Jump to content

Sanctimonious Christian Shits


SquareOne
 Share

Recommended Posts

I am fucking sick of the sanctimonious bullshit I am finding on Christian apologetic forums.  Is Christianity really so vapid that this is the best they can offer up?

 

SquareOne: Hey Howie. Hoping you might explain the correct interpretation of the passages where God endorsed receiving a child sacrifice.

 

Howie: And that's because you say so, right?

 

SQNo, it's because God says so.

 

H: And you'll be doing more than just asserting that, when?

 

SQ: [Posts all Judges 11, including the following: 

29 Then the Spirit of the Lord came on Jephthah. He crossed Gilead and Manasseh, passed through Mizpah of Gilead, and from there he advanced against the Ammonites. 30 And Jephthah made a vow to the Lord: “If you give the Ammonites into my hands, 31 whatever comes out of the door of my house to meet me when I return in triumph from the Ammonites will be the Lord’s, and I will sacrifice it as a burnt offering.”


32 Then Jephthah went over to fight the Ammonites, and the Lord gave them into his hands. 33 He devastated twenty towns from Aroer to the vicinity of Minnith, as far as Abel Keramim. Thus Israel subdued Ammon.

34 When Jephthah returned to his home in Mizpah, who should come out to meet him but his daughter, dancing to the sound of timbrels! She was an only child. Except for her he had neither son nor daughter. 35 When he saw her, he tore his clothes and cried, “Oh no, my daughter! You have brought me down and I am devastated. I have made a vow to the Lord that I cannot break.”

36 “My father,” she replied, “you have given your word to the Lord. Do to me just as you promised, now that the Lord has avenged you of your enemies, the Ammonites. 37 But grant me this one request,” she said. “Give me two months to roam the hills and weep with my friends, because I will never marry.”

38 “You may go,” he said. And he let her go for two months. She and her friends went into the hills and wept because she would never marry. 39 After the two months, she returned to her father, and he did to her as he had vowed. And she was a virgin.

From this comes the Israelite tradition 40 that each year the young women of Israel go out for four days to commemorate the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite.

 

HIn which verse is God endorsing this?

 

SQ: Jephthah said that if God aided him, he would sacrifice the first thing that came out of his house.  God is omniscient, and therefore had full knowledge that on returning home the first that would come out of Jephthah's house would be his daughter. Therefore God knew that Jephthah would sacrifice his daughter if he helped him.  What did God do? He helped him.  God had no objection to Jephthah's promise, on the contrary, he seems to have perceived it to be a suitable bargain.

 

H: Perhaps you didn't understand my question.  I didn't ask you what Jephthah said, I asked you where in that passage God endorses child sacrifice? In which verse, please?

 

SQ: Why must the endorsement come from a specific verse, and not from a nexus of events?

 

H: In other words, you cannot cite any endorsement of child sacrifice by God in the passage Judges 11.  That's because God does not endorse child sacrifice.

 

SQ:  I cited an entire passage, and explained why it demonstrate's God's endorsement.  You have not explained why the events do not constitute endorsement of slavery. Your assertion that my argument must stem from one single verse, and rejection that an argument cannot be based upon a nexus of verses, is patently absurd.

 

H: You are unable to provide any statement by God in which He endorses child sacrifice. That's the fact, Jack.

 

SQ: Are you denying that God displays his intentions and his nature through his actions?

 

H: This isn't about me, but it is about your assertion that God endorses child sacrifice. So far, you've not proven that assertion.  Now I asked you a question regarding your assertion, and you're ignoring it. Here again is the question: where in the passage does God ask Jephthah to sacrifice anything to Him?

 

SQ: Howie, I have answered your question. If by ignoring my questions you can feel good about yourself, then go ahead. I hope you have been entertained.  I have had enough of you.

 

<end>

 

 

I mean, really.  What a fucking sanctimonious, ignorant, paragraph-defying, question-dodging, murder-aggrandising, child-sacrifice apologizing, head-up-his-arse, fingers-in-his-ears, evil piece of shit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good god. Xians adore loopholes. "You didn't answer my question EXACTLY the way I demanded. Therefore, your argument is invalid." Obviously, gawd endorses the sacrifice by not opposing it! Jesus! Reminds me of the SS teacher. *gag* Good times....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am fucking sick of the sanctimonious bullshit I am finding on Christian apologetic forums.  Is Christianity really so vapid that this is the best they can offer up?

