Can a fundamentalist please explain these bible verses to me?

[Sci Fi Fan]

I will say with full sincerity that I've tried coming up with every possible rationalization for these verses, and have even researched justifications from Christian sites...and I still haven't come up with an excuse for this disgusting embarrassment to the human conscience.  Please read these verses.



Hosea 16:13

The people of Samaria must bear their guilt, because they have rebelled against their God. They will fall by the sword; their little ones will be dashed to the ground, their pregnant women ripped open."

Judges 21:10-24


    Then they thought of the annual festival of the LORD held in Shiloh, between Lebonah and Bethel, along the east side of the road that goes from Bethel to Shechem.  They told the men of Benjamin who still needed wives, "Go and hide in the vineyards.  When the women of Shiloh come out for their dances, rush out from the vineyards, and each of you can take one of them home to be your wife!  And when their fathers and brothers come to us in protest, we will tell them, 'Please be understanding.  Let them have your daughters, for we didn't find enough wives for them when we destroyed Jabesh-gilead. And you are not guilty of breaking the vow since you did not give your daughters in marriage to them.'"  So the men of Benjamin did as they were told.  They kidnapped the women who took part in the celebration and carried them off to the land of their own inheritance.  Then they rebuilt their towns and lived in them.  So the assembly of Israel departed by tribes and families, and they returned to their own homes.

Deuteronomy 22:28-29


    If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father.  Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.

Deuteronomy 22:23-24



    If within the city a man comes upon a maiden who is betrothed, and has relations with her, you shall bring them both out of the gate of the city and there stone them to death: the girl because she did not cry out for help though she was in the city, and the man because he violated his neighbors wife.


Exodus 21:7-11



    When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are.  If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again.  But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her.  And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter.  If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife.  If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment.

These are just the ones about rape, and one about cutting open pregnant women.  I can literally find hundreds of verses about genocide, torture, etc.  Heck, I can find passages of God mandating abortions.  This is why any Christian who isn't a blind follower should actually read the Bible, on his/her own time, front to back.  It's probably the best way to make atheists.

[Solar]

I'm guessing these are all Old Testament?

[JustKari]

I have looked up some things for you and written some notes, typing it all from my phone would take an eon.  I will type it out from my computer later.  I just didn't want you to think I was avoiding your question.  As a bonus, MFA will stop by at some point and either expand on what I say or prove me wrong, so you will get an answer. 

[supsalemgr]

I'm guessing these are all Old Testament?

Correct

[Solar]

Correct

Thanks..
When the Muscum write a revised version of the Koran, he might have a point, but until then...

[JustKari]

Alright, lets start at the beginning, which is of course the end of your post, and work our way to the end.

Ex. 21:7-11  I am not sure which translation you are using, so please forgive me.  I prefer KJV and ESV.   I will put the text in ESV so that you understand what I am talking about. 

"When a man lsells his daughter as a slave, she shall not go out as the male slaves do. 8 If she does not please her master, who has designated her1 for himself, then he shall let her be redeemed. He shall have no right to sell her to a foreign people, since he has broken faith with her. 9 If he designates her for his son, he shall deal with her as with a daughter. 10 If he takes another wife to himself, he shall not diminish her food, her clothing, or mher marital rights. 11 And if he does not do these three things for her, she shall go out for nothing, without payment of money."

This verse all revolves around verse 8, "When a man sells his daughter" this verse is about slavery, not rape.  A man would sell his daughter if he were so poor that he must.  It was not something that people "just did".  That being said, once a daughter was sold, it was assumed that she was no longer pure, basically she would have been married to either her master or one of his sons.  If she were sold to another, it would cause her to sin (adultery).   Slavery was a temporary at that time, you could make yourself a slave to repay a debt and work for no more than six years without pay to relieve the obligation.  That is the only reason this was set forth, if a woman would have been released after the six years, no man would have taken her.  She would have been alone, uncared for, and probably starve.  I would hope that her original family would think long and hard before selling a daughter into permanent servitude, but I have no proof that they did or did not. 

