Is The Trinitarian Ontology Coherent?

Philosophical theism, in contemporary times, has been dominated by philosophers who are Christians. These theistic philosophers have published a great amount of literature defending the rationality of belief in God, and any participant in the great debate will surely be familiar with the names of intellectual giants like Alvin Plantinga, Richard Swinburne, William Lane Craig, among many others.

Swinburne, for example, gives theistic belief, and in particular Christian belief, philosophical treatment in toto. I have noticed the following progression in his case for Christianity. First, he argues that the notion of ‘God-talk’ is perfectly coherent, and there are no a priori reasons to reject theistic belief. See Swinburne’s The Coherence of Theism (Oxford, Clarendon Press: 1977) Next, he argues on cumulative grounds that natural theology renders the existence of God more probable than not. Richard Swinburne, The Existence of God (Oxford, Clarendon Press: 1991)Finally, Swinburne articulates various arguments for Christian particularism, e.g. reasons to believe in the Christian Revelation, the Resurrection of Christ, etc.Swinburne’s arguments can be found in Responsibility and Atonement (Oxford, Clarendon Press: 1989), and Revelation (Oxford, Clarendon Press: 1992). He therefore epitomizes the classic Lockean evidentialist, who is prepared to give rational reasons for all his beliefs.

Of course, not all Christian philosophers have the evidentialist enthusiasm of Swinburne. The reformed epistemologists, spearheaded by Alvin Plantinga and Nicholas Wolterstorff, approach theistic belief analytically, but not on evidentialist grounds.See for example, Alvin Plantinga & Nicholas Wolterstorff, Faith and Rationality(South Bend, The University of Notre Dame Press: 1983) Although they may reject giving arguments for religious beliefs, and still claim that belief in God is rational, what is important to note is that they are prepared to discuss theism in an analytic and rational manner.

These prefatory remarks are important to bear in mind, since I now wish to look at the philosophical tenability of the (orthodox) Christian depiction of God, which I feel has been largely ignored by contemporary Christian philosophers. My analysis will only be confined to divine ontology, and the contention I will be arguing for is that ‘Christian monotheism’ is ontologically incoherent. This has further implications for Christian particularism (in so far as it is understood by Pauline ontology), for if, on a priori grounds, the Christian depiction of God is impossible, then it follows a fortiori, that the doctrinal particulars which are contingent on this erroneous ontology cannot be true.

I am writing this piece with the intention of hearing from Christian philosophers who adhere to the Pauline ontology of God, believe in its coherence, and are willing to discuss the matter on rational grounds.

[toc]

Locating Our Topic

Naturally, no insight is free from presuppositions, and so I will need to state the position from which my analysis is going to depart. The terminus of natural theology is usually a metaphysical postulation, some ‘first cause’, ‘intelligent designer’, ‘law giver’, or the like. The theist, of course, argues that this being is God. According to Swinburne, to state that God exists is to state that there is:

“A person without a body (i.e. a spirit), present everywhere, the creator and sustainer of the universe, a free agent, able to do everything (i.e. omnipotent), knowing all things, perfectly good, a source of moral obligation, immutable, eternal, a necessary being, holy, and worthy of worship.”Swinburne, The Coherence of Theism, p. 1

This is a definition of God that Jewish-Islamic theism can easily accept without any major difficulties, for this is the common understanding of God in Western theism. As far as divine ontology goes, it is a monotheistic definition: there is only one God, the Creator and Sustainer of the universe who exists. Understood thus, there is nothing obviously incoherent about postulating such a being. I will further assume that there are no a priori reasons for considering the existence of such a being (taking Swinburne’s definition) as impossible, due to some logical contradiction or the like (a defence of such a contention will be the task for another day).

Now the questions I wish to explore are these: When Swinburne’s definition of God is unpacked, and further explicated within orthodox Christian theism, is it still coherent? Are there any a priori reasons for considering it to be incoherent, and thus impossible? If so, what implications are there for orthodox Christian particulars?

Stating Trinitarian Ontology

According to orthodox Christianity, although there exists a God as understood by Swinburne, He is tri-personal. In other words, God is three distinct persons (The Father, Son and Holy Spirit) in one substance, and yet He is still one being. To understand this, we can do no better than turn to the Athanasian Creed, where we find the following existential statements:

“[T]he Catholic Faith is this, that we worship one God in Trinity and Trinity in Unity. Neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the Substance. For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son and of the Holy Ghost is all One, the Glory Equal, the Majesty Co-Eternal. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Ghost … So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet they are not Three Gods, but One God … there is One Father, not Three Fathers; one Son, not Three Sons; One Holy Ghost, not Three Holy Ghosts … He therefore that will be saved, must thus think of the Trinity.”The Athanasian Creed, available online. I have summarized the idea behind the doctrine of the Trinity, although it is suggested the reader scrutinize the entire text.

Trying to make sense of the creed can be difficult, and therefore we can follow philosopher Richard CartwrightRichard Cartwright, ‘On the Logical Problem of the Trinity’, in Philosophical Essays (MIT Press: 1987), p. 188. by stating the seven basic propositions of the creed, the belief in which is essential for salvation, for the purposes of analysis.

From this point onwards, when I refer to the Christian understanding of God, it is in reference to the Athanasian Creed that my arguments are to be understood.

Can A Tri-Personal Deity Exist?

Answering this question is very much an ontological exploration. We need to distinguish between a priori and a posteriori answers to the question of existence. By a priori answers, I am referring to answers which speak of conceptual possibilities or impossibilities. For example, there is a conceptual possibility that there exists in the world a unicorn. There is nothing in the definition of a unicorn which would immediately render its existence impossible. On the other hand, it is conceptually impossible that there exists in the world a married bachelor, since the notion of a married bachelor is incoherent. We know immediately a priori that such a being could not exist, ever.

By a posteriori answers, I am referring to propositions which we know the truth or falsity of through experience. Thus, although the existence of a unicorn is conceptually possible, most people do not believe that unicorns exist because of the lack of experience they have had, or lack of evidence. However, one would always be open to the evidence, since unicorns could exist. But it would be absurd to seek evidence for the existence of married bachelors, since it is conceptually impossible for such beings to exist.

Here, I am concerned with the definition of the Trinity, propositions (1)-(7) stated above. If any two of these propositions are contradictory, then it would be conceptually impossible for God, in so far as He is understood in orthodox Christian theism, to exist. And therefore, assessing the a posteriori evidence for or against the doctrine of the Trinity (as is often the case with the Biblical data) would be as meaningless as entertaining a married bachelor’s request for divorce.

Let the Father be designated by x, the Son by y, and the Holy Spirit by z. God, as defined by Swinburne, can be designated by G. As Cartwright notes, one way to interpret the creed is to take the verb ‘is’ and understand it to mean ‘is identical with’Cartwright, Trinity, p. 191, therefore, x = G, y = G, and z = G. But if this is true, then it logically follows (according to Leibniz’s principle of identity, which states: if x is the same object as y then x has exactly the same properties that y has) that x = y, x = z, and y = z. However, the creed will not allow this: (4)-(6). The Father, Son and Holy Sprit are different and distinct from each other.