 

SquareOne: Hey Howie. Hoping you might explain the correct interpretation of the passages where God endorsed receiving a child sacrifice.

 

Howie: And that's because you say so, right?

 

SQNo, it's because God says so.

 

H: And you'll be doing more than just asserting that, when?

 

SQ: [Posts all Judges 11, including the following: 

29 Then the Spirit of the Lord came on Jephthah. He crossed Gilead and Manasseh, passed through Mizpah of Gilead, and from there he advanced against the Ammonites. 30 And Jephthah made a vow to the Lord: “If you give the Ammonites into my hands, 31 whatever comes out of the door of my house to meet me when I return in triumph from the Ammonites will be the Lord’s, and I will sacrifice it as a burnt offering.”

 

32 Then Jephthah went over to fight the Ammonites, and the Lord gave them into his hands. 33 He devastated twenty towns from Aroer to the vicinity of Minnith, as far as Abel Keramim. Thus Israel subdued Ammon.

 

34 When Jephthah returned to his home in Mizpah, who should come out to meet him but his daughter, dancing to the sound of timbrels! She was an only child. Except for her he had neither son nor daughter. 35 When he saw her, he tore his clothes and cried, “Oh no, my daughter! You have brought me down and I am devastated. I have made a vow to the Lord that I cannot break.”

 

36 “My father,” she replied, “you have given your word to the Lord. Do to me just as you promised, now that the Lord has avenged you of your enemies, the Ammonites. 37 But grant me this one request,” she said. “Give me two months to roam the hills and weep with my friends, because I will never marry.”

 

38 “You may go,” he said. And he let her go for two months. She and her friends went into the hills and wept because she would never marry. 39 After the two months, she returned to her father, and he did to her as he had vowed. And she was a virgin.

 

From this comes the Israelite tradition 40 that each year the young women of Israel go out for four days to commemorate the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite.

 

HIn which verse is God endorsing this?

 

SQ: Jephthah said that if God aided him, he would sacrifice the first thing that came out of his house.  God is omniscient, and therefore had full knowledge that on returning home the first that would come out of Jephthah's house would be his daughter. Therefore God knew that Jephthah would sacrifice his daughter if he helped him.  What did God do? He helped him.  God had no objection to Jephthah's promise, on the contrary, he seems to have perceived it to be a suitable bargain.

 

H: Perhaps you didn't understand my question.  I didn't ask you what Jephthah said, I asked you where in that passage God endorses child sacrifice? In which verse, please?

 

SQ: Why must the endorsement come from a specific verse, and not from a nexus of events?

 

H: In other words, you cannot cite any endorsement of child sacrifice by God in the passage Judges 11.  That's because God does not endorse child sacrifice.

 

SQ:  I cited an entire passage, and explained why it demonstrate's God's endorsement.  You have not explained why the events do not constitute endorsement of slavery. Your assertion that my argument must stem from one single verse, and rejection that an argument cannot be based upon a nexus of verses, is patently absurd.

 

H: You are unable to provide any statement by God in which He endorses child sacrifice. That's the fact, Jack.

 

SQ: Are you denying that God displays his intentions and his nature through his actions?

 

H: This isn't about me, but it is about your assertion that God endorses child sacrifice. So far, you've not proven that assertion.  Now I asked you a question regarding your assertion, and you're ignoring it. Here again is the question: where in the passage does God ask Jephthah to sacrifice anything to Him?

 

SQ: Howie, I have answered your question. If by ignoring my questions you can feel good about yourself, then go ahead. I hope you have been entertained.  I have had enough of you.

 

<end>

 

 

I mean, really.  What a fucking sanctimonious, ignorant, paragraph-defying, question-dodging, murder-aggrandising, child-sacrifice apologizing, head-up-his-arse, fingers-in-his-ears, evil piece of shit.

 

Instead of debating theists why not just smash your fingers in a door?

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest r3alchild

I know how you feel bro, today I talked with a christian woman who replied to my understanding (that people who search for jesus claim they were unwell people looking for help and a doctor) with a, no chris they are not sick or unwell there just sinners. What the hell sin is not sickness now, fucking hell apples and oranges. And even when I mentioned the verse that jesus said I come for the sick not those who are well, she just bullshited me on.

 

I also posted something at carm in the apologetics section, is the bible error free.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I began reading the discussion out loud to my wife and as I went along my voice was rising until, near the end, I was practically screaming. They really are a bunch of slimy eels when it comes to explaining things. When he kept asking where does god endorse it, I screamed out 'BY NOT INTERVENING IN ANY FUCKING WAY YOUR gOD WAS ENDORSING IT!'

