Sunday, 15 September 2013

Ten things we can learn from the slaughter of the Amorites in the Old Testament

The Amorites were an ancient people, who according to the Bible were directly descended from Noah’s grandson Canaan (Genesis 10:16). At the time of Israel’s exodus from Egypt (c 1446 BC) they occupied much of present day Palestine and Jordan on both sides of the Jordan River (see map).

The Israelites under Moses wiped out the Amorites east of the Jordan (including the two kings Og of Bashan and Sihon of Heshbon) and occupied their land (Numbers 21:21-35).

After crossing the Jordan the Israelites, now under Joshua’s leadership, destroyed the western Amorite civilisation.  The kings of the five city states of Jerusalem, Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish and Eglon were executed by Joshua and their people erased from the pages of history (Joshua 10:1-27).

On both occasions the Amorites attacked first.

What lessons can we learn from the slaughter of the Amorites? Here are ten:

1. The nations belong to God

The Amorites, like all people on earth, belong to God (Psalm 24:1) and he can do whatever he chooses with his own possessions. If he decides to wipe a nation out, in this case by using the nation of Israel as his instrument, then that is his prerogative. God is sovereign over the nations and gives them to anyone he wishes (Daniel 4:17, 5:21). He does the same today.

2. Human beings are mortal

Virtually no one lives beyond 120 years, the limit for human longevity which God set after the flood (Genesis 6:3). Every human being eventually dies, usually from disease or trauma. This is a consequence of the curse of the Fall – when humankind rejected God’s rightful rule (Genesis 3). The Amorites suffered the fate that awaits all human beings but died through battle rather than from disease.

3. God is sovereign over the nations

God marks out for all nations their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands (Acts 17:26). He decreed that the Amorites would last until around 1400 BC. You’ll notice that most of the other nations in the immediate vicinity at the time no longer exist either. Where are Moab, Edom, Ammon, Philistia and Phoenicia today? For that matter where are the empires of Assyria, Babylon, Persia, Media, Greece and Rome? Today’s nations (and Empires) should take warning.

4. God is incredibly patient

Have you ever wondered why God kept his own people under slavery in Egypt for over 400 years? It was because the ‘sin of the Amorites had not yet reached its full measure’ (Genesis 15:16). God delayed his judgement on the Amorites for over 400 years out of mercy whilst his own chosen people suffered and he suffered with them. The Amorites had every opportunity to change their ways but chose not to, so judgement eventually came. We should not take God’s patience for granted. It should rather lead us to change our ways (Romans 2:4).

5. God regards sin as serious and will bring judgement

The Amorites indulged in sexual immorality, child sacrifice and idolatry. These are serious sins and such a people could not be allowed to survive. The Amorites were called to account for their sins as eventually will every nation - and every person - on the face of the earth. Nations which indulge in sexual immorality (ie. sex outside marriage), kill their children (eg. through abortion) and practise idolatry (ie. greed – see Colossians 3:5) today should learn from the fate of the Amorites. 

6. God delivers on his promises

God told Moses that he would drive the Amorites out of Canaan ahead of Israel. He did, along with the nations of the Hittites, Hivites, Jebusites, Girgashites and Perizzites. He also told Moses he would give Israel the Amorites’ land. He did but he drove the Amorites out not because Israel was good but because the Amorites' time for judgement had come (Deuteronomy 9:4-6). But these were not God’s only promises. In Genesis 15 God tells Moses that those who eventually share his faith in the one true God will be like the stars in number. Furthermore these people will include not only believing Jews, but people from every nation on earth (Romans 4:16,17; Revelation 7). God will deliver on these promises too.

7. God will protect his people

There are no Amorites on the streets of New York or Palestine today but there are many Jews both in New York and in Israel. God ensures the survival of his chosen people. Sometimes the only way of doing that is by destroying their enemies. When Israel came to the boundaries of the Amorite territory they simply asked for safe passage (Numbers 21:22). But the Amorites sought to destroy them. Israel responded in self-defence. Those who seek to destroy the Jewish nation today need to appreciate that it was God who put them back in Palestine and that he already has ensured their survival against the greatest world empires for the last 4,000 years. Those who seek to destroy Christians today should note the warning of 2 Thessalonians 1:6-10.

8. God disciplines his people

God promised the Israelites (who became the Jews) Amorite land both east and west of the Jordan River. But they possessed it only for a limited period of time. As a result of their disobedience to God their own territory was reduced in size by foreign armies and they were later exiled to Babylon. After their return they were scattered all over the world following the fall of Jerusalem to the Romans. This is exactly what God warned them would happen if they disobeyed him (Deuteronomy 28:15-68). God disciplines those who he loves (Hebrews 12:4-11). He still does so today.

9. There is something far more serious than a violent death

Jesus said, ‘Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.’ (Matthew 10:28) There is fate far worse than death: being excluded from God’s presence forever in Hell. When people asked Jesus about others who had died violent deaths he warned them, 'unless you repent, you too will perish' (Luke 13:1-5). We need to remember that after death comes judgement and that all human beings who have ever lived, including the Amorites and ourselves, will face it (Hebrews 9:27).  We need to make sure we do not end up on the wrong side of that judgement.

10. We all need to turn to God

The Amorites were evil people but all of us have equally sinned and fallen short of God’s glory (Romans 3:23). We all thereby deserve God’s judgement but God offers eternal life through Jesus Christ (Romans 6:23). God’s desire is that all should reach repentance (2 Peter 3:9) but we know that many will not (Matthew 7:13,14). God has provided the way through Jesus Christ for anyone who seeks it to receive God’s forgiveness and to spend all eternity with him (John 3:16-18, 5:24; Romans 10:9,10). If you want to understand more about how Christ’s death and resurrection makes this possible see here. If you wish to read a short explanation of the Christian gospel message see here

220 comments:

  1. god's pretty petty really!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No. God is is slow to anger, abounding in love and forgiving of sin and rebellion. But he does not leave the guilty and unrepentant unpunished. Are you suggesting that a nation should be able to sacrifice its own children for hundreds of years with impunity? That is not justice.

      Delete
    2. According to your story, the Amorites did do it for hundreds of years with impunity. It was only the last generation that paid the price. How does wiping out the last of the line have any effect of the generations that came before. They lived their lives how they wanted with no punishment. Killing the great great great etc grandsons does not bring any kind of justice against the earlier Amorites.

      The majority of the world is not Christian, so is practicing idolatry. Are you saying that God will be wiping the rest of us out at some point?

      Delete
    3. Every human being is mortal and will die at some point of some disease or injury (unless Christ returns first). We are all tainted by the curse of the Fall.

      In addition every person who has ever lived will come to judgement after death and will end up in one of two destinations. Forgiveness is offered to all through Christ but not all are willing to receive it.

      Those Amorites who died of disease will face judgement, just like all of us.

      Delete
    4. Yes, so judgement occurs after death. Evil people live long lives of comfort and excess and good people suffer and experience devastating loss so God and Satan can settle a wager. The Amorites being wiped out can not be used as an example of God punishing sin because He doesn't work that way.

      Delete
    5. Yup! As we already knew,God's a real asshole.

      Delete
    6. The Bible is very clear that God's judgement acts both temporally (through disease, war, famine etc) - see Ezekiel 14 - and eternally (after death).