Another possibility is to construe G as a general termIbid., p. 192 to avoid the logical inconsistency. Thus, x is a G, y is a G and z is a G. But surely this would contradict (7), for we are suggesting the existence of three Gods, or tri-theism. Cartwright presents the following syllogism: “every Divine Person is a God; there are at least three Divine Persons; therefore, there at least three Gods”.Ibid., p. 196 The second premise is supported the principle: if every A is a B then there cannot be fewer B’s than A’s. Cartwright cites the following analogy. If every cat is an animal, there cannot be fewer animals than cats.

It seems we have a dilemma: if x, y and z are identical with G, then we simply have one person, or three names for one person. The heretical position of modalism comes to mind, where the eternal coexistence of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit is denied. But if x, y and z are a G (i.e. belong to a genera), then one has three divine persons, which of course is another heretical position: tri-theism. In the first instance, the contradiction can be removed by altering propositions (4)-(6). In the second, by altering (7). But taken altogether, (1)-(7) portray an inconsistent set. It follows ipso facto that the Christian God, as He is depicted in the Creed, cannot possibly exist.

Implications For Christian Particularism

Orthodox Christian ontology, as depicted in the Athanasian Creed, forms the basis for a number of Christian particulars. And these particulars are contingent upon the truth of the Christian ontology of God. The implications of ontological incoherence of the Trinity are that certain doctrinal particulars simply cannot be true. For example, the divinity of Jesus (the second person of the Trinity took on human form), the incarnation (which involves the second person in the Trinity being completely God and man simultaneously), etc. There seems to be an a priori blockade that prevents these doctrinal particulars from even getting off the ground.

Conclusions

To conclude, the doctrine of the Trinity as presented in the Athanasian Creed depicts an ontologically incoherent model of God. To dissolve the contradictions which arise from analyzing the Creed, one can either reject the plurality of persons and hold that there exists a single person with different names or modes.

Alternatively, one can embrace tri-theism. As long as one is committed to neither confounding the persons, nor dividing the substance, as the Creed would have us do, one is holding beliefs about God which are logically inconsistent. And if one is to remain consistent with the philosophical treatment of theism in contemporary philosophy by the likes of Swinburne and Craig, it follows that the doctrine of the Trinity, and its relation to ‘Christian monotheism’ — being profoundly irrational — should be abandoned. Is The Trinitarian Ontology Coherent? 1

Cite This As:

Published:

February 15, 2006

Christian Doctrines, Christianity

Author:

Bismika Allahuma Team

Tags:

Comments

20 responses to “Is The Trinitarian Ontology Coherent?”

shery

November 13, 2006

A few comments: One thing I’d like to add, based on my current reading in the new book “Who Wrote the Gospels?” by Randel Helms, on the differences between Marcan and Matthean theologies, is: Why did Jesus’ family, on hearing of Jesus’ commission, go “out to lay hold on him: for they said, He is beside himself” (Mark 3:21), even though Mary knew her son was on a divine mission, from the annunciation and from Joseph’s dream?

As a theist, however, I do find one item particularly poor: If God exists, is it unreasonable to suppose that there would be at least one irrefutable proof of his existence. One could just as easily justify solipsism to oneself (who else is there?) by saying that if other people really existed (as first-person, feeling beings rather than as automaton’s or figments of my imagination), then there would be at least one irrefutable proof of their existence. Perhaps James is more concerned with the Biblical God, but one need not be a Christian to believe in God (not the biblical imitation).

On a similar question, while I find the doctrine of the trinity ridiculous, I don’t think it could not possibly be true (just that there is no reason to think it true). A better refutation of the trinity would be twofold: 1. Even if the Bible claimed it to be true, that wouldn’t make it so. 2. The Bible doesn’t even claim it. i.e., in the synoptic Gospels Jesus is the son of God, not God, so we have disagreement among the evangelists over this person being part of the godhead, and there is nothing in references to the “holy spirit” that indicates this is a person covalent with God. The Holy Spirit could be just another angel, like Gabriel, or maybe another name for the whole heavenly host of all angels, or who knows what? BTW, I don’t find the concept impossible, because God is indeed beyond comprehension (that’s a reason why no possible Bible could ever allow us to comprehend God), and an analogy would be that if we tried to explain three-dimensional space to a person living,somehow, in a one-dimensional universe, would result in the same bewilderment we feel at the other type of trinity. Space? Dimension? what’s the difference he would say. But I repeat, I see no need for the hypothesis of a trinity.

Reply
meedge

November 3, 2006

Read that first part of that article till it got to about here:

“But it would be absurd to seek evidence for the existence of married bachelors, since it is conceptually impossible for such beings to exist.”

And then I stopped. Why you might ask?

Let me ask you a question? Do you expect to be able to logically understand God and quantify him mathematically? This is (as you would say) an infinite being. God exists outside of the physical laws and restrictions of the space in which you inhabit. All of your logic is tied to this physical universe, but it wouldn’t restrict God because he isn’t contained by it. Maybe the properties of this space allow a married bachelor. How do you know?

Now, lets ask this question:
“Okay, if God created the universe – who created God?”

Does this question make sense? No? Well, its certainly not a very good one because it assumes that time and causality exist in the same way in the space God inhabits to that in our universe. Causality maybe didn’t exist before the creation of the universe, and maybe didn’t exist in the different properties of the space in which God inhabits, or maybe its completely different. Maybe an event happens first, and then the thing that caused it happened afterwards. We JUST DON’T KNOW.

And this is where we get into problems….For example here
“Let the Father be designated by x, the Son by y, and the Holy Spirit by z. God, as defined by Swinburne, can be designated by G. As Cartwright notes, one way to interpret the creed is to take the verb ‘is’ and understand it to mean ‘is identical with’8, therefore, x = G, y = G, and z = G. But if this is true, then it logically follows (according to Leibniz’s principle of identity, which states: if x is the same object as y then x has exactly the same properties that y has) that x = y, x = z, and y = z. However, the creed will not allow this: (4)-(6). The Father, Son and Holy Sprit are different and distinct from each other.”

You are evaluating something using the mathematics/physics of this space that exists in another space with almost certainly a completely different set of mathematics/physics governing it and expecting to get a sensible answer? Its whole possible that in this space the Creed WILL follow this. Do you think that you should be able to quantify what God is? It doesn’t make sense to assume that the logic of your world also restricts God.

Ultimately, using logic tied to the mathematic space that we know holds true in this universe and applying it to anything which is not wholey contained BY this mathematical space is utterly pointless. We can really reliably infer anything about anything that is not contained wholely and restricted wholey by the nature of the space in which we inhabit. The maths is broken. This is why it will never be possible to be able to look back _beyond_ the singularity at the inception of the big bang, because all physics breaks down and we have no means to do it.

Reply
Denis Giron

April 26, 2006

Some quick comments…

First, “kudos” to MENJ for mirroring Imran Aijaz’ article. Many of his extremely well written pieces were apparently lost as his site underwent revision some time ago, and that is an unfortunate loss indeed, since Imran is one of the most brillian Muslims on the net.

Regarding George’s post from February 15th, one portion which I wish to view in isolation (i.e. unrelated to the rest of the stuff he wrote) is the following:

“the equation is not G = x, G = z, G = y, but G = (x + y + z), which is to my mind perfectly coherent.”

