The Old Testament was found to be more than twice as violent as the Quran

[1robin]

YHVH Elohim supposedly motivated it (Exodus 15:3), in a time as you say where war like gods were prominent...

Why did you choose three words from my entire post and fragments from other posts and slam them altogether. This is no way to get to the bottom of anything.

As to the above Elohim motivated what?
and
I did not say that at the time war like Gods were prominent.

You need to slow down, read carefully, and make more detailed claims.

Thus we can understand a tribal mentality, creating texts justify their own actions as Godly...

I can imagine a 3 legged, pink, unicorn. I thought we were discussing reality.

Yet if we see the God Most High as a 100% logical CPU that manifests reality; which makes us not to like pain, and to seek pleasure, that to me is totally alien to what God is about.

What are you talking about. None of this has anything to do with the OP or my response to you.

 

[Muslim-UK]

As I said the Koran does not say to kill all unbelievers.

Furthermore the verse he quoted clearly says,2:191 'And kill them wherever you find them, and drive them out from whence they drove you out, and persecution is severer than slaughter, and do not fight with them at the Sacred Mosque until they fight with you in it, but if they do fight you, then slay them; such is the recompense of the unbelievers.' Qur'an 2:191

The context makes it clear, this verse was in reference to a particular group of people in a particular location during a very particular time.

 

[wizanda]

this verse was in reference to a particular group of people in a particular location during a very particular time.

Have verses like these been misapplied in history to attack vast numbers of polytheists, and unbelievers?

 

[1robin]

Spoiler: off-topic digression

I made my point explicitly. Somebody advocated for a single world religion, and I advocated for a world without religion. I picked the Alabama data because I had just seen it yesterday. There's a lot of religion in Alabama. It doesn't seem to be making people better people.

I could have used priest data instead. There's a lot of religion in Catholic churches. And pedophilia.

Or Muslim data. There's plenty of religion in the places where people are suicide bombers, do honor killings, push homosexuals off of towers, behead people, throw acid in people's faces, and burn them alive in cages.

I read your other post comparing the Old Testament to the Qur'an. You seemed to be saying that the OT is less bad because not all of the genocides in it were ordered by God, and it doesn't contain an order to kill infidels. The OP seems to be suggesting the opposite - that the Qur'an is less bad, or at least less violent.

Secular humanism repudiates both, as well as the murderous, non-religious authoritarian regimes:

• "We affirm humanism as a realistic alternative to theologies of despair and ideologies of violence" - Affirmations of Humanism

That's a worldview that one can be proud of, one which generates culturally healthy people. It contains the best aspects of religion without all of the harm. The typical humanist is more Christlike than the typical Christian. The Golden Rule is why secular humanists support tolerance and support for homosexuals and transgendered people whether included in either of those groups or not. It's why straight secular humanists supported the dignity and legal protections afforded by same sex marriage as Christians fought it is diligently as possible. Which group embodied the Golden Rule better? Which is working toward a more peaceful, equitable world?

Get the point now? If we're going to advocate for a universal worldview, let it be that one and none of the religions.



Isn't it obvious? What has religion created in Alabama? Why are most white, conservative Christians in Alabama willing to vote for a pedophile? Why did just as many white evangelicals vote for an admitted sexual predator for president? White evangelicals voted overwhelmingly for Donald Trump, exit polls show



How about that kind of thinking? Is that your full analysis? Is that all you require of a candidate? What would Moore have to do to make him unacceptable to you?

I've undoubtedly offended you, and for that I apologize. But there is no way to discuss these matters without breaking a few eggs. I can assure you my ideas are carefully considered, sincerely believed, and constructively offered in the marketplace of ideas with the purpose of helping create a slightly better world, not to insult Christians or Muslims.

Having said that, some religions seem pretty harmless, especially the ones that are philosophical rather than revelatory. I suppose that a world of Zen Buddhists would be fine.

Now I get it. You have reversed the legal standards of the presumption of innocence and due process, and built an entire argument based on something you can't know. Perhaps you would be happier in the DPRK as well since you share their legal sentiments.