      Delete
    7. As a Doctor, do you honestly believe that disease is a punishment from God, or a living entity that is spread from person to person through contact and unsanitary practices, such as keeping sewerage and drinking water supplies separate? Is war an act of God or do people have true free will?

      And you said that letting a people sacrifice their children without wiping them out would not be just. My point is that according to the bible the true justice is doled out in the after life because good people die, bad people live, etc, and the things that happen to us on this earth are insignificant in the scheme of things.

      On the topic of working as agents of God to bring about his justice: as the evidence that the chemical weapons recently used in Syria to "sacrifice their children" (and other "innocents") is pointing more and more towards an act of the government in control, do you think we should wage a war on them?

      Delete
    8. Man created jesus, god and all this stuff. That's why they all ain't perfect, so do not Judie them so severely.

      Delete
    9. Shane, thank you for being the one person on this page who is prepared to engage in intelligent discussion on this matter. I appreciate that.

      As a doctor I believe that senescence is genetically programmed and that genetic predisposition, environmental factors and lifestyle choices all play a part in the aetiology of disease. As a Christian I believe that all these factors are a direct result of the fall.

      We are all thereby mortal. And according to the Bible there are no good people. Not one. All deserve judgement and all need and are offered forgiveness and redemption.

      I am strongly opposed to the use of chemical weapons, to US and British military intervention in Syria and to our country supplying arms to rebel factions. I support diplomatic efforts to resolve the situation and relief efforts for refugees, internally displaced people and other victims of war. I have close friends in Syria and personally give to support such efforts.

      The Amorites were a very special case whereby God decreed their end and used Israel as his agent. I would stress again that the Amorites were offered peace but took up arms and attacked Israel first. Israel was strictly forbidden to take up arms against other nations in the area at the time such as Edom, Moab and Ammon.

      Delete
    10. Intelligent discussion !!! You're fucking mad! You can't have intelligent discussion about something that doesn't exist!

      Delete
    11. ^^ Of course you can have an intelligent discussion about something that doesn't exist. You've never spent any time talking about movies, books or games?

      lol, Peter. When I checked in yesterday and saw 87 replies, I thought something interesting had happened. I'm not sure what lead to Professor Dawkins tweeting the link, but you can bet that a good number of his followers are going to disagree with you.

      Sorry, I should have been clearer with my point about disease. I understand that the bible says disease is a consequence of original sin. However you implied God uses it as a "targeted" form of punishment against specific sinners. There is no evidence that God "interferes" with the natural order of the world in any way. Heck if there was, it would be proof of His existence.

      Thanks for your thoughts on Syria, and the clarification that the Amorites was a special case. Could you envisage a situation of a God decreed special case today? What would convince you to follow/endorse someone that said God had spoken to them and we should eliminate a specific people?

      Delete
    12. One has to be very careful linking specific individual sins with specific individual diseases although there are some examples in the Bible. We also recognise that certain behaviours predispose people to particular illnesses (eg. smoking and lung cancer, promiscuity and STDs) but in many cases of illness there is no discernible link.

      The biblical picture focuses more on the link between the sins of a people or nation and God's judgement. This is the situation with the Amorites. The whole nation was guilty and held accountable.

      God is active in the rise and fall of nations today (by whatever means) but Jesus was very clear that his followers were not to take up arms to advance the gospel, merely to obey his command to love as he loved and to speak his truth.

      The issue of whether Christians as citizens should be involved in self-defence against an aggressor or participate in a just war between nation states is however much more complex and there are a variety of views on this. I am not a pacifist myself in that I think there are circumstances which justify taking up arms to protect ones family, community or country. But not all Christians would agree with me.

      The conquest of Canaan whereby God specifically commanded Israel to destroy the Amorites and others was I believe a historical one-off. But this does not mean that Israel as a nation has no right to defend itself against aggressors today.

      Delete
    13. "God is active in the rise and fall of nations today (by whatever means)"

      What is your evidence to back this up? Or what makes you think this is the case?

      Delete
    14. This is what the Scriptures clearly teach. And it is clear that the behaviour of nations correlates with their survival prospects. Most rot from within making them susceptible to destruction by whatever means.

      Delete
    15. But their behaviour is of their own choosing, because people have free will. How does this make God active in their rise and fall? Where do the scriptures teach this, and can you give me an example of it happening in recent history?

      Delete
    16. See the scriptures linked in the blog above. Every nation an empire is an example.

      Delete
    17. @ Shane Fletcher : Excuse me, but God being omniscient, He has forever known what the actions of each and every one of us would be.

      Better yet, He knew and saw every action of every future person as soon as the fifth day, at a time where no one of these people were yet in existence to make any of these decisions. Hence these decisions are not these people's - who did not exist at the time these decisions were already known - but are God's own design and will.

      Better yet, God saw every sin and every crime that His future creatures would perform, at a time these creatures did no exist, at a time then where God could quite freely change the path of things, and yet God chose to create our world and no other. God Himself chose every single sin and crime that has ever been performed by mankind.

      If God is omniscient, people cannot have free will.

      Delete
    18. @ Yogi - if God can see the choices all men will make, how does that remove from them the free will they exercise in making them?

      @ Peter - any nation that declares war on another does so with free will, and therefore God can claim no credit. As for natural disasters of famine, plaque or attack of wild animals, these are likewise out of God's control. There is no evidence at any time that the natural order of the universe has ever been suspended. A plaque of locusts does not get summoned from nothing. They are born

      Delete
    19. From parents. We had a mice plaque here in Australia in 2011. It was predicted by the CSIRO coming off the back of a wet Summer and a mild Winter. The wet Summer and mild Winter were themselves predicted based on movement of the great ocean currents which are based on melting of ice and the change of the salinity content of particular parts of the ocean.

      Regarding Ezekiel 14, the vast majority of countries do not believe in the Christian God and are unfaithful to him. There should be nothing but famine and plague and pestilence.

      Delete
    20. @ Shane Fletcher: What do you call "free will" when everything you will ever do is already written in God's Plan, and has been there even before mankind was even created?

      Then you're just a robot accomplishing whatever God has always known; that is: accomplishing whatever God had already decided on the fifth day. Your decisions are his, since he conceived them at a time you did not even exist to assume their responsibility.

      I don't see what you could ever call "free will" for the creature of an omniscient creator. Does a clock have "free will" for its watchmaker?

      Delete
    21. @shane The god you are describing is not the God of the Bible. I can understand now though why you think it is so powerless and why you don't think it is worth believing in or worshipping. I wouldn't bother either.

      Delete
    22. @Yogi - a watchmaker isn't omniscient, so that's not a good analogy. Accomplishing what God has known and accomplishing what God has decided are two very different things. Knowing the outcome of a toss of a coin is different to rigging the toss of a coin to give the outcome you want.

      Delete
    23. @Peter I'm describing the God that must exist in the world we live in. If you have evidence that things are different to how I describe them I would love to hear it.

      Delete
    24. God doesn't exist 'in' the world. He is both omnipresent (everywhere at once) and transcendent (outside the space time continuum).

      Delete
    25. @ Shane Fletcher: The watchmaker is the clock creator, that's the point you are overlooking.

      God is not only "omniscient", but is "omniscient creator", which means:
      1- God is tossing all coins, since he created this world with absolute knowledge of all consequences that would ensue,
      2- God having free will, he chose each and every one of these consequences, otherwise he would have tossed the coins differently.