I think this scratches the surface of a proper response to Imran’s argument. I agree with Imran that it is a contradiction to claim that each Person is identical to the Godhead yet not identical to one another. I also agree with Imran that it would be a contradiction to claim that each person is a god yet there is only one god. But there is another solution…

The response to Imran is inspired by William Lane Craig’s approach to the doctrine of the Trinity (cf. his book, “Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Worldview”). It holds that the three Persons are not by themselves deities, but rather divine beings which are each a proper part of a single Deity. When it is said that “Jesus is God,” the copula of such a proposition is interpretated as one of predication rather than identity (i.e. the statement is that Jesus is divine, but not The God [of Abraham]). Interestingly enough, this position has support in the Greek text of John 1:1. Regardless, putting Biblical support (or lack thereof) aside for a moment, I would like to offer a logically coherent version of the Trinity, put forth in the language of formal logic, and then explained.

But first let me describe some of the symbols I weill employ:

G’x will represent that x is a member of the class of things which are “God” in a sense of predication (i.e. divine or in possession of some of the attributes of deity) and proper
parts of the Godhead.

The similar looking construction Gx (the difference between this and the above might be vocalized G-prime-of-x and G-of-x, respectively) will state something different, namely that x is a deity.

I will use the constants f, j, h, and ixGx to represent the Father, Jesus, the Holy Ghost and the Godhead, respectively (with regard to ixGx, this is taken from Brian Leftow’s employment of Russell’s definite description operator, but if anyone objects, they can simply replace ixGx with g).

x –> y will represent “if x, then y”

~ will represent negation (e.g. ~x means not-x)

= will be used to represent identity

& will be used as the conjunctive connective

x y will represent the biconditional (i.e. both if x then y as well as if y then x)

x.P.y will represent the relation function such that x is a proper part of y

{x,y,z} will represent the set/class containing x, y and z

x.U.y will represent x and y being united within the Godhead in some way

(x) will represent the universal quantifier (i.e. for all x)

(Ex) will represent the existential quantifier (i.e. for some x, or there is at least one x such that)

With that, the doctrine might be written as follows:

1. (x)(Gx (x = ixGx))
2. ~(Ex)(Gx & ~(x = ixGx))
3. (x)(G’x –> x.P.ixGx)
4. (x)(y)((x.P.ixGx & y.P.ixGx) –> x.U.y)
5. G’f
6. G’j
7. G’h
8. ~Gf
9. ~Gj
10. ~Gh
11. (~(f = j) & ~(f = h)) & ~(j = h)
12. {f,j,h} = ixGx

ELUCIDATION: The first proposition notes that anything which is identical to the Godhead is a deity, and the second proposition notes that there does not exist any being which is a deity and not identical to the Godhead. In other words, the first two propositions are statements of Monotheism (there is only one deity, and that is the Godhead). The third proposition notes that any being which is God in a sense of predication (i.e. divine or in the possession of some of the attributes of deity) is a proper part of the Godhead (and it logically follows by denying th consequent that those beings which are not proper parts of the Godhead are not “God” in a sense of predication). The fourth proposition states that any two (or more) beings who are proper parts of the Godhead are united within the Godhead. I make no attempt to explain *how* they are united; rather I am simply asserting that they are united in some way. The fifth, sixth and seventh propositions note that the Father, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit are each God in a sense of predication. The eighth, ninth, and tenth propositions specifically deny that any of these persons are deities by themselves, nor is any of them (by virtue of the first proposition) identical to the Godhead. The eleventh proposition notes that none of the three persons are identical to one another. The twelfth proposition notes that the Godhead is identical to the combined set of the three persons in toto. Note however that this is for these constants specifically – no hard and fast rule was stated where an object is necessarily identical to the collection of its member parts. The point is that an object *can* be identical with the collection of its proper parts in toto, and in this case it is. This doctrine is logically coherent (i.e. there is nothing self contradictory about it).

Reply
Sunny

April 4, 2006

George, why restrict your god to 3 persons, why not 4, 5, 6. If what you say is true then god is so powerful that he can be one and have billion persons at the same time (eg, Fater, Mother, Son, Daughter, Spirit, Grand-son, Grand-daughter, …)

Reply
George

March 31, 2006

It is of course true that such thing as a married bachelor cannot exist logically. But if we assume that God is omnipotent – and I assume that we all agree on that, don’t we – He should have the power to overrule logic if it suits His needs (a variant of Shane’s argument). Apparently, you make logic the real god, and the one that we worship becomes only a kind demiurg. This is, as you know, an old gnostic herecy.

However, I agree totally with Arnold, and I think that his example is very appropriate indeed. It is of course only a parable (but I’m sure that God has nothing against parables): the Father is the Mind, the Son is the Body, and the Holy Spirit is the Soul. They are all aspects of God, and all three aspects are eternal, or better: co-eternal.

In other words, the equation is not G = x, G = z, G = y, but G = (x + y + z), which is to my mind perfectly coherent.

The question is if God experiences Himself as three persons, or he is tripartite only in the eyes of the mortal human who is not able to grasp the whole nature of God in one thought. (The similarity with the Dum?zilian three functions is perhaps not accidental, but a possible consequence of the same organising principle of the human mind.)

The answer must be that He experiences himself as one because He is able to overview all eternity in one glance; at the same time, the omnipotent God is also able to reduce Himself to the infinitely insignificant being of a mortal man if that is what He wants to. And as a man, though still God, He must have seen Himself as three persons. To deny the power of God to do so if He for some reason wants to, is equivalent to denying His absolute omnipotence.

Reply
aian jaafar

March 23, 2006

btw, arnold, if you’re saying that three fractions can become one whole, then i agree with you.but that would mean that each of the persons of the trinity is a fraction.

Reply
aian jaafar

March 21, 2006

hi arnold,

thanks for your reply. however, you still haven’t answered my question. when ‘you’ die and your mind, body and soul separates, how many ‘yous’ will there be? the point of this question is that each of the components you just mentioned need the other two to become ‘you’. by analogy, it would mean that each of the persons of the trinity cannot be God by itself without the other two. therefore, it is more appropriate to say that the sonis 1/3 God, and so on. astagfirullah! God forbid! you say that He is beyond comprehension. so what is the business of the whole athanasian creed then?

Reply
Arnold

March 14, 2006

I don’t remember saying Jesus was an independent god. I look at Jesus as an aspect of God.

Reply
rambo

March 11, 2006

can 2 brains exist in one body? can 2 souls exist in 1 body? if jesus is an independent god who doesn’t need the father god then we have according to your analogy 2 brains in 1 body.if he does need the father god then there is something the son god cannot do.

Reply
Arnoldlyn

March 10, 2006

Like I said. All I did was show that it is possible for three things to be seperate and yet one. Your body is not your thoughts. You can’t open your brain up (part of your body) and pull out thoughts from it. So while your brain might be used to generate thoughts, it is not your thoughts themselves. Thoughts are not the brain. At most, they are an action of the brain. They are a result of the brain’s action. But, without thoughts, how can you even have a notion of this thing called “you”. You can’t. So it becomes a very weird and complex setup. A human being is indeed a very strange and miraculous thing that defies many tenets of logic and goes beyond the conceptualizing mind. That said, now, are we are supposed to think that God doesn’t defy conventional logic and makes perfect sense to the conceptualizing mind? I don’t think so. But that’s what the author thinks.

