True Faith Respects Human Life

PAMSM:

Hope you're doing well. I'm thinking the problem I had posting may be a connectivity issue on my end rather that with the length of my posts.

Anyway this is a quick one, but I wanted to keep the dialogue going. As for your disbelief in God & Jesus, I don't find it hard to believe. I'm saying this tongue in cheek, "There's a lot of that going around." In the same way there's a lot of believing in God & Jesus (or believing in one and not the other) going around as well. I think the best part is being able to discuss things.

A couple of things--quickly. I know you mentioned the King James Version using "little children" in the Isaiah passage. The New International Version & Holman Version use "youths" & the New American Standard Version uses "youthful lads." Since these are newer translation's from the Hebrew, I believe these are more accurate, and the info on the Hebrew word was from the Holman Version & the notes in The Apologetics Study Bible. I haven't researched, but if memory serves I believe the KJV translators were working from the Greek Septuagint version of the Old Testament.

As for the New Testament, I know that it's tradition that Mark, Matthew, Luke & John are the authors, and that there is a degree of uncertainty about the authorship. However, some of the tradition comes from Papias, a disciple of John. There are more reasons than just tradition for the authorship being the names ascribed to them (with [John] Mark's gospel reportedly being from Peter's testimonies). They all claim to have eye witness accounts.

As for the differences in Judaism & Christianity and other religions such as things like Thor's hammer that you mentioned, I would say that the Bible is different from these other religions for a number of reasons. The eye witness accounts for one. Did you ever notice how the Bible also has maps in the back of it? It claims to have taken place in history. Archaeology is lending creedence to a good deal of historicity of the Bible. We also have numerous copies of the ancient texts within years of the happenings. No other ancient text has this amount of information. I believe the closest copy of Homer's *The Iliad* is within 400 years. We have copies of New Testament writings within 50 years of the events.

Thanks for reading, and sorry for the delay in posting again. Hopefully we'll get to dialogue a little more frequently this week.

Take care,
Isaiah68

PART 2
ISAIAH68: “I would recommend a couple of Old Testament books for reading… [and] reading the Easter story of the Crucifixion and the Ressurection. The Crucifixion is God's provision for restoring a relationship with us, and the Resurrection is the evidence that Jesus is who he claims to be (God Incarnate/God's Son) and is also what gives us hope.”

I have read all of this. But the bad parts still come firmly bound together with the “good.”

I know it’s hard for you to understand, but I really don’t believe that there is a God, or that there was a Jesus. It’s barely possible that there was a historical Jesus, but I don’t believe that he was born of a virgin, performed miracles, or rose from the dead. It’s hard to see how such a person could have been so totally overlooked by history that he was completely forgotten until Paul resurrected him (there it is!) with his visions (he never saw him alive) some 20 years after his supposed death. And Paul never claimed any miracles or virgin birth – all of this was added (more with each retelling) many years later. You do know, don’t you, that Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John (to put them in their correct chronological order) were just names assigned to those writings – that no one actually knows who wrote them?

When you read about all the magic and the miracles (essentially the turning of natural law on its head) – all the people parting waters, or walking on them; giants; people who live to be 700 years old; talking snakes; pillars of salt; etc., do you not see the resemblance to the mythology of other ancient peoples? How are Medusa and Cyclops any more fantastic? How is Thor’s hammer any less believable? Doesn’t this give you some kind of a clue that this, too, might be merely a creation myth of an ancient, ignorant people?

Part 1
ISAIAH68: “I was trying to figure out how to condense some of my answers…”

You don’t have to – just split them into separate posts.

ISAIAH 68: “As for the 1 Samuel passage, the Beth-Shemites should have known better because the passage states that the Levites were there, and the Beth-Shemites were descended from Moses' brother, Aaron, who was a priest. Plus, the early part of Chapter 7 lets the reader know that Israel was worshipping other gods at this time.”

I’ll bet you have ancestors who were farmers – do you know a lot about farming? I have ancestors who were seamen in the 18th century – I don’t know jack about rigging sails. Heck, my grandfather was an ornamental plasterer, but not only can’t I do fancy ceiling medallions; I can’t even plaster a straight wall. While some of Israel may have been worshipping other gods, the Beth-shemites were rejoicing to see the ark, and were sacrificing to God, so they clearly weren’t among them. BTW, there is another bit in that story about someone who reached up to steady the ark when the road was rough, to keep it from toppling off the cart. He was struck dead, as well. Sure, that’s fair.