      So no one can make any decision that has not actually been decided and designed by God.
      There can be no free will in a world built by an omniscient creator.

      Delete
    26. @Peter Again any evidence you have of this would be greatly appreciated.

      Delete
    27. @Yogi - No, you're confusing "creator" with "omnipotent". An omnipotent God can change things to fit in with the foreseeable consequences. But a creator that starts things off may be able to see the consequences without being able to alter them.

      So if God is omnipotent and omniscient then there can be no free will. But it is quite apparent that God is not omnipotent. He cannot control everything in the universe at a whim. There is no evidence he can affect any part of the universe. But he could have started things off through the Big Bang and then been able to see what happened. If the multiverse theory is correct and there are an infinite number of universes, then perhaps God has been firing them all off waiting to see which one would give him the outcome he desired.

      Delete
  2. So no matter what Jews do, in the eyes of God it's ok? Sounds like a load of shite.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you read the Bible you will see that God remained faithful to the Jews in spite of their unfaithfulness and sin. He refused to abandon them but he was very clear that he did not regard them as good (Deuteronomy 9:4-6).

      Delete
  3. God created the universe nearly 14 billion years ago and then waited for his chosen people to evolve. Of course He's patient.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. God is unbelievably patient but judgement will eventually come. We need to make sure that we are on the right side of it through faith in Jesus Christ because there is no other way to receive God's grace and forgiveness (John 3:16-18).

      Delete
    2. If you accept the preponderance of evidence that shows the Universe is ancient and all life on the planet evolved over aeons, how do you rationalise the "creation week" and a life of perfection that prefaced "the fall"?

      Delete
    3. I'd been interested in your reply to this too, Peter.
      Of course, Shane, Genesis does not refer to "perfection" before The Fall. (It also doesn't call the account of Adam, Eve and the Serpent "The Fall.")

      Delete
    4. Where did I say anything in this post about the age of the earth and how is this relevant to the Amorites?

      Wrt the Fall, the fall of Satan predated the fall of man, so all was not perfect immediately prior to Genesis 3.

      Delete
    5. You said God was patient, and used an example of 400 years. I was pointing out that as the Universe is around 14 billion years old, claiming patience for that 400 years is akin to looking at a guy who spends 2 years rebuilding a vintage car, and then claiming he's patient because he waited 10 minutes in line to buy petrol for it.

      Was Eden perfect? Was man perfect? Was the Earth and all the animal and plant life on it perfect? In short, was God's creation of the Universe, for the 14 billion years prior to the fall perfect? If you would like to address this in another blog post, I would be happy to wait. I'm pretty patient myself. ;-)

      Delete
    6. I am myself an 'old-earth creationist' and like you accept the generally accepted geological timescales. However human civilisation is very recent; the first cities only appeared a few thousand years ago so against that framework 400 years is a very long time. 1613 is quite a long time ago in human history.

      To answer the questions in your second paragraph would take a lot more space. I am very happy to do so in another blog post but some of it I think would be speculative. If by 'perfect' you mean 'without sin' then the short answers to your questions are as follows: 1. No because the devil was there. 2. Yes prior to the fall but not after. 3. We are not told but the devil was there before the fall of man.

      Thank you for your patience and your willingness to engage in discussion. Most atheists are not.

      Delete
    7. To be fair, most Christians aren't either. Or any religious fundamentalist. I'm a recent born again atheist, so I'm full of that missionary zeal at the moment. lol

      Well a whole new post concerns where did the devil come from. Was he created by God, without God's knowledge that he would turn evil? How are angels different from people, ie are they not created in God's image, and how does that relate to Lucifer?

      But back to the points, I don't mean without sin, but the consequences of sin. Was Eden a place of vegetarian animals without weeds or death (to bring up the first 3 things which seem mutually exclusive between creation/evolution)? If man (and all animals) evolved over time, through multiple generations, how can this occur without death, if man was perfect before the original sin?

      Delete
    8. Again you are raising complex questions which cannot be adequately answered in soundbites and would need more time to unpack. I can address them at more length in another blog if you would like me to. They are all very good questions and there are a range of views amongst Christian apologists and thinkers.

      The Bible tells us what we need to know for salvation but is not written to satisfy all our curiosities. It is a book for travellers rather than armchair philosophers.

      However, running the inevitable risks of brief explanations:

      1. The devil is a fallen angel. He was created good but rebelled and turned bad. He took other angels with him.

      2. Angels are intelligent beings but many are not fallen and so don't need salvation. They act as God's messengers but are not made in God's image in the same way that humans beings are. They are invisible but can choose to be visible for specific purposes.

      3. Christians fall into three main camps on the questions in your third paragraph. Young earth creationists would see all death as a consequence of the fall of man. Theistic evolutionists would see God in control over evolution with death occurring from the outset and man evolving like other animals. Old earth (progressive) creationists take a variety of views but accept that evolution plays a (limited) role in producing biological complexity. One view is that Eden was an enclave into which man was placed within a world already red in tooth and claw. If you are genuinely interested in pursuing this I can unpack it more. I would probably describe myself as an old earth progressive creationist in that I don't think chance and necessity alone can account for biological complexity and am deeply sceptical about human evolution.

      Delete
    9. Thanks, Peter. It's good that you've highlighted the breadth of opinion of Christians on this topic - which is often (?deliberately) not acknowledged by so-called 'militant' atheists. I find it helpful to know your own views on age of the earth/perfection etc. Given how prolific are your posts, and how many times this sort of thing comes up in discussion, I think your own views on this deserve a post dedicated to that alone. Sorry if I've missed it. I myself am a theistic evolutionist and I would probably go further than your (necessarily) brief description to make the point that what appears random depends on one's perspective, and may not be from a different perspective.
      Personally I would add 2 things further:
      1. If early Genesis is understood as an apologetic parable using the language of the "science" of the day, setting out a "theology" very different to alternative worldviews of the time, many problems generated by insisting it to be forensic history disappear. My understanding is that this is actually the approach which treats the scripture with the most integrity, whether we're talking spiritual or academic.
      2. On the notion of "perfect," the proper understanding of the Hebrew טוֹב usually translated as "very good" is not "perfect." Another suitable renderings are "efficient" and "fit for purpose" - note the same word is used in Judges 18 as the spies from the tribe of Dan describe the land of Laish. “Arise, and let us go up against them, for we have seen the land, and behold, it is very good.” They go on to describe the land as “spacious . . . a place where there is no lack of anything that is in the earth”. This hardly suggests that the land is perfect; rather, it is a suitable place for the tribe of Dan to fulfil its commission to “fill the earth and subdue it.”

      Delete
    10. More questions that would be cool to be answered in a new post:

      What is the difference between people and angels? Can fallen angels receive salvation by accepting Christ, and why don't they when they obviously know the truth? If they can't die like human's can do they have essentially a much longer time to accept Christ as saviour? Satan is supposed to proclaim the truth near the end of days, so does he get saved then and welcomed back into heaven?

