the INNOCENT BLOOD that he had shed; for he had filled Jerusalem with INNOCENT BLOOD, which the Lord would not pardon."
God, have mercy on us now...
carolineislands 3 years ago
The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully."
7Row7enn7 3 years ago
You didn't get it did you. Do you have any original thought? If it wasnt for the God of the old testament You might have been sacrificed to the Sun as a child!
ScriptureAlone 3 years ago
...
What does that have to do WITH GOD BEING OMNIPOTENT? I'm asking you a question about the nature of divine being, not me being sacrificed to the sun. This is purely an epistemological statement that I'm trying to make. I'd say it's quite a simply question. IS GOD OMNIPOTENT: YES OR NO?
7Row7enn7 3 years ago
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?
7Row7enn7 3 years ago
7row7 - is God a puppetmaster? NO
humanedomain 3 years ago
Well ofcourse any God would be. God is supposedly omnipotent, meaning that all things are "puppet" to God.
7Row7enn7 3 years ago
Actually Omnipotent means all powerful. Romans 7 deals with anyone questioning God. It doesn't matter if we like it or not. God is God and He is right and His will is for the best. Our finite mans can't grasp all His infinite plans.
JesusLoveMinistries 3 years ago
So just sit back and don't question, no matter how absurd that command is?
7Row7enn7 3 years ago
Actually we sit back, stand, jump, run, walk, wait, or whatever God commands through His word the Bible. Nobody who has a relationship with God through His Son Jesus Christ sees God's commands as "absurd". Sometimes beyond our grasp to understand, and often we choose to sinfully not follow them as well as we are still in a body of sin. However they are never absurd, and are always profitable to Him and thus as He is our perfect and loving Father, for us as well. You as well if you choose Him.
JesusLoveMinistries 3 years ago
Does the Bible say Yah is Omnipotent?
I think you fell for mainstream traditions.
Yah said "It repenteth me that I made man"
Yah said "now I know you love me"
Yah said "Who told you you were naked"
The bible does not say half the things believed in the Church!
ScriptureAlone 3 years ago
Are you saying that God is not omnipotent....?
7Row7enn7 3 years ago
Does the bible say he is?
Yah said "It repenteth me that I made man"
Yah said "now I know you love me"
Yah said "Who told you you were naked"
He wasn't Kidding when he said he created us in his image.
ScriptureAlone 3 years ago
"Does the bible say he is?"
Yes it does!
Revelation 19:6 (King James Version)
"And I heard as it were the voice of a great multitude, and as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of mighty thunderings, saying, Alleluia: for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth."
bigwhammyRocks 3 years ago
and then he stops talking lol
lilchrizz123 3 years ago
Are you saying that God is not God? God by definition has to be omnipotent or it's not God. That's a paradox.
7Row7enn7 3 years ago
God translated from Elohim which means judge Did you know Elohim was translated Judge five times in the bible. Exodus 7:1 Moses was called a God which means a judge. Psalms 82 many men are called Gods. Psalms 8:4 all Angels are called Gods. God is not a name.
ScriptureAlone 3 years ago
Exodus 7:1 "See, I have made you like God to Pharaoh," Sorry but "Like a God" is not calling Moses God. The angels are called Gods but are never equated with Jehovah Elohim. the Hebrew term Elohim is more correctly translated as "spirit being" it.
bigwhammyRocks 3 years ago
Exodus 7:1 "See, I have made you like God to Pharaoh,"
You fell for that one?
nâthan Elohim
Made you God
Nathan does not translate Like!
ScriptureAlone 3 years ago
"nâthan Elohim " My point has nothing to do with the word "like" and everything to do with "to Pharaoh"! The context is clearly that it was in the eyes of Pharaoh not that God transformed Moses into a God. This verse speaks of Pharaohs perception - Moses was not transformed.
bigwhammyRocks 3 years ago
Then drop the foolishness of "Like a God". My point is clear what ever Moses was to pharaoh that is what a God is! The definition of the Title Elohim is a Judge nothing more!