Deut. 22:23-24, and Deut. 22:28-29

"If there is a fbetrothed virgin, and a man meets her in the city and lies with her, 24 then you shall bring them both out to the gate of that city, and you shall stone them to death with stones, the young woman because she did not cry for help though she was in the city, and the man because he violated his neighbor's wife. dSo you shall purge the evil from your midst.

"If a man meets a virgin who is not betrothed, and seizes her and lies with her, and they are found, 29 then the man who lay with her shall give to the father of the young woman fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife, because he has violated her. He may not divorce her all his days.

For this verse, you have to understand who is speaking, and who is not.  This is a very angry Moses speaking who just returned from the Mount after spending 40 days with the Lord to find his people worshiping a golden calf that his own brother Aaron forged.  To say he was ticked, would have been putting it lightly.  Moses may have been our very first liberal.  He had just given them the 10 commandments and "expounded" on them, through books and books of more rules and punishments.  I am sure he felt that if he gave them clear guidelines, they would all be perfect, God fearing little wanderers in the wilderness.  The exact opposite happens.  So why are all these rules in the Bible?  I assure you, it isn't there to confuse first-time readers or give ah-ha moments to Atheists.  It is there to show man that he needs a Savior, no matter how hard we try, no matter how many rules God gives us, or man gives us, we will fall short. 
These verses are not God speaking, see Deut 11:8 "Which I command you..." this book was either written by Moses, or dictated by Moses, but it is from his POV. so when it says "I" in that verse, it is talking about Moses, it is Mosaic law.  It is not unimportant, but in my mind, the ten that God was enough.  The Mosaic law is just more proof that man is completely fallible, no matter how hard or well intentioned laws are to make man good.
If you want Biblical proof of this:

"Some Pharisees came and tested him by asking, 'Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?' 'What did Moses command you?' he replied. They said, 'Moses permitted a man to write a certificate of divorce and send her away.' 'It was because your hearts were hard that Moses wrote you this law,' Jesus replied. 'But at the beginning of creation God "made them male and female." "For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh." So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate.' When they were in the house again, the disciples asked Jesus about this. He answered, 'Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her. And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery' " (Mk. 10:2-12).

Judges 21:10-24 (Judges and Kings are particularly bloody parts of the Bible because God has pulled his hand back from His chosen because they have defied him and asked for a human ruler)

So the congregation sent 12,000 of their bravest men there and commanded them, r"Go and strike the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead with the edge of the sword; also the women and the little ones. 11 This is what you shall do: severy male and every woman that has lain with a male you shall devote to destruction." 12 And they found among the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead 400 young virgins who had not known a man by lying with him, and they brought them to the camp at tShiloh, which is in the land of Canaan.

13 Then the whole congregation sent word to the people of Benjamin who were at the urock of Rimmon and vproclaimed peace to them. 14 And Benjamin returned at that time. And they gave them the women whom they had saved alive of the women of Jabesh-gilead, but they were not enough for them. 15 And the people whad compassion on Benjamin because the Lord had made a breach in the tribes of Israel.

16 Then the elders of the congregation said, x"What shall we do for wives for those who are left, since the women are destroyed out of Benjamin?" 17 And they said, "There must be an inheritance for the survivors of Benjamin, that a tribe not be blotted out from Israel. 18 Yet we cannot give them wives from our daughters." yFor the people of Israel had sworn, "Cursed be he who gives a wife to Benjamin." 19 So they said, "Behold, there is the yearly feast of the Lord at Shiloh, which is north of Bethel, on the east of zthe highway that goes up from Bethel to Shechem, and south of Lebonah." 20 And they commanded the people of Benjamin, saying, "Go and lie in ambush in the vineyards 21 and watch. If the daughters of Shiloh come out to adance in the dances, then come out of the vineyards and snatch each man his wife from the daughters of Shiloh, and go to the land of Benjamin. 22 And when their fathers or their brothers come to complain to us, we will say to them, 'Grant them graciously to us, because we did not take for each man of them his wife in battle, neither did you give them to them, else you would now be guilty.'" 23 And the people of Benjamin did so and took their wives, according to their number, from the dancers whom they carried off. Then they went and returned to their inheritance band rebuilt the towns and lived in them. 24 And the people of Israel departed from there at that time, every man to his tribe and family, and they went out from there every man to his inheritance.

