If you expect to find any sympathy in me for one of the multiple commands to atrocity and genocide in the OT you are sadly mistaken.



Yup, that's right they were. Especially the children and animals who were commanded to be cut down like the rest.



And when praytell were these people under the covenant made in Exodus that is the only justification you present for their indiscriminate slaughter?



Oh teh noes! Heaven forbid someone oppose the almighty Israelites! Hell, under this standard you should be screaming for the blood of the entire nation of Germany.



1) Wherein is this stated?

2) If you're admitting that YHVH was part of the Canaanite pantheon, you are admitting that he is the son of El and thusly a pagan god like any other. This removes all of the (pathetically shaky) grounds for religious genocide that you claim above.



Prove it. The only sources we have on the matter (the bible and Roman sources in relation to Carthage) are the ones that wiped out the cultures in question, making it very very easy for them to demonize their victims (as you are doing now) in a feeble attempt at self justification.



Frankly, if this is the god you worship it is not my Lord. Tell me Joe, how long did the Israelites get to "repent of their practices"? How long the rest of the world? How long did you get Joe to repent of your practices?

Genocide is evil, regardless the reason or attempt at justification. If this god you worship commanded it, he is an abomination and deserves death himself. He is not my Lord, and I would want nothing to do with him. Nor I believe would my Lord.

I was curious from which thread this new one was snipted from?

The Astral Projection one - sorry, I should have noted it.

I never said that they WERE under the covenant made by God at Sinai! Once again, they constantly opposed Israel--they were her enemy! When you're the one who has to defend yourself in army warfare against an enemy constantly, THEN you come and tell me that God was unjust to have a constant oppressor killed! Not only that, the very fact that they continually opposed Israel was the very reason why God had told them to wipe them all out!

You have NO RIGHT to put yourself above God's authority, neither do you have the right to imply that Israel should not defend herself against her enemies! When Israel was coming into the Promised Land, ALL the nations that they passed by KNEW that God was with them! Their God had just drowned the Egyptian Empire's king; in Egyptian culture, Pharoaoh WAS God and her neighbors knew that this was what they believed! For him to get drowned WITH his army--that's making a statement! Not only that, remember that Egypt was the empire of the day!

Israel's opponents KNEW that God was with them--but the irony of the whole affair is that even though they DID know, some STILL tried to resist them from getting into Canaan!

What can you call that but opposing the will of God?





And you aren't trying to demonize God? Your accusations are not against me or my character--they are against God and His character! There is no reason for me to give or state any sources here--because you've just proven that the real issue is not whether child sacrifice was ever practiced or not; you've proven that the issue you have with God is an issue of your heart. I can quote sources all I want--and you'd NEVER believe anything b/c of your hardened heart.



God deals with each person individually--there isn't one cut and dry mehod that He uses b/c everyone is different.
Time is not the issue--the issue is with the condition of that individual's heart. Because God is just, He gives grace b/c it says in scripture that "mercy triumphs over judgment." But, it also says, "Do not take advantage of God's grace as a license to live in sin."





And who is your god and lord?

~ JD

Eygpt was but one of many early culture kingdoms surrounding the fertile crescent.

If someone turns up and tries to invade you and subjugate you ; you resist.
Even today that land is contested because God gave two promises.

You have very interesting ideas about military defense. I just love the way that Napoleon "defended" himself against the Prussians don't you? Or how Ceasar "defended" himself against the Gauls. And don't forget Xerxes "defending" himself against those awful Spartans...

I also just adore the mutability of God's laws don't you? You know, how they apply to everyone but Him?



Yeah, if anybody tried to take over my home, based on the shoddy premise that Buddha, or Ganesha had promised them my home, I think I'd resist. And you know what? You would too. And you would even if they told you that it was that Yahweh had promised them.



Oh so compassion is to blame for our collective stubbornness! Oh well... that makes things simple then doesn't it. Let's just cut out the portion of our brains that make us compassionate, then we too can be the sheep that Yahweh so desperately desires...



Oh oh! Can I go first!?! At the moment, I have a Hellenic pantheon and therefore, as the head honcho of that pantheon I guess my guy is Zeus. Warts and all, he's okay by me.



Seriously, Theo and I have hashed this discussion to pieces. Pagans will NEVER "give Yahweh a pass" so to speak. Zeus or Ganesha or any of the Pagan deities might be the universe's most awful thing, committing genocide and rape and pillage etc, etc. They aren't, but even if they were, they never did so, and then claimed to be all compassionate and all loving.

