Those heathen Canaanites sacrificed some children

Argue for and against Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
Zzyzx
Site Supporter
Posts: 25089
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 10:38 pm
Location: Bible Belt USA
Has thanked: 40 times
Been thanked: 72 times

Those heathen Canaanites sacrificed some children

Post #1

Post by Zzyzx »

.
Those heathen Canaanites sacrificed some children so we 'children of God' invaded, slaughtered everyone, killed ALL their children, and enjoyed smashing babies against rocks.

We are the good guys because we're God's chosen people and he told us to kill those people – and besides, they lived on land that we wanted; and they worshiped Baal.

Everyone should worship our God because he is the God of love and righteousness.

References:

Numbers 21:3 And the LORD hearkened to the voice of Israel, and delivered up the Canaanites; and they utterly destroyed them and their cities: and he called the name of the place Hormah.

Deuteronomy 20:17 But thou shalt utterly destroy them; namely, the Hittites, and the Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites; as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee:

Deuteronomy 7:1-5 When the LORD thy God shall bring thee into the land whither thou goest to possess it, and hath cast out many nations before thee, the Hittites, and the Girgashites, and the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and mightier than thou; And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, [and] utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them: Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son. For they will turn away thy son from following me, that they may serve other gods: so will the anger of the LORD be kindled against you, and destroy thee suddenly. But thus shall ye deal with them; ye shall destroy their altars, and break down their images, and cut down their groves, and burn their graven images with fire.

Psalm 137:9 Happy is the one who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks.


How can this be justified or excused -- let alone be made to sound noble or heroic?
.
Non-Theist

ANY of the thousands of "gods" proposed, imagined, worshiped, loved, feared, and/or fought over by humans MAY exist -- awaiting verifiable evidence

User avatar
rikuoamero
Under Probation
Posts: 6707
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 2:06 pm
Been thanked: 1 time

Post #251

Post by rikuoamero »

[Replying to post 248 by JLB32168]
You are taking one verse in the Pentateuch while ignoring the other four books. There are a multitude of places in Leviticus, for example, that speak out the reception of converts. Why do you guys constantly build arguments upon one verse to the exclusion of all other verses??
Exactly the same charge can be levied against you JLB. You are ignoring what it says in Deut 20, and other places, where they talk about slaughtering everyone in a given city or population.
No – I attempt to reconcile all the verses with one another since the people who wrote them down didn’t see a problem with them or they would have simply revised them.
I don't operate under the assumption that there is a story that can be reconciled out of all the verses. I've read many books, sometimes from those with multiple authors, where they contradict each other, in the final published versions.
You just ignore those verses that don’t advance your argument and make no attempt to address them.
Again, right back at yourself. You ignore the passages that describe commands to kill everybody.
That you speak of how others ignore verses while apparently being oblivious to your own avoidance of certain verses is uproarious in its irony.
At best, we're both guilty of the same thing then.
Well, when the text says, “ . . . because they let their children pass through the fires of Moloch� then how shall we interpret their motives, prey expound?!
Did the Canaanites who did that religious practice think it was wrong? I don't think so. It is entirely possible that if one lives in a city, and a foreign army marches up demanding that you renounce your religion or die, that you might just distrust any offer of peace from that army.
Okay – so may we have your credentials so we can see how your opinion trumps that of a rather large group that doesn’t classify them as genocide?
May I ask in exchange why I apparently need to have historian credentials before I can class something as a genocide? Alex gave a rather thorough definition of genocide, and it looks to me like what is described in the Joshua Conquest stories meets that definition.
I don't need a college education to say "This meets that definition".
And since the Hebrews didn’t kill whole populations of people, nor attempt to wipe their cultures from the planet, you cannot sustain the ridiculous charge that they committed genocide.
What do you think demanding that someone renounce their religion is, if not an attempted destruction of culture?
Imagine if I lead an army into Saudi Arabia, whose culture and legal system are based on their religion. If I demand that Saudis renounce their religion because Practice XYZ of that religion is evil in my eyes, then how am I not attacking the culture as well?
Shall I bring up later verses from the Old Testament about pulling down altars to other gods?
Image