Again, as with any part of the Bible, you must understand who is speaking, or at the very least the POV.  This verse appears to be written by the elder tribesman from all tribes except Benjamin, who is all but obliterated because they committed a vile act of rape and murder.  The tribes of Israel ask God for guidance, but I don't read that they actually get a response in the text before they make up their own minds what to do.  They want to redeem the raiment of the tribe of Benjamin, but they have pledged to not give their daughters to the tribe of Benjamin previously.  This puts them in a bind.  So they decide that whomever did not show up to assist them in the battle against Benjamin shall pay for their lack of support by giving wives to the remaining Benjamites.  Vengeance was taken against them and their virgins were taken for the Benjamites. 

It is really important to remember that just because something is written in the Bible, does not mean it is endorsed by God for you to do.  For instance, I can not think of one case in the Bible when I man took more than one wife, when it did not make him stumble and sin.  Yet people still claim that the Bible "allows" for multiple wives.  It just isn't the case. 

Hosea 13:16 (took me a minute to find as Hosea 16 does not exist LOL)

Samaria jshall bear her guilt,

because kshe has rebelled against her God;

they shall fall by the sword;

ltheir little ones shall be dashed in pieces,

and their mpregnant women ripped open.

This is the prophet Hosea speaking.  He is supplicating and prophesying that if the stiff-necked Israelites do not change their ways, their will be destruction.  If you read just prior to the quoted verse he mentions that the wind of the Lord with rise up from the wilderness and his fountain shall dry up.  He will strip his treasury (Israel) of every precious thing.  Then after the verse you quoted, 14:1 "Return, O Israel, to the LORD your God..."  He is warning Israel to remember the protection that the hand of God provides and if they do not make things right soon, they will lose everything, probably from the description to war, and being conquered.

As I said, if I am wrong, MFA is far and away more knowledgeable than I.    If you have any other questions, LMK but I probably won't get to them today, I have exhausted my littles naptime for the day. 

[Sci Fi Fan]

Thanks..
When the Muscum write a revised version of the Koran, he might have a point, but until then...

Ah, I see where you're going with this.  You're claiming that the New Testament "supersedes" the Old Testament, and that the disgusting drivel in that section of the Bible can't be used against Christianity.

Well, too bad for you that Jesus explicitly denied that he was going to overturn any Old Testament laws (ie. marrying rapists with their victims and executing people who work on Sundays).

-----

I don't see how the Koran is relevant to all this.  You don't actually think I find Islam any less ridiculous than Christianity, do you?

[JustKari]

Ah, I see where you're going with this.  You're claiming that the New Testament "supersedes" the Old Testament, and that the disgusting drivel in that section of the Bible can't be used against Christianity.

Well, too bad for you that Jesus explicitly denied that he was going to overturn any Old Testament laws (ie. marrying rapists with their victims and executing people who work on Sundays).

-----

I don't see how the Koran is relevant to all this.  You don't actually think I find Islam any less ridiculous than Christianity, do you?

Small point of contention that is terribly important for you to understand.  You are confusing the laws of Moses with the ten commandments, those are two separate things.  Jesus said he did not come to "overturn" as you put it Gods law, which is the ten commandments.  He was not talking about the laws that Moses wrote.  I quoted above a case where Jesus said Mosaic law was wrong.

[supsalemgr]

What I see is an Atheist who resents anyone with faith. If you don't choose to believe, so be it. However, stay in your hole and allow people of faith to worshop as we choose. You have the same right to be a non-believer.

[Sci Fi Fan]

Thank you for your reply.

This verse all revolves around verse 8, "When a man sells his daughter" this verse is about slavery, not rape.  A man would sell his daughter if he were so poor that he must.  It was not something that people "just did".  That being said, once a daughter was sold, it was assumed that she was no longer pure, basically she would have been married to either her master or one of his sons.  If she were sold to another, it would cause her to sin (adultery).   Slavery was a temporary at that time, you could make yourself a slave to repay a debt and work for no more than six years without pay to relieve the obligation.  That is the only reason this was set forth, if a woman would have been released after the six years, no man would have taken her.  She would have been alone, uncared for, and probably starve.  I would hope that her original family would think long and hard before selling a daughter into permanent servitude, but I have no proof that they did or did not. 