Pagans will always default to interpreting Yahweh's actions in the old testament as being irreversibly tainted - you could call this bias. Perhaps it IS, increasingly however, it seems that the broader human family is coming to the conclusion that this behavior is unacceptable from anyone. Isn't it reasonable that genocide would also be unacceptable from an all-loving all-compassionate supreme being? Doesn't the same go for blatant favoritism?

Christian bias will give Yahweh a pass, they will try to paint the old testament in a favorable light. Perhaps, ultimately this bias will prove correct, but in the meantime, you'll never convince a Pagan that genocide is somehow ethically defensible.

I personally have a major problem with anybody hurting, or inducing others to hurt innocent children and animals. Nothing short of a major lobotomy will ever make me change my mind about that.

EDIT: In other, Yahweh doesn't stand a chance, nor should he.

Caitlin, would you care to clarify which two promises you refer to God (I'm presuming you mean Yahweh) to have given?

The first is Genesis 16 the second Genesis 17 - a region torn asunder for so many generations all because of Abraham's disobedience and not waiting upon God.

...Oh ok; so then it would have better if Israel would've dropped dead? It would've been perfectly ok that God's will be violated and opposed and God sit back and never do anything about it?

If God is just, then for a time, He would tolerate misbehavior; but as judge, you must admit that justice at some point must be served for perpetual disobedience! IF you deny that this is true, then YOU are the one that is serving a false god!

For if God never passes sentence on evil, then evil would forever prosper.



Buddha, Ganesha, and Yahweh are three DIFFERENT beings; to imply that they are the same is not accurate as Yahweh does not accept ANY plant or animal sacrifices or incense neither does He have an image that people bow down to and worship. You mentioned Zeus and you portrayed him in a very rosy manner--a little too rosy. Have you forgotten that he cheated on his wife on more then one occassion? Have you forgotten so soon his quick anger and wrath that he would hold against people? Have you forgotten ALL those other CARNALLY HUMAN attributes that he displayed? For that matter...what about the whole PANTHEON?


...And you said something about Zeus not being an "awful thing" and some of these are his children? Why would I want to emulate, much less worship these "virtues?"



No; compassion is not the issue. If you read what I said, the issue is what's inside of one's heart.



...and the whole point is that your many gods have better behavior then Jehovah?

I find that to be quite fascinating. Your gods rape, murder, commit fornication, have incest (even with their own mothers), cheat on each other, get drunk, their children fight one another, and finally they follow their sexual passions.

But when my God tells Israel to go ahead and defend herself by wiping out an enemy, my God is some kind of hideous monster that many Neo-Pagans don't even want to have anything to do with?

You know, the old saying is true...



If Neo-Paganism is ANYTHING like the children of Baal or Zeus, then seriously, why should I even bother with Neo-Paganism?



Mhmmm...

But of course; your gods that you worship, after all, are sooo much better then Yahweh...



JD

Hey...Genocide happens. Some folks say God told them to, others do it for the will of the King/Queen, some for Communist, some for National Socialism, some of Manefest Destiny, etc.....

In reality it is more about goods and realestate than anything else. The rest is justification. Infact...God may have never even said "Kill Them". The religious caste has always been used to justify the evils of the ruling class.

So because it's God's will that a certain people should push a different certain people off their land, that makes it okay? No, they were the enemy right! Just like the natives that European colonists dealt with so kindly... But that was God's will too right?



Evil is an abstract. And no, evil has not prospered forever. Far from it. We are still here! If evil was an all powerful external force, we wouldn't be alive discussing it, because it's had more than enough opportunity to accomplish its objectives. And none of it was assisted by God.



So once an idolator always an idolator? Well that's hopeful... But you're right. Pagans still practice human sacrifice. It even appears to work. Chew on that one for a while...



Well, first of all the God Zeus is distinct from the myths we tell about him. You see, the Greeks came up with this thing called Allegory. Thus, I don't consider the stories that we tell about Zeus and Hera to be the literal truth. They are elaborate metaphors that are supposed to teach us about morality. And you know, it was such a cracking good idea that we're still doing it! Hollywood does this every second, of every minutes of every hour, of every day, of every week, of every month, of every year.

Unfortunately, they don't always speak plainly, but for the most part, the Greeks are pretty good at figuring out what is right action, and what is wrong action. Do they make mistakes? Sure. But they were trying. And they weren't inventing shoddy reasons for genocide.

