• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Is genocide ok if God tells you to do it?

A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
Perfect Circle said:
I agree. But I don't think anyone is arguing that any modern state bases their public policy on such things. However, it's only through a long, arduous, bloody, 3000 years of history that people have been persuaded to not take it literally.
Click to expand...

Do you know anything about the history of biblical interpretation? I'm not so sure that you're correct about this. There are well known atrocities commited in the name of Christianity - the Inquisition, the religious wars in Europe, and the strict Puritan laws and witch burnings - but that doesn't mean that all Christians, or even the majority of them, took everything literally. (However, at the same time, even if we take it literally, it's not genocide - to go that far, we have to take it "stupidly")

The Gnostics, who outnumbered orthodox Christians in many areas had a highly imaginative neo-Platonic view of Scripture and interpreted almost nothing literally.

There is also quite a long tradition - from earliest Christianity to the mideval times and onward of taking the Hebrew bible as allegory, anagogical material, or metaphor.

What's more, is there are people who wield considerable power in the modern world (i.e. Pat Robertson), who may not condone participating in such a genocide, but do justify the biblical one.
Click to expand...

Like I said - no reason to share in his stupidity.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Perfect Circle

Perfect Circle

Just Browsing
angellous_evangellous said:
Do you know anything about the history of biblical interpretation? I'm not so sure that you're correct about this. There are well known atrocities commited in the name of Christianity - the Inquisition, the religious wars in Europe, and the strict Puritan laws and witch burnings - but that doesn't mean that all Christians, or even the majority of them, took everything literally. (However, at the same time, even if we take it literally, it's not genocide - to go that far, we have to take it "stupidly")

The Gnostics, who outnumbered orthodox Christians in many areas had a highly imaginative neo-Platonic view of Scripture and interpreted almost nothing literally.

There is also quite a long tradition - from earliest Christianity to the mideval times and onward of taking the Hebrew bible as allegory, anagogical material, or metaphor.



Like I said - no reason to share in his stupidity.
Click to expand...

Yes, I understand that not every person throughout history has taken scripture literally. In fact, I hate when people try to depict ancient peoples as backwards or stupid. They are genetically the same as you and I, which means that their mental faculties aren't lacking.

And yes, in a modern sense of the word, it's not genocide. But honestly, how else can you describe the deliberate eradication of a people? I understand it didn't really happen, and I understand that even in a biblical sense these populations were not big enough to call it a genocide. But what else should I call it? Mass execution? Cleansing the land? Can you please clarify how it's stupid to interpret it this way? I'm just missing it, I guess.

And yes, the Gnostic's are very interesting to me, though I admit I'm not as well versed on them as I am on fundamentalists. By the way, if you'd like to read a good book about underlying meanings and metaphors within ancient texts, I would recommend "Fingerprint of the Gods." A lot of questionable stuff in it, but good points none the less.
 
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
Perfect Circle said:
And yes, in a modern sense of the word, it's not genocide. But honestly, how else can you describe the deliberate eradication of a people? I understand it didn't really happen, and I understand that even in a biblical sense these populations were not big enough to call it a genocide. But what else should I call it? Mass execution? Cleansing the land? Can you please clarify how it's stupid to interpret it this way? I'm just missing it, I guess.
Click to expand...

Not without repeating myself. :shrug:

You can call it "venting one's frustrations on God."

And yes, the Gnostic's are very interesting to me, though I admit I'm not as well versed on them as I am on fundamentalists. By the way, if you'd like to read a good book about underlying meanings and metaphors within ancient texts, I would recommend "Fingerprint of the Gods." A lot of questionable stuff in it, but good points none the less.
Click to expand...

Thanks.

By fundamentalists, do you mean those unimaginative folks who need nothing other than a "reliable" translation?
 
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
Perfect Circle said:
What's more, is there are people who wield considerable power in the modern world (i.e. Pat Robertson), who may not condone participating in such a genocide, but do justify the biblical one.
Click to expand...