ISAIAH68: “In regards to the 2 Kings passage, the Hebrew word for "youths" here means 12-30 year-olds. It's less a Li'l Rascals image and more a Lord of the Flies or a street gang type image. Plus, at this time if you insulted an emmisary of a ruler it was the same as insulting that ruler. Hence an insult to the Lord's prophet, Elisha, is like an insult to God Himself.”

KJV says “little children.” I’ve seen claims that the Hebrew word means anything from just born to twenty. You’re the first to claim 12-30, and I would find it odd for any language to have a word to cover that particular age range, since it has no commonality. But *whatever* - it’s an appalling story no matter how old they were. Do you really think that *anyone* deserves to be torn apart by wild animals for saying “go up thy bald head”??? I don’t care *who* they say it to – as a punishment, it’s *way* over the top. If you read in tomorrow’s paper that someone had yelled an insult at the Pope, and had been thrown in a cage with lions and torn apart, would you think that was OK? (Doesn’t matter whether you think the Pope is holy or not.)

PART 3
KERT: “God is not speaking nor is anyone instructing people to kill babies.”

No? Well he killed all the firstborn of Egypt, didn’t he? And how about this: "Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt. Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass." (I Samuel 15:2-3)

No matter what the adult Amalekites did, or didn’t do, there is no way that “sucklings” or animals had any hand in it.

Here’s a similarly disgusting directive from Moses: "Behold, these caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to commit trespass against the LORD in the matter of Peor, and there was a plague among the congregation of the LORD. Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves." (Numbers 31:16-18)

A little sexual slavery, anyone?

As for getting my bible quotes online – I do look them up online when blogging so that I don’t inadvertently say what isn’t there, and to grab text for cutting and pasting; but I do happen to own a bible, and I have read it through as a book. Have you? I only ask because I found it appalling, and I don’t understand why people like you don’t. How do you justify stuff like this to yourselves?

If any human dictator did the things that God does in the bible, I’ll bet you would be among the first to denounce him. Why does God get a free pass?

KERT: “With a following of millions and an unprecidented circulation and history, I would think the Bible deserves a chance.”

Do you think that numbers of believers make a thing true? There was a time when everyone believed that the world was flat – did that make it so? There was a time when they all believed that the Sun circled the Earth. Did it?

As a percentage of the population, fewer people believe today than at almost any earlier time – does that mean the bible is becoming less true?

KERT: “I would also get some balance. Try to understand both sides before you make a decission.”

Do you do this? You told me once (months ago, when discussing evolution) that you’d never read much about it. I challenge you to read “Godless” by Dan Barker, and “Why Evolution is True” by Jerry Coyne. If your faith is as strong as you say it is, you should be able to read them without losing any of it, but you will be better informed when arguing with people like me.

PART2
KERT: 1Samuel 6:13-19 and Elijah
These are acts of judgment against people that were disobeying God’s instructions. God is loving but also just and he will keep his promises of judgment. If he made rules and then failed to enforce them, he would be a liar and he obviously can’t do this.

This is simply not true. Neither the Beth-shemites, nor the children were “instructed.” Give me the chapter and verse where you find this. The Beth-shemites were *worshipping* him – why did simply looking into the ark deserve death? And why did 50,000+ other Beth-shemites, who did not look, also deserve death? And the children (KJV says “little children”) also deserved death, for merely taunting someone about being bald? DEATH? Really?? Man, I’m glad I’m not a child of yours!

KERT: “If it weren’t for the tree I believe Adam would have found another way to sin.”

Well, *this* is telling. As I said, according to the bible, God gave Adam his nature. Apparently, the result is what God wished it to be – without it, what would God have done for fun all these years?

KERT: “Job wasn’t a bet by God, since God already knew what would happen and has nothing to prove with the devil.”

I think you’d better re-read the first two chapters of Job – it absolutely *is* a bet. God allows the devil to torture Job in order to prove to him that Job will still not curse him.

KERT: “In the Bible earthly suffering is not something must be avoid. In fact we are told that suffering is inevitable and shows our devotion to God.”

Lovely. I knew there was some reason why I wasn’t interested in showing devotion.

KERT: “God certainly doesn’t hate anyone especially the weak or poor (see below). This is describing specifications for a specific job for priests giving sacrifices. As with anything in the temple, the person sacrificing needed to be unblemished. This is very much in accord with the other requirements God gave.”