Reply
aian jaafar

March 8, 2006

ok, then arnold, how many ‘arnolds’ or ‘yous’ will there be when you die and your mind, body, and soul separates? will there be three, or will there be one? when somebody points at you and apparently call your body ‘you’, it is always under the assumption that the three components you mentioned are together, never when they are separate.people who grieve over dead bodies as if they were the entire person is just used to seeing that person alive, again, with the three components together. about your thoughts, can you voice out your thoughts without your body? without speaking? can you think when you’re dead? regarding the soul, some have interpreted it as the totality of one’s being, not as one component out of many. in any case, it is valid for me to call your soul ‘arnold’s soul’, or your body ‘arnold’s body’ or your mind ‘arnold’s mind’, thus again, indicating that each of these three parts cannot be ‘arnold’ without the other two. and your question to rambo: well, he should answer that. but if you’re going to ask me, then i should say that, no, i am not my brain, the brain is a part of me.the brain alone will not be ‘me’. it needs everything else within ‘me’ to be called ‘me’. and Allah knows best.

Reply
Arnold

March 6, 2006

to by aian jaafar

The article said that the Trinity was logically impossible and tried to use logic postulates to prove so. So all I did was give an example where three aspects were different and yet one to show that not only is it possible, it’s going on right now inside this thing called “you”. So it is indeed “possible”. When someone points at me, are they pointing at me? Yes. What are they pointing at? My body. When someone listens to my ideas, are they listening to me? Yes, they are listening to my thoughts. When someone tells me that my soul will end up in heaven or hell, are they talking about me? Yes.

Reply
Arnold

March 6, 2006

“by rambo on Wednesday, February 15th, 2006
the brain is in control of the body.is the father in control of the son or the son independantly in control of himself?

Well then, it looks like you would say that you are your brain. Are you? You never did answer the question.

Reply
shane

March 4, 2006

I think the fault of this argument is not its form (which is perfectly valid–of course, the church fathers who formulated the doctrine of the trinity also realized this), but the presuppositions which animate it.

The presuppositions are these:
A1. Only those things which are demonstrably logically coherent are true.
A2. God is the sort of thing whose essence is amenable to logical investigation.

Now, I don’t know what Swinburne thinks about either of these propositions, but I am strongly inclined to deny the first and note that the early fathers of the church all denied the second. (Note the emphasis the Athanasian creed places on ‘incomprehensibility’) My rejection of the first assumption is more disputatious, so I’ll focus only on the importance of the denial of the second.

If God is in himself incomprehensible (please correct me if I’m wrong–but I think that many Muslim philosophers believed this as well), then–ex hypothesi–we have no way of predicating univocal terms of him. This is the significance of the medieval doctrines of analogy). If we cannot predicate univocal terms of God, then we cannot very well generate a contradiction G * ~G, consequently your conclusion seems to fail.

cordially yours,

shane wilkins

Reply
rambo

March 4, 2006

the brain is in control of the body.is the father in control of the son or the son independantly in control of himself?

Reply
rambo

March 4, 2006

if you never had a mind you would exist as a body according to the christian nonsesne

Reply
rambo

March 4, 2006

Can three be also one? Which of the three would best describe what this thing called ?you? is?

A) Your mind (thoughts, feelings?)

B) Your body (including your brain)

C) Your soul

D) All of the above

I would say it?s D. All three things are essential parts of this larger thing called ?you?.
————–
people how do i exist as my mind? how do i exist as my soul? how do i exist as my body? what kind of nonsense is this?

Reply
aian jaafar

March 4, 2006

hi arnold,

i do not know what your point is with that question. i am assuming that you want to say that since your body can be called “you”, same as your mind and soul, then this can be somehow related to the trinity. if my assumption is wrong, then you can completely disregard this, but please try to clarify your point next time. i would like to say that i cannot call my body “me” by ITSELF. same with the soul and the mind. so, if we compare it to trinitarian logic, it would mean that the Son cannot be God, because he needs the Father and the Holy Spirit to be God. because if you can call your soul “you”, and also your body “you”,then that means that when you die, and your body and soul are separated, there will be two arnolds. that is illogical, of course. of course, for there to be an “arnold” mind, body , and soul need to be together. but the mind is not arnold, the body is not arnold, and the soul is not arnold if they are not together. by analogy, the Father is not God, the Son is not God, and the Holy Spirit is not God,when they are not united, or without a unifying agent, the exact opposite of what the Athanasian creed wants us to believe. the Athanasian creed says that the Son is God, the Holy Spirit is God, the Father is God, while at the same time the Son is not the Father neither the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit is not the Son neither the Father, and the Father is not the Son, neither the Holy Spirit. if that is the case, then we have three gods. either it is possible that each one of them could be a god by itself or not. and you are right. all three things are ESSENTIAL PARTS of A LARGER THING. so using your statement, the Son is a small part of God, the Father is a small part of God, and the Holy Spirit is a small part of God. it invalidates the statement that the Son IS God, the Father IS God, and the Holy Spirit IS God. besides, since they are small parts, they need a unifying agent to be God. but each one cannot be God by itself. and also, God is not in need of anything. just as your mind needs to be with your body and soul, your body to be with your mind and soul, and your soul to be with your body and mind to be “you”, then the Son needs to be with the Father and the Holy Spirit, the Father with the Son and the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit to be with the Father and the Son, to be God. therefore, each component is not God by itself, in the same manner that each of your “three things” needs the two other things to be “you”.

Reply
Arnold

March 3, 2006

Can three be also one? Which of the three would best describe what this thing called “you” is?

A) Your mind (thoughts, feelings…)

B) Your body (including your brain)

C) Your soul

D) All of the above

I would say it’s D. All three things are essential parts of this larger thing called “you”.

Reply
Shamsul

February 18, 2006

The Terror in the Bible

By
Sami Zaatari

Many Times Christians post passages from the Quran on war and say that Islam is not valid because of them because of the violence. Christians say Muhammad cannot be a prophet because he fought in wars and killed people, they say Jesus never killed anyone nor harmed any one, and that their God is loving and not a killer. Are these comments true? The simple answer is no, in this article I will quote several verses from the Bible showing the brutal terror found in it, I will be quoting from the OT. Christians should have no problem with it, since its the same God, so hence if the God of the OT said kill then it means Jesus said kill because he has no God. So Christians have no way out of this mess.

Let us begin:

Deuteronomy
Chapter 2

32-37

And the LORD said unto me, Behold, I have begun to give Sihon and his land before thee: begin to possess, that thou mayest inherit his land. 32 Then Sihon came out against us, he and all his people, to fight at Jahaz. 33 And the LORD our God delivered him before us; and we smote him, and his sons, and all his people. 34 And we took all his cities at that time, and utterly destroyed the men, and the women, and the little ones, of every city, we left none to remain. 36 From Aroer, which is by the brink of the river of Arnon, and from the city that is by the river, even unto Gilead, there was not one city too strong for us: the LORD our God delivered all unto us

So Moses and his army killed women and children. Moses broke the 6th commmandment, thou shall not kill ANYONE. Or I see, when its in war it okay? Yet when Muslims say the 6th commandment is followed, but in war its different, Christians say nooooo. Either way, The Quran does not say kill women and children, I CHALLENGE ANY CHRISTIAN TO BRING THE VERSE RIGHT NOW. We see it in your Bible, one of your greatest prophets killing women and children by God’s permission, meaning Jesus allowed it! So hence Jesus was responsible for killing women and children, and so was Moses so according to the Christians own argument, Moses cannot be a prophet since he killed. Note Moses and his army did this to many cities, verse 37 says there was not one city which was strong enough in the plural sense, hence up to 6 or 7 cities were destroyed with its women and children? What is the Christian response?