Your life is your own. Rise up and live it - Richard Rahl, Sword of Truth Book 6 "Faith of the Fallen"

I condemn all gods who dare demand my fealty, who won't look me in the face so's I know who it is I gotta fealty to. -- JoeyKnotHead

Some force seems to restrict me from buying into the apparent nonsense that others find so easy to buy into. Having no religious or supernatural beliefs of my own, I just call that force reason. -- Tired of the Nonsense

JLB32168

Post #252

Post by JLB32168 »

alexxcJRO wrote:I asked you why do believe the Israelites didn’t committed genocide.
And I said that they didn’t attempt to erase entire peoples and their cultures from off the face of the earth, which is how the term “genocide� is commonly understood. I produced evidence to that affect.
You simply cited recent cases of genocide in Africa where one group did attempt to extinguish entire peoples and their cultures.

Oh – and you cited an example of one person who said that Genghis Kahn acted as a genocidal ruler.

And you ignored the fact – several times – that Ivan the Terrible did the same thing in Russia that the Hebrews did in Canaan but no one has ever said that Ivan the Terrible committed genocide, which exposes your illogical use of a double standard (called a fallacious "special pleading")

Your arguments fail on so many levels.

JLB32168

Post #253

Post by JLB32168 »

rikuoamero wrote:Exactly the same charge can be levied against you JLB. You are ignoring what it says in Deut 20, and other places, where they talk about slaughtering everyone in a given city or population.
WILL YOU PLEASE ATTEMPT TO RECONCILE OTHER SCRIPTURES WITH WHAT YOU SAY THAT DEUTERONOMY SAYS IN CHAPTER 20? The writers had no problem with it and didn’t see a discrepancy. Were they stupid?? Why do you refuse to address the other scriptures that clearly said that entire groups of peoples were spared? I have addressed yours. Other texts say that people were spared. Yours says kill ‘em all. Clearly the two must be reconciled since the writers couldn’t have been oblivious to the discrepancy. The only logical conclusion is that people were spared while others who resisted were utterly destroyed because they refuse to renounce their religions of death.
Your response has been to avoid those verses that advance my argument altogether and merely repeat your point over and over in spite of evidence against it. That’s called a fallacious ad nauseam.
rikuoamero wrote:I've read many books, sometimes from those with multiple authors, where they contradict each other, in the final published versions.
So what do you do with a contradiction – ignore the part you don’t like and build an idea upon half the information??
rikuoamero wrote:You ignore the passages that describe commands to kill everybody.
Nope – I’ve addressed them and shown how the contradiction is perfectly reconcilable. YOU HAVE DONE NOTHING LIKE THAT. YOU ARE JUST REPEATING YOUR ARGUMENT FOUNDED UPON HALF THE INFORMATION OVER AND OVER AGAIN.
rikuoamero wrote:Did the Canaanites who did that religious practice think it was wrong? I don't think so.
Okay – so they thought it was okay to throw kids into fires. The Hebrews should have simply left them alone.
rikuoamero wrote:What do you think demanding that someone renounce their religion is, if not an attempted destruction of culture?
Only if religion is the be all and end all of culture. Are you saying it is??? So atheists have no culture?

User avatar
rikuoamero
Under Probation
Posts: 6707
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 2:06 pm
Been thanked: 1 time

Post #254

Post by rikuoamero »

[Replying to post 251 by JLB32168]

For the record, here is one academic who talks about Genghis Khan and genocide.