I wonder if there is a Christian actually stupid enough to call it a genocide.
 
Perfect Circle

Perfect Circle

Just Browsing
angellous_evangellous said:
Not without repeating myself. :shrug:

You can call it "venting one's frustrations on God."



Thanks.

By fundamentalists, do you mean those unimaginative folks who need nothing other than a "reliable" translation?
Click to expand...

I think I understand what you mean... It just bothers me that so much of the world aligns their moral compass with what someone 3000 years ago wrote when they were "venting their frustrations on God." And yes... the very same unimaginative folks that have been forcing their ideals on me as long as I can remember. Sorry to toss you, or anyone else in this thread, in with them.
 
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
Perfect Circle said:
I think I understand what you mean... It just bothers me that so much of the world aligns their moral compass with what someone 3000 years ago wrote when they were "venting their frustrations on God." And yes... the very same unimaginative folks that have been forcing their ideals on me as long as I can remember. Sorry to toss you, or anyone else in this thread, in with them.
Click to expand...
:foryou:
 
Willamena

Willamena

Just me
Premium Member
Perfect Circle said:
And yes, in a modern sense of the word, it's not genocide. But honestly, how else can you describe the deliberate eradication of a people? I understand it didn't really happen, and I understand that even in a biblical sense these populations were not big enough to call it a genocide. But what else should I call it? Mass execution? Cleansing the land? Can you please clarify how it's stupid to interpret it this way? I'm just missing it, I guess.
Click to expand...
If it didn't really happen, it doesn't matter what you call it. :D
 
Last edited:
Autodidact

Autodidact

Intentionally Blank
Caladan said:
Sure, if you are looking for answers to quantum mechanic problems.
The Bible is not full of falsehood, if you read it maturely, because it is a text which includes many genres, ideologies, literature, and authors.. it is an ideological text and as such, 'falsehood' becomes meaningless, you have ideas, poetry, and yes even propaganda... great insight into the history of humanity, because we were so unbelievable lucky that the ancient Judeans and Israelites wrote their ideas on text.
while you may choose to fight windmills, and throw the bible because it doesnt feet your sterile agendas, other people are not willing to throw away this priceless piece, which has been a timeless gem in the history of human landscape.


I am an atheist, and I still can find parts of the bible to be very valuable in giving us historical insights, especially when put together with further ancient near easter annals, chronologies (such as the Assyrian ones), and epigraphy.
The factor of believing it as infallible is simple irrelevant when you are ready to put aside the debate between fundamentalists, and theologically ill equipped yet brilliant scientists and humanists.


I think thats overreaching. I dont think we should be so quick to summarize the entire scope of injustices and atrocities of entire societies on scriptures. what about politics? fight over territory and resources? and a variety of social strifes?
do I think the Bible or the Qur'an can be misused? sure, just like anything else. its all in the context people give it, and how mature they are in reading it, if they are not mature enough, you can be sure they would act in cruelty with or without scriptures.
Im actually in the opinion that the bible has many beautiful and uplifting passages in it, which have been immortalized in our arts, music and literature.
Click to expand...

What I'm saying is, if people believe that the Bible directs them to kill non-believers, then killing non-believers is not misusing the Bible.
 
Autodidact

Autodidact

Intentionally Blank
angellous_evangellous said:
There's no good reason to share in the stupidity of people who read the stories of Joshua literally to the extent that they are glorifiying a God that actually exists who commanded Joshua to commit genocides that he actually carried out.
Click to expand...
For heaven's sake, criticizing their beliefs doesn't mean sharing them, angellous.
Basing public policy on such terror is all but completely foreign to modern politics, because it is well out of the range of contemporary Christianity and Judaism.
Click to expand...
Thank God for secularism.

If there are reasonably minded people who actually believe this, they can be persuaded of their foolishness quite easily by remedial education in ancient archaeology and biblical interpretation.
Click to expand...
Well, if they believe it, they're probably not very reasonably minded, are they? That doesn't stop them from voting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top