 

[Muslim-UK]

Have verses like these been misapplied in history to attack vast numbers of polytheists, and unbelievers?

Not that I know of, unless you can cite people using them before doing such acts.

 

[wizanda]

I did not say that at the time war like Gods were prominent.

Sorry you spoke as if you knew what was happening around that time, that a majority of different warring nations had their own religion separating them.

All cultures (especially in the ANE) had constant battles and wars back then.

With each tribe claiming they had favor by their God, so the idea that YHVH of the Gods (Elohim) is the chief of all the others, is a tribal argument.

You need to slow down

Will slow down to explain... Sorry.

What are you talking about.

which God motivated

This was in reference to you implying the God Most High, the creator of reality this very second; went out of its way to tell a select group of people on a little rock in space, to kill other people for its pleasure.

Do you understand in many ancient cultures, there was God (El) Most High, and then a council of Elohim/Elders... Thus when an Elohim is referenced these can be the angels that had a war in heaven, and came down to mankind.

Thus you saying God motivated it, is ambiguous from the text.

Why did you choose three words from my entire post

Because your post was mainly looking for a way to point, without much self analysis.

In my opinion.

 

[wizanda]

Not that I know of, unless you can cite people using them before doing such acts.

Muslim conquests of the Indian subcontinent - Wikipedia

 

[Flankerl]

w. and L. in a thread about something involving Jews.

Oh goody.

 

[ChristineM]

Now I get it. You have reversed the legal standards of the presumption of innocence and due process, and built an entire argument based on something you can't know. Perhaps you would be happier in the DPRK as well since you share their legal sentiments.

What? I read IANS post nothing of legality in it, only evidential facts and robust argument which is seems you are unable to counter so jump onto the ad hominem muck cart.

Of course it contradicts the world view of (at least the Abrahamic) religions who seem to have a vested interest in covering up the atrocities perpetrated by those religions

Note :north Korea is largely a traditional Buddhist country with a high percentage of the population following Confucianism with some Korean shamanism and syncretic Chondogyo, there is also a Christian minority.

Also note that Article 14 of the NK constitution states "citizens of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea shall have the freedom of religious belief and of conducting religious services". So despite your intention NK has enshrined freedom of religion into law.

So those sentiments you mention are the sentiments of religion. Interesting!!!

 

[Muslim-UK]

Muslim conquests of the Indian subcontinent - Wikipedia

I saw no reference to any quote from the Qur'an, much less anyone citing the verse you quoted to justify attacking non believers.

 

[Baroodi]

Fighting in Islam was legalized after long years of persecution with killing, torture, and exiling. i.e for self defense. all verses are linked to repulsion of offense. please pinpoint to any verse which came in Quran outside this context.(And don't assault, Verily Allah doesn't like assaulters)
(And if they resorted to peace, resort to it)
(whoever killed a soul, as if he killed the whole people)
fighting was legislated as well to hold off the hands of the criminals who are spreading havoc and destruction. ( Verily the reward of those who strife to fight Allah and his messinger and to spread havoc and destruction is to be killed). Just as what terrorists do now and the whole world is fighting back

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Now I get it. You have reversed the legal standards of the presumption of innocence and due process, and built an entire argument based on something you can't know..

Legal standards don't apply when assessing the character and hence the qualifications of a political candidate. You need a higher bar than merely proven guilty of a crime or not. That's a minimal standard for freedom, but far too low for voting

 

[SalixIncendium]

by this logic poisoning someone so that they fall asleep and die would not be considered violent

You are correct.

 

[Lyndon]

taking away someones life is violent!!

 

[SalixIncendium]

taking away someones life is violent!!

You are incorrect.

 

[1robin]

Sorry you spoke as if you knew what was happening around that time, that a majority of different warring nations had their own religion separating them.

You still do not understand. I said nothing what so ever about warlike Gods being prevalent at the time.

Assuming their were does not make anything I said any different.
Nor
Would assuming there were not change my statement.

I know exactly what your trying to do but I am going to make you actually do the work required only to show that your conclusion is not valid.