And since the myths are just that, myths, and not the literal truth, I question who has been harmed by Zeus' behavior. Indeed if you actually bothered, you'd see that Zeus' actions especially are supposed to serve as a warning to mortals. Hera worked her vengeance, so the logical thinker who for whatever reason interpreted the stories as literal truth, would conclude that if Zeus' actions got him into trouble, and he's THE GREAT SKY-FATHER, what chance does a mortal have? I know, "do as I say, not as I do" isn't a great start, but it seems to apply very readily to someone else we're discussing...



If a deity is nothing more than an ethical system, then it's not something that we can relate to very well. In art, a perfect character, or a perfect protagonist with no apparent flaws, or failings is called a "Mary-sue" or a "Marty-stu." It's typically a perfect way to loose the audience. We humans connect with characters, we want to relate to them in our story telling.

You may say that Zeus' behavior is deplorable. Sure, at times it is. But then Zeus never claimed to be an all-loving, all-compassionate deity. Yahweh did, and the commanded his followers to believe it, which they did, despite evidence to the contrary.



Compassion causes me to be appalled by Yahweh's behavior. If compassion resides in the heart, then it follows.



I don't remember any stories about Zeus destroying whole cities for being "sinful." In fact, Zeus typically gives humans enough rope to hang themselves. I don't recall him doing it for them. He even gave Prometheus a pass. Besides, it's an allegory, not literal truth.


Rape -
While the Rape of Persephone is called, yes, a rape, the story is an allegory about the seasons. It isn't supposed to be a description of a crime... Also, not literal truth.

Murder -
Not literal truth. And other than Artemis, you don't really get Gods wiping out cities for no real reason.

Fornication -
Considering that I don't have a problem with some good ol' fashion fornication, you fail to make a point. Also, not literal truth.

Have incest -
Not literal truth. Also, allegory.

Cheat on each other -
Allegory. Not literal truth. Cheating also tends to have some pretty unfortunate consequences.

Get drunk -
So you've never gotten drunk? Well I have, just often enough to know that I don't really like it. Also, allegory. Not literal truth.

Their children fighting -
Because Yahweh's adopted children never fight...? Also, not literal truth. It's allegory.

Follow their sexual passions -
Do you have psychological hang-ups about sex? I happen to rather enjoy sexual passions, as do probably the other 99% of the population. Why are sexual passions, or leading to them somehow misconstrued as a bad thing? Also, it's allegory, and not literal truth.



That's not what the scriptures say.



So... Why are you bothering? Why so much venom? Why doesn't Yahweh straighten us out? Oh yeah! It's because we're NOTHING LIKE WHAT YOU SAY WE ARE.

[/quote][/quote]


Um... yeah, actually they are.

While I respect your perspective on Zeus, that was not the perspectives of the Greeks because in those days, Zeus was most definately associated with those stories.


Yes; Hollywood produces such great moral films as "Texas Chainsaw Massacre", "Night of the Living Dead", "The Exorcist", "Californication", and "American Pie."

Looking at the Greek stories again, you stated that they were supposed to convey a message about morality. Hence, you proved my point that I made in my last response--that is that fact that I'm not going to worship gods whose morality is twice as bad if not worse then the rest of humanity.



Ok--and why would I want to serve a god like that?





I'm trying to figure out why you would want to follow an unloving god who, in the stories, acted just as bad (if not worse) then the rest of humanity.

--JD

While that may be true, I suspect it is a half-truth. I doubt the Greeks believed that Zeus' antics were literal truth. Virtually all stories are attempts to explain how something came into existence. When people didn't know better they might ask, why do we have seasons - a winter, and growing seasons? And somebody made something which was entertaining and stimulating up to explain it - Hades carried Kore down to the underworld. Eventually, because the Gods weren't keen on the idea of all the humans dying because Koré (that's, the grain) wasn't growing a deal was struck which allowed Persephone to return for three quarters of the year, and thus preserve human existence.

If Zeus is such a douche-bag, why did he allow the grain to return? Why did he allow humanity to eat the good parts of the meat when they decided to sacrifice something? Why didn't he destroy humanity when Prometheus gave us fire?

Zeus ends up helping humanity, a lot. If he didn't care, why'd he bother? You might not agree, and that's fine, but what the stories say is that Zeus isn't such a bad guy. NONE of them are actually bad. None. They're all part of existence.

But even besides from this, we're dangerously close to "You fail Classical Mythology forever" territory. Often, Zeus isn't what we would consider a paragon of virtue, we don't need to belabor this. However, what do you suppose the cardinal sin of Greek mythology was? If you believe that Zeus was supposed to "lead by example" then you've missed the point. That's what Heracles, Jason, and Odysseus were supposed to do.