Deuteronomy
Chapter 3

1-7

1 Then we turned, and went up the way to Bashan: and Og the king of Bashan came out against us, he and all his people, to battle at Edrei. 2 And the LORD said unto me, Fear him not: for I will deliver him, and all his people, and his land, into thy hand; and thou shalt do unto him as thou didst unto Sihon king of the Amorites, which dwelt at Heshbon. 3 So the LORD our God delivered into our hands Og also, the king of Bashan, and all his people: and we smote him until none was left to him remaining. 4 And we took all his cities at that time, there was not a city which we took not from them, threescore cities, all the region of Argob, the kingdom of Og in Bashan. 5 All these cities were fenced with high walls, gates, and bars; beside unwalled towns a great many. 6 And we utterly destroyed them, as we did unto Sihon king of Heshbon, utterly destroying the men, women, and children, of every city. 7 But all the cattle, and the spoil of the cities, we took for a prey to ourselves

Notice the killing spree, scores of cities were raided by Moses and his army by the permission of JESUS, and they killed women and children! What does the Christian have to say to this?

Deuteronomy
Chapter 7

1-6

1 When the LORD thy God shall bring thee into the land whither thou goest to possess it, and hath cast out many nations before thee, the Hittites, and the Girgashites, and the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and mightier than thou; 2 And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor show mercy unto them: 3 Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son. 4 For they will turn away thy son from following me, that they may serve other gods: so will the anger of the LORD be kindled against you, and destroy thee suddenly. 5 But thus shall ye deal with them; ye shall destroy their altars, and break down their images, and cut down their groves, and burn their graven images with fire. 6 For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God: the LORD thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth

So note, Jesus allows Moses to completly destroy cities and show NO MERCY, NO MERCY AT ALL meaning you can do whatever you want to them. Not only that, Jesus orders Moses and his army to destroy all their images and their places of worship, so much for religous tolerance among Christians. So once again we see Moses killing with NO MERCY as God Jesus ordered, we also see no tolerance of other religions, somethings which Christians rant about Islam! This proves which religion is the in-tolerant one, it is the Christian, their God is in-tolerant to other religions as you see.

Deuteronomy
Chapter 13

6-18

6 If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers; 7 Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth; 8 Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him: 9 But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. 10 And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the LORD thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage. 11 And all Israel shall hear, and fear, and shall do no more any such wickedness as this is among you.

12 If thou shalt hear say in one of thy cities, which the LORD thy God hath given thee to dwell there, saying, 13 Certain men, the children of Belial, are gone out from among you, and have withdrawn the inhabitants of their city, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which ye have not known; 14 Then shalt thou inquire, and make search, and ask diligently; and, behold, if it be truth, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought among you; 15 Thou shalt surely smite the inhabitants of that city with the edge of the sword, destroying it utterly, and all that is therein, and the cattle thereof, with the edge of the sword. 16 And thou shalt gather all the spoil of it into the midst of the street thereof, and shalt burn with fire the city, and all the spoil thereof every whit, for the LORD thy God: and it shall be an heap for ever; it shall not be built again. 17 And there shall cleave nought of the cursed thing to thine hand: that the LORD may turn from the fierceness of his anger, and show thee mercy, and have compassion upon thee, and multiply thee, as he hath sworn unto thy fathers; 18 When thou shalt hearken to the voice of the LORD thy God, to keep all his commandments which I command thee this day, to do that which is right in the eyes of the LORD thy God.

Once again we the tolerance of the Christian God Jesus. In these passages God says that anyone who worships others Gods wherever they be must be killed. Even if your antartica and you worship some pagan deity you shall be put to death. As the verse says, to the ends of the world, meaning all over the world, so there is no tolerance in the religion. God Jesus orders his followers to stone the ones who dont believe in him, and to kill them, and to destroy the city with the sword and burn it and never rebuild it. The ending ot the paragraph is very interesting, God tells his followers TO KEEP all his commandments which include this one! To kill others who dont believe in him, so hence no religous tolerance. So this rule STILL APPLIES TODAY, because their God said:

keep all his commandments which I command thee this day, to do that which is right in the eyes of the LORD thy God.

Or did God change his mind? The God of the OT does NOT change his mind:

“God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man, that he should change his mind. Does he speak and then not act? Does he promise and not fulfill?” Numbers 23:19

He who is the Glory of Israel does not lie or change his mind; for he is not a man, that he should change his mind.” 1 Samuel 15:29

So hence the Christian God doesnt change his mind so this rule still applies today, so Christians are still ordered to kill us!

Deuteronomy
Chapter 21

18-22

18 If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them: 19 Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place; 20 And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. 21 And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear. 22 And if a man have committed a sin worthy of death, and he be to be put to death, and thou hang him on a tree

I wonder what Christians have to say about that? So as you can see, a bad kid is stoned, and bad men are hanged on trees for all to see. I would really love to see what Christians have to say to these verses. Remember the God the Christians believe in is the same God of the OT, so hence this is Jesus making these commands. So Jesus commanded people to kill their bad kids, to kill bad people and hang them on a tree.

Deuteronomy
Chapter 22

25-29

25 But if a man find a betrothed damsel in the field, and the man force her, and lie with her: then the man only that lay with her shall die. 26 But unto the damsel thou shalt do nothing; there is in the damsel no sin worthy of death: for as when a man riseth against his neighbor, and slayeth him, even so is this matter: 27 For he found her in the field, and the betrothed damsel cried, and there was none to save her. 28 If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; 29 Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel’s father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days

So as you can see, rape is allowed in certain cases. When the victim is a virgin, she must marry the rapist, if the victim is not a virgin then the rapist is put to death. This law is a shame and insult to rape victims, you bring me one single lady who would want to marry her rapist, and if Christians even try to defend this then they are even more sick and their own book which says it is okay. So hence you now see that the Christian God Jesus allowed rape in certain cases, this is why America seperated Church and state, because Christian laws are sick as you can see.

Deuteronomy
Chapter 23

1-4

1 He that is wounded in the stones, or hath his privy member cut off, shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD. 2 A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD. 3 An Ammonite or Moabite shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to their tenth generation shall they not enter into the congregation of the LORD for ever: 4 Because they met you not with bread and with water in the way, when ye came forth out of Egypt; and because they hired against thee Balaam the son of Beor of Pethor of Mesopotamia, to curse thee

Now why cant these people go into the congregation of the lord? What happened to the God who hears all, and accepts all? It seems at one time Jesus did not like bastards, and did not like men without their private parts! I wonder what the Christian has to say to this. Why cannot Ammonites and Moabites go into the congregation of the lord? What again happened to the God who loves all and hears all? It seems that the Christian God Jesus is not very loving after all and that Christians have been spreading a myth about their God. Anyway, can we really accept such rubbish like this?