      I don't understand how their can be interpretation differences over certain parts of the bible. Either you take it as fact or you don't. Suggestions that the creation part is an allegory just doesn't make any sense, because the 'morning/evening - the first/second/.../sixth day' part is very specific and could easily been replaced with equally poetic phrases about God fashioning the lands/animals through out the ages or aeons or any other term that meant a long period of time. If It also seems to me that using the phrase "God made woman to be with man" when condemning homosexuality is disingenuous if you believe in an evolutionary beginning to life on earth, and the whole point of man being perfect and living in an actual "Eden" free from death is a moot point if we had to evolve to get here. This is a large reason that I became an atheist. There is no doubt in my mind that the Universe is ancient and that all life on the planet came from a single source that evolved over time. The biological and genetic evidence is fairly plain. I am very interested in listening to your argument against evolution. And if evolution is true, then why, if God is all powerful, would he create a Universe so ancient, and see the rise and fall of so many species of animal, just to get to us and play out the last few thousand years of history that was important to him? The other option/question being, why would God make a Universe 6000 years ago, but leave false trails and evidence to suggest that the world/universe was ancient?

      Delete
    11. I think the text of Genesis 1 actually allows for a range of interpretations. Personally I see it as poetic/prophetic/apologetic. It is not history because there was no human observer.

      Genesis 2-5 however are different. There are named and identifiable geographical features, neolithic culture, definite lifespans, genealogies, personalities.

      Satan was there by chapter 3, telling us that the fall of angels predated the fall of man. It is not inconceivable that the fall of angels had effects on the nature of the world prior to man's arrival.

      I don't see that the text excludes a long time period before the creation of man, nor a cosmic fall before his arrival. In fact I would see the creation of man as a step in cosmic redemption and restoration. Jesus after all, as well as being fully God, became fully human.

      God's plan is not just to redeem human beings but the whole of creation. There will be a new heavens and new earth. This world is only the small and finite beginning of the great cosmic drama that is unfolding.

      Delete
    12. I would say Genesis 1 is not history because it is factually inaccurate. If there is one thing we have learned it is that human observation is dramatically flawed. People see things that aren't there and fail to see things that are there all the time. Scientific testing trumps observation every time.

      So where does the story of creation come from? If it is not told to man by God, then did man just make it up? The latter choice is obviously not good for the bibles legitimacy, but the former is not much better, as God was obviously lying. Is there a third choice?

      So God needed to create man to redeem the universe from Satans sin?

      Genesis seems pretty specific that weeds didn't exist before Adam sinned, snakes didn't crawl on the ground, and there was no pain in child birth. This is not scientifically accurate.

      Delete
    13. You are making a false distinction. Scientific testing relies on human observation.

      The story of creation in Genesis 1 was revealed. It is poetry/prophecy and not meant to be read as a scientific paper.

      God's plan of salvation involves both man and Satan. The effects of the fall of man in Genesis 3 were effects primarily for man. How do you know scientifically when human beings began to experience pain in childbirth?

      Delete
    14. Scientific testing relies on repeatable human observation by multiple people. I guess I should have said it trumps eye witness accounts of a one off occurrence.

      What do you mean Genesis 1 was revealed? And why wasn't it revealed accurately?

      Pain in child birth is due to the physical act of the baby emerging through the birth canal. Babies did not get dramatically bigger, nor the birth canal get dramatically smaller over a single generation.

      Delete
    15. This is precisely why historical events are established by the legal-historical method rather than by scientific experiment.

      Genesis 1 as I explained is not a scientific document but prophecy/poetry. It tells us who, why and what but not when and how.

      And I thought that pain sensation was transmitted by A delta and C neurone fibres. Silly me!

      Delete
    16. Scientific experiment can be part of the legal historical method. The two sources of information can be narrative or relic. Relic is preferred because it removes any bias that might be in a narrative.

      So you are suggesting there was a rewiring of the nerves in the female body?

      Delete
    17. Relics need themselves to be interpreted and are often not present. Most history relies on oral and written testimony rather than exhibits.

      I'm suggesting that you were not there to examine the neuroanatomy before and after the fall and that pain sensation is a subjective phenomenon that can change for a whole host of reasons.

      Delete
    18. And the greater the number of sources of oral and written testimony, the better the picture of history.

      Obviously neither of us were there. But evolution is a slow process and the suggestion that in a single generation a few thousand years ago pain was introduced into child birth, is, as you say, silly.

      Delete
  4. So what does slaughtering have to do with 'medical comments'?
    Just wonderin'

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This blog deals mainly with matters at the interface of Christianity and Medicine. But I do also diverge into other subjects - especially New Zealand, rugby, economics, developing world, politics and topics of general Christian and/or medical interest.

      Delete
  5. Hahahaha wow this is such bs. Can't understand how people believe this crap and find justification for it

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Now you can comprehend why the world is such a facking mess. They not only believe it, they think it is real, vital knowledge.

      Delete
    2. Jesus Christ believed and taught these things. If people followed his teaching the world would not be a mess. The world is a mess because of human sin.

      Delete
    3. Considering most wars and conflicts throughout history have been between religious groups whose opinions of a supernatural being differ fractionally from one another, I find the above statement wholly inaccurate and very offensive.

      Delete
    4. What religions did Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao and Hitler follow?

      Delete
    5. Stalin and Hitler were catholic. Pol pot was religious but not christian. You think that atheism is a religion?
      In 1813 your words her would have been respected, following. The expansion of knowledge and logic your words sound like that of a delusional mad man.
      http://www.examiner.com/article/refuting-the-myth-that-hitler-stalin-and-pol-pot-were-atheists-1

      Delete
    6. Hitler used religion (Catholic subtype) to his purposes. Stalin did exactly the same. In any case, this is totally irrelevant to the discussion, because WWII was not fought because of religion. And atheism is not a religion, as an educated doctor should really know ;)

      A good bunch of bloody crusades and this nice, still running institution we know as the inquisition (it's under a new name now, though), on the other hand... thanks, christianity for those! Or what about GWBush and his "message from god" that told him to bomb Iraq flat?

      Yeah, the national socialist Germany did what they did to jewish people, gypsies, homosexuals and other people they didn't like - or were useful scapegoats - but that was not the excuse for the war or the reason for it.

      Delete
    7. Atheism, like theism and pantheism is a world view.

      I don't accept that Stalin and Hitler were practising Catholics nor that there is any justification in Catholicism for their actions. It is profoundly intellectually dishonest to blame Catholicism for what they did.

      As Jesus said, 'by their fruit you shall know them'.

      Delete
    8. What religion do YOU think Hitler was, then? He may not have been your idea of a Catholic, but he'd be an odd kind of atheist who referred to 'my Lord' so much.

      Delete
    9. It's convenient to deny someone belongs to your religion when they embarrass you, isn't it?

      Delete
    10. And the "fruits" of the established "Christian" churches are arange of stuff - vast wealth for poncing around and a history of brutal subjugation of differing views

      Fuck them and the often fetid ancient guff they trawl for flakey support for their bollocky pronouncements.

      Delete
    11. It is Jesus Christ and the apostles who define the beliefs and boundaries of the Christian faith. If you want to know more about Christianity look to them and not to followers of the Prince of Darkness like Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot and Mao.

      Delete
    12. i Jesus Christ and the apostles who define the beliefs and boundaries

      they're merely characters in texts codged together to suit the political needs of an earlier set of flakey bullshitters

      no reason to believe that the pronouncements in the Bible are in any way purer/free of bias and bollocks than any later flummery by religoid creeps

      Delete
    13. Nice phrase 'intellectually dishonest'. Sums you up. I hope I never have to be treated by you.