So certain physical traits – *given by God* - are blemishes in his eyes. Very nice. And do we have these requirements for the clergy today? ‘Cause I’m pretty sure I’ve seen some with flat noses.

PART 1
KERT: “Thank you for such a cordial invitation. How could I refuse?”

I dunno – maybe the same way you did before…?

KERT: “I think if you remember back we actually engaged in quite a long discussion and I answered many questions.”

Not really – you answered one set of my questions (some of them – some you ignored), then when I asked more, you left the blog. Here, refresh your memory: http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/panelists/cal_thomas/2009/03/the_devils_avocation.html

KERT: After many responses, I realized that weren’t accepting my answers. After you declared yourself the winner (not sure of what), I clearly stated I didn’t see much point of continuing the discussion further.

This is quite distorted. I never declared myself “the winner”, and you did not make “many responses.” If I wasn’t “accepting” your answers, it’s because I found them unacceptable. Sorry if you expected me to roll over and accept the truth of the bible on your say-so.

KERT: “I think by asking the question, we see that humans are anticipating something bigger. Even those who don’t believe in God seem to believe in ‘fate’.”

Not me. I don’t have any superstitions. I don’t think I’m alone in that, either.

KERT: “I’m not comfortable with the idea of humans being the moral authority. Human ideas change on a whim and I don’t think real morality can. I am much more comfortable with the idea of ‘higher authority’.”

This seems quite childish to me. There is a time when parents are the ultimate authority, and hand down the decrees, but eventually, we grow up and think for ourselves. At least, some of us do.

I don’t find human ideas of morality whimsical at all. They evolve over time, but I don’t see any regression. I used the example of slavery – fine by God – he even handed down rules for where slaves were to be obtained. Women were mere chattel in the bible. During the middle ages people kept slaves, beat their wives with impunity, cruelly mistreated animals (dominion, don’tcha know), and sent young children to work as servants, farm hands, and beggars. Because of evolving *human* ideas of morality, Western countries no longer think this way. Neither the bible nor the church had a hand in this enlightenment.

Things continue to get better – and I think there’s no chance of regression. Rather, as third world countries become more educated, the ideas will spread.

Isaiah,
Thanks for the extra comments.

You learn to be me more concise when you realize people don't have time to read book length blogs. It takes time and I am still learning. Mr Colson does a good job.

Pam,
I don't think I am wrong to say that you get most of Bible commentary from web sites that specialize in discrediting the Bible. May I recommend a different approach.

First I would recommend reading the Bible as a book, like you would any other book. You have to admit grabbing snippets isn't a fair way to judge any book. At least read full books of the Bible to get a full understanding. I realize many people on both sides just choose small passages to read but this is certainly not the intention. I believe you must read the Bible in whole to get the real perspective, especially the New Testement.

Second, I would get some more credible commentary, especially for the Old Testement. If all a commentator wants to do is disprove the Bible, ignore it. You can't possibly dissprove a book you don't understand. They should at least be able to give you some context and understanding of what is going on before they try to prove anything. I would also get some balance. Try to understand both sides before you make a decission.

I understand that you are a bit skeptical of a book that makes the claims the Bible does. It makes perfect sense to look for proof or disproof of such claims. I believe the Bible anticipates this since much of the New Testement was written as testimony of what they saw, so others would believe. With a following of millions and an unprecidented circulation and history, I would think the Bible deserves a chance.

Blessings on this Easter Weekend.

PAMSM & KERT1:

I was trying to figure out how to condense some of my answers and then with your two posts, Kert1, you stated (much more succictly than I) what I would have liked to have written. Hopefully you don't mind me adding just a few points concerning the Biblical passages.

In the Leviticus passage, adding to Kert1's description of the handicapped ONLY not being able to perform priestly duties, I would say that God also made sure that they were still to be cared for (see 21:22).

As for the 1 Samuel passage, the Beth-Shemites should have known better because the passage states that the Levites were there, and the Beth-Shemites were descended from Moses' brother, Aaron, who was a priest. Plus, the early part of Chapter 7 lets the reader know that Israel was worshipping other gods at this time.

In regards to the 2 Kings passage, the Hebrew word for "youths" here means 12-30 year-olds. It's less a Li'l Rascals image and more a Lord of the Flies or a street gang type image. Plus, at this time if you insulted an emmisary of a ruler it was the same as insulting that ruler. Hence an insult to the Lord's prophet, Elisha, is like an insult to God Himself.

