Pointless

have you read the Torah or are you repeating something your professor said in class?

I'd like you to cite your sources and provide translations in their correct context... if you're going to compare hashem to hitler.

If a parent raises a child to the best of their ability, you can't question it... they may do it differently to how you would raise your own, but that doesn't mean it is wrong.



so now ure saying my parents brought me up right ?

haha you're quite devious for someone i keep mistaking for an idiot

Jimi your father is a nazi and although you hold some views that sicken me... to my knowledge you don't go round "paki bashing".... so although i hate to say it they probably have done a good job.

I know kids from similar families who are total fucking scum.

nah mate i really am thick as fuck

yeah but he turned water into wine and fed 500 fuckers with bread and fish and they all rejoiced


well i wish i was there as i dont liek fish unlesss its cooked in a certain way and hate red wine


id prefere a nice kebab n a can

how can u pick and choose when it comes 2 the bible

i

You've taken themes from a text you've never read, so there is no understanding of the context in which they appeared (nor of the actual text itself).

Neither were killings based on religion?!?!? To suggest so shows a huge ignorance towards one of the most influencial scripts of mans history.

When hashem passed/hovered/whatever over egypt he took the lives of the first born because the egyptians were keeping the Israelites in bondage (after killing all the new born a few years earlier).... How can you compare this to the unprovoked murder of 6 million in the holocaust?

Similarly Jericho had nothing to do with religion, in the biblical world it was widely accepted that people had the right to worship their own g-d (it is argued that many jews would of believed in rival g-ds - but they would of worshiped hashem)... These were a warring people in a violent era - again fuck all like the unprovoked slaughter of 6 million.

The Jewish bible is different to the christian bible.

Christians added the new testament, we don't believe that Yeshua/Jesus was the messiah as he didn't fit any of the criteria prophesised.

The first half of the christian bible is ok, but all that is new - isn't true

I cant watch it as I'm at work... but is it the documentary where two ignorant wankers confront each other and the paedophile/homosexual minister accuses dawkins of calling his children animals?

you fuckers need to get out more.

the majority of jews believe the conquest of Jericho was justifiable... its the foundation of our bloody religion!

You can't compare ancient times with contemporary practises, they are not one and the same andy... different eras command different moral values.

Existence was a lot more savage 3000 years ago.

I'd only talk about the same things

Dawkins point was that the Israeli children who were told joshua's story overwhelmingly approved his actions but when the name was changed to general Wu and was set in China they overwhelmingly disaproved.
The point being that your perspective is culturally conditioned.

he's unknowable mate

getting back to the thread, Dawkins also said that if the whole history of the planet were to be represented by the length of his arm then the whole of recorded history is represented by one shaving of a nail file from his nail.
And doesn't it seem pointless arguing over who did what 3000 years ago.

The perspective you speak of isn’t culturally conditioned, its contextually conditioned.

The General Lin question in the Tamarin case study had no context, there was no history or cause for the events, where as the Joshua instance was rooted in history and the children had sat through terms of education justifying the siege.

Typical of Dawkin to use such a flimsy case study to support his anti-religious rants.

pot and kettle