| harbin336 | |
 |
 |
| () | |
| RE: testing on
topics you may disaggre with 06/21/07 09:00pm |
Knowledge Tests,Biblical Hypocrisy & Abortion
or,,,how is a woman like a chicken?
|
|
||||||||
okay,,silvriis,
~It always amazes me how many times this God orders the killing
of innocent people even
after the Ten Commandments said ?Thou shall not kill?~
Kill?or murder?Prove its KILL,,and not murder.You can't,,can you?
~For example, God kills 70,000
innocent people because David ordered a census of the people (1
Chronicles 21).~
ummm,,God kills them right?Or brings them home?
Will the pot ask the potter,,what doest thou?
~God
also orders the destruction of 60 cities so that the Israelites
can live there. He
orders the killing of all the men, women, and children of each
city, and the looting of
all of value (Deuteronomy 3). He orders another attack and the
killing of ?all the
living creatures of the city: men and women, young, and old, as
well as oxen sheep, and
asses? (Joshua 6). In Judges 21, He orders the murder of all the
people of
Jabesh-gilead, except for the virgin girls who were taken to be
forcibly raped and
married.~
Well,,if Sihon,the King of Heshbon had heard the words of
peace(Deut3v26) and allowed Israel to pass through the
land(v27),,buy provisions while they walked through then maybe it
would have been different right?
Of course,,considering that it was a primitive people with some
really nasty ways of
worshipping their gods and satisfying their base desires,,I
personally think it was a matter of removing a 'disease' infected
set of people.Why else would He include animals if not due to the
rule of executing both human and animal that participated in the
act of bestiality?
After all,,it isn't like they had penicillin back then.You do
know where syphillis came
from don't you,silvrii?Yeah,,a virgin would still be
uninfected,,right?
Of course,,He knew it,,so He hardened Sihons heart so there would
be no question of the outcome.
Regarding the book of Judges,,you have to read all the way to the
end of it to really get the context of the times,,Ch21v25,,'In
those days there was no King in Israel;every man did that which
was right in his own eyes.'
Note,,not Gods.
Judges 21:For this one,,you have to back up to get the
context,silvrii.
Back in Chapter 19 a man had his concubine/wife murdered while in
Gibeah,,of the Benjamites.
There were men in this town that were described as men of
Belial,,that's a god,,and a nasty one.They acted in a manner as
bad as that ascribed to those is Sodom,,they wanted to rape the
man.
Well,,even tho the mans host offered these pervs his own two
daughters instead of the man they wouldn't let up.Finally,,the
man gave his wife/concubine to them and they raped her to death.
That man goes home and tells the rest of his tribe,,they call on
all of the other tribes and go and raze Gibeah,,and kill all the
men except 600 or so.
Then,,becoming contrite,,because the name of Benjamin was
cutoff,,they try to figure out how to straighten up the mess.They
go to the House of the Lord,(Ch21v2) ask God (v3) then they make
a decision,,God said NOTHING to them.(v5,v6,v7,v8,v10-11)
So,,in that case,,you are patently incorrect.
~In 2 Kings 10:18-27, God orders the murder of all the worshipers
of a different god in their
very own church!~
Nope,,again you are patently incorrect.That was at the order of
Jehu,,not God.
Now,,in v30,,God did tell Jehu something.But Jehu didn't take it
to heart(v29,v31)so God began to cut Israel short(v32)
~So were is killing forbidden?~
Killing is accidental.
Murder is forbidden.
Execution is demanded,,'so that these things will cease from
among you'.
With all due respect to all on this planet,
The DANG - DINGIE American
aka,, The Evil White Man
|
|
||||||||
Sorry, harbin, does not wash. God ordered to intentionally exterminate peoples, children included. You may hypothetize that they were all infected with some disease, but the Bible does not say so. Why are you surprised that God did? The idea that life of every human is precious is a very late one. Never before in history a life of every human being was considered precious. It all depended on what particular human: lives of slaves were zip, lives of kings somewhat more precious. Certainly not 2000-3000 years ago!
|
|
||||||||
Dimitri?
~Sorry, harbin, does not wash. God ordered to intentionally
exterminate peoples, children included.~
Not in the verses 'silvrii' cited.
~You may hypothetize that they were all infected with some
disease, but the Bible
does not say so.~
No one claimed it did.I hypothesized.And I said as much.
~Why are you surprised that God did?~
Did what?In the passages silvrii (YOU?) cited his claim was that
God ordered the executions.
