No Christian atrocities?

Recently, I had a discussion with a theist. They claimed that the reason we see muslim extremists is because it is nothing more than a "false religion" and that such atrocities would not occur in Christianity.

However, I contend that this is not the case at all. What about the crusades? The spanish inquisition? What about the Salem witch trials? Those instances aside, there are more than enough verses in the bible that can be used to justify horrendous acts. Here are just a few:

Joshua seven verse fifteen calls for human sacrifice for those who have "broken the covenant of the lord." In Second Kings chapter twenty-three verses twenty through twenty five, Josiah burns pagan priests on their own altars as a sacrifice to god. In Deuteronomy chapter thirteen verses thirteen through nineteen it commands one to "put the entire town to the torch as a burnt offering to the lord your god." There is quite more than just human sacrifice, though. God commands you to kill just as in the koran. Deuteronomy seventeen verse twelve says that those who reject the verdict of a priest must be put to death. Exodus twenty-two verse seventeen says you should kill witches. We learn in Leviticus twenty verse thirteen that homosexuals must be put to death. And in verse twenty-seven that fortune tellers must also be stoned to death. Anyone who curses their father or mother must be put to death in Leviticus twenty verse nine. In the very next verse, it says that anyone found guilty of adultery must be put to death. In Leviticus chapter twenty-one verse nine it calls for death for fornication. In Second Chronicles chapter fifteen verses twelve through thirteen they killed anyone who did not believe in the judeo-christian god.

n Zechariah thrirteen verse three it calls for parents to kill their children if they are false prophets. Even worse, in Deuteronomy thirteen verses thirteen through nineteen it says to kill all the inhabitants of a town if one person believes in another god. We are told to kill women who are not virgins on their wedding night in Duetoronomy twenty-two verses twenty through twenty one. In Exodus thirty-one verses twelve through fifteen it says we should even kill someone for working on the sabbath! Furthermore, In Isaiah fourteen verse twenty one we are told to kill the sons of those who have sinned. How cruel!Some of my favorite verses are Jeremiah fifty one verse twenty two, in which it calls to kill men and women, young and old alike. But by far, the most horrendous one I think is Isaiah thirteen, verses fifteen through eighteen in which it says, "their little children will be dashed to death right before their eyes." As well as "The attacking armies will shoot down the young people with arrows."In essence, god is commanding people to kill children in his name. And if you think that you are off the hook, lets look at another verse. In Jeremiah forty-eight verse ten it states: "Cursed be he who does the Lords work remissly, cursed he who holds back his sword from blood."

So the bible clearly states that you HAVE to kill. Cursed is he who holds back his sword from blood indeed. In summary, I have provided several examples of verses in which atrocities not only can be justified, but are even more so commanded by god himself. It is quite possible that one might read the bible and commit horrendous acts in the name of religion.

Cheers

Category:

Education

Tags:

• atheism
• atheist
• god
• jesus
• bible
• immoral
• muslim
• koran

[DomeSwag]

@flashinpon No, we have not. No proto-cell has ever been synthesized in a controlled environment.

[flashinpon]

@naejimba I would consider thousands of years worth of human learning, combined with this generations top scientists, FINALLY figuring out how to create the tiniest semblance of life-- I would call that hyper-intelligence creating life. If we were constantly seeing new organisms spring out of mud from chemical pools, then it would be obvious that life is created by natural processes. however this has never been observed and cannot be replicated. We have seen very smart scientists do it though.

[naejimba]

@flashinpon, hmm. I think the point about complexity would do little for either of our arguments (like the snowflakes and diamonds I used as an example; essentially complexity != design). Either way, we are essentially discussing the watchmaker argument, which perhaps we could discuss in detail at some point.

[naejimba]

@flashinpon, oh... I should elaborate. It is not that the term offends me, it is simply implying certain attributes (omniscience, omnipotence, etc.) that I think does complicate the matter (perhaps a point of agreement). I too agree it is nice to have a civilized conversation in which neither side is emotionally attached to their position. =)

[naejimba]

@flashinpon, well, we have not observed scientifically life being created by a hyper-intelligent being, so I don't think that would apply. Plus, I'm not really deducing anything, I just think a naturalistic explanation might be more probable than a supernatural one (referring of course to occam's razor).

[flashinpon]

@naejimba well you don't have to call it 'God' if that offends your sensitivies. for now lets just use the term 'creator'. later on we could get in to why I believe the creator was God. also, I'm not offended by your disagreement either. I'm actually pleasantly surprised at how reasonably you can hear a differing opinion, unlike the oh-so-many trolls out there on the internet

[flashinpon]

@naejimba and on this point I will not equivocate. there is no such thing as life originating from non-living matter spontaneously, any more than there is any such thing as cars assembling themselves in tornado-stricken junkyards (which I do believe is a fair illustration, considering that a single living cell is far more complex than a machine like a car, which is relatively simple by comparison)

[naejimba]

@flashinpon, well.. I offered contentions with the case presented. If you wish to continue on as you plan, I'm afraid it will have to be with me disagreeing, as I do not think the probability of a creator (if defined as "god") is very high (you would have to see some of my other videos, or I could elaborate as to why). Either way, I am not offended by differing opinions, and I still think a civilized and interesting discussion could be had.

[flashinpon]

*absence

[flashinpon]

@naejimba science is observable, testable, and repeatable. if I observed life springing forth spontaneously from non-life, then I would be scientific to say that life springs from non-life. if I observe life being created by hyper-intelligent beings, then I would be scientific to deduce that life is created by hyper intelligent beings. To see life created by intelligent beings and then deduce the opposite in complete absense of any evidence is the opposite of science.