Yah told Moses he was made a God to Pharaoh and that is exactly what he was
ScriptureAlone 3 years ago
No I have read Hebrew language scholar Dr Michael Heriser's thesis on the the word Elohim it means "spirit being". If you read the chapter that verse clearly speaks of Pharohs perception of Moses. All the miracles were done by God the father not Moses.
bigwhammyRocks 3 years ago
This is your problem you have no original thought. Noah Webster stated in his dictionary of English Psalm 82 was referring to Man! This is why anyone can pick up an concord Nance and look up Elohim and see it can refer to men! Dr Michael Heriser's was wrong if he excluded man as Elohim.
ScriptureAlone 3 years ago
Your heresy is nothing new...
"For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:
I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.
Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit. "
(Isaiah 14:13-15)
bigwhammyRocks 3 years ago
And you cannot argue against Gods omnipotence without denying Scripture as I just quoted Revelation 19:6 which explicitly makes that claim.
The fact that God has allowed Satan to rule over the earth since man sinned is not evidence that he is not all powerful. Just that he is patient in allowing many to come to repentance.
bigwhammyRocks 3 years ago
Omnipotence is translated from the word pantokratōr which mean all ruling. Alexander the great would be called this as well. It does not mean what you are using it for.
Don't misunderstand me Yah is the only source of Power and the possessor of it. However he is not half the things people imagine him to be.
ScriptureAlone 3 years ago
Omnipotence is too weak of a term.
He's infinitely more than a mere human is capable of imagining. You are making the error of anthropomorphizing God. The reason you are able to play semantics games to minimize Gods glory is that human language fails to describe him .
Num 23:19
God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?
bigwhammyRocks 3 years ago
Thats great now just believe the scripture you posted. God is not a man or a son of man!
Jesus is a man and a son of man!
ScriptureAlone 3 years ago
Now you are trying to deny Christ as well?
First of all, even if the phrase "Son of Man" is a reference to Jesus' humanity, it is not a denial of His deity. By becoming a man, Jesus did not cease being God. The incarnation of Christ did not involve the subtraction of deity, but the addition of humanity. Jesus clearly claimed to be God on many occasions (Matthew 16:16,17; John 8:58; 10:30).
bigwhammyRocks 3 years ago
No it seems you can't believe the scripture you present.
ScriptureAlone 3 years ago
what people fail to remember is that when an atheist kills a person, it isnt a killing by an atheist unless it is in the name of atheism.
no person has caused a genocide in the name of atheism.
unlike religion.
this argument is void
jassi4010709 3 years ago
++no person has caused a genocide in the name of atheism++
You're right it's even worse. An atheist has no moral standards to live up to. Atheists kill when it suits their purposes. The survival of the fittest. And they're good at mass murdering people even better than all religions combined.
Stalin, Hitler, Pol pot, Mao, Kim Jong I and II, etc......
JESUS IS LORD!!
IchtusDeogloria 3 years ago
your argument makes no sense.
at which point have atheists generally killed for "survival of the fittest" ?also ,when has the fear of god ,ever stopped religious followers from killing in acts of war and terrorism?
jassi4010709 3 years ago
jassi stop believing what you are fed via media! rather talk to indiviuals ... if you do not have the chance to talk to others from outside your own country, then take moneymaking "news" and public "education" with a BUCKET of salt
humanedomain 3 years ago
maybe you would like to open your eyes and actually read what i wrote,than just babble on about a subject that i didnt even mention.
jassi4010709 3 years ago
Excellent media. The sheer amount of evil of those who work to deny God and teach others to do so never ceases to astound me. Anyone who calls themselves an atheist lives a life of denail in seeking to disassociate themselves from the long history of atheists, idoleters, and peagans who have been the purveyors of such acts.
NephilimFree 3 years ago
This video neither fully quotes nor address Dawkins' aforementioned arguments. The video would do equally well to just mention the passage in Matthew about lilies of the field as proof of the morality of Christianity.
Any scripture that praises blind loyalty and promises an eternity of painful retribution for the slightest transgressions is fundamentally flawed, for such passages have always and will continue to encourage the vengeful to cloak their personal fury with righteous indignation.
deadacc29343 3 years ago
Great job! Better than the original. God bless.
Blogrich55 3 years ago
this vid is a big pile of bull plop. the quote at 1:57 is absolutely evil. its both implies evil and directly command evil acts, all done in the name of the lord.
errskin 3 years ago
Def a better video, at first I didnt think anything of the last video, but this is def. a better presentation... sometimes it hard to accept criticism but kudos on being mature enough to handle it, God Bless!
jesseakers 3 years ago
Wonderful Video.