Deuteronomy
Chapter 25

1-3

1 If there be a controversy between men, and they come unto judgment, that the judges may judge them; then they shall justify the righteous, and condemn the wicked. 2 And it shall be, if the wicked man be worthy to be beaten, that the judge shall cause him to lie down, and to be beaten before his face, according to his fault, by a certain number. 3 Forty stripes he may give him, and not exceed: lest, if he should exceed, and beat him above these with many stripes, then thy brother should seem vile unto thee

Now I can understand that punishments like this can be carried on, the reason I post this is because CHRISTIANS do not accept things like this. When they read in the Quran that it says lash the ones who commit illegal sexual intercourse, the Christians start ranting how can you do such a thing! Thats so evil!!!!!! So I am just using their own argument against them, so as we see, the punishment of beating a sinner is in their own book. Hence based on their own arguments and own criteria, their book and God is not peaceful and is evil, and who is this God? It is Jesus.

Deuteronomy
Chapter 28

15-68

15 But it shall come to pass, if thou wilt not hearken unto the voice of the LORD thy God, to observe to do all his commandments and his statutes which I command thee this day; that all these curses shall come upon thee, and overtake thee: 16 Cursed shalt thou be in the city, and cursed shalt thou be in the field. 17 Cursed shall be thy basket and thy store. 18 Cursed shall be the fruit of thy body, and the fruit of thy land, the increase of thy kine, and the flocks of thy sheep. 19 Cursed shalt thou be when thou comest in, and cursed shalt thou be when thou goest out. 20 The LORD shall send upon thee cursing, vexation, and rebuke, in all that thou settest thine hand unto for to do, until thou be destroyed, and until thou perish quickly; because of the wickedness of thy doings, whereby thou hast forsaken me. 21 The LORD shall make the pestilence cleave unto thee, until he have consumed thee from off the land, whither thou goest to possess it. 22 The LORD shall smite thee with a consumption, and with a fever, and with an inflammation, and with an extreme burning, and with the sword, and with blasting, and with mildew; and they shall pursue thee until thou perish. 23 And thy heaven that is over thy head shall be brass, and the earth that is under thee shall be iron. 24 The LORD shall make the rain of thy land powder and dust: from heaven shall it come down upon thee, until thou be destroyed. 25 The LORD shall cause thee to be smitten before thine enemies: thou shalt go out one way against them, and flee seven ways before them: and shalt be removed into all the kingdoms of the earth. 26 And thy carcass shall be meat unto all fowls of the air, and unto the beasts of the earth, and no man shall fray them away. 27 The LORD will smite thee with the botch of Egypt, and with the emerods, and with the scab, and with the itch, whereof thou canst not be healed. 28 The LORD shall smite thee with madness, and blindness, and astonishment of heart: 29 And thou shalt grope at noonday, as the blind gropeth in darkness, and thou shalt not prosper in thy ways: and thou shalt be only oppressed and spoiled evermore, and no man shall save thee. 30 Thou shalt betroth a wife, and another man shall lie with her: thou shalt build an house, and thou shalt not dwell therein: thou shalt plant a vineyard, and shalt not gather the grapes thereof. 31 Thine ox shall be slain before thine eyes, and thou shalt not eat thereof: thine ass shall be violently taken away from before thy face, and shall not be restored to thee: thy sheep shall be given unto thine enemies, and thou shalt have none to rescue them. 32 Thy sons and thy daughters shall be given unto another people, and thine eyes shall look, and fail with longing for them all the day long; and there shall be no might in thine hand. 33 The fruit of thy land, and all thy labors, shall a nation which thou knowest not eat up; and thou shalt be only oppressed and crushed alway: 34 So that thou shalt be mad for the sight of thine eyes which thou shalt see. 35 The LORD shall smite thee in the knees, and in the legs, with a sore botch that cannot be healed, from the sole of thy foot unto the top of thy head. 36 The LORD shall bring thee, and thy king which thou shalt set over thee, unto a nation which neither thou nor thy fathers have known; and there shalt thou serve other gods, wood and stone. 37 And thou shalt become an astonishment, a proverb, and a byword, among all nations whither the LORD shall lead thee. 38 Thou shalt carry much seed out into the field, and shalt gather but little in; for the locust shall consume it. 39 Thou shalt plant vineyards, and dress them, but shalt neither drink of the wine, nor gather the grapes; for the worms shall eat them. 40 Thou shalt have olive trees throughout all thy coasts, but thou shalt not anoint thyself with the oil; for thine olive shall cast his fruit. 41 Thou shalt beget sons and daughters, but thou shalt not enjoy them; for they shall go into captivity. 42 All thy trees and fruit of thy land shall the locust consume. 43 The stranger that is within thee shall get up above thee very high; and thou shalt come down very low. 44 He shall lend to thee, and thou shalt not lend to him: he shall be the head, and thou shalt be the tail.

45 Moreover all these curses shall come upon thee, and shall pursue thee, and overtake thee, till thou be destroyed; because thou hearkenedst not unto the voice of the LORD thy God, to keep his commandments and his statutes which he commanded thee: 46 And they shall be upon thee for a sign and for a wonder, and upon thy seed for ever. 47 Because thou servedst not the LORD thy God with joyfulness, and with gladness of heart, for the abundance of all things; 48 Therefore shalt thou serve thine enemies which the LORD shall send against thee, in hunger, and in thirst, and in nakedness, and in want of all things: and he shall put a yoke of iron upon thy neck, until he have destroyed thee. 49 The LORD shall bring a nation against thee from far, from the end of the earth, as swift as the eagle flieth; a nation whose tongue thou shalt not understand; 50 A nation of fierce countenance, which shall not regard the person of the old, nor show favor to the young: 51 And he shall eat the fruit of thy cattle, and the fruit of thy land, until thou be destroyed: which also shall not leave thee either corn, wine, or oil, or the increase of thy kine, or flocks of thy sheep, until he have destroyed thee. 52 And he shall besiege thee in all thy gates, until thy high and fenced walls come down, wherein thou trustedst, throughout all thy land: and he shall besiege thee in all thy gates throughout all thy land, which the LORD thy God hath given thee. 53 And thou shalt eat the fruit of thine own body, the flesh of thy sons and of thy daughters, which the LORD thy God hath given thee, in the siege, and in the straitness, wherewith thine enemies shall distress thee: 54 So that the man that is tender among you, and very delicate, his eye shall be evil toward his brother, and toward the wife of his bosom, and toward the remnant of his children which he shall leave: 55 So that he will not give to any of them of the flesh of his children whom he shall eat: because he hath nothing left him in the siege, and in the straitness, wherewith thine enemies shall distress thee in all thy gates. 56 The tender and delicate woman among you, which would not adventure to set the sole of her foot upon the ground for delicateness and tenderness, her eye shall be evil toward the husband of her bosom, and toward her son, and toward her daughter, 57 And toward her young one that cometh out from between her feet, and toward her children which she shall bear: for she shall eat them for want of all things secretly in the siege and straitness, wherewith thine enemy shall distress thee in thy gates. 58 If thou wilt not observe to do all the words of this law that are written in this book, that thou mayest fear this glorious and fearful name, THE LORD THY GOD; 59 Then the LORD will make thy plagues wonderful, and the plagues of thy seed, even great plagues, and of long continuance, and sore sicknesses, and of long continuance. 60 Moreover he will bring upon thee all the diseases of Egypt, which thou wast afraid of; and they shall cleave unto thee. 61 Also every sickness, and every plague, which is not written in the book of this law, them will the LORD bring upon thee, until thou be destroyed. 62 And ye shall be left few in number, whereas ye were as the stars of heaven for multitude; because thou wouldest not obey the voice of the LORD thy God. 63 And it shall come to pass, that as the LORD rejoiced over you to do you good, and to multiply you; so the LORD will rejoice over you to destroy you, and to bring you to nought; and ye shall be plucked from off the land whither thou goest to possess it. 64 And the LORD shall scatter thee among all people, from the one end of the earth even unto the other; and there thou shalt serve other gods, which neither thou nor thy fathers have known, even wood and stone. 65 And among these nations shalt thou find no ease, neither shall the sole of thy foot have rest: but the LORD shall give thee there a trembling heart, and failing of eyes, and sorrow of mind: 66 And thy life shall hang in doubt before thee; and thou shalt fear day and night, and shalt have none assurance of thy life: 67 In the morning thou shalt say, Would God it were even! and at even thou shalt say, Would God it were morning! for the fear of thine heart wherewith thou shalt fear, and for the sight of thine eyes which thou shalt see. 68 And the LORD shall bring thee into Egypt again with ships, by the way whereof I spake unto thee, Thou shalt see it no more again: and there ye shall be sold unto your enemies for bondmen and bondwomen, and no man shall buy you.