OK, a few points here.

1. Do you seriously believe that a teenage girl sold into slavery with the express order to "please" her master is not going to be subjected to rape?

2. Do you believe that selling your daughter into slavery for money, even temporarily, is just?  If so, would you support legislation legalizing such practice today?

You've shifted your standards from "the bible is the most enlightened moral document ever written and is infallible in all its aspects" (assuming you are, as the OP assumes, a fundamentalist) to "the bible doesn't condone rape...it only condones temporary child slavery!"

Deut. 22:23-24, and Deut. 22:28-29
For this verse, you have to understand who is speaking, and who is not.  This is a very angry Moses speaking who just returned from the Mount after spending 40 days with the Lord to find his people worshiping a golden calf that his own brother Aaron forged.  To say he was ticked, would have been putting it lightly.  Moses may have been our very first liberal.  He had just given them the 10 commandments and "expounded" on them, through books and books of more rules and punishments.  I am sure he felt that if he gave them clear guidelines, they would all be perfect, God fearing little wanderers in the wilderness.  The exact opposite happens.  So why are all these rules in the Bible?  I assure you, it isn't there to confuse first-time readers or give ah-ha moments to Atheists.  It is there to show man that he needs a Savior, no matter how hard we try, no matter how many rules God gives us, or man gives us, we will fall short. 
These verses are not God speaking, see Deut 11:8 "Which I command you..." this book was either written by Moses, or dictated by Moses, but it is from his POV. so when it says "I" in that verse, it is talking about Moses, it is Mosaic law.  It is not unimportant, but in my mind, the ten that God was enough.  The Mosaic law is just more proof that man is completely fallible, no matter how hard or well intentioned laws are to make man good.

Hold here.  What you don't mention is that Moses and his men actually follow through with many of these threats and slaughter entire tribes.  Moses may be a fallible man, but such genocide qualifies him as nothing less than sadistically evil.  Yet it's clear that God still considers him ones of his prophets.

If God did not condone Mose's killing and raping of entire civilizations, he certainly would have said something.  After all, he wants to kill people who work on the Sabbath, so why do mass murderers still get his endorsement?

If you want Biblical proof of this:

This has nothing to do with God's condoning of mass genocide. 

Judges 21:10-24 (Judges and Kings are particularly bloody parts of the Bible because God has pulled his hand back from His chosen because they have defied him and asked for a human ruler)

So again we run into the common theme that God allows evil men to run amok, on the grounds that they brought the destruction upon themselves, ignoring the fact that innocent people die as a result of their actions.  It's the ultimate guilt by association trick.

Again, as with any part of the Bible, you must understand who is speaking, or at the very least the POV.  This verse appears to be written by the elder tribesman from all tribes except Benjamin, who is all but obliterated because they committed a vile act of rape and murder.  The tribes of Israel ask God for guidance, but I don't read that they actually get a response in the text before they make up their own minds what to do.  They want to redeem the raiment of the tribe of Benjamin, but they have pledged to not give their daughters to the tribe of Benjamin previously.  This puts them in a bind.  So they decide that whomever did not show up to assist them in the battle against Benjamin shall pay for their lack of support by giving wives to the remaining Benjamites.  Vengeance was taken against them and their virgins were taken for the Benjamites. 

It is really important to remember that just because something is written in the Bible, does not mean it is endorsed by God for you to do.  For instance, I can not think of one case in the Bible when I man took more than one wife, when it did not make him stumble and sin.  Yet people still claim that the Bible "allows" for multiple wives.  It just isn't the case. 

A few points here.

1. You're indulging in quite a share of post ad hoc rationalization here.  The fact is that theologians and Christian rulers throughout human history did not question the Bible's attitude towards women, slaves and conquered enemies in the slightest; Constantine even took it upon himself to impose the "rape victim should be punished because she didn't scream loudly enough" rule from the OT.  Only after recent advancements in human rights do Christians conveniently "notice" that God really did not condone this behavior and it was really his followers defying his will.

2. Related to the first, God orders the execution of Sabbath-workers and severely punishes those who do not worship him, yet in the face of such genocide, he is silent.  Inconsistently he punishes such murderers, but often times does nothing to express his disapproval, such that it takes 2000 years before revisionists even realize that he [allegedly] opposed such actions.