I would recommend a couple of Old Testament books for reading, as well. One is the book of Ecclesiastes, which early on deals with an existential existence without God, and ultimately ends with the author, stating that existence is better in serving God: "Fear (respect) God and keep His commandments." (12:13) I would also recommend the Book of Ruth, which displays God's Providence and how he cares for people by bringing them together (including Ruth, who is a foreigner--not an Israelite).

Finally, with it being Easter, I feel I would be remiss in not recommending reading the Easter story of the Crucifixion and the Ressurection. The Crucifixion is God's provision for restoring a relationship with us, and the Resurrection is the evidence that Jesus is who he claims to be (God Incarnate/God's Son) and is also what gives us hope.

Thanks for reading and being patient with the posts, PamSM, & thanks Kert1 for your thoughts as well as showing me how to be (somewhat) briefer in my posts (I tend to want to include too much information for this format). I look forward to dialoguing with you both in future posts.

Blessings,

Isaiah68

Pam,
(part 1)
Thank you for such a cordial invitation. How could I refuse?
I think if you remember back we actually engaged in quite a long discussion and I answered many questions. After many responses, I realized that weren’t accepting my answers. After you declared yourself the winner (not sure of what), I clearly stated I didn’t see much point of continuing the discussion further. Sorry if this displeases you but I only have so much time for blogging.
I think that one answer to the mean of life is that there is no deeper meaning. I never implied there isn’t. I think by asking the question, we see that humans are anticipating something bigger. Even those who don’t believe in God seem to believe in “fate”. Personally I think that having no deeper meaning leaves me at a dead end and doesn’t satisfy my human desire for a real purpose.

I’m not comfortable with the idea of humans being the moral authority. Human ideas change on a whim and I don’t think real morality can. I am much more comfortable with the idea of “higher authority”.

I will give you my perspective on these Bible passages, although I think I did some of these before.

1Samuel 6:13-19 and Elijah
These are acts of judgment against people that were disobeying God’s instructions. God is loving but also just and he will keep his promises of judgment. If he made rules and then failed to enforce them, he would be a liar and he obviously can’t do this.

Pam,
(part 2)
Adam
God gave Adam all he could ever want and the choice to an almost infinite number of good things. He did also give him the ability and means to do one wrong thing. Free will can’t be without a choice of right or wrong. If it weren’t for the tree I believe Adam would have found another way to sin. I think the tree was actually a warning, not a temptation that Adam could rebel.

Job
Job wasn’t a bet by God, since God already knew what would happen and has nothing to prove with the devil. In the Bible earthly suffering is not something must be avoid. In fact we are told that suffering is inevitable and shows our devotion to God. Job is a practical story for all who suffer (some more, some less) to give us hope and let us know God will get us through with a reward at the end.

Leviticus 21:17-23
God certainly doesn’t hate anyone especially the weak or poor (see below). This is describing specifications for a specific job for priests giving sacrifices. As with anything in the temple, the person sacrificing needed to be unblemished. This is very much in accord with the other requirements God gave.
Ps. 140:12. I know that the LORD will maintain the cause of the afflicted, and justice for the poor.
Is. 25:4. For You have been a defense for the helpless, a defense for the needy in his distress.

Psalm 137
God is not speaking nor is anyone instructing people to kill babies. This is during the Babylonian captivity. The Babylonians are soon going to be destroyed by the Medo-Persians. They are the ones that acted in God’s judgment and performed these atrocities, most likely because the Babylonians did the same. The Bible is just recording what happened, possibly as a prophecy.

OK, PAMSM,

So this one made it through. Maybe I have to work on my length (I tried splitting it into two posts last night) but it still may be too wordy. I will attempt to reorganize some of my thoughts and get back with you this evening.

Thanks again for your patience,

Isaiah68

PAMSM:

I attempted to post a couple of messages last night, and it was indicated they were received, but held by the author of the blog for review. Hopefully this one will at least be let through, so that you know I did attempt to respond. Maybe the previous posts will make it through eventually.

Thanks for your patience,
Isaiah68

I'm listening.

PAMSM:

Thanks for responding. I wanted to drop a quick note to let you know I've read your posts and that I am interested in responding and also in dialoguing with you further, but it will have to be later on today.