      Delete
  6. That god sounds dreadful. I think I'll make up a nicer one.

    ReplyDelete
  7. How do you justify what the bible says should be done about women who cannot prove they are virgins? Oh I know by saying :
    "the bible is a collection of made up stories written by a collection of iron age nomadic shepherds and has no relevance the modern world", easy....

    ReplyDelete
  8. life as a deluded nut

    ReplyDelete
  9. God keeps his promises?

    What about when Jesus promised the disciples that he would return before they died?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Perhaps he did return, often, but decided not to tell anyone after what happened to him on his first visit.

      Delete
    2. If you want to know what Jesus said would happen before his return read the Olivet discourse in Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21.

      Delete
    3. Peter,

      Interesting stuff indeed and I think you do well to allow comments to the extent you do.

      As a translator, however, I find invitations to "read this, read that" from Biblical texts extremely problematic.

      Not only are the vast majority of original texts patchwork compositions using ancient tongues largely inaccessible to the general public, but there are also many, many different translations, in English alone.

      I would ask you to consider the oddity of inviting someone to read a) e.g. koiné Greek or b) a translation of the same, without citing the exact translation, if you expect such arguments from authority to have any such authority in any sense whatsoever.

      With regard to the above, if you do not yourself read NT Greek then you are quite literally "taking someone else's word for it" -- not just for this particular citation but, apparently, for the way in which you have chosen to lead your life.

      That I find strange, I must confess. Much stranger, in fact, than other Christian religious traditions such as personal witness, revelation, &c.

      Delete
    4. As you know the Bible was originally written in Hebrew (most of OT), Greek (NT) and Aramaic (some small parts of OT).

      These three languages are well understood and the biblical text is well established. Furthermore good critical commentaries based on the original languages are widely available.

      There are of course some variations in manuscripts and in interpretation but these do not affect any key historical claim or core doctrine.

      Delete
    5. >biblical text is well established.

      well established as being a load of blethery ancient guff made up by bullshitters to suit their scam of the day. Texts attributed to whoever they fancied would give it extra gloss (eg "Paul") - all with an ungainsayable magic pixie motif added whenever they felt the need for an added level of bollocks. All then picked over by a team of editors to suit a developing Romano temporal politico-religoid scam.

      aq steaming heap of guff being picked over for gobbets of toss to suit your prating pontificating - what a creep.

      Delete
  10. This blog seems like the ravings of a delusional person. It's amazing that someone with even the basest level of education could believe this carefully balanced stack of myth and superstition.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A delusion is an unshakeable false belief. The beliefs expressed in the blog post above are not delusions because they are not false.

      However the belief that there is no God is a delusion if unshakeably held because it is not true :-)

      Delete
    2. Peter, you left me speechless with your stunning argumentation. Thanks! :D

      Delete
    3. You have no proof that your beliefs are true, therefore you are deluded. Personal belief in the absence of evidence is not proof, it's delusion. It's actually quite simple, unless you are deluded, as you clearly are.

      Delete
    4. I don't know any Christians whose faith is not based on evidence.

      Delete
    5. Call a spade a spade19 September 2013 at 09:34

      So you're saying the existence of the Christian god can be proven with evidence

      Go ahead: present your evidence and prove it..

      Oherwise your beliefs are not evidenced and you are deluded.

      Delete
    6. I was a Christian for nearly 4 decades with no evidence. I was indoctrinated into the church by my grandmother. I believed it, much like Santa Claus, because I was told it was true by the adults in my life whom I trusted. I hope you don't mind me posting a link to my blog post which satirises this point. http://www.thesentientpuddle.com/?p=24

      I was a Christian for so long via my own apathy. It was examining the evidence that led me to the truth. If you have any evidence that affirms your beliefs, I would like to hear of it.

      Delete
    7. Examining the evidence took me in the opposite direction. What sort of church were you in?

      Delete
    8. I was raised a Presbyterian. I posted above the evidence that led me away from a belief in God. Would be interested in any evidence you have that showed the opposite.

      One more reason for my disbelief, is the problem with using God as a creator, but not needing a creator himself. I have read other posts in this blog that says we only need an explanation for things that have a beginning. God has no beginning and so needs no explanation. This is a cheat. And I will add, 2 questions; 1. How do you know God has no beginning? It says he has always existed, but if we take that to be from our perspective, than that is only from when time began with the creation of our universe. It does not preclude God from having a beginning from his own vantage point.

      2. How would God know he has no beginning?

      Delete
    9. God is outside the space-time continuum and therefore outside time. It is meaningless to talk of him having a beginning.

      Delete
    10. Again, he is outside our space-time continuum. Not his own. It is impossible for him to be outside his own. Our own location and clock is something that we each take with us wherever we go. If I travel at the speed of light then then rest of the universe speeds up and I can effectively travel into the future. But my own space-time continuum is a constant. Always.

      The bible written from a mankind point of view can see that God has always existed, but God's own point of view would be very different.

      Delete
    11. Fascinating that you think God exists within a space time continuum. How do you know this?

      Delete
    12. To ask where an omnipresent and transcendent being exists is not a helpful question. God is everywhere within the space time continuum but also present outside it.

      Delete
  11. Congratulations, you can now justify any abomination with "god wants it to happen". You've abandoned whatever concept of morality you had in favor of blind obedience to a book. Hopefully you're one of only a few that do this.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There are about 560 million evangelical Christians worldwide who believe in the authority of the the Bible. Many of the world's remaining 1.7 billion Christians would also take it very seriously.

      Delete
  12. God needs to go on trial for ethnic cleansing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Who would be the judge and what would be the basis of morality on which he would be judged?

      Delete
    2. His own rules! Come on! How can you be a scientist and voided of any logic. It baffles me.

      Delete
  13. You should be ashamed of daring to send such stuff to Richard Dawkins. You would do better to just keep all this bullshit for your personal pleasure. Why do you imagine for an instant that it might interest Dawkins and his readers?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, a lot of us have found a new ignorant numpty to laugh at...

      Delete
    2. In the four hours since Dawkins retweeted about 5,000 people have viewed this blog post. I would argue that that constitutes a level of interest.

      Delete
    3. There's a Youtube video of a butt scratching, finger sniffing chimp that's been viewed over 28 000 times. People obviously find that more interesting than what you have to say... Just putting things into perspective.

      Delete
  14. I'm stealing that "carefully balanced stack of myth and superstition" line. Brilliantly put.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My gift to you Walter. Take it out into the world.....

      Delete
    2. It's simply Christian theism. It is only myth if Christianity is not true. What's your case for that?

      Delete
    3. Christianity is based on the bible being fact. Starting from the first chapter of the bible, it states that the universe, and specifically the earth and all life on it was created over the course of a week several thousand years ago. The opening page demonstrates that the bible isn't fact.

      Delete
    4. Where does it state that? Can you give me chapter and verse?

      Delete
    5. The end of Genesis 1:05 is "there was evening, there was morning - the first day." Similar wording marks the first 6 days of creation.

      Delete
    6. The Hebrew as I understand simply says 'one day' after each phrase. The days are not numbered first, second etc in the text. The seventh day is incomplete. The word translated day does not mean 24 hours elsewhere in Scripture. The sun and moon do not come until the fourth day but you cannot have a 24 hour day without the sun. These are some of the problems with taking the text to mean seven consecutive 24 periods. The text of Genesis 1 allows for a longer time period and fits with prophetic/poetic descriptions. I don't have a problem with it.