Now the reason I post this is because Christians namely Craig Winn claim Islam is not peaceful because Allah Warns of punishing people who dont follow him etc. Now since Christians believe that, then using their own criteria and own arguments then the verses I just posted show that it is infact their God who is violent and non peaceful because as you can see he will punish those who dont follow them in a very harsh manner. So Christians should not throw stones if they live in a glass house, and they do live in a glass house. I wonder what Craig Winn will have to see about these verses, I mean he does believe in this God who is warning of these punishments, if Christians have a problem with Allah punishing people then why dont they have a problem with their own God when he says he will punish people? So hence Christians must now admit their God is violent and not peaceful since they say Allah cant be God because of his wrath and punishments, if Christians do not admit it then they can no longer argue against Islam, if they continue to use this silly argument on Islam then they must leave their own religion. So they are in a bad dilema now, attack Islam and leave Christianity or dont attack Islam and therefore have nuthing much to attack Islam on. ;)

Now let me make it easier for the reader, I will basically post what the Christian God will do as a punishment to those who wouldnt follow him:

1- God will cause his people to murdered and massacared, and they will flee in all directions.

2- People will beget children but will not be able to enjoy them because they will be sent into slavery.

3- People’s children shall be given to other people and the parents will wish they could have them back but they wont.

4- cannabilism, yes cannabilism! 53 And thou shalt eat the fruit of thine own body, the flesh of thy sons and of thy daughters, which the LORD thy God hath given thee

5- God will send diseases to the people

6- You will get married, and your wife will sleep with other men.

These are some of the punishments that the God of the Bible will do to his people if they dont follow him.

Numbers
Chapter 31

7-12

7 And they warred against the Midianites, as the LORD commanded Moses; and they slew all the males. 8 And they slew the kings of Midian, beside the rest of them that were slain; namely, Evi, and Rekem, and Zur, and Hur, and Reba, five kings of Midian: Balaam also the son of Beor they slew with the sword. 9 And the children of Israel took all the women of Midian captives, and their little ones, and took the spoil of all their cattle, and all their flocks, and all their goods. 10 And they burnt all their cities wherein they dwelt, and all their goodly castles, with fire. 11 And they took all the spoil, and all the prey, both of men and of beasts. 12 And they brought the captives, and the prey, and the spoil, unto Moses, and Eleazar the priest, and unto the congregation of the children of Israel, unto the camp at the plains of Moab, which are by Jordan near Jericho.

I wonder what Christians have to say about this? Using their own criteria against them this makes their God a false violent God. So once again Christians should not throw stones if they live in a glass house.

17-18

17 Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. 18 But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves

What do Christians have to say to this? This is their God commanding Moses to kill the women and CHILDREN and to keep the virgins alive.

Joshua
Chapter 2

8-21

8 And before they were laid down, she came up unto them upon the roof; 9 And she said unto the men, I know that the LORD hath given you the land, and that your terror is fallen upon us, and that all the inhabitants of the land faint because of you. 10 For we have heard how the LORD dried up the water of the Red sea for you, when ye came out of Egypt; and what ye did unto the two kings of the Amorites, that were on the other side Jordan, Sihon and Og, whom ye utterly destroyed. 11 And as soon as we had heard these things, our hearts did melt, neither did there remain any more courage in any man, because of you: for the LORD your God, he is God in heaven above, and in earth beneath. 12 Now therefore, I pray you, swear unto me by the LORD, since I have showed you kindness, that ye will also show kindness unto my father’s house, and give me a true token: 13 And that ye will save alive my father, and my mother, and my brethren, and my sisters, and all that they have, and deliver our lives from death. 14 And the men answered her, Our life for yours, if ye utter not this our business. And it shall be, when the LORD hath given us the land, that we will deal kindly and truly with thee. 15 Then she let them down by a cord through the window: for her house was upon the town wall, and she dwelt upon the wall. 16 And she said unto them, Get you to the mountain, lest the pursuers meet you; and hide yourselves there three days, until the pursuers be returned: and afterward may ye go your way. 17 And the men said unto her, We will be blameless of this thine oath which thou hast made us swear. 18 Behold, when we come into the land, thou shalt bind this line of scarlet thread in the window which thou didst let us down by: and thou shalt bring thy father, and thy mother, and thy brethren, and all thy father’s household, home unto thee. 19 And it shall be, that whosoever shall go out of the doors of thy house into the street, his blood shall be upon his head, and we will be guiltless: and whosoever shall be with thee in the house, his blood shall be on our head, if any hand be upon him. 20 And if thou utter this our business, then we will be quit of thine oath which thou hast made us to swear. 21 And she said, According unto your words, so be it. And she sent them away, and they departed: and she bound the scarlet line in the window.

Now several things to note, notice how the people are so scared of Joshua’s people. They are all filled with terror because of the acts commited by Moses and Joshua under God’s commands. Now what do Christians have to say about this? Look how their God installed terror into the hearts of everyone, women and children, and these people had no hope of survival! Even if they were kids and women who did not do anything. This is enough evidence of the terror that was going around under God’s command.

Joshua
Chapter 6

17-27

17 And the city shall be accursed, even it, and all that are therein, to the LORD: only Rahab the harlot shall live, she and all that are with her in the house, because she hid the messengers that we sent. 18 And ye, in any wise keep yourselves from the accursed thing, lest ye make yourselves accursed, when ye take of the accursed thing, and make the camp of Israel a curse, and trouble it. 19 But all the silver, and gold, and vessels of brass and iron, are consecrated unto the LORD: they shall come into the treasury of the LORD. 20 So the people shouted when the priests blew with the trumpets: and it came to pass, when the people heard the sound of the trumpet, and the people shouted with a great shout, that the wall fell down flat, so that the people went up into the city, every man straight before him, and they took the city. 21 And they utterly destroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ass, with the edge of the sword. 22 But Joshua had said unto the two men that had spied out the country, Go into the harlot’s house, and bring out thence the woman, and all that she hath, as ye sware unto her. 23 And the young men that were spies went in, and brought out Rahab, and her father, and her mother, and her brethren, and all that she had; and they brought out all her kindred, and left them without the camp of Israel. 24 And they burnt the city with fire, and all that was therein: only the silver, and the gold, and the vessels of brass and of iron, they put into the treasury of the house of the LORD. 25 And Joshua saved Rahab the harlot alive, and her father’s household, and all that she had; and she dwelleth in Israel even unto this day; because she hid the messengers, which Joshua sent to spy out Jericho. 26 And Joshua adjured them at that time, saying, Cursed be the man before the LORD, that riseth up and buildeth this city Jericho: he shall lay the foundation thereof in his firstborn, and in his youngest son shall he set up the gates of it. 27 So the LORD was with Joshua; and his fame was noised throughout all the country.