3. Most do not believe that God literally wrote the Old Testament himself, but you'd expect him to have enough sense to get someone trustworthy to write it.  Don't you think he could have saved literally hundreds of millions of lives by making his disapproval of mass genocide a little more clear?  Why doesn't he come outright and endorse human rights and equality under the law, rather than making strangely draconian legislation that Christians have to spend entire paragraphs rationalizing?

4. With all due respect, you're doing nothing more than delaying the tide here.  I can, if I wanted to, find similar laws that come straight out of the lord's mouth.  I was simply typing up the most readily accessible verses.

This is the prophet Hosea speaking.  He is supplicating and prophesying that if the stiff-necked Israelites do not change their ways, their will be destruction. 

No, he's making a very blunt threat in God's name.  If he really meant "you're in danger, enemies might come and slaughter your children!", he with the most basic communication skills would have made it clear.  Again, your rationalizations require that God and his prophets be utter morons.

[JustKari]

Thank you for your reply.

You're welcome.

OK, a few points here.

1. Do you seriously believe that a teenage girl sold into slavery with the express order to "please" her master is not going to be subjected to rape?

No I don't believe that, I thought I made that clear in my post.  I didn't say this was okay.  You seem to miss the point of free will.  No, God is not going to step in and protect every person from every ill. 

2. Do you believe that selling your daughter into slavery for money, even temporarily, is just?  If so, would you support legislation legalizing such practice today?
[\quote]
No, I never said it was just.  I said it was Mosaic law, I certainly would not support that today. 

You've shifted your standards from "the bible is the most enlightened moral document ever written and is infallible in all its aspects" (assuming you are, as the OP assumes, a fundamentalist) to "the bible doesn't condone rape...it only condones temporary child slavery!"

I am not a fundamentalist as you describe, but if you take verses out of context (as you have) and apply them at random, then you can no longer call it an enlightened moral document.  You are using it as no more than a book, a tool to use for your own purposes.  You said you wanted "justification", I answered your questions, you went on the defensive about my answers.  I will have to come back later.  To finish answering you.

Hold here.  What you don't mention is that Moses and his men actually follow through with many of these threats and slaughter entire tribes.  Moses may be a fallible man, but such genocide qualifies him as nothing less than sadistically evil.  Yet it's clear that God still considers him ones of his prophets.

If God did not condone Mose's killing and raping of entire civilizations, he certainly would have said something.  After all, he wants to kill people who work on the Sabbath, so why do mass murderers still get his endorsement?

This has nothing to do with God's condoning of mass genocide. 

So again we run into the common theme that God allows evil men to run amok, on the grounds that they brought the destruction upon themselves, ignoring the fact that innocent people die as a result of their actions.  It's the ultimate guilt by association trick.

A few points here.

1. You're indulging in quite a share of post ad hoc rationalization here.  The fact is that theologians and Christian rulers throughout human history did not question the Bible's attitude towards women, slaves and conquered enemies in the slightest; Constantine even took it upon himself to impose the "rape victim should be punished because she didn't scream loudly enough" rule from the OT.  Only after recent advancements in human rights do Christians conveniently "notice" that God really did not condone this behavior and it was really his followers defying his will.

2. Related to the first, God orders the execution of Sabbath-workers and severely punishes those who do not worship him, yet in the face of such genocide, he is silent.  Inconsistently he punishes such murderers, but often times does nothing to express his disapproval, such that it takes 2000 years before revisionists even realize that he [allegedly] opposed such actions.

3. Most do not believe that God literally wrote the Old Testament himself, but you'd expect him to have enough sense to get someone trustworthy to write it.  Don't you think he could have saved literally hundreds of millions of lives by making his disapproval of mass genocide a little more clear?  Why doesn't he come outright and endorse human rights and equality under the law, rather than making strangely draconian legislation that Christians have to spend entire paragraphs rationalizing?

4. With all due respect, you're doing nothing more than delaying the tide here.  I can, if I wanted to, find similar laws that come straight out of the lord's mouth.  I was simply typing up the most readily accessible verses.