      Delete
    7. Well Peter, if you had a problem with it, you would be where I am. :-)

      You also cannot create the Sun after the Earth was created. Like I say, it is obviously a false account. And it removes credibility from the bible as an authoritative source.

      Delete
    8. No Shane it is simply poetry/prophecy. If you realised what kind of document it was you would perhaps be where I am :-)

      It's arranged in three pairs of space/contents: heavens (day 1) filled by sun, moon, stars (day 4); sea and sky (2) f/b fish and birds (5); land and plants (3) f/b animals and man (6)

      Delete
    9. I had not heard it put that way before. So how does that track with:

      Exodus 20:11
      11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day.

      Exodus 31:17
      17 It will be a sign between me and the Israelites forever, for in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, and on the seventh day he rested and was refreshed.’”

      Delete
  15. Doesn't sound like a god worthy of my worship!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Please describe the kind of God that would be worthy of your worship.

      Delete
    2. I believe the humanoid progenitors revealed in TNG 6:20 are worthy of worship.

      cf. en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/The_Chase

      Of course, there is also a pretty compelling case to be made for worshiping the Bajoran Prophets.

      Delete
  16. Never mind that there isn't any evidence of the jews ever actually being slaves in Egypt.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The evidence is their own historical records. Are you suggesting that the Jews lied about their history? If so what is your evidence for that?

      Delete
    2. You mean the same history that denies jesus was the son of god? You're rather picky about which parts of other religions you believe in, aren't you. How do you explain the muslims "historical evidence" that jesus wasn't crucified?

      Delete
    3. Muslim 'evidence' comes from 7th century 'revelation', 600 years after the crucifixion. It is not eye-witness evidence and actually contradicts that of eye-witnesses. No serious historian doubts the historicity of Jesus' crucifixion. It is attested in both Christian and secular sources.

      Only some first century Jews denied Christ's divinity. The early Christian church was entirely Jewish and the twelve disciples and Paul, who largely wrote the New Testament, were all Jews.

      Delete
    4. > that of eye-witnesses

      where "eye-witness" = flakey guff recorded well after the event by bullshhitters touting a scam

      >It is attested in both Christian

      after the event bullshitters

      >and secular sources

      recording bullshitters claims at several removes

      >twelve disciples and Paul, who largely wrote the New Testament

      who had guff from a range of authors attributed to them as suited bullshitters codging together support for a political scam

      >Only some first century Jews denied Christ's divinity

      trinitarian bollocks that gained it's currency by brutal subjugation of differing positions on the flakey load of guff

      Delete
  17. "God regards sin as serious and will bring judgement"

    Seems that God would not be omniscient if He's got to wait for your death to judge you ...

    Actually, being omniscient and "out of the time", He has known forever, even before the sixth day, that you'd be a sinner.
    Actually, being omnipotent Creator, He chose to make this particular world in which you were a sinner. Even before you existed and could make any choice, He chose to make you a sinner.

    So who is He judging anyway?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Precisely. Roman 9 sets the stage but does not draw the conclusion.
      God gets mad at the sinner, whose sins God Himself chose and designed. As if the potter made some pottery "for common use" and then got mad at it because it is "for common use".
      It's either pervert or nonsensical.

      Human free will does not exist for an omniscient creator; therefore there can be no "judgment".

      Delete
    2. It's breathtaking that you, a mere human being, dare to judge God.

      Delete
    3. I do think a mere human being is entitled to judge a mere fictional character. Don't you dare to judge Zeus, Voldemort or Dr. Strangelove ?

      On the other hand, you seem to have no moral values if you accept that a creator may punish his creation for being exactly as it was created.

      Delete
    4. Aha. It's a fallen creation - not as created.

      Delete
    5. Do you mean that God did not know that His creation would fall when he created it?

      Either God is omniscient, he knew all along of the Fall, i.e. he chose to create a world that would eventually fall.
      Or God is not omniscient, he was taken aback by Adam's choice, he is clueless regarding human decisions, and he watches, baffled, human history as it unfolds.

      Which one is right?

      Delete
    6. God knew all along of the Fall and he knew that the price of giving human beings free will was that some would use it to rebel against him permanently.

      He then intervened at great personal cost to himself, through Christ, to rescue his fallen creatures.

      However some, still choose to shake their fists at him, mock those whom he had saved and obstinately go their own way to destruction.

      There are those who embrace God as creator and saviour and say, 'thy will be done'.

      There are also sadly others to whom God says, 'thy will be done' and he gives them their wish.

      He lets you choose which group you wish to be in so don't blame him for how it turns out if you refuse to be rescued.

      Delete
    7. If God is omniscient, then whatever happens is His will. The way things turn out is the way God wanted them to turn out, otherwise he would not have been omniscient when he created the world.

      God chose to create man a sinner, since that's the way things turned out. God himself chose who exactly among us would be shaking their fists at him, so why should he punish them?

      Delete
  18. Apparently Jeanne Calment didn't get the memo on the 120 year restriction.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Many people both before and after the flood lived more than 120 years but ages came down rapidly afterwards. There are one or two exceptions but 120 years as the ceiling is pretty accurate. Apparently genetically programmed, quite possibly something to do with telomerase.

      Delete
    2. Feeble wriggling crap - caught out making ridiculous claims based on a load of old drivel

      Delete
  19. Haha! This is great!
    When I started reading this I thought it was an anti-christian post. Finished reading it and still consider it an anti-christian post. A shame most people don't get that.

    And, by the way, I know of people older then 120... How can that be?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If there is anything in the post that is inconsistent with biblical teaching then by all means point it out. Re ages I refer the honorable member to the answer I gave some moments ago.

      Delete
  20. fuck god and all who sail in her

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. May the Lord bless you. I hope you find him.

      Delete
  21. 122 years old: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeanne_Calment

    ReplyDelete
  22. >t I do also diverge into other subjects

    such as blethery half arsed shite extrapolated from the fuckwitted rambling of ancient spivs and loons

    all on behalf a a ridiculous shitty little God concept puppet that dances to any bigots tune

    what a steaming pile of specious crap - take your wretched God and stick it, creep

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. May you cease spouting trite crap supported by duck all but feeble extrapolations from whatever ancient cock you fancy deifies your inane ramblings

      Delete
    2. May the Lord bless you even more

      Delete
    3. You have to keep reminding the flakey conceit?

      What a daft palaver.

      Delete
  23. Uhmmm...excuse me...the Exodus?...Moses who? This is what happens when fairytale stories get passed on as real life events. Sad that people in the 21st century believe this stuff.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And your evidence that Moses didn't exist and that the exodus didn't happen? I'm sure our Jewish readers are most interested to hear.

      Delete
    2. Actually it is up to you to prove he did not theother way around. Referring to a book nearly two millennia old does not constitute evidence, especially considering so many things stated in said book can be proven false.

      Delete
    3. If we wish to know what happened 2,000 years ago then written records from that time are precisely the kind of documents we should be consulting.

      Please go ahead and disprove the existence of Moses and the historicity of the Exodus. I'm sure our Jewish readers will be very interested to see your 'evidence'.