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i spose you could've asked where the asterisk was that led to a footnote stating, "This does not reflect the author's opinion or that of the publisher"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can also add in the whole Abraham sacraficing Isaac thing. The loopholes there are that Abraham trusted god's promise to give him descendents through Isaac so assumed he wouldn't stay dead (well, at least that's what it claims in the NT). And then the ram as a replacement. However... god wanted to know that Abraham was cool with human sacrafice. God wanted to be followed by someone who was fully capable of killing his own child in cold blood as a gift to god.

 

Now, the out in that story is that god made it all better at the end and father and son happily killed an animal instead. Supposedly that's how we know that human sacrifice isn't ok. In fact, despite wanting to prove to himself that Abraham is capable of being a murderer, god was so against human sacrifice that he changed the plan last minute. Why isn't any out provided for Jephthah?

 

Even as a christian, I was freaked out that Abraham was praised for going through with it, instead of it being a test to see Abraham stand up for morality. I mean, it was totally cool that he tried to argue god down about Sodom and Gommorah, so why wasn't god just wanting to see Abraham do something like that again?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jephthah (through tears) - "There, God - I have done what I promised and sacrificed my daughter for you."

God -  "Well, um - hey, I never said you had to do that."

Jephthah - "What?"

God - "I didn't TELL you to sacrifice your daughter.  That was your idea."

Jephthah - "But I promised that I would sacrifice the first thing that greeted me after the victory you granted!"

God - "You really should have been more specific.  I would have been okay with your finest goat."

Jephthah - "Why didn't you say something!  My only child is dead!"

God - "Yeah, that's kind of a shame.  It would have been wiser to think through your promise instead of just blurting out the first thing that comes into your head."

Jephthah - "But didn't you know that it would be my daughter who would greet me first?"

God - "Yes. What's your point?"

Jephthah - "Couldn't you have stopped her? Couldn't you have let that goat out of the gate?  You know, that one you've got your eye on?"

God - "Well, I didn't want to interfere in people's free will.  But don't get so bent out of shape about this. You can make more children.  Heck, I'll even bless you with a more beautiful daughter than the one you had."

Jephthah - "What? I loved my daughter! She WAS beautiful! I don't want a new daughter! You can't just replace people!  What kind of a God are you, anyway?"

God - "I'm omnicient, omnipotent, and infinitely loving."

Jephthah - "You're an ass."

 

An ass, indeed.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest r3alchild

Thats odd, the verse says, (whatever comes out of the door of my house to meet me) who did he expect to see other than a human. Did goats, sheep or bulls know how to use doors back then, did animals come out greeting you back then and of course god is not saying anything about the stupidity of the oath. Jephthah must have thought animals acted like they would in a episode of family guy, like brian the dog who is just another member of the family who can open doors drive cars and come up and greet you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was going to point out the Isaac thing like VacuumFlux did, too. Either way you look at it, as a "test" or not, it's sadistic and completely evil. Either God was okay with child/human sacrifice, or he was okay with mindfucking someone to make him think it was okay. Either way, not cool. Certainly not "Christian." 

 

I've decided to quote these bible stories as proof that my abortion was just a "child sacrifice" to the glory of God! yum.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

God endorsed it by including it, as an example of faithfulness, in his perfect book! Does Howie not believe that god really wanted that passage to be included? If it were not endorsed, Jepthah would have been condemned in the chapter. It could easily have said "thus did Jepthhah do evil in the sight of the LORD." (In fact, I'm surprised that a scribe didn't add that somewhere along the way.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They've got this all figured out, 1. You can't win this argument, the apologists are way too slippery and well-prepared.

 

http://ronyan.org/aaronk1994/aaronsblog/20100725does-god-support-human-sacrifice/

 

http://www.tektonics.org/gk/humansac.html

 

Those are just the first two I found...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let’s see here. We’ve already had Jephthah and Abraham mentioned in this thread. How about we throw in some other examples like Ezekiel 20:25-26. Here Yahweh says he actually gave the people statutes and regulations that were not good in order to entrap them. What statute in particular? Child sacrifice. Verse 26 says he defiled them through their very gifts in offering up their firstborn. Why? In order to horrify them, so they might know he is Yahweh.