Thanks again and hope you are well,

Isaiah68

PART TWO

And you think that this being is worthy to tell you how to be moral??? On my *worst* day, I’m a hundred times more moral than your God. I don’t expect people to worship me, but even if they’re nasty to me, I don’t kill them.

As an atheist, I know that my inborn sense of morality comes from all of my social-living ancestors – all the way back to the apes and beyond. I know that it’s also refined by evolving human social standards – the zeitgeist. Where once slavery was accepted as just the way things were, we now see it as reprehensible. But don’t look to the bible for this new idea of morality.

Oh, and Isaiah68 – it wouldn’t matter how long I was kept captive, or how badly I was treated – I might hate my captors, but I would never, not even in my fantasies, consider dashing their innocent babies against stones. Never.

PART ONE

Hey Kert - you ran from me the last time I asked you some questions - I'm surprised to find you back responding to my comments again. Are you into drive-by commentary? You just say your piece and then disappear, rather than engaging in a dialog?

I find it quite difficult to fathom how minds like yours, Isaiah68's, and those of the members of the One Mind Ministry work. Baffling, really.

You have to have a meaning for life? Why? Why isn’t it enough that it just IS? Why can’t the meaning be what *you* give to your life, and not what some invisible man in the sky gives it?

Why must there be an *absolute* source for morality? Why must it be handed down by decree – might makes right – with no foundation other than the whim of a dictator? And whim it must be, because his brand of morality, as set forth in the bible, is not the one he follows himself, and is certainly far different from my own.

Time after time, people in the bible are struck dead because they failed to show enough reverence or deference. And not just one or two, but tens of thousands. I gave you the example from 1Samuel 6:13-19 where the Beth-shemites see the ark of the covenant passing their fields and rejoice, come to worship God and make sacrifices to him. But because they looked into the ark – *which no one told them not to do* - they are struck dead - *and so are 50,080 of their countrymen*!

I gave you the example of Job, who as a pious and “perfect” man, had all of his children killed and everything he owned taken from him - *to settle a bet* between God and Satan that even after all of this, he wouldn’t curse God. A BET!

I gave you the example of the little children who teased Elijah about his bald head, and then were cursed by him so that God sent two she-bears to rip them to pieces.

In Genesis, Adam, whose nature was given to him by God, has temptation put before him (if I don’t want my dogs to eat the meat on the counter, I put it away, where they can’t get to it), after being, in his innocence, seduced by a serpent, that was made by God. Then, having failed the test that was a set-up and a foregone conclusion, he has his transgression visited on all of his descendants *for all time*. What a sweetheart that God is.

God hates the handicapped. Check out Leviticus 21:17-23.

"Personally, I find the belief that the universe came from nothing and that life randomly came out of the non-living. Science has yet to come up with a good explanation for this and in fact tells us that matter can't be created and life only comes from life."

Well, science doesn't frame the issue as your Bible does, simply speaking.

A big whackin (apparent) 'singularity' isn't the same as 'nothing.' It's just as far back as it means anything to linearize that stuff we call 'spacetime' as we do on human scales.

Frankly, the math indicates that even *this* vast universe arises like a wave on a bigger sea. There's nothing either 'soulless' or 'artifice of a designer' necessarily *about* it.

Evolution of life is probably a simpler concept. Basically, inevitable, given enough time and stuff, which we know have been present.

Doesn't make it any less wondrous or astonishing, mind you, but if you have the atoms, you end up with some molecules. Self-replication is a property in the shape of the combinations of these things, and given enough time and iterations, these can refine, ...those that replicate well do so, and so on with more complex structures.

Which build upon each other, form systems, and whatnot.

It's a human arrogance to think it's like a device we make, then decry how 'soulless' that must be.

It's alive. It grows. Like a forest from a small seed. I do believe that it, and more, are conscious and aware in some way. I don't have to believe it was designed and constructed by a dude outside it all, who doesn't like gay folks.

I agree. Please see the free 30 minute version of The Third Jihad at
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-864522917532871834

That is a very interesting quote by Voltaire. I think the quote begs the question, "What is the absurd?"

Personally, I find the belief that the universe came from nothing and that life randomly came out of the non-living. Science has yet to come up with a good explanation for this and in fact tells us that matter can't be created and life only comes from life.