      Delete
  24. I was amused to see links to bible stories inserted as if they were academic references!

    ReplyDelete
  25. Didn't have to read very far before I came across the first error; the longest lived person ever was 122 years and 164 days old when they died (French woman by the name of Jeanne Calment). Try again...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. See above. The exception proves the rule.

      Delete
    2. It's not a general rule that you were claiming. You were specifically claiming a copper- bottomed, God ordained diktat plucked from a load of ancient toss to tart up your bullshitting with a magick ungainsayable motif.

      Delete
    3. It is a fact that there is a ceiling on human longevity at about 120 years. The Bible is right about this.

      Delete
    4. Feeble wriggling crap - the cheesy God character makes a very specific claim as to the limit - not a ballpark figure.

      You're an evasive bullshitter

      Delete
  26. It's always amazing to watch Christians try and rationalize genocide as the moral act of a good God. I'm sure it's what the guards working in Nazi death camps did.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Where is your evidence that the Nazis believed they were acting on God's instructions?

      Delete
    2. 1) German soldiers of the Nazi period having "Gott mit uns" on their belt buckles?

      2) And both Catholic and German Protestant churches signing treaties ( "concordats") with Adolf shortly after he was made Kanzler agreeing not to sermonise against the Nazi govt 's policies in return for Adolf allowing them to control education ( in an increasingly Nazified society where the schoolkids were all members of Hitler Youth or BDM) and support of his plan to invade Soviet Union and destroy Communism - always regarded by the religious as the real enemy due to its non-religious dogma.

      Do you dispute either of these assertions?

      Delete
    3. My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded only by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison! To-day, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before, the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross.

      Adolf Hitler (Munich speech, 12th April 1922)

      Delete
    4. This is why the US regards itself as a Christian nation. Americans can rationalize nuking Japan or throwing some napalm over Vietnam the same way they do it with their god. but if somebody attacks them it's terrorism, murder, the devil, etc.

      In many ways the US is a Christian nation, abhorrent to the rest of the world.

      Delete
    5. This is why the US regards itself as a Christian nation. Americans can rationalize nuking Japan or throwing some napalm over Vietnam the same way they do it with their god. but if somebody attacks them it's terrorism, murder, the devil, etc.

      In many ways the US is a Christian nation, abhorrent to the rest of the world.

      Delete
    6. The bible is full of warnings about false teachers that will twist and warp the scriptures and it instructs Christians to test teachers, and each other, to see if what they are saying is true to Gods word, or not. To do this requires a detailed knowledge of the Bible, as a whole, not as separate bits, as well as a repentant loving heart and the holy Spirit. Without the Spirit humans are stubborn and can twist anything to suit themselves, given opportunity.
      This speech quoted above goes against even the most basic understanding of the Bible, against its most important principle. Jesus died to take the punishment for our sins, as a free gift, through Gods works and grace, not ours, undeserved, so all who repent and follow him are saved, whether Jew or Gentile. Not to fight against the Jews, to save them.
      Christians should stand up against warping of the Bible, as I believe some did and lost their lives for, though not all do as we are also human and by nature fallible. I believe Hitler went even further with his twisting of the Bible and rewrote it, as he found the actual teachings contained in it offensive.

      (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-399470/Jewish-references-erased-newly-Nazi-Bible.html I'm sure there must be better references).

      This is why people should actually read Gods word for themselves, from cover to cover, multiple times, alone, as well as in mature Christian company, to develop a thorough grounding in its teachings in entirety, rather than just following blindly because someone else says to. Then politicians and false teachers will not be able to claim things are according to Gods will if they go against his word.
      As to how do you find mature Christian company? By their behaviour. Do they love God? Do they love their neighbour as themselves? When they correct or instruct do they do so out of love and a wish to help people experience Gods love and forgiveness rather than out of judgement or "holier than thou"ness? Do they love other people and God enough to spread his word? Though all people, including Christians, sin, a mature Christian should be trying to follow Gods word. Nobodies behaviour is perfect in this life, including Christians, but a true believers behaviour should become more Christ-like the more they study the Bible, rather than less.
      In conclusion, I do not believe Hitler loved Jesus as his actions did not follow Jesus' example or commands.
      Though this life is full of injustice, it will all be paid for. My sins - past, present and future, (because I am fallible, even though if I am one of Gods children I should try not to sin), and those of all Gods people, past present and future, are already paid for, in entirety, by the only blood sacrifice capable of doing so in our place, that of God himself.

      Delete
  27. This article lacks sanity.

    ReplyDelete
  28. >122 years and 164 days old when they died

    presumably doctors who treated her will be tortured for eternity by this cheesy loving God for interfering with the limit of human longevity which the wretched cock and ball swinging conceit set

    glad this creep isn't my doctor - what a fucking loon

    ReplyDelete
  29. So God's chosen people handed himself over to the Romans to be put to death on a cross. You couldn't make this stuff up...oh wait, someone did.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes you have it. God's chosen people handed God over to the Romans to be crucified. And his death and resurrection provided the means by which they could be forgiven.

      Delete
    2. "...by which they could be forgiven..." of the sins which god had lumbered them with in the first place. Your god doesn't seem too bright.

      Delete
    3. So God sacrifices himself to himself to save us from himself. As HarryR said, he doesn't seem too bright. He could have said "I forgive you" but no, your loving caring 'father' needs a blood sacrifice. He's the sort of God I don't want to know.

      Delete
    4. They didn't take his offer of forgiveness did they? His chosen people still deny the Son of God was the Messiah.

      Delete
    5. >his death and resurrection provided the means by which they could be forgiven.

      wak a fucking doodle - what a splendid level of weirdo creepy shite

      on what planet does such freaky blood crazed death cult magickery make sense ?

      It's like Harry Potter on drugs.

      Delete
  30. In the book of kings the Israelites were winning the battle agait the moabites, until the moabite king sacrificed his son, which turned the tide against the Israelites. If there is only one god then it must have been the Israelite god that accepted his human sacrifice and allowed him to kick the Israelites arses

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hey Peter, why don't you respond to the point made about your God accepting a blood sacrifice?

      Delete
  31. My Spirit will not contend with[a] humans for ever, for they are mortal;[b

    a or My spirit will not remain in

    wooooo, perhaps she became some sort of zombie

    did they teach you that at medical school - or is it just extrapolation from flakey ancient guff

    b Or corrupt

    some certainly seem prone to making up fantastical drivel and supporting it with fuck all but references to the often fetid rambling of ancient bigots, spivs and loons

    ReplyDelete
  32. >the interface of Christianity and Medicine

    such as stopping treating 119 year old patients so as not to interfere with some shitty God concept's plans as revealed in the rambling guff of ancient loons

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Is that for real? Head banging bible-literalist Christians believe no human lifespan can be longer that 120years because it was so decreed by The Big Fella after The Flood? It's like learning a bizarre technicality in chess or The Glass Bead Game that most people never get exposed to.

      Delete
  33. As dreadful, sad, delusional and made up all those excuses for religious violence is in the story that is posted here, by someone who clearly needs a serious intellectual wake up call... I am very happy to see mostly rational responses in the comments.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Will Christians hire a public relations consultant who might point out to them that defending the killing of whole tribes of men, women and children is not good PR?

    Try getting professional marketing advice and see if the image of Christianity improves.