And "Sophie's Choice," "Schindler's List," "Saving Private Ryan," "Up," "Glory," "Star Wars," "Bladerunner," "Wall-E," "Avatar" "Dances With Wolves" "The Boondock Saints" "The Lord of the Rings" (though it was filmed in New Zealand), and "The Passion of the Christ"....

And "Californication" was actually really good....



Nobody is asking you to, and I'm not proselytizing.

Conversely however, your inability to understand why someone would want and choose this life is not sufficient justification to make it wrong. Nor is an appeal to ethics, whatever system you choose. If we accept that first, I'm not harming any person, including myself, nor am I doing more harm to the life of other creatures than human existence already causes, the issue is at worst ethically neutral. If we consider that I, and other, find meaning in these stories and practices, then we have moved away from neutrality and into good.

That's not to suggest that it would be good for you. You should find your own meaning. If that's in Christianity, that's fine. We'll not keep you, we'd consider it harmful to you.

If Neo-Paganism is ANYTHING like the children of Baal or Zeus, then seriously, why should I even bother with Neo-Paganism?[/quote]

I'm wondering... Do you really think this is about numbers? Do you think I'm looking for converts? If so, then you've missed the point.



Zeus isn't unloving. That may be what you understand, but that is not what I understand, nor is it what is in the text. Zeus wasn't supposed to be setting an example. We're supposed to make our own.

Noted FW. I also notice that once the prospect of quick mutual genocide (MAD) became an option, so too did open war between the great powers, for six decades and counting now.

jfritzyb: I don't see why you bring in only other Gods from that area of the world. I don't mean to offend anyone very much, but Gods from the Middle East/ Mediteranian area are kind of crappy. They tend to have poor charater. So of course using them as moral back drops makes your argument easy.

In contract there largely moral and honorable Gods of nothern and central Europe would be a whole other story, or say the Gods of a good many indiginous peoples around there world.

I dunno, man...Zeus has always struck me as a bit of a weasel. He did try to get rid of us once, after the Lycaeon incident. And the only reason he leaves us the good parts of the meat is because Prometheus tricked him.

Dionysus, now, there's a deity I can get behind. Not because he's good, but because he's him. And kind of hot.

The ancient Greeks dramatized their myths, and sometimes bits added or changed by the dramas were incorporated as part of the myths, but as far as I understand it, their pinned-down, "scriptural" works were supported by a pre-existing body of oral tales. Aetiological myths could be incorporated into these things, the way that the Eleusinian Mysteries were incorporated into the Homeric Hymn to Demeter, but they weren't the reasons for the tales. The tales were themselves, just as the gods are themselves. Morals change, but at the core of every myth is a kernel that is totally amoral.

That said, I do think that Zeus is preferable to Yahweh, in that when Zeus does something nasty, the excuse is, "Well, it's not right, but he's a god, so what are we gonna do?" But when Yahweh does something nasty, suddenly this too has to be nudged, reasoned, tortured into a moral good.

And I don't worship either of them. There are people in the world, right now, who are better than that. Heck, I'm better than that. We may not be as capable of frying people, but you know, if that's what makes a god a god, then maybe we'd do well to think about what sort of behaviour we're encouraging in our deities.

A classics professor taught us that Zeus let the trick stand because of his soft-spot for humans. I dunno, seems plausible given the whole "He's the big God" theme that runs through a lot of stories...



I can totally appreciate the latter sentiment. I was pretty devoted to Aphrodite for a while, especially after I saw the statue that Oberon Zell did. I thought, "If there's anything worth worshiping, I want to worship what that represents!" *sigh* Idolatry isn't cool but sometimes it's a lot more fun.



Okay. I deffer to the Classics grad-student.



I would submit that often the guilty party brought it on themselves. Hubris tends to bring down the wrath pretty quickly, but usually that's a character who's screwed up a lot. It's cliche, but Oedipus for example.

The flip-side is that stories without adversity aren't entertaining. The Odyssey is an epic, and a good story because of what Odysseus goes through. We connect his trials with our own.



This is exactly the idea that I was getting at. We don't go around trying to make excuses for Zeus, but the same cannot be said of Yahweh.



To each their own?



Interesting. Can you elaborate on how we encourage behaviour in deity? I'm not clear on that...

FHG, the thing I found with a lot of Greek material is that in punishing the folks who might deserve it, or even in just doing their regular god things, they hurt a lot of innocents--Phaedra, Semele, Amphitryon, and I'd even go so far as to call Cassandra an innocent.