Alan D. Cooper is a professor at North Carolina Central University. He is the chair of the Political Science department.
http://www.nccu.edu/directory/details.cfm?id=acoope44
My expertise is in the area of international law with an emphasis on human rights, questions of genocide and terrorism,
I have published five books related to international law; four exploring questions related to southern African politics and the last one analyzing why and where genocide occurs.
Now what exactly does he say in that book?
Page 132 of Geography of Genocide
Genghis Khan sought to exercise power over the populations inhabiting his empire. Genocide became a hobby for Genghis Khan, and when all was said and done, it is possible that more than 30 million people had died from his empire-building and that of the Mongol leaders who succeeded him
From where I stand, alex earlier provided a very thorough definition of genocide. JLB rejects that GK meets this definition. Here, I have an academic, someone who specialises in research on genocides (among other things), and this person says that GK did genocide.
I await JLB's rebuttal.
Image

Your life is your own. Rise up and live it - Richard Rahl, Sword of Truth Book 6 "Faith of the Fallen"

I condemn all gods who dare demand my fealty, who won't look me in the face so's I know who it is I gotta fealty to. -- JoeyKnotHead

Some force seems to restrict me from buying into the apparent nonsense that others find so easy to buy into. Having no religious or supernatural beliefs of my own, I just call that force reason. -- Tired of the Nonsense

Elijah John
Savant
Posts: 12235
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 8:23 pm
Location: New England
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 15 times

Post #255

Post by Elijah John »

alexxcJRO wrote: [/i]Q: Why are you lying ? :)) :shock:
Moderator Comment

You're attempt to soften your accusation of lying with a smile emoticon is noted. Still, accusing others of lying is uncivil. I advise you to tread very carefully especially now that you have recieved a final warning. Another serious infraction will trigger a probation vote.

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.
My theological positions:

-God created us in His image, not the other way around.
-The Bible is redeemed by it's good parts.
-Pure monotheism, simple repentance.
-YHVH is LORD
-The real Jesus is not God, the real YHVH is not a monster.
-Eternal life is a gift from the Living God.
-Keep the Commandments, keep your salvation.
-I have accepted YHVH as my Heavenly Father, LORD and Savior.

I am inspired by Jesus to worship none but YHVH, and to serve only Him.

User avatar
alexxcJRO
Guru
Posts: 1319
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2016 4:54 am
Has thanked: 45 times
Been thanked: 160 times

Post #256

Post by alexxcJRO »

[Replying to JLB32168]

"And I said that they didn’t attempt to erase entire peoples and their cultures from off the face of the earth, which is how the term “genocide� is commonly understood. "

Firstly,

Again the 100th time; maybe this time you will get it:

The UN definition, which is used in international law, is narrower than Lemkin's, and states that genocide is: "...any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part , a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."


You keeping saying over and over that genocide is destroying entirely or trying to destroy entirely, but the definition clearly specify “acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or (annnnnd wait for it, here it comes) in part a national, ethnical, racial religious group.

Intent to destroy in whole is not a necessary condition for genocide to occur.
Intent to destroy in part is a sufficient condition for genocide to occur.


Secondly,

You said because lion’s share of historians have this conviction: that Genghis Han didn’t committed genocide.

Q: How did you came to the conclusion that lion’s share of historians have the conviction that
Genghis Han didn’t committed genocide?
"It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets."
"Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived."
"God is a insignificant nobody. He is so unimportant that no one would even know he exists if evolution had not made possible for animals capable of abstract thought to exist and invent him"
"Two hands working can do more than a thousand clasped in prayer."

User avatar
alexxcJRO
Guru
Posts: 1319
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2016 4:54 am
Has thanked: 45 times
Been thanked: 160 times

Post #257

Post by alexxcJRO »

[Replying to rikuoamero]

I provided too a book written by the Frank McLynn (historian) called : "Genghis Khan, His Conquests, His Empire, His Legacy".

On page 68 he says:

"it was
clear he had something of an obsession with this tribe – while Temujin
prepared a self-avowed campaign of genocide against the Tartars."


"Francis James McLynn FRHistS FRGS (born 29 August 1941), known as Frank McLynn, is a British author, biographer, historian and journalist. He is noted for critically acclaimed biographies of Napoleon Bonaparte, Robert Louis Stevenson, Carl Jung, Richard Francis Burton and Henry Morton Stanley.

McLynn was educated at Wadham College, Oxford[1] and the University of London.[2] He was Alistair Horne Research Fellow at St Antony's College, Oxford (1987–88) and was visiting professor in the Department of Literature at the University of Strathclyde (1996–2001)[3] and professorial fellow at Goldsmiths College London (2000–2002)[4] before becoming a full-time writer."