As you can see,,as I pointed out,,he was wrong.
Wasn't he?Pick up a KJV.
~The idea that life of every human is precious is a very late
one.~
Not yet,,but many are trying to kill it.
And it ain't in a coffin and buried just yet.
Even if,,with God stuff,,that wouldn't be the end anyway,would
it?
~Never before in history a life of every human being was
considered precious.~
Yet God did say that 'passing children through the fire to
Moloch' was detestable,,didn't he?
AND,,that such a thing had never even came into His mind.Right?
And to commit murder was NOT desirable as well,,right?
And to beat your servant to death was verboten as well.
So,,no murder,,,but NOT every life was considered precious?
(??,,can't murder adults,,can't beat your slave to death,,can't
sacrifice children,,who's left?What HUMAN LIFE doesn't fall under
that equation??)
That was one of the BIG differences between Yahaveh and the
'other dieties' of the region and age.
Have you read the Bible,Dimitri?Or just the NT?
Have you read anything about those ancient religions?
~It all depended on what particular human: lives of slaves were
zip, lives of kings
somewhat more precious. Certainly not 2000-3000 years ago!~
In what culture,,what peoples?That statement is way too vague and
amorphous for me to believe you expect me to take it seriously
regarding to the Hebrews/Israelis.Do you?
After all,,God is not a respector of persons.
With all due respect to all on this planet,
The DANG - DInGIE American
aka,, The Evil White Man
|
|
||||||||
20:23
Now the children of Israel went up, weeping before the Lord till
evening,
requesting the Lord and saying, Am I to go forward again to the
fight against the
children of Benjamin my brother? And the Lord said, Go up against
him.
Seems to me that is a Command from the Lord God to Go and
slaughter.
|
|
||||||||
Allrighty
then,,I see how you guys want to be.
Lets be specific and terse.
claim:
~In Judges 21, He orders the murder of all the people of
Jabesh-gilead~
FALSE
PROOF:
Then,,becoming contrite,,because the name of Benjamin was
cutoff,,they try to figure out how to straighten up the mess.They
go to the House of the Lord,(Ch21v2) ask God (v3) then they make
a decision,,God said NOTHING to them.(v5,v6,v7,v8,v10-11)
claim:
~Seems to me that is a Command from the Lord God to Go and
slaughter.~
THAT'S an OPINION,,just like my hypothesis REGARDING why God
might want them dead.
COMMENT:
So,,in that case,,you are patently incorrect.
PROOF:
20:7 Behold,ye are all children of Israel;give here you advice
and counsel.
20:8 And all the people arose as one man, saying, We will not any
of us go to his tent, neither will we any of us turn into his
house.
20:9 But now this shall be the thing which we shall do to
Gibeah;we will go up by lot against it.
And they went to Gibeah and said:
20:13 Now therefore deliver us the men, the children of Belial,
which are in Gibeah, that we may put them to death, and put away
evil from Israel. But the children of Benjamin would not hearken
to the voice of their brethren the children of Israel:
20:14 But the children of Benjamin gathered themselves together
out of the cities unto
Gibeah, to go out to battle against the children of Israel.
Even though they were facing a force of over 400,000 with only
'20 and 6 thousand'
(20:15 - 17)
20:18 And the children of Israel arose, and went up to the house
of God, and asked counsel of God, and said, Which of us shall go
up first to the battle against the children of Benjamin?
And the LORD said, Judah shall go up first.
COMMENT:
God said,,Judah would go up first,,not go slaughter women and
children.
(THIS WAS THE FIRST ATTACK and they lost 18,000 men)
THEN:
20:23 Now the children of Israel went up, weeping before the Lord
till evening,
requesting the Lord and saying, Am I to go forward again to the
fight against the
children of Benjamin my brother? And the Lord said, Go up against
him.
COMMENT:
(Go up against.Not go murder women and children)
COMMENT:
OH,,BTW,,they were attacking a city filled and ran by Sons of
Belial and those who
advocated and defended the right of the pervs to rape
someone,,even to death.They were psychopathic murdering rapist
perverts.That makes it execution,,not killing nor murder.)
For any who wishes to look and see for themselves,,click this:
http://etext.virginia.edu/etcbin/kjv2www?specfile=/te...
With all due respect to all on this planet,
The DANG - DInGIE American
aka,, The Evil White Man
|
|
||||||||
~There is not a single liberal who talks about a right to slay children.~
I offer for your consideration the liberal mantra of,,
"My body,my right,my choice.'