Now, obviously other people will find some of my beliefs a little "absurd" as well. My purpose here isn't to argue particular "absurdities", which could take all year. My point is that if we could easlily identify something that makes absolutely no sense at any level, wouldn't we already have life figured out.

I actually think somewhat absurd beliefs are a part of life. We need to believe something, even when there are no clear answers. I'm sure we've all asked the "What's the meaning in life?" question. In many cases our answers don't make sense to others. Not to say there isn't a real answer, it's just clearly not easy to find them always.

I really feel as believers in anything we need to examine our beliefs and prove our beliefs true. Even though this will generally be to ourselves. If something doesn't work out in reality, we should evaluate it and be accepting of real criticism.

In this particular case I think the woman was not thinking for herself and she gave in to something that was "absurd" by any measure. There was no reason for her to believe what she did or act in this way. She did so because a powerful leader manipulated her. We should all avoid this type of unexamined life.

That's a pretty comprehensive list of violence in the Old Testament provided by the godless geeks website. I guess my first question would be, does listing violent deeds alone equal condemnation? Is violence itself not part of the world? Our modern society likes to pretend, at times, that life is not precarious, but for the most part, it is. In some parts of the world and in some cultures more than others.

Secondly, going with the assumption that the Bible is true about who God is, then if he is an omniscient God, who better to make decisions about life and death than someone who is all-knowing?

The type of bloodshed listed here is set during a particular time when God is calling Abraham out from the Chaldeans (I realize I'm glossing over some of Genesis, Cain & Abel, etc., but space is limited to address all of these things) and then the Israelites out of Egypt to form a nation which is aggressively monotheistic. Most other nations are polytheistic at this point. Are any nations ever formed without struggle and violence?

Also, the God of Abraham, Isaac & Jacob and of Christianity is not concerned only with nation building but also with people forming. God is wanting to bring about a people who seek purity, because God cannot abide sin, and the "wages of sin is death"(Romans 6:23) and God warned people of this from the very beginning when he warned Adam & Eve in Genesis 2:17 that if they ate from the tree of the knowledge of good & evil that they would "surely die."

As for the Voltair quote: "Anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities
has the power to make you commit injustices." I think he is right in this, however I would also caution that Hitler & Stalin both made people believe in absurdities, too, and Hitler was an avid reader of atheistic Nietzschean thought and gave copies of Nietzsche to Mussolini and Stalin. I'm not saying this to absolve Christendom from many atrocities committed over the centuries, but then most major religions have these types of skeletons in their closets, as does atheism. We've all got blood on our hands.

I'm not offering excuses, I'm trying to give reasons, with which we may or may not agree. The thing I would suggest, though, is that we at least dialogue and try to better understand each other's points of view. Making a list of items with which we disagree in each other's worldviews and then making one sentence, snarky comments after each of those items benefits no one.

Thanks for the time and blessings,
Isaiah68

But Queen Antionette DID claim to respect human life -- she assured her parishoners that the baby would be resurrected (if they just hid the body in a suitcase in a toolshed in Philadelphia).

What true faith has to do is, at minimum, NOT CONTRADICT FACTS.

Faith is what you're willing to believe without evidence. It shouldn't be what you're willing to believe IN SPITE of it.

Anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities
has the power to make you commit injustices. - Voltaire, 1767

Oh, please, Isaiah68! Can you come up with excuses for every biblical act of violence? God kills *plenty* - of all ages.

Start with the four books:
http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/BibleViolence.htm

WATCHTOWER HEMOPHILIAC HYPOCRISY


Jehovah's Witnesses may take certain components of blood, such as hemophiliac preparations (Factor VIII and Factor IX),and have for many years.
The greatest risk of AIDS infection comes from this procedure which is allowed by the Watchtower society,so this proves that this whole entire blood ban thing is totally made up and man made and NOT from the Bible.

[[ Remember the Jehovah's Witnesses use thousands and thousands of pints of blood donated by others for their blood "FRACTIONS". ]]

Danny Haszard life-long Jehovah's Witness http://www.dannyhaszard.com

In Psalm 137 is God really calling for the Israelite people to bash their enemies’ heads against rocks?

In Psalm 137, context and some historical information are going to help us understand verse 9 a little better. While this verse does say, “Happy is he who takes your little ones and dashes them against the rocks,” who is actually speaking in this verse. If we read the previous 8 verses we find that it is actually some of the Israelite people who are speaking, and that they have been captured and made slaves after the fall of Jerusalem to the Babylonians (586 BC/BCE).