No, he's making a very blunt threat in God's name.  If he really meant "you're in danger, enemies might come and slaughter your children!", he with the most basic communication skills would have made it clear.  Again, your rationalizations require that God and his prophets be utter morons.

[Sci Fi Fan]

I'm assuming you haven't finished your post, but just to respond to this important point:

No I don't believe that, I thought I made that clear in my post.  I didn't say this was okay.  You seem to miss the point of free will.  No, God is not going to step in and protect every person from every ill. 

This doesn't make any sense.  The girl here does not choose to be sold into slavery.  The father chooses that, and then the new master can choose to beat, rape, or whatever the girl.  Since when does allowing people to hurt others constitute a just exercising of their free will?  Should the government allow murderers to run amok because they have the free will to kill?

To repeat: the girl did not bring this ill upon herself.  Others did.  The notion that god has no moral obligation, despite having supposed omnipotence, omniscience and omnipresence, is patently absurd.  Not even a fallible mortal would escape disdain and condemnation for doing nothing in such a situation; but one who can literally stop it with a thought?

[JustKari]

I'm assuming you haven't finished your post, but just to respond to this important point:

This doesn't make any sense.  The girl here does not choose to be sold into slavery.  The father chooses that, and then the new master can choose to beat, rape, or whatever the girl.  Since when does allowing people to hurt others constitute a just exercising of their free will?  Should the government allow murderers to run amok because they have the free will to kill?

To repeat: the girl did not bring this ill upon herself.  Others did.  The notion that god has no moral obligation, despite having supposed omnipotence, omniscience and omnipresence, is patently absurd.  Not even a fallible mortal would escape disdain and condemnation for doing nothing in such a situation; but one who can literally stop it with a thought?

So you are saying that only good people should have free will?  Or, in God's eyes, perhaps only believers.  You do realize that would make you a pawn, right?

[JustKari]

Hold here.  What you don't mention is that Moses and his men actually follow through with many of these threats and slaughter entire tribes.  Moses may be a fallible man, but such genocide qualifies him as nothing less than sadistically evil.  Yet it's clear that God still considers him ones of his prophets.

Yes, Isn't it wonderful that God chose humans, to write His Word?  If he had waited for perfection, Jesus would have spent his entire life writing, and not teaching.  Humans are fallible and forgivable, that is the point.  If God expected perfection, He would have wiped us all off the face of the planet, in totality long ago.

If God did not condone Mose's killing and raping of entire civilizations, he certainly would have said something.  After all, he wants to kill people who work on the Sabbath, so why do mass murderers still get his endorsement?

God is just and holy.  That may not be the answer you are looking for, but that is the crux of it.

This has nothing to do with God's condoning of mass genocide. 

So again we run into the common theme that God allows evil men to run amok, on the grounds that they brought the destruction upon themselves, ignoring the fact that innocent people die as a result of their actions.  It's the ultimate guilt by association trick.

All men are evil, all are fallen.  Don't color yourself better than anyone else, neither you, nor I are.  Sin is sin and we all are rank with it.

A few points here.

1. You're indulging in quite a share of post ad hoc rationalization here.  The fact is that theologians and Christian rulers throughout human history did not question the Bible's attitude towards women, slaves and conquered enemies in the slightest; Constantine even took it upon himself to impose the "rape victim should be punished because she didn't scream loudly enough" rule from the OT.  Only after recent advancements in human rights do Christians conveniently "notice" that God really did not condone this behavior and it was really his followers defying his will.

Constantine is human.  Why should the attitude of the time towards women be questioned?  Would it cause that attitude to suddenly change?  Does my feeling that women should not speak in synagog change the fact that they didn't?  No.  Does my feeling about how rape victims now change how Constantine ran things?  No.  Does how I do things change the way God feels about them, no matter how many people read my words?  No.

2. Related to the first, God orders the execution of Sabbath-workers and severely punishes those who do not worship him, yet in the face of such genocide, he is silent.  Inconsistently he punishes such murderers, but often times does nothing to express his disapproval, such that it takes 2000 years before revisionists even realize that he [allegedly] opposed such actions.