God Bless.
SavedTru8 3 years ago
Today ritual human sacrifice is code named "choice"
OriginalRiffMeister 3 years ago
You seem to be missing the point that God is omnipotent. Would Jewish leaders have asked for the camps to be bombed if they instead had the power to simply liberate all the prisoners, and make all the buildings vanish?
CameraManly 3 years ago
typical apologetic crap.Dawkins presented no strawman,his description was accurate.you efforts to excuse the evil of the bible is the only dishonesty here.
NemoUtopian 3 years ago
Does anyone see the hypocrisy in this, god had children killed to prevent pagans from killing children.
sweatytoothmadman 3 years ago
that's what we call justice, that's what the military and the police are fighting for, they are stopping criminals and killers to avoid that you and your family be killed, but I guess the brain of Atheists can't handle to much information as an evolved ape ...
Dangelooo 3 years ago
that is most certainly not what we call justice.police and military are not allowed to target and kill children.god specifically commanded his servants to do so.when the military accidentally kills civilian children it is regrettable and unavoidable collateral damage,with god it has bean a military objective.comments like yours make me sick
NemoUtopian 3 years ago
"with god it has bean a military objective"
The military objective was to totally eliminate the threat for their safety, God by definition is omniscient, if he gave such order it's because he knows that in the future that practice could come again.
That's interresting to read the Atheist negationism ...
Dangelooo 3 years ago
if god thinks infants are a threat his omniscience is on the fritz.the Israelites committed tribal genocide in the name of an imaginary being,like all the others that have ever committed tribal genocide in the name of their gods.the only difference between the Israelites and everybody else that did it,is they have people like you around to make bad excuses for them.
NemoUtopian 3 years ago
"if god thinks infants are a threat his omniscience is on the fritz."
What ????
Is omniscience is absolute like is being, those infants are a threat because they would commit abomination.
What genocide are you talking about ?
Listen to the video.
You are the kind of people who would refuse to fight Nazism or any awful thing and you believe that your freedom of speech is a magic gift that came free.
Total moral relativism and lack of historical background.
Dangelooo 3 years ago
what,were they genetically hardwired to commit evil by god?they certainly could not have been predestined to do so since god all ready knew he was going to have them killed before they could ever make those decisions.the truth remains that they were innocent children killed in an act of tribal genocide common to the times.everything else is humans using religion as an excuse for their evil,some habits never go out of style.i watched the video,it was crap.
NemoUtopian 3 years ago
"what,were they genetically hardwired to commit evil by god?"
???What it have to do with genetic ?
If their custom and their practice would have survived their children would have commit the same atrocities.
"they certainly could not have been predestined to do so"
For God there is no past, present, future what He knows what they would do in an absolute way and he decreed to kill them, except if you are omniscient yourself, you have absolutely no argument.
Dangelooo 3 years ago
"whats it have to do with genetics?"well i am hard pressed to imagine how the infants and young children could all be expected to be innately a threat unless they had some sort of "evil monster genetic coding".the isrealites could have adopted them and raised them as their own.there is no good excuse for targeting and killing children.the"they would have all grown up to be evil"argument is just rubbish.
NemoUtopian 3 years ago
"You are the kind of people who would refuse to fight Nazism or any awful thing and you believe that your freedom of speech is a magic gift that came free.
Total moral relativism and lack of historical background."impressive load of crap assumptions to pull out of your backside.
NemoUtopian 3 years ago
That's based on what you've said.
They were innocent people killed by bad people on your perspective when all the story say the opposite.
Dangelooo 3 years ago
i think they are monsters.the adults they killed may have well been as monstrous as the isrealites themselves,but there is no excuse for killing infants and children.and in killing infants and children they clearly showed they were monsters.
NemoUtopian 3 years ago
++when the military accidentally kills civilian children it is regrettable++
It's funny though that the ONLY reason why you think this is regrettable is because of the judeo/Christian background you were raised in. Your(and mine) european(romans, celts, germans, etc.) weren't that fine tuned....
Even Hitler stated once:
"Conscience is a Jewish invention. It is a blemish, like circumcision.
JESUS IS LORD!!