    What have you got to lose?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The aim is not good PR but simply to tell the truth about how one can be saved. You will find the answers linked above.

      Delete
    2. ...yes please...I'd like to be saved from an imaginary scary place that doesn't exist. Where do I sign up?

      Delete
  35. The Almighty Flying Spaghetti Monster decreed that no one should live beyond 122 years and 164 days. A mystical tramp told me, and since no one has lived longer than that, then it proves both the existence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, and that the tramp was really a prophet.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tell us where we can find this mystical tramp so we can listen to his teachings and make up a book of nonsensical drivel that we will try to force everyone to believe in for the next two millennia and use as an excuse to kill those that don't.

      Delete
  36. These people are not delusional nuts, they are dangerous. Religion is about power and control facilitated through fear. why did I hit 32yr old before I read any major publicised critique of religion (good delusion) when I live in a liberal educated allegedly secular country. Look at the hatred and anger toward Dawkins and his book. Religion is dying so they will get even more dangerous to cling to power and authority, and focus more on kids because religion feeds on the vulnerable.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Christianity is growing faster than at any time in history. I can't say I know anyone who hates Dawkins. Most of the Christians I know just feel sorry for him.

      Delete
    2. It is mutual, I'm sure.

      And do you have numbers of conversation rates to back up that claim?

      Delete
    3. The numbers in Christianity he is referring to will likely be those who have been baptised. That is to say babies who can't even form a concept of God in their head much less than actually believe. Those who realise the truth about religion once they are old enough to do it will rarely get themselves removed from the church records making any quote of numbers of Christians wholly inaccurate.

      I was baptised and will still be in church records as a Christian but haven't believed in over 25 years, so if I am a person you would like to include just to keep your numbers inflated, your religion is in a much worse state than I had hoped.

      Delete
    4. Christianity is growing faster than ever before coos the world population never grew so fast. Is also being split into n many new sects, a bit like people she to eat, but they'll be vegan, gluten free, rawgan... Not much universalism there. Is consumer religion.
      Stunning that this man is a CEO of anything and not under prosecution for hated speech and justifying crimes against humanity.

      Here's a Godwin point: Hitler was god's agents in punishing sinners: Roma's (nomadic chicken thieves), Jews (they still don't believe in Jesus? Good is patient, but punishment was overdue), gays (except for the straight Nazi men in power who liked to experiment, but that's not gay, a bit like Michele bachman's husband, not gay, or any anti-gay prominent republican man).
      Yugoslavians have been wiped out too. They've been replaced by Slovenes Serbs and shit. Act of god.

      Delete
  37. Never mind that there isn't any evidence of the jews ever actually being slaves in Egypt.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Are you discounting the Jews own historical records? Do you do the same for all other civilisations as well or is it just the Jews?

      Delete
  38. give me a child until he's seven - and I'll fuck him up

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-17458376

    ReplyDelete
  39. Your justification of the israelite wiping out a whole nation just to get their Lands could equally be applied to the Nazis attempts to wipe out jews, gypsies,gays,slavs,balts etc and any political opponents. #TimeToReevaluateYourValues

    ReplyDelete
  40. Your God is a mass delusion. You are a monster.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Really scary that a qualified and supposedly educated doctor can spout this stuff. What an invitation to genocide -

    "If he decides to wipe a nation out, in this case by using the nation of Israel as his instrument, then that is his prerogative"

    Obviously 'he' can't say who should and shouldn't be wiped out, so that's down to his 'representatives' on earth...

    - I suggest you find someone else to do your thinking for you.

    ReplyDelete
  42. 1. The nations belong to God
    You are begging the question. You cannot quote scripture for evidence of itself.

    2. Human beings are mortal
    Really? I couldn't tell.

    3. God is sovereign over the nations
    Then why were there so many gods before AND after this scripture was written?

    4. God is incredibly patient
    Is he? He wasn't patient when he decided to wipe out the earth of humans because he hated them. He's quite a dick for letting "his people" suffer but letting the pagans do whatever. Sounds like a jerk more than a patient, humble entity. And how could God suffer? it's not possible for him to - I mean... hello... he's God. Suffering isn't perfection, God is perfection, God cannot suffer.

    5. God regards sin as serious and will bring judgement
    God made rules to punish people for doing things he knows they will do. Sounds like a self-righteous ass instead of an all-loving God. And he hates "fags" yet we are called to love everyone. Contradict much?

    6. God delivers on his promises
    That'll be the day... He promised to take care of me yet I was left fatherless, abandoned by most of my family, without money, with a mother who had to work two jobs just to support me... yeah way to deliver on that promise. My life is much better once I stopped believing in his nonsense.

    7. God will protect his people
    Again, read the above. I wasn't protected from s**t. Just because I'm alive and breathing isn't a testament to his protection. I've made it on my own, and made it even better once I said eff off.

    8. God disciplines his people
    God's discipline is annihilation. Supposedly pagans are also his people, but their punishment is to burn in a fiery pit forever (as if its possible to burn forever...)

    9. There is something far more serious than a violent death
    Oh yeah? Please tell me what comes after death... life again? I die a violent death by the wrath of god, and get sent to hell to burn forever and ever... sounds like a self-righteous narcissitic jerk who can't stand people not believing him. Well stop hiding and prove your existence. Stop letting science and philosophy disprove your existence. If you're so mighty, prove it. Not supposed to question god, but he gives no reason to believe him when science and philosophy prove much more than a book written by a bunch of incompetent idiots who can't even get their stories straight between each other...

    10. We all need to turn to God
    Ha...ha......... ha.... I just can't go by scripture that's full of holes to tell me that I need to "turn to god" when he's turned his back on me so many times. There's no comfort in suffering other than delusions and platitudes. Maybe when he decides I'm worth showing himself to, maybe then I'll "turn to god."

    ReplyDelete
  43. No group of people that have ever committed genocide has done it without justifying it for themselves in some way. Congratulations for finding justifications for your own favourite historical mass murder. I recommend you to read the following: http://www.genocidewatch.org/aboutgenocide/8stagesofgenocide.html

    ReplyDelete
  44. Peter Saunders, do you ever feel like your fighting a losing battle? What if you reach the end of your life and you close your eyes for the last time and nothing happens. You just die, no soul to ascend to heaven. Would your life have been wasted? Could you have done something more substantial with your life to help the poor and the down trodden. Perhaps you should live your life more like Jesus and lead with your actions and stop wasting your words here to the throngs of non-believers.

    ReplyDelete
  45. PJ should stick to playing antique Risk, and not advocate for genocide and nation cleansing. Something not subtle is telling me this man is trying to justify a Palestinian genocide.
    I wouldn't bother to engage in a debate with this man. What's there to debate about good holy genocides and bad child sacrifice.
    Anyway, I'll go back to raping my future wife now.
    Amen.

    ReplyDelete
  46. It is frightening that a group can wipe out an entire civilization and just claim they are being used by god to bring justice against their "sins." There is no accountability for religious people. They claim that it is god's will that it happened.
    A non believer living a good life, who's polite and treats people with respect is condemned to punishment for eternity. A criminal, a murderer, a sexual abuser that accepts Jesus as his savior and asks god for forgiveness is rewarded after death. This sounds like a backwards way of thinking to me, but then again I wasn't alive in the bronze age when this stuff was being thought up and written.

    ReplyDelete

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.