The question I ask myself here, is, “How would I react if someone from a neighboring country were to destroy my home city—the capitol of my nation—and likely kill members of my family and friends, then cart me away to another nation in slavery and then tell me to sing songs about my homeland merely for their entertainment?” This is the lot in which the Israelites find themselves, and they are expressing that in song. These are some pretty raw emotions. Also, have there been times in my life where I feel someone has wronged me and I might think, “I wish they were dead,” or maybe, “I hope they get what’s coming to them,”? Do I really wish for something like this to take place in the heat of my anger? It’s easy to pass judgment on a passage like this when we’re relatively secure in the United States from warfare taking us from our homeland.

One example of how God values children is in the passage found in Mark 10:13-16. In this passage we see Jesus (God in the Flesh) rebuke disciples who are preventing little children from seeing Jesus. He says, “Let the little children come to me,” in verse 14 and goes on further to say that the Kingdom of God belongs to ones like them. At the end of the passage he blesses them and hugs them as well.

Blessings,
Isaiah68

Obviously, to Chuckles, any religion that's not Christian is a cult. And as for respect for life, where were you when Bush was pushing "shock and awe" against the Iraqis?

Ah, Norrie, a sane person in the world of madness. Thank you for your contribution.

Lisalove:

Do you always tell complete stranger they are trolls?

Imagine if it was forbidde, on WAPO (onfaith/onreligion & postglobal) to use the words CHU{CK} }COL{SON}" Or "SA{LLY}" "QU{i}NN" or "DA{VID" "WA{}TERS" or " "FA{R}EED" "ZAK{A}R}IA}" or "DAV-ID" "I{}G{}NATiUS" or the word "Washing{ton}" or "PO{ST" , MOSES, JESUS etc..???

Please remove curly brackets in WAPO's Editor & hit "Submit" button. For the Word:

""SH{i}L{O}H" [PEACE BRINGER]. So
WHY would Washington Post or George Town University et al; be soo so afraid of a (biblical) word meaning, "PEACE", Freidan, PAZ, Mir, SHALOM or "SH{}{A}{L}{O}{M}", Salaam, Ahimsah, Zhingyu"?.....?.. Testing testing:

"HUE{-}MATES"
"JO{}K}{T}AN" [The UNITED Anscestors]
{WE [i] Cometh from This Father/Mother EBERu line} hence [i] WE; US? are innately evolved as "HUEMATES" not as HUMAN anymore. As Prophecy: WE [i] Removeth the "Scepter & the Rod.. from Both hand & between King DAVID's realm who are "P{E}{L}E{G"ians [The DIVIDED Ancestors]. WE Reverseth the DRUNKIN NOAH [racist] CURSETH/SINETH preposterous Story of Moses & his Jealoused Co., And So
INSTEAD of god, replaced "ITSELF" w/the knowledge of "IT" via the Holyi Cosmic "MELCHIZEDEK PEACE-BLESSING" & more "Good TiDINGS"!

Testing Testing:

"P{E}{L}E{G"
[Means the "DIVIDED" Eber/ABRAHAMICs branch/splinter, Isaac, Ishamael, Jacob, Joseph, David, Solomon, Esau, Jesus, includes Muhammad Folks, Mormons too etc.., as their Lineage/Anscestor (NOT OUR's, Never! or unlike US HUEMATE-arians of that Holyi Cosmic NEBULA awared "IT"s (G-D) Naturally Selected , aka, Chosen, "JO{}K}{T}AN"ian) EBERu race!

WOW! WHY WAPO???????????? WHO {Sect?, Cult?, Preacher, Editor, Moderator(s) , Mormon, Evangelousical? , rick Warren? Chuck Colson? etc..} is Behind This Blatant 1st Amendment Violation & Anti Public-Internet DEVILISH/EVIL Censorings???
Wow! Please WAPO & Co., stop Jealously Blocking OUR, not your, Intellectual works about the "IT" [G-D doing work & becoming what one is becoming] And then Borrow for Ye gains or Withholding such whiteboarding hard work from its genuine Authors!?

"True Faith Respects Human Life"

No, True Faith, a.k.a. Buddhism, respects the life of all sentient beings. It teaches that I, our two Maine Coon Cats, and the insect that just flew into our living room, all have the same essential nature.

Christians, Jews and Moslems should take off their species-centric blinders and notice that truth.