So Joshua and his army storm a city, they kill everyone as usual accept the harlot and her familly. Is this not terror?

Joshua
Chapter 8

1-29

1 And the LORD said unto Joshua, Fear not, neither be thou dismayed: take all the people of war with thee, and arise, go up to Ai: see, I have given into thy hand the king of Ai, and his people, and his city, and his land: 2 And thou shalt do to Ai and her king as thou didst unto Jericho and her king: only the spoil thereof, and the cattle thereof, shall ye take for a prey unto yourselves: lay thee an ambush for the city behind it.

3 So Joshua arose, and all the people of war, to go up against Ai: and Joshua chose out thirty thousand mighty men of valor, and sent them away by night. 4 And he commanded them, saying, Behold, ye shall lie in wait against the city, even behind the city: go not very far from the city, but be ye all ready: 5 And I, and all the people that are with me, will approach unto the city: and it shall come to pass, when they come out against us, as at the first, that we will flee before them, 6 (For they will come out after us) till we have drawn them from the city; for they will say, They flee before us, as at the first: therefore we will flee before them. 7 Then ye shall rise up from the ambush, and seize upon the city: for the LORD your God will deliver it into your hand. 8 And it shall be, when ye have taken the city, that ye shall set the city on fire: according to the commandment of the LORD shall ye do. See, I have commanded you. 9 Joshua therefore sent them forth: and they went to lie in ambush, and abode between Bethel and Ai, on the west side of Ai: but Joshua lodged that night among the people. 10 And Joshua rose up early in the morning, and numbered the people, and went up, he and the elders of Israel, before the people to Ai. 11 And all the people, even the people of war that were with him, went up, and drew nigh, and came before the city, and pitched on the north side of Ai: now there was a valley between them and Ai. 12 And he took about five thousand men, and set them to lie in ambush between Bethel and Ai, on the west side of the city. 13 And when they had set the people, even all the host that was on the north of the city, and their liers in wait on the west of the city, Joshua went that night into the midst of the valley. 14 And it came to pass, when the king of Ai saw it, that they hasted and rose up early, and the men of the city went out against Israel to battle, he and all his people, at a time appointed, before the plain; but he wist not that there were liers in ambush against him behind the city. 15 And Joshua and all Israel made as if they were beaten before them, and fled by the way of the wilderness. 16 And all the people that were in Ai were called together to pursue after them: and they pursued after Joshua, and were drawn away from the city. 17 And there was not a man left in Ai or Bethel, that went not out after Israel: and they left the city open, and pursued after Israel. 18 And the LORD said unto Joshua, Stretch out the spear that is in thy hand toward Ai; for I will give it into thine hand. And Joshua stretched out the spear that he had in his hand toward the city. 19 And the ambush arose quickly out of their place, and they ran as soon as he had stretched out his hand: and they entered into the city, and took it, and hasted and set the city on fire. 20 And when the men of Ai looked behind them, they saw, and, behold, the smoke of the city ascended up to heaven, and they had no power to flee this way or that way: and the people that fled to the wilderness turned back upon the pursuers. 21 And when Joshua and all Israel saw that the ambush had taken the city, and that the smoke of the city ascended, then they turned again, and slew the men of Ai. 22 And the other issued out of the city against them; so they were in the midst of Israel, some on this side, and some on that side: and they smote them, so that they let none of them remain or escape.

23 And the king of Ai they took alive, and brought him to Joshua. 24 And it came to pass, when Israel had made an end of slaying all the inhabitants of Ai in the field, in the wilderness wherein they chased them, and when they were all fallen on the edge of the sword, until they were consumed, that all the Israelites returned unto Ai, and smote it with the edge of the sword. 25 And so it was, that all that fell that day, both of men and women, were twelve thousand, even all the men of Ai. 26 For Joshua drew not his hand back, wherewith he stretched out the spear, until he had utterly destroyed all the inhabitants of Ai. 27 Only the cattle and the spoil of that city Israel took for a prey unto themselves, according unto the word of the LORD which he commanded Joshua. 28 And Joshua burnt Ai, and made it an heap for ever, even a desolation unto this day. 29 And the king of Ai he hanged on a tree until eventide: and as soon as the sun was down, Joshua commanded that they should take his carcass down from the tree, and cast it at the entering of the gate of the city, and raise thereon a great heap of stones, that remaineth unto this day.

Another battle, another massacare of women and children.

Joshua
Chapter 10

28-43

28 And that day Joshua took Makkedah, and smote it with the edge of the sword, and the king thereof he utterly destroyed, them, and all the souls that were therein; he let none remain: and he did to the king of Makkedah as he did unto the king of Jericho. 29 Then Joshua passed from Makkedah, and all Israel with him, unto Libnah, and fought against Libnah: 30 And the LORD delivered it also, and the king thereof, into the hand of Israel; and he smote it with the edge of the sword, and all the souls that were therein; he let none remain in it; but did unto the king thereof as he did unto the king of Jericho. 31 And Joshua passed from Libnah, and all Israel with him, unto Lachish, and encamped against it, and fought against it: 32 And the LORD delivered Lachish into the hand of Israel, which took it on the second day, and smote it with the edge of the sword, and all the souls that were therein, according to all that he had done to Libnah. 33 Then Horam king of Gezer came up to help Lachish; and Joshua smote him and his people, until he had left him none remaining. 34 And from Lachish Joshua passed unto Eglon, and all Israel with him; and they encamped against it, and fought against it: 35 And they took it on that day, and smote it with the edge of the sword, and all the souls that were therein he utterly destroyed that day, according to all that he had done to Lachish. 36 And Joshua went up from Eglon, and all Israel with him, unto Hebron; and they fought against it: 37 And they took it, and smote it with the edge of the sword, and the king thereof, and all the cities thereof, and all the souls that were therein; he left none remaining, according to all that he had done to Eglon; but destroyed it utterly, and all the souls that were therein. 38 And Joshua returned, and all Israel with him, to Debir; and fought against it: 39 And he took it, and the king thereof, and all the cities thereof; and they smote them with the edge of the sword, and utterly destroyed all the souls that were therein; he left none remaining: as he had done to Hebron, so he did to Debir, and to the king thereof; as he had done also to Libnah, and to her king. 40 So Joshua smote all the country of the hills, and of the south, and of the vale, and of the springs, and all their kings: he left none remaining, but utterly destroyed all that breathed, as the LORD God of Israel commanded. 41 And Joshua smote them from Kadeshbarnea even unto Gaza, and all the country of Goshen, even unto Gibeon. 42 And all these kings and their land did Joshua take at one time, because the LORD God of Israel fought for Israel. 43 And Joshua returned, and all Israel with him, unto the camp to Gilgal.

Same old story, more