[Lord Dave]

No, a rational person would start to question the validity of the book they're reading.  This is a plot hole man and if it's factual, it shouldn't HAVE plot holes.

That simply makes no sense. If God was speaking to Moses, there would be no reason for the 2 million people to hear what he said. Since the message was not intended for them all to hear, why would you assume they would all hear it. You and I are having a discussion in this thread. Do you therefore assume that EVERY SINGLE PERSON in this website is going to be privy to what we are saying to each other?

If they didn't hear what God said, how did they hear God speak?

Also:
Your analogy sucks.  All 2 million people WERE THERE TO HEAR GOD!  Not everyone on this website wants to hear what we have to say but guess what: they could.  Every single one of them could visit this thread and see what we say.

You are literally proving that God did NOT speak to all 2 million Jews.  You realize that right?

[Rama Set]

The Creator turned a city to salt along with its inhabitants and called for the genocide of all current and future Amalekites, babies included. He also, just to prove a point watched with interest as Abraham almost murdered his son then at the last minute, after Abe had all but done the deed, and no doubt felt the cruel irony of the act, says "kidding!"

I am not sure why you think him above terrible, reprehensible commandments, for I cannot see it myself.

[markjo]

Jesus Christ you need to learn how to quote. Enter your response below the [/quote] tag.

Yes, that did get a little complicated. My apologies.

Vindictus, lrn2nobbc

Yakkov, lrn2bbcode

[Yonah ben Amittai]

Jesus had an angel announce his birth from a virgin. Three magi followed a star on God's command to witness it. What about that could be mistaken for natural?

Yes, but from the age of 12-30, he was a carpenter in his father's shop and lived such an uneventful life that no one even bothered to record it. The same appears to have been true of his life from age 8 days to 12 years.

No, a rational person would start to question the validity of the book they're reading.  This is a plot hole man and if it's factual, it shouldn't HAVE plot holes.

That simply makes no sense. If God was speaking to Moses, there would be no reason for the 2 million people to hear what he said. Since the message was not intended for them all to hear, why would you assume they would all hear it. You and I are having a discussion in this thread. Do you therefore assume that EVERY SINGLE PERSON in this website is going to be privy to what we are saying to each other?

If they didn't hear what God said, how did they hear God speak?

Also:
Your analogy sucks.  All 2 million people WERE THERE TO HEAR GOD!  Not everyone on this website wants to hear what we have to say but guess what: they could.  Every single one of them could visit this thread and see what we say.

You are literally proving that God did NOT speak to all 2 million Jews.  You realize that right?

I hear people speak every day without hearing exactly what they say. In a crowd of 2 million people? Think about it! If I am on a busy street corner in any American Midwestern city of your choice (I'll pick Omaha, just because I don't live there, but I have been there), and I just stand there, and watch and listen to people, I will hear plenty of people speak. But in many, perhaps even most, cases, I won't hear exactly what they say to each other, or anything of what they say, for that matter.

Now, assuming the crowd of 2 million was dead fucking silent, and it probably was, that still doesn't imply that everybody heard what the Lord said. Some of them might have, and most probably would not have. And remember, MOSES was writing this shit down. No one else was. These were former slaves. I expect they didn't know how to read or write any language. In fact, one wonders what language they even spoke? Hebrew? Egyptian? A bastardised version of both? And what did God speak to Moses? Hebrew? Egyptian? I expect Hebrew. Could the people even UNDERSTAND what God said to Moses? Moses was a learned man, having been raised as a Prince of Egypt. The others? Not so much. The Levites probably had more knowledge than the others, but how much, as slaves?

So there are so many variables involved in this subject that you can hardly come up with a straightforward answer. And anyone who tries to just proves themselves to be a schmuck. And I say that knowing that it applies to either side of the argument.

The Creator turned a city to salt along with its inhabitants and called for the genocide of all current and future Amalekites, babies included. He also, just to prove a point watched with interest as Abraham almost murdered his son then at the last minute, after Abe had all but done the deed, and no doubt felt the cruel irony of the act, says "kidding!"

I am not sure why you think him above terrible, reprehensible commandments, for I cannot see it myself.

I don't see that turning Sodom and Gomorrah into salt were a bad idea myself. They were guilty of the most wicked and vile behaviours known to man, then and now. The commandment regarding the Amalekites cannot be performed today, as there are none, so that is irrelevant. The closest thing to them that we have are the "Palestinians" who are in part descended from them, but also have other Canaanite heritage (as they themselves proudly acknowledge), so they don't fall under the ban.