With each tribe claiming they had favor by their God, so the idea that YHVH of the Gods (Elohim) is the chief of all the others, is a tribal argument.

Your assuming it is untrue therefor it begins and ends as a tribal matter. Unlike all other tribal deities half the OT is a tribe in trouble with it's God. That is called hostile testimony and is the most trustworthy form of testimony there is. When the Jews record their own suffering at the hands of the God they betrayed that's hostile testimony of the highest order.

Will slow down to explain... Sorry.

It seems like you post before you really analyze what you go on to say.

This was in reference to you implying the God Most High, the creator of reality this very second; went out of its way to tell a select group of people on a little rock in space, to kill other people for its pleasure.

I didn't say most of that in the context you place it but it's close enough, but I never said what is in bold. If you want to quote me I am happy to oblige.

In the ANE God did at times order his people to wage war against others for various reasons.

There quote that from now on.

Do you understand in many ancient cultures, there was God (El) Most High, and then a council of Elohim/Elders... Thus when an Elohim is referenced these can be the angels that had a war in heaven, and came down to mankind.

Before I decide whether I pick on any of this or not lets assume it's true. What's your conclusion?

Thus you saying God motivated it, is ambiguous from the text.

Statements like:
New International Version
Therefore I will send you into exile beyond Damascus," says the LORD, whose name is God Almighty

are as emphatic as possible. I know I already stated that by God or (EL) I specifically mean Yahweh but only your not understanding that explains the above.

Because your post was mainly looking for a way to point, without much self analysis.

In my opinion.

Well you got this part right. I try to tease the actual conclusion a vague poster is trying to make before getting emphatic and specific or commit large resources of time.

 

[1robin]

What? I read IANS post nothing of legality in it, only evidential facts and robust argument which is seems you are unable to counter so jump onto the ad hominem muck cart.

You must be talking about something else. In Roy Moore's case there has been no due process, no judgment, no case, and the (laughing) is a year book signature that no one will produce.

Of course it contradicts the world view of (at least the Abrahamic) religions who seem to have a vested interest in covering up the atrocities perpetrated by those religions

Note :north Korea is largely a traditional Buddhist country with a high percentage of the population following Confucianism with some Korean shamanism and syncretic Chondogyo, there is also a Christian minority.

Also note that Article 14 of the NK constitution states "citizens of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea shall have the freedom of religious belief and of conducting religious services". So despite your intention NK has enshrined freedom of religion into law.

So those sentiments you mention are the sentiments of religion. Interesting!!!

I honestly don't know what post your responding to. Or at least what part.

The only related point I saw was the statement by you:

Also note that Article 14 of the NK constitution states "citizens of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea shall have the freedom of religious belief and of conducting religious services".

1. We were not talking about the freedom of religion. We were talking about due process and the presumption of innocence. It is amazing that this was the closest you got to relevancy.
2. I think there is a grand total of one Christian Church in Korea and it is a total sham (like almost everything in the country) run by the state.

Keep in mind I wasn't talking about religious freedom but since you brought it up.
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/08/18/north-korea-how-christians-survive-in-worlds-most-anti-christian-nation.html

 

[1robin]

Legal standards don't apply when assessing the character and hence the qualifications of a political candidate. You need a higher bar than merely proven guilty of a crime or not. That's a minimal standard for freedom, but far too low for voting

Wait a minute, which bar are you saying is the higher one? I must have read that wrong.

 

[idav]

Someone analysed the Bible and Quran to see which is more violent

Personally find this interesting that when based on a analytical perspective, it says the Jews have far more violent beliefs than Muslims; thus should either book be endorsed in society anymore, when they encourage such disgusting acts?

Like shouldn't we move on from the barbaric past that humans have had, instead of teach it to our children as religious values to live by.

In my opinion.

My analytics tell me that the Quran took all the bad parts out so it would seem that way, they still kept the violence mysogeny and religious elitism.

 

[Jeremiah Ames]

I guess i agree with your evaluation and opinion...
though the modern Jews i know are somewhat more peaceful and enlightened ...

Perhaps a few Palestinians would disagree.