It appears from this passage that as a way to judge them for their idolatry and Sabbath breaking, Yahweh had ordered them (either directly or through intermediary false prophets) to sacrifice their firstborn to him. It seems this is the only way he can get them to do something so horrendous that it will justify breaking his oath, which prior to this time had prevented him from destroying Israel.

Not surprisingly, translators of this passage will do everything they can to try to soften the blow here so that people won’t make the connection and commentators will typically either gloss over or contort interpretations to put as much distance between Yahweh and this disturbing practice as possible. However, entrapment does not seem to be something that Yahweh has an aversion to in the biblical record (see Deut. 13:1-3; 2 Sam. 24:1-17; 1 Kings 22:19-23)

It’s suggested by scholars that during and after the exile compliers and redactors went out of their way to counter this practice of child sacrifice, which would’ve been opposed by their Persian rulers, and that Ezekiel is just among the first sources to begin putting a negative spin on it in suggesting that it was part of the judgment of Yahweh on the people. Countering this line of tradition and practice in Israel’s history could be what gave rise to the final ending of the Isaac sacrifice story, which may have originally ended with the death of Isaac. It could account for the death of the firstborn of Egypt as the tenth and final plague, which interestingly reverses Ezekiel’s version of events. Also it could account for the repeated insistence in Jeremiah that this abhorrent practice “never entered” Yahweh’s mind (Jeremiah 7:31; 19:5 & 32:35). Methinks Yahweh doth protest too much.

We also see evidence in passages like Micah 6:7, and the repeated mentioning of the redemption of the firstborn in Exodus (13:13, 34:20) and Numbers (3:12, 3:40ff, 8:16-18, 18:15) by either substituting an animal or by way of the dedication of the Levites. It may even be that the circumcision of males after eight days when they are presented to Yahweh could have been posited as a ritual substitute for sacrificing them that was eventually extended to all males, although this seems less likely given that other cultures practiced circumcision as well.

At any rate it comes across as a calculated response to the sincere claims of other Yahweh worshippers that their god had indeed commanded child sacrifice.  This also explains the strangeness of passages like the ambiguously worded Exodus 22:29 and Leviticus 27:26-29, which would appear to be odd leftovers of that tradition that later redactors, for whatever reason, did not feel was necessary to amend or exclude. It also casts the story of Jephthah’s vow in a different light.

While not child sacrifice, we do find human sacrifice in other places like Numbers 25:4. Yahweh is angered over the idolatry and sexual immorality in this passage. He orders Moses to have the leaders of the people executed and impaled on spikes out in the open. At first glance it may look like the public display is to serve primarily as a warning to the people, but a careful reading shows that Yahweh’s demand is to, “hang them up before Yahweh in the sun so that the fierce anger of Yahweh may be turned away from Israel.” Note this: representatives are selected from the among the larger group, slaughtered and placed on display for the deity in order to turn the deity’s wrath away from the larger group. How is this not human sacrifice? This becomes even more explicit in the verses that follow and it won’t be the last time human sacrifice is required to sate Yahweh’s wrath and keep it from the larger group.

See 2 Samuel 21:1-14 where essentially seven innocent descendants of Saul are sacrificed and put on display in order to end a drought. People that want to argue that Jesus Christ is the only example of human sacrifice ever condoned by God are going to have to deal with the implications of passages like these. Commentators that want to skirt the issue by saying this is being done merely as a warning for others or as punishment for individual guilty sinners and isn’t a part of prescribed worship are simply ignoring the way these examples are presented in the narrative. At best Yahweh is failing to adequately distinguish himself from other tribal deities of the Ancient Near East that required things like human sacrifice to end droughts. Mostly Yahweh comes across almost identical in savagery and bloodlust to gods like Artemis who required human sacrifice to permit Agamemnon and the Greeks to enjoy smooth sailing to Troy.

Still not convinced Yahweh’s down with child sacrifice? How about we look at Numbers 21:1-3? An important thing to note about this passage is that these women, children and animals were burned along with their stuff because they were being offered to Yahweh as a sacrificial payment for a vow the Israelites made. This was a burnt offering and was in accordance with Leviticus 27:28-29. They made a vow and their deity had blessed them with victory and they were acknowledging his aid by offering up the plunder to him in worship. Any argument to the contrary would be merely a semantic one. Just because Arad and his people weren’t taken to the top of a step pyramid in the Yucatan Peninsula and offered to Huitzilopochtli, doesn’t make this something other than a mass human sacrifice following victory in battle.