Regarding the issue of Abraham and Isaac, scholars and Rabbis much smarter than either of us have wrestled with that one for centuries. The best explanation that I have yet heard is that it was a test of Abraham's faith, and possibly even Isaac's. In fact, the end result of it was that human sacrifice was forbidden in Judaism completely, although there was one incidence where it did occur, namely, during the judgeship of Jephtha (sp?). But this was directly contrary to the will of God.

[Rushy]

Why is the voice of a deity limited to petty scientific laws of sound propagation?

[Yonah ben Amittai]

Why is the voice of a deity limited to petty scientific laws of sound propagation?

Assuming Moses speaks to God, and God answers Moses, the answer is presumably intended for Moses, and not others. Ergo, while others may be intended to hear the voice, they may not be intended to hear what is said. And you appear to have ignored the rest of my post regarding the question of who spoke what language to whom.

[Rushy]

Assuming Moses speaks to God, and God answers Moses, the answer is presumably intended for Moses, and not others. Ergo, while others may be intended to hear the voice, they may not be intended to hear what is said. And you appear to have ignored the rest of my post regarding the question of who spoke what language to whom.

Okay, so, the evidence that god exists is that 2 million people presumably heard loud booming noises and one guy heard exactly what he needed to hear. Now, here we are today, with exactly zero people that have heard any such voice of god. Does it say anywhere that literally all of their descendents are chosen people? Because it sounds like those people were a lot more chosen than anyone today. No one alive today is even good enough to hear a loud booming noise.

[Rama Set]

Jesus had an angel announce his birth from a virgin. Three magi followed a star on God's command to witness it. What about that could be mistaken for natural?

Yes, but from the age of 12-30, he was a carpenter in his father's shop and lived such an uneventful life that no one even bothered to record it. The same appears to have been true of his life from age 8 days to 12 years.

Sure.  But the point is that once he revealed his supernatural nature, there was no denying it.

The Creator turned a city to salt along with its inhabitants and called for the genocide of all current and future Amalekites, babies included. He also, just to prove a point watched with interest as Abraham almost murdered his son then at the last minute, after Abe had all but done the deed, and no doubt felt the cruel irony of the act, says "kidding!"

I am not sure why you think him above terrible, reprehensible commandments, for I cannot see it myself.

I don't see that turning Sodom and Gomorrah into salt were a bad idea myself.

Why am I not surprised.

They were guilty of the most wicked and vile behaviours known to man, then and now.

Like genocide?  Oh wait...

The commandment regarding the Amalekites cannot be performed today, as there are none, so that is irrelevant. The closest thing to them that we have are the "Palestinians" who are in part descended from them, but also have other Canaanite heritage (as they themselves proudly acknowledge), so they don't fall under the ban.

That does not change the fact that on your view, God not only sentenced babies to death, who no doubt had not done a thing wrong, but asked his proxies to carry it out instead of doing it quickly and painlessly himself.  What a terrible thing to do.  This is your God. 

Regarding the issue of Abraham and Isaac, scholars and Rabbis much smarter than either of us have wrestled with that one for centuries. The best explanation that I have yet heard is that it was a test of Abraham's faith, and possibly even Isaac's. In fact, the end result of it was that human sacrifice was forbidden in Judaism completely, although there was one incidence where it did occur, namely, during the judgeship of Jephtha (sp?). But this was directly contrary to the will of God.

If that is how God tested his subjects faith, then he is a psychopath.  The Rabbi's obviously were not smart enough to come to the conclusion that Yahweh was beneath contempt morally.  Instead, as irushwithscvs aptly pointed out, they are prisoners of the most perverse case of Stockholm syndrome ever. For further evidence of unspeakable horrors that God visited upon people who were guilty of nothing but loving him, see the Book of Job.

P.S.  Thanks for cleaning up the quoting.

[Lord Dave]

I hear people speak every day without hearing exactly what they say. In a crowd of 2 million people? Think about it! If I am on a busy street corner in any American Midwestern city of your choice (I'll pick Omaha, just because I don't live there, but I have been there), and I just stand there, and watch and listen to people, I will hear plenty of people speak. But in many, perhaps even most, cases, I won't hear exactly what they say to each other, or anything of what they say, for that matter.

Hundreds of people talking at once is equivalent to God now?

Now, assuming the crowd of 2 million was dead fucking silent, and it probably was, that still doesn't imply that everybody heard what the Lord said. Some of them might have, and most probably would not have.

Well no one wrote it down or spoke up about it.
Also:

However, you couldn't imitate the voice of God such that 2 million people could all hear it. That would be hard to do even today, let alone then.