The thing that makes the Jehovah's Witnesses a cult is that they don't allow members free association with former members. There is no way to leave this religion without permanently losing family and friends who choose to remain "loyal" to the group.

They live in fear of being punished themselves. It's sad. Before anyone considers joining any group, they should talk to former members.

Gaby1 you didn't "open up a can of worms" because you are not in control of comments.

bee gone troll

On JW's they are a deceptive cult on the blood thing and it kills men,women and children.

Oh, Danny boy, did I ever open up a can of worms.

Wow, your rant is almost as good as CCNL's.

I could go on and on about other "religions" who have similar restrictions. Trust me the JW's are not alone.

Jehovah's Witnesses blood transfusion confusion

Simple fact-The Bible does not prohibit Blood transfusions.If you are bleeding to death it is more dangerous to refuse a blood transfusions than to take one.
Bloodless surgeries are great if they can be elective.1/3rd of all trauma deaths are from blood loss.

Jehovah's Witnesses elders will investigate and disfellowship any Jehovah Witness who takes a blood transfusion,to say the issue is a 'personal conscience matter' is subterfuge to keep the Watchtower out of lawsuits..

Jehovah's Witnesses children die every year worldwide due to blood transfusion ban.Rank & file Jehovah's Witness are indoctrinated to be scared to death of blood
FYI
1) JW's DO USE many parts aka 'fractions' aka components of blood,so if it's 'sacred' to God why the hypocritical contradiction flip-flop?

2) They USE blood collections that are donated by Red Cross and others but don't donate back,more hypocrisy.

3) The Watchtower promotes and praises bloodless elective surgeries,this is a great advancement indeed.BUT it's no good to me if I am bleeding to death from a car crash and lose much of my blood volume and need EMERGENCY blood transfusion.

Remember the Jehovah's Witnesses use thousands and thousands of pints of blood donated by others.They use 60% of the blood volume as broken down "fractions" then go on Bible thumping rants about how dangerous and sinful blood transfusions are.

( JW do allow organ transplants which has more risk than whole blood transfusions so their arguments of disease transmission is bogus)

Know this,the reason that JW refuse blood is because of their spin on the 3000 year old Biblical old testament,modern medicine will eventually make blood donations and transfusions a thing of the past.When this technology happens it won't vindicate the Jehovah's Witnesses and all the deaths that have occurred so far.

The Watchtower's rules against blood transfusions will eventually be abolished (very gradually to reduce wrongful death lawsuit liability) even now most of the blood 'components' are allowed.

They are such hypocrites!
--
Danny Haszard http://www.dannyhaszard.com

Respect for the dignity of life??

Have you ever actually read yyour bible??

Chuck,

You said "A cult, as it is commonly understood, is a highly rigid and usually strictly enforced total belief system. Almost always it is led by an authoritarian leader who tolerates no dissent."

First of all, what does commonly understood mean? You definition??

Second, read your statement again. That holds true for just about every religion in our solar system.

A cult is an offshoot of a previously held belief/philosophy. Therefore, all religions are a cult/sect.

I especially love that statement about the authoritarian leader, that would be the pope of the catholic church. No?

Silly old man!

Huh?

Yahweh of the Old Testament fame ordered the destruction of human life (among other things).

More than once. Including smashing the heads of infants of the targeted tribes on rocks.

Explain how the people who carried out the bidding in the Old Testament had "True Faith"

"Any teaching which does not respect human life fully cannot be consistent with belief in a God who created human life in His image."

Ahh, so a religion that believes in a god that would tell a believer - let's call the believer Abraham just as an example - to slaughter his child as a blood sacrifice to appease god - that would be a 'bad' religion, yes?

That is, of course, if you're inclined to stretch metaphors into absolutist terms in any way.

Reverend.

Chuck.

"As a Christian I can speak only for my own faith, which fully recognizes individual free will, and has as its most underlying precept respect for the dignity of life."

Well, 'Reverend,' she *was* a Cristian by creed.

Quite extreme about everyone saying 'Amen,' apparently, but then again, I've heard some interesting things said about who'd really 'respecting life,' who's 'in God's Image' and what book that says 'they shall be killed and their blood upon them.'

Hang on tight to them ears o' the big ol' beast you're riding.

Obviously 'disrespect for life' makes 'evil' and never no mind how. I'm sure you'll refer to it obliquely in the next bit of punditry.