You assume that God thinks death is a bad thing.  It is only a bad thing for the unbeliever, and even at that time, God knew the future.  God knew that Jesus would come, and would descend into Hell for 3 days convert non-believers.  Why would this short time on Earth be the important part, when Eternity was at stake?  If God asked you to rest on one day out of seven for the sake of your eternal well-being, could you do it?  Finally, Jesus healed on the Sabbath day.  The law was set to show men that following the law (that the Israelites in the wilderness asked for by the way, because they thought following God was too easy) was impossible.  Salvation can not be attained through following rules.  The rules were made seemingly easy, but infinitely impossible for man to attain on purpose.  God knew that the Savior was coming, that all of these people who had faith, who messed up but kept trying, would be redeemed by Jesus blood, even though they had no inkling of Jesus at the time.  Salvation has ALWAYS come by faith, not works.   

3. Most do not believe that God literally wrote the Old Testament himself, but you'd expect him to have enough sense to get someone trustworthy to write it.  Don't you think he could have saved literally hundreds of millions of lives by making his disapproval of mass genocide a little more clear?  Why doesn't he come outright and endorse human rights and equality under the law, rather than making strangely draconian legislation that Christians have to spend entire paragraphs rationalizing?

Humans were allowed to be human.  Again, you don't like it, but how far does God intercede before he takes away free will?  I know that you think everyone should just live happy in a CoExist sort of way, but that can not and will never happen.

4. With all due respect, you're doing nothing more than delaying the tide here.  I can, if I wanted to, find similar laws that come straight out of the lord's mouth.  I was simply typing up the most readily accessible verses.

Go ahead, I am not saying that I will agree with Him.  There are verses that make me downright angry.  I am human and my understanding is not complete, but discussing them does not make me fear.

No, he's making a very blunt threat in God's name.  If he really meant "you're in danger, enemies might come and slaughter your children!", he with the most basic communication skills would have made it clear.  Again, your rationalizations require that God and his prophets be utter morons.

Um, he was quite clear, it took very little time to tell you what he meant.  The great majority of the Bible is written in parable or teach by story style, why would the prophets be any different?

[Yawn]

If you really want honest debate/discussion, you'd ask one question per post, not toss a sh*tload against the wall just to make a statement. You're not interested in learning, only TRYING to equate the Bible with the Koran. They are in every way, polar opposites.

I will say with full sincerity that I've tried coming up with every possible rationalization for these verses, and have even researched justifications from Christian sites...and I still haven't come up with an excuse for this disgusting embarrassment to the human conscience.  Please read these verses.



Hosea 16:13

The people of Samaria must bear their guilt, because they have rebelled against their God. They will fall by the sword; their little ones will be dashed to the ground, their pregnant women ripped open."

Judges 21:10-24


    Then they thought of the annual festival of the LORD held in Shiloh, between Lebonah and Bethel, along the east side of the road that goes from Bethel to Shechem.  They told the men of Benjamin who still needed wives, "Go and hide in the vineyards.  When the women of Shiloh come out for their dances, rush out from the vineyards, and each of you can take one of them home to be your wife!  And when their fathers and brothers come to us in protest, we will tell them, 'Please be understanding.  Let them have your daughters, for we didn't find enough wives for them when we destroyed Jabesh-gilead. And you are not guilty of breaking the vow since you did not give your daughters in marriage to them.'"  So the men of Benjamin did as they were told.  They kidnapped the women who took part in the celebration and carried them off to the land of their own inheritance.  Then they rebuilt their towns and lived in them.  So the assembly of Israel departed by tribes and families, and they returned to their own homes.

Deuteronomy 22:28-29


    If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father.  Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.

Deuteronomy 22:23-24



    If within the city a man comes upon a maiden who is betrothed, and has relations with her, you shall bring them both out of the gate of the city and there stone them to death: the girl because she did not cry out for help though she was in the city, and the man because he violated his neighbors wife.


Exodus 21:7-11



    When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are.  If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again.  But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her.  And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter.  If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife.  If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment.

These are just the ones about rape, and one about cutting open pregnant women.  I can literally find hundreds of verses about genocide, torture, etc.  Heck, I can find passages of God mandating abortions.  This is why any Christian who isn't a blind follower should actually read the Bible, on his/her own time, front to back.  It's probably the best way to make atheists.