You have admitted that 2 million people heard him speak yet now you're backtracking and say they really didn't hear him speak, just some noise and that they COULDN'T hear him.  You're moving your own goalpost and basically throwing my own argument at me.  Which is hilarious.

And remember, MOSES was writing this shit down.

1. No he wasn't.
2. He wrote it down AFTER it happened. 
3. He didn't write down the first words God spoke to his people?  Do you not see a problem with that?

No one else was. These were former slaves. I expect they didn't know how to read or write any language. In fact, one wonders what language they even spoke? Hebrew? Egyptian? A bastardised version of both? And what did God speak to Moses? Hebrew? Egyptian? I expect Hebrew. Could the people even UNDERSTAND what God said to Moses? Moses was a learned man, having been raised as a Prince of Egypt. The others? Not so much. The Levites probably had more knowledge than the others, but how much, as slaves?

So they wouldn't know the voice of God from say... a bunch of loud noises.  Got it.

So there are so many variables involved in this subject that you can hardly come up with a straightforward answer. And anyone who tries to just proves themselves to be a schmuck. And I say that knowing that it applies to either side of the argument.

At least you're finally admitting you're a schmuck.

[Yonah ben Amittai]

Assuming Moses speaks to God, and God answers Moses, the answer is presumably intended for Moses, and not others. Ergo, while others may be intended to hear the voice, they may not be intended to hear what is said. And you appear to have ignored the rest of my post regarding the question of who spoke what language to whom.

Okay, so, the evidence that god exists is that 2 million people presumably heard loud booming noises and one guy heard exactly what he needed to hear. Now, here we are today, with exactly zero people that have heard any such voice of god. Does it say anywhere that literally all of their descendents are chosen people? Because it sounds like those people were a lot more chosen than anyone today. No one alive today is even good enough to hear a loud booming noise.

Woah, slow down, Tex! Nice shooting, but slow down! That's a rather radical change in subject, don't you think? People who heard God speak to the Chosenness of the Jewish People.

I shall refer you to the entire text of the Wikipedia article on "Jews as the Chosen People". This is the easiest way to deal with the problem.

[markjo]

Jesus had an angel announce his birth from a virgin. Three magi followed a star on God's command to witness it. What about that could be mistaken for natural?

Yes, but from the age of 12-30, he was a carpenter in his father's shop and lived such an uneventful life that no one even bothered to record it. The same appears to have been true of his life from age 8 days to 12 years.

This is not true.  There are a number of gnostic and/or heretical gospels that tell of the early life of Jesus.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Infancy_Gospels

[Yonah ben Amittai]

Jesus had an angel announce his birth from a virgin. Three magi followed a star on God's command to witness it. What about that could be mistaken for natural?

Yes, but from the age of 12-30, he was a carpenter in his father's shop and lived such an uneventful life that no one even bothered to record it. The same appears to have been true of his life from age 8 days to 12 years.

Sure.  But the point is that once he revealed his supernatural nature, there was no denying it.

To whom did he reveal this supernatural nature as a baby? He was in Bethlehem, and then went to Nazareth. No one there knew anything about who he was. Please note there WAS NO quote sign to follow with this portion of my post. My apologies for this.

The Creator turned a city to salt along with its inhabitants and called for the genocide of all current and future Amalekites, babies included. He also, just to prove a point watched with interest as Abraham almost murdered his son then at the last minute, after Abe had all but done the deed, and no doubt felt the cruel irony of the act, says "kidding!"

I am not sure why you think him above terrible, reprehensible commandments, for I cannot see it myself.

I don't see that turning Sodom and Gomorrah into salt were a bad idea myself.

Why am I not surprised.

They were guilty of the most wicked and vile behaviours known to man, then and now.

Like genocide?  Oh wait...

Being ordered to divinely punish is not genocide.
 
The commandment regarding the Amalekites cannot be performed today, as there are none, so that is irrelevant. The closest thing to them that we have are the "Palestinians" who are in part descended from them, but also have other Canaanite heritage (as they themselves proudly acknowledge), so they don't fall under the ban.

That does not change the fact that on your view, God not only sentenced babies to death, who no doubt had not done a thing wrong, but asked his proxies to carry it out instead of doing it quickly and painlessly himself.  What a terrible thing to do.  This is your God. 

IT WAS THE BRONZE AGE! What do you expect? That they sit around and smoke it up like hippies?

Regarding the issue of Abraham and Isaac, scholars and Rabbis much smarter than either of us have wrestled with that one for centuries. The best explanation that I have yet heard is that it was a test of Abraham's faith, and possibly even Isaac's. In fact, the end result of it was that human sacrifice was forbidden in Judaism completely, although there was one incidence where it did occur, namely, during the judgeship of Jephtha (sp?). But this was directly contrary to the will of God.