As far as encouraging behaviour in deities, the reason Zeus held off destroying humans utterly in the flood is that it was pointed out to him, if there were no humans, there would be no sacrifices. I mean, maybe realistically we can't control what the gods do, but like the ones who walk away from Omelas, we can at least refuse to benefit from what we do not want to endorse.

How does this change the fact that the Amalekite women, children, and animals were likely innocent in varying degrees?





You stated "They had practiced witchcraft and idolatry LONG BEFORE Israel had left Egypt;". At this time in history ONLY the Hebrews knew anything about any prohibition against witchcraft or idolatry and then ONLY because they were under a covenant prohibiting said activities. To condemn the Amalekites or any other people for witchcraft and idolatry is to presume they were under that same covenant. Otherwise there is no ground to condemn them.



So that justifies the slaughter of women and children in your eyes huh? Ever stop to think that said women and children had nothing to do with the horrible crime of opposing pwecious wittle Israel? And how many of the men just went along with what their leaders commanded?



BULL. I am a thinking being that understands that genocide is wrong regardless of who does it. As such, if your god can't understand that simple fact of morality, I have every right - duty in fact - to put myself above his so-called authority.



Genocide is not self defense. Killing women and children is not self defense. It is gratiutious slaughter, and you are condoning it.



If some unmitigated jackhole came knocking on your door determined to kill you and your family and take your land you'd resist too. But maybe you wouldn't if they did so in YHVH's name huh?



Wrong. If God supports this kind of atrocity my accusations then indeed stand. But then I don't believe he does or did. Thusly, my accusations are indeed against you and your lack of character, as you're the only one I see standing here and defending - almost reveling in - the slaughter of women and children.



Translation - "I got nothing to support my bs claims."



Not yours, that much is obvious. My Lord Christ would never approve of the indiscriminate slaughter you so eagerly defend - nor any of the other gods I associate with. He is appalled by such atrocity. But then it is as I said elsewhere - it is very obvious you are no follower of Christ.

Damn straight. No god should get a pass just due to divine status IMO.



Such indeed is my thinking atm.



Methinks there is a typo herein as MAD was actually a major deterrent to open war between the super powers.



I my friend doubt he would consider any pagan god moral or honorable regardless of his or her behavior.



Seems like an overgrown frat boy to me

Your assumption, however, of what actually happened is incorrect.

And another thing...you said something along the lines of "b/c Amalek wasn't under the Law, they didn't have to obey God." To this I answer thusly; every man has a conscience and an awareness that God does exist. Therefore, it is the duty of all men to respect Him. Love that does not entail some kind of obedience, is not love at all but rather hate and selfishness.


You started this thread, not b/c I was "reveling in the slaughter of women and children" in the Astral Projection thread--but b/c you wished to disrespect Yahweh and His Word. If you will recall, I wasn't salivating over the blood of innocents in the Astral Projection thread--rather, that portion of God's Word was in the context of a whole 'nother passage of scripture that I used to bring clarification to what I was talking about in that thread.

The ROOT issue is, you're upset that if you're gonna serve God, you're gonna have to give up your witchcraft too. That's all.

One more thing in closing...This is NOT the way you approach a debate or discussion:



THIS is the way to approach a discussion or debate:



You're not in a debate to "win"--you're in a debate to "learn". If you win, great; if you don't, great. If I win, great; if I lose, great. It isn't about "survival of the fittest (or the smartest)"...

Howso?



I started this thread because I have issues with this and a number of the other "kill every living thing" commands found in the OT. You simply provided a convenient jumping off point to address the matter - that's why I started a different thread, duh.

And as I've stated, if YHVH truly did command these genocides he deserves nothing but disrespect.



You're certainly defending their slaughter eagerly enough here. In my opinion, in comparison to that all else is semantics.



If you truly think I have to justify my life to you precious then you're even more of a fool than I thought. I'd made my stance clear - my Lord has not asked I give up my practice, and has in fact stated it is my gift. I take his word at far higher value than yours.



Who says I even care to have a debate or discussion with you anymore? Any civility you were entitled to you threw away when you started an increasing trend of dishonesty, culminating in flat out lying about my statements and the inexcusable defense of genocide. Thusly, you've thrown away any grounds to lecture me on anything. In retrospect I should have expected this much however from someone who claims to be enlightened ("The Buddhist however, will tell you that enlightenment is only achieved through strict discipline; however, for me as a believer, I got it when I got saved!").