Of course,,we all know that this is equal with,,,
'I have a right to choose to slay the child that is growing in my
body.'
SO:
FALSE
The DANG - DInGIE Ameriacn
aka,, The Evil White Man
|
|
||||||||
'I have a right to choose to slay the child that is growing in my body.'
How about this (libertarian) mantra:
"I have the right to rid my body of any of its parts, even
that part, that may become a child when, and if, born."
But the bobhuntress' suggestion was that before we allow liberats
to pollute the air we breathe with their spew, we have to
administer to them the test for knowledge of the Constitution and
the Bible, and the right answers for the test are 1) that the
Constitution considers embryos as persons, and does not give the
right to anyone already born to own their own bodies; and 2) that
the Bible says that every human life is sacred, especially the
life of those not yet born.
|
|
||||||||
Dimitri wrote:
~~'I have a right to choose to slay the child that is growing in
my body.'
How about this (libertarian) mantra:
"I have the right to rid my body of any of its parts, even
that part, that may become a child when, and if, born."
But the bobhuntress' suggestion was that before we allow liberats
to pollute the air we breathe with their spew, we have to
administer to them the test for knowledge of the Constitution and
the Bible, and the right answers for the test are 1) that the
Constitution considers embryos as persons, and does not give the
right to anyone already born to own their own bodies; and
2) that the Bible says that every human life is sacred,
especially the life of those not yet born.~~
To which I respond with:
Okay,Dimitri,,I'm confused by your response since,,to be frank,,I
wasn't responding to bobhuntress I was responding to you and
'silvrii'.
As to bobhuntresses suggestion,,I am all for it.But I don't think
bobhunt was suggesting anything about what would be 'correct'
answers,,just that they need to have knowlwdge of what ever
topicis being 'debated' or discussed.The test would demand they
pay attention to views,thoughts and considerations of the folks
that they may oppose or disagree with.
Knowledge of the 'opposers' views and considerations leads to
higher chances of equitable arrangements.IF THAT IS THE DESIRED
OUTCOME.
Yet,,as to your 'possibly facetious' suggestions for 'correct
answers' I for one agree.
(btw,,aren't you for 'abortion on demand',,er,,excuse me,,aren't
you pro choice?)
And the fellow that started the thread did illustrate that
'tests' often ONLY get passed IF one gives the answer that the
'test' requires,,not what one may believe is correct.
For instance,,a student may believe God created the world but
when the test asks how it came to be,,anything OTHER than by
'chance' would be considered incorrect.Correct?
IOW,, a test does not determine 'belief or 'acceptance'.A test
determines how well you payed attention to the material as it was
presented.
(and this is what has been largely responsible for the decline in
the quality of education,IMHsmellyO.Logic and critical thinking
skills are not required or promoted,,only memory skills)
AS IN,,,knowledge of subject does not nessecitate believing or
agreeing' in conclusions drawn by the 'test'.And giving the
'answer the test is looking for' does not exclude 'disagreeing'
with the subject.
YET,,
As to what we were discussing,,,well,,what you have morphed it
into:
~"I have the right to rid my body of any of its parts, even
that part, that may become a child when, and if, born."~
Is it legal to cut off ones own legs?
Wouldn't that be considered 'insane'?
Is it legal to cut off ones own head?
Wouldn't that be considered suicide?
Is it legal to attempt to commit suicide?,,or is that considerd a
psychological problem?
Is,, a baby part of the mothers body?
Was the spermatoza that impregnated the egg part of the mothers
body?
Doesn't that mean half of the 'growth' in her womb IS NOT hers?
Does the umbilical attach to the mother,,or to the placenta?
Is not a 'placenta' nothing more than a mammalian eggshell?
Is that NOT what Darwinianism claims?
When does the egg inside of a chicken cease being part of the
hens body?
BTW,,I thought you were 'pro choice as regards convenience
abortions',,are you?
With all due respect to all on this planet,
The DANG - DInGIE American
What came before : The content of the other posts preceding these.(here at The Staks )
These are Excite Links.They will take to the thread this exchange came from:
| Pages: <First|Previous|Next|Last> | Views: Collapse Sort: Descending |
| Excite Community Tools | |||||
|
Created on ... June 24, 2007
©Roy Harbin/The DANG &ndash DinGIE American/2007®
roy harbin is roy l.harbin aka,,the dang-dingie american
aka,,the evil white man
2007