If that is how God tested his subjects faith, then he is a psychopath.  The Rabbi's obviously were not smart enough to come to the conclusion that Yahweh was beneath contempt morally.  Instead, as irushwithscvs aptly pointed out, they are prisoners of the most perverse case of Stockholm syndrome ever. For further evidence of unspeakable horrors that God visited upon people who were guilty of nothing but loving him, see the Book of Job.

P.S.  Thanks for cleaning up the quoting.

I would suggest that it is you with the problem. God was dealing with a race of slaves in the Bronze Age! What the hell do you expect. I have read Job, thank you.

The quoting in that passage is likely to be a mess. My apologies.

I hear people speak every day without hearing exactly what they say. In a crowd of 2 million people? Think about it! If I am on a busy street corner in any American Midwestern city of your choice (I'll pick Omaha, just because I don't live there, but I have been there), and I just stand there, and watch and listen to people, I will hear plenty of people speak. But in many, perhaps even most, cases, I won't hear exactly what they say to each other, or anything of what they say, for that matter.

Hundreds of people talking at once is equivalent to God now?

Now, assuming the crowd of 2 million was dead fucking silent, and it probably was, that still doesn't imply that everybody heard what the Lord said. Some of them might have, and most probably would not have.

Well no one wrote it down or spoke up about it.
Also:

However, you couldn't imitate the voice of God such that 2 million people could all hear it. That would be hard to do even today, let alone then.

You have admitted that 2 million people heard him speak yet now you're backtracking and say they really didn't hear him speak, just some noise and that they COULDN'T hear him.  You're moving your own goalpost and basically throwing my own argument at me.  Which is hilarious.

Actually, that is not what I said at all. What I said is that they all heard him speak. They did NOT necessarily understand what they heard. Again, your failure to comprehend the English language is your problem, not mine. I recommend basic literacy courses.

And remember, MOSES was writing this shit down.

1. No he wasn't.
2. He wrote it down AFTER it happened. 
3. He didn't write down the first words God spoke to his people?  Do you not see a problem with that?

MOSES SPOKE TO GOD. GOD THEN SPOKE TO MOSES. "19:19 And when the voice of the horn waxed louder and louder, Moses spoke, and God answered him by a voice."  The words may not have been intended for anyone other than Moses himself. It may have been that the Hebrews were intended to hear the voice, but not what it said.

No one else was. These were former slaves. I expect they didn't know how to read or write any language. In fact, one wonders what language they even spoke? Hebrew? Egyptian? A bastardised version of both? And what did God speak to Moses? Hebrew? Egyptian? I expect Hebrew. Could the people even UNDERSTAND what God said to Moses? Moses was a learned man, having been raised as a Prince of Egypt. The others? Not so much. The Levites probably had more knowledge than the others, but how much, as slaves?

So they wouldn't know the voice of God from say... a bunch of loud noises.  Got it.

That is not what I said. One can recognise a voice but not know what it says. If I speak a bastardised French Creole and hear crisp Parisian French, I WILL hear a voice. But I may not understand what I am hearing. Do you not comprehend basic English when it is written? Perhaps your literacy needs to be re-evaluated?

So there are so many variables involved in this subject that you can hardly come up with a straightforward answer. And anyone who tries to just proves themselves to be a schmuck. And I say that knowing that it applies to either side of the argument.

At least you're finally admitting you're a schmuck.

I am not admitting to being a schmuck at all. I am simply saying that anyone who says that variables don't exist is a schmuck. I have admitted that variables do exist. You are the one that says they don't. Ergo...

Jesus had an angel announce his birth from a virgin. Three magi followed a star on God's command to witness it. What about that could be mistaken for natural?

Yes, but from the age of 12-30, he was a carpenter in his father's shop and lived such an uneventful life that no one even bothered to record it. The same appears to have been true of his life from age 8 days to 12 years.

This is not true.  There are a number of gnostic and/or heretical gospels that tell of the early life of Jesus.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Infancy_Gospels

I am well aware of this, having read several of these. But since they are not accepted as canonical, there is little point in discussing them.

EDIT: Please note that my responses are underlined due to the confusing nature of this passage.

[Rama Set]

I expect the creator of the universe and the originator of morality to not do heinous evil things. Don't you?  If anyone has a choice, it is Yahweh.

[Yonah ben Amittai]

I expect the creator of the universe and the originator of morality to not do heinous evil things. Don't you?  If anyone has a choice, it is Yahweh.