IchtusDeogloria 3 years ago
++when the military accidentally kills civilian children it is regrettable++
It's funny though that the ONLY reason why you think this is regrettable is because of the judeo/Christian background you were raised in. Your(and mine) european(romans, celts, germans, etc.) ancestors weren't that fine tuned....
Even Hitler stated once:
"Conscience is a Jewish invention. It is a blemish, like circumcision.
JESUS IS LORD!!
IchtusDeogloria 3 years ago
no.the only reason i think it is regrettable is that i have the capacity for reason and empathy.both of which are not limited to your religious tradition.what is not funny,but certainly sad,is those that defend this evil do in fact do so only because their Judeo/Christian background.
NemoUtopian 3 years ago
++that i have the capacity for reason and empathy++
That's ONLY because the Living GOD created the human conscience.
But sadly enough we(you included) like evil that much that we need constantly to be reminded what's good or what's bad.
The Judeo/Christian religion did/does just that.
Like stated before cause you seem to have a dislection problem:
'Your(and mine) european(romans, celts, germans, etc.) ancestors weren't that fine tuned....' The survival of the fittest!
JESUS IS LORD!!
IchtusDeogloria 3 years ago
"That's ONLY because the Living GOD created the human conscience."an easy claim to make,but one that has no supporting evidence.and considering that your god is ok with the mass slaughter of children,and i am not,i would say that if anything it is clear that your god has nothing to do with the crafting of my conscience.your religion has genocide and slavery in it's history,it clearly has no authoritative moral source.
NemoUtopian 3 years ago
"The survival of the fittest!"truer then you know.
in nature what tends to survive is what is most adaptive,and your religion has a long history of being a highly adaptive beast red in tooth and claw.
NemoUtopian 3 years ago
it dumped almost all it's supposedly god given rule in order to become more appealing to the Romans,then attached it's self to their political power structure.
NemoUtopian 3 years ago
it oppressed other religions,and even dissenting Christian opinions and beliefs.
NemoUtopian 3 years ago
++your religion has a long history of being a highly adaptive beast red in tooth and claw.++
All other religions including atheism produced cruelty and 'survival of the fittest'.
Atheists/evolutionists like Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Hitler, etc. killed more humans than all the religions combined.
My religion is 100% perfect however the people who claim to be Christians always sabotage......
AGAIN:
You're ignorant of the fact that your morals come from Chriustianity....
JESUS IS LORD!!
IchtusDeogloria 3 years ago
If someone kills my child I get to kill theirs, is that what your talking about? Ultimately the Israelites did not need to kill them, they could have simply taken them in and that's what makes this so hypocritical, kill children to protect children. Those children had no understanding, no ability to make decisions and were punished in a brutal fashion for something they didn't do. If our military did anything similar I hope you would stand against it. Stop trying to justify your gods atrocities
sweatytoothmadman 3 years ago
"If someone kills my child I get to kill theirs, is that what your talking about?"
No.
"they could have simply taken them in and that's what makes this so hypocritical"
Slavery rather than a genocide ...
Dangelooo 3 years ago
Strange how I didn't mention slavery but if your god said take them into slavery you would argue for that too. The point is what is the justification for killing children that could not defend themselves or make any type of decisions and if the motive as stated in the video was to stop pagans from killing children why kill their children, isn't that hypocritical.
sweatytoothmadman 3 years ago
How dumb you are ?
Did you even know what you are talking about ?
Do you have any knowledge about that region and any historical background.
"if the motive as stated in the video was to stop pagans from killing children why kill their children, isn't that hypocritical. "
That's not what the video said, and apparently pagans don't kill babies anymore except in our society and they call that abortion ...
Are pro-life ?
Dangelooo 3 years ago
Are you kidding me? Since when does police kill children and burn down entire towns in order to "save" children from being killed?? You must be smoking something.
SupaAmi 3 years ago
Why are you re-posting this?
sweatytoothmadman 3 years ago
Why are you re-posting this?
sweatytoothmadman 3 years ago
Where do you reference that the Canaanite Alter at Megiddo was used for "Burning Children" ?
GregQzag 3 years ago
Well done Brother......
Christians ought to avoid personal attacks....
Brilliant message......
5*/Fav
JESUS IS LORD!!
IchtusDeogloria 3 years ago