The only reason I continue to respond to you is because you still post in response to me, simple.

How so?

1. When I mentioned the Israelites being in the wilderness a while ago, you said that the reason the Amalekites fought was b/c they were defending themselves against Israel's invasion. I showed you the scripture that stated that the Amalekites had attacked them from behind where a good number of the weak people were; not only that, they had no reverence for God. This is why, after the battle, God told Israel that when they entered into the Promised Land, the Amalikites were to be OBLITERATED! If you're going to obliterate them, you have to kill everyone.

2. "Your God is a vicious God!" you may reply. I respond thusly...



Keep in mind, the CONTEXT of this quote is dealing with Amalek fighting Israel BEFORE the Promised Land! Why DID Amalek fight them? You have already seen quite clearly from scripture that Amalek attacked Israel FIRST (and mind you, it was from BEHIND!) WHY? B/c they had NO reverence for God at ALL! That's why (see above quote as to why this was so).


I already explained scripture's concept of enlightenment in that same thread you quoted on (and you know it). It doesn't mean that I know it all! I want to point something else out as well; for someone who states that I make assumptions, you yourself hold a few of 'em about me that aren't true:

B/c I post quotations almost frequently that I pride myself on my many quotations and therefore, I must not have very much experience. Well, no, I don't pride myself on my quotations; and concerning me not having very much life experience, the answer to this is yes--and no. Yes, because I'm 22 years old; but who I am as a person spiritually can't be defined within the strict confines of my age. No, because I've lived life--I've been around, even though I'm only 22 so I do have some measure of experience. As to those quotations? Well, they are only there to help you understand the text better.

You also think that I think that in the spiritual world, all that exists is the trinity and the devil, heaven and hell, when in reality, nothing could be further from the truth! Read Ephesians 6:12; do you honestly think that this is just a text to me and that I've NEVER seen these realities before in my LIFE???



Priceless.

~

I've got a feeling that the Israelites had an addiction to retconning so that they could one day rival George Lucas. In this particular circumstance, the Israelites were probably migrating, or settling on land that the Amalekites believed was theirs. The Amalekites attacked the Israelites, and the Israelites overreacted when they counter-attacked. They probably knew they'd gone too far and used Yahweh to attempt to their actions rather than simply admit the mistake, seek forgiveness and move on. Instead, the effectively just shifted the blame off of themselves. It's rather tragic that the same argument would be used thousands of years later in the other direction.

In any case, we didn't buy it fifty years ago, and we don't buy it now. There's no justification possible. None.



Being attacked, even by a coward doesn't justify genocide.



Why didn't the Egyptians document that?



No, no you don't. That's what you believe. That's what MANY believe. Many used to believe the Earth was flat and the heavens revolved around the earth. But their numbers didn't make them correct. The difference between us and you is that we're willing to look into a telescope to check.



LOL! Just brow-beat the Pagans into submission! That'll work!



Context didn't do squat. Try again?



Many words that say nothing.

So this makes my conclusion that women and children were mercilessly slaughtered and that you are attempted to defend, justify, and glory in such actions wrong how precisely? You've just reiterated my entire point.



WHO THE HELL CARES? If you think that's a justification for the murder of women and children.....well, I won't finish that thought as it is against forum rules but suffice to say it is clear a murderer like you (for you have murdered those people in your heart by defending this) has much more to fear than I should God be just.



Look to the forest in you own eye - your arrogant pride, your willful ignorance, your insistence on your own rightness and righteousness, and most of all your callous and utter disregard for others - before "rebuking" me of the spec in mine. Jesus stated "Let he without sin throw the first stone", well "precious" you started throwing and then firmly proved your sin. In my eyes it is inexcusable. Be glad my Lord is more merciful than I.



Bull. If you consider those Amalekites worthy of butchery for the practice of witchcraft and worship of other gods, then it follows you hold the same true of myself and all my kind. So don't try to dress up your condemnation and judgment as some sort of bs caring. It's simply too easy to see the real you on the other side of it.



Concept - then perhaps you shouldn't act like you know it all!



I value not age - the young can be just as wiser or wiser than the old. What I am talking about is actual experience with the occult - you have none. You prove such every time you post. But because you read some crap book by the likes of some idiot hack like Brown or Larson you seem to think you know every last nuance of occultism. I stated it before - you are exactly the type of falsehood spouting know-nothing that it was the original mission statement of this ministry to debunk.



Try acting like you've seen more than a binary world that you read about in a book, and I'll give you credit for such. As is I can only judge you based on what you've shown.

And you are found wanting.