In the Bronze Age, the Creator of the universe does what he needs to do to keep his Chosen People alive to reach this day. Given the savagery of the people whom they faced off with in battle, he allowed and even commanded them to do what was necessary to win. But there were still codes of honour that had to be maintained. You can read about them in the Jewish Bible. The Hebrews were always a step above other nations in that respect.

I have to go. I'll chat with you all tomorrow.

[Rama Set]

I expect the creator of the universe and the originator of morality to not do heinous evil things. Don't you?  If anyone has a choice, it is Yahweh.

In the Bronze Age, the Creator of the universe does what he needs to do to keep his Chosen People alive to reach this day. Given the savagery of the people whom they faced off with in battle, he allowed and even commanded them to do what was necessary to win. But there were still codes of honour that had to be maintained. You can read about them in the Jewish Bible. The Hebrews were always a step above other nations in that respect.

I have to go. I'll chat with you all tomorrow.

Well that is an awfully big assumption.  Didn't you say:

They can't be analysed from a human perspective, because the book makes divine claims for itself. It is that simple. To compare, it would be like me, an historian, trying to evaluate the work of a mathematics professor. I am not equipped for the task, nor could I ever be. Its out of my paygrade. So there you are.

How could you possibly try and understand his actions?  Fortunately I do not feel the same way, so I will.  All I know is that a being who has ultimate power over life and death make the deliberate choice to lead his chosen people in to committing genocide rather than the million other ways that an omnipotent being could have solved it in which no one has to die.  This sounds like a perverse extreme of how African warlords indoctrinate their child soldiers.  Sounds like he is evil. 

Again, given the choice, your God chose genocide over some peaceful supernatural solution.

[EnigmaZV]

In the Bronze Age, the Creator of the universe does what he needs to do to keep his Chosen People alive to reach this day.

That seems like a reasonable way to keep people safe.

[Yonah ben Amittai]

I expect the creator of the universe and the originator of morality to not do heinous evil things. Don't you?  If anyone has a choice, it is Yahweh.

In the Bronze Age, the Creator of the universe does what he needs to do to keep his Chosen People alive to reach this day. Given the savagery of the people whom they faced off with in battle, he allowed and even commanded them to do what was necessary to win. But there were still codes of honour that had to be maintained. You can read about them in the Jewish Bible. The Hebrews were always a step above other nations in that respect.

I have to go. I'll chat with you all tomorrow.

Well that is an awfully big assumption.  Didn't you say:

They can't be analysed from a human perspective, because the book makes divine claims for itself. It is that simple. To compare, it would be like me, an historian, trying to evaluate the work of a mathematics professor. I am not equipped for the task, nor could I ever be. Its out of my paygrade. So there you are.

How could you possibly try and understand his actions?  Fortunately I do not feel the same way, so I will.  All I know is that a being who has ultimate power over life and death make the deliberate choice to lead his chosen people in to committing genocide rather than the million other ways that an omnipotent being could have solved it in which no one has to die.  This sounds like a perverse extreme of how African warlords indoctrinate their child soldiers.  Sounds like he is evil. 

Again, given the choice, your God chose genocide over some peaceful supernatural solution.

Waah. When you are dealing with the kind of vileness committed by these people not only in their daily lives, but as a part of their religious lives it becomes a moral imperative to punish them. I feel no differently about the Aztecs. It was a moral imperative to destroy Tenochtitlan and pretty much everyone in it for the wickedness that flourished therein. I'm not going to sit here and feel bad about the loss of people who committed human sacrifice on the order of 20,000 human hearts ripped out in 4 days back in 1489 at one ceremony.

What African warlords do to perfectly innocent persons who never did harm to man nor beast, and what the righteous Israelites did to those who fell under ban of God are two different things, and I defy you to make a reasonable comparison between the two. I encourage you to quit whining so much. Like I said. Waah. Or perhaps I should extend it to "Waah fuckin' waah".

EnigmaZV, whatever.

[beardo]

BAAAAWWW

[Rama Set]

What did Amalekite babies do that required their death?

By the way, making the argument that Aztecs were vile so Amalekites were as well is illogical. Can you cite anything independent of God's claims that show the Amalekites were "vile"? Right now it looks like Israelites were the awful ones.

[Yonah ben Amittai]

The fact that Amalekites attacked Israel without cause or justification made them awful. But they were also just like their Canaanite brethren in terms of their practices. I was using the Aztecs as a comparison, not as an argument. If you don't know the difference, that sounds like a failure in your education.

You know, its like saying "The Islamic State is as bad as Hitler". One is not saying that ISIS has anything to do with the Nazis. That would be stupid. It is only to compare their mentality.

Waah fuckin' waah.