I don't care what excuses the apologists come up with, if it stinks like human sacrifice, screams like human sacrifice and looks like human sacrifice…

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I began reading the discussion out loud to my wife and as I went along my voice was rising until, near the end, I was practically screaming. They really are a bunch of slimy eels when it comes to explaining things. When he kept asking where does god endorse it, I screamed out 'BY NOT INTERVENING IN ANY FUCKING WAY YOUR gOD WAS ENDORSING IT!'

 

Wouldnt it be fun for all of us here to descend upon an Xian forum and start out as Xians but then begin to troll ever so slightly until eventually we all get banned :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They've got this all figured out, 1. You can't win this argument, the apologists are way too slippery and well-prepared.

 

http://ronyan.org/aaronk1994/aaronsblog/20100725does-god-support-human-sacrifice/

 

http://www.tektonics.org/gk/humansac.html

 

Those are just the first two I found...

 

With regard to the first link, the blog commentary says, "With these reasons alone, the idea that Jephthah actually sacrificed his daughter can be immediately dismissed."

 

But the bible scripture says he did sacrifice his daughter. So WTF? He's saying his own bible lacks credibility. What a dumbfuck.

 

And later on:

 

"I suppose, TECHNICALLY speaking, it was a human sacrifice. Jesus was a

human, and it was a sacrifice. Therefore, Jesus was a human sacrifice.

But it was not a human sacrifice in the traditional sense, which one would indeed find disgusting or immoral."

 

Being nailed to a cross isnt disgusting, is it? haha.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I began reading the discussion out loud to my wife and as I went along my voice was rising until, near the end, I was practically screaming. They really are a bunch of slimy eels when it comes to explaining things. When he kept asking where does god endorse it, I screamed out 'BY NOT INTERVENING IN ANY FUCKING WAY YOUR gOD WAS ENDORSING IT!'

 

Wouldnt it be fun for all of us here to descend upon an Xian forum and start out as Xians but then begin to troll ever so slightly until eventually we all get banned :-)

Definitely! And since YOU came up with this idea I am ordering YOU to coordinate our movement over there to do just that. If you actually pulled it off I would believe in miracles even if only the one you performed by doing it. LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I began reading the discussion out loud to my wife and as I went along my voice was rising until, near the end, I was practically screaming. They really are a bunch of slimy eels when it comes to explaining things. When he kept asking where does god endorse it, I screamed out 'BY NOT INTERVENING IN ANY FUCKING WAY YOUR gOD WAS ENDORSING IT!'

 

Wouldnt it be fun for all of us here to descend upon an Xian forum and start out as Xians but then begin to troll ever so slightly until eventually we all get banned :-)

 

And we could pretend to have really heated arguments over finer points of doctrine, each of us claiming that none of the others could be saved if we don't all believe the same thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The whole premise of Christianity is that god required a human sacrifice-- his son!! That is a huge example of god wanting ( needing) a human sacrifice.

 

In the jephthath example, god condoned the child or human sacrifice the minute the battle was won. The expectation was that he met his end of the bargain and now it was Dads turn to do the same. If you "purely" read the verses you cited, there is no other conclusion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What kind of god would make Jephthath follow through with that? Why not step in and say, "Jephthath, you made that vow too hastily. I will absolve you from it." or "Jephthath, sacrifice 10 bulls instead." All he had to do was send an angel or something to stop Jephthath (as he did with Abraham/Isaac) and this man's daughter would have been spared.

 

Regarding the Abraham-Isaac example, let's give the Christians the benefit of the doubt here for a second, and say that God never intended Abraham to complete the act. Isn't it still MASSIVELY FUCKED UP that he would put Abraham through that to JUST TO TEST HIS FAITH????? Who the fuck does that? Can you imagine for a second if I made my child think they had to shoot their sibling to prove their trust in me, then stop them right before they pulled the trigger and said, "OK, you've proven yourself." Anyone with a brain would call that psychological torture. And shouldn't biblegod, who knows our hearts anyway, have known whether or not Abraham had faith in him WITHOUT HAVING TO TEST HIM????

 

This is the kind of shit that burns me up about the bible, and that ultimately turned me off to xtianity.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Babylonian Dream

If I was Isaac, I don't know that I'd trust either God nor my dad after that. And as for Abraham, that must've been traumatic. Why use trauma to test someone's faith? What does it do for God? Why not test his loyalty some other way. Why test it at all? Is he not omniscient?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.