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_McLynn

Waiting for his reply. This for sure will be interesting to watch. 8-)
"It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets."
"Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived."
"God is a insignificant nobody. He is so unimportant that no one would even know he exists if evolution had not made possible for animals capable of abstract thought to exist and invent him"
"Two hands working can do more than a thousand clasped in prayer."

JLB32168

Post #258

Post by JLB32168 »

rikuoamero wrote:Alan D. Cooper is a professor at North Carolina Central University. He is the chair of the Political Science department.
Okay – so now there are two people in the world who agree that Genghis Kahn, who killed millions in attempts to wipe out entire ethnic groups, committed genocide.

You’re still left with the fact that the text of the OT says that the Hebrews made no attempt to wipe out entire peoples and their cultures.
rikuoamero wrote:From where I stand, alex earlier provided a very thorough definition of genocide. JLB rejects that GK meets this definition.
Yes, I reject it because it doesn’t comport with the Hebrew actions of sparing large groups of people from destruction and only attempted to wipe out a religion. The illogic of Alex’s and now you’re argument is only exacerbated by the fact that even though directed to wipe out those individuals who maintained their baby-killing religion, the Hebrews did not do as they were directed.

In order to commit genocide, you actually have to obey the directive to kill the people you’re directed to kill. Do you disagree?

So here are two fails with your argument.
  • 1. Genocide is the attempt to wipe out an entire people and their culture. The Hebrews were not directed to wipe out entire peoples and their cultures. They were directed to wipe out those individuals w/in each people/culture who refused to abandon their religion that required the immolation of infants in fires.

    #2 – Even though they were directed to wipe out those individuals w/in each people/culture who refused to abandon their religion that required the immolation of infants in fires they didn’t obey the directions and for that reason the odious religion infected them and they were judged for it according to the text by being invaded by the Assyrian, then the Babylonian, and finally the Medo-Persian Empires.
You have no argument. It’s that simple.

User avatar
alexxcJRO
Guru
Posts: 1319
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2016 4:54 am
Has thanked: 45 times
Been thanked: 160 times

Post #259

Post by alexxcJRO »

[Replying to JLB32168]

Avoiding my posts like the plague.8-)

“Hebrews made no attempt to wipe out entire peoples and their cultures. “

Again? Please not again! :?

Yep. He did it again. :shock:

The UN definition, which is used in international law, is narrower than Lemkin's, and states that genocide is: "...any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part , a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."


You keeping saying over and over that genocide is destroying entirely or trying to destroy entirely, but the definition clearly specify “acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or (annnnnd wait for it, here it comes) in part a national, ethnical, racial religious group.

Intent to destroy in whole is not a necessary condition for genocide to occur.
Intent to destroy in part is a sufficient condition for genocide to occur.


Also

You said because lion’s share of historians have this conviction: that Genghis Han didn’t committed genocide.

Q1: How did you came to the conclusion that lion’s share of historians have the conviction that
Genghis Han didn’t committed genocide?

Q2: So did Genghis Han committed genocide ?(Yes/No question)
"It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets."
"Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived."
"God is a insignificant nobody. He is so unimportant that no one would even know he exists if evolution had not made possible for animals capable of abstract thought to exist and invent him"
"Two hands working can do more than a thousand clasped in prayer."

User avatar
otseng
Savant
Posts: 18629
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Has thanked: 147 times
Been thanked: 228 times
Contact:

Post #260

Post by otseng »

JLB32168 wrote: You have avoided this question several times now and it’s very telling. Maybe alexx can give it a try since you don't seem to want to tackle the question - assuming he bothers to read it after I ignored his posts several times.
:warning: Moderator Final Warning

Please do not make any comments of a personal nature.

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator final warnings serve as the last strike towards users. Additional violations will result in a probation vote. Further infractions will lead to banishment. Any challenges or replies to moderator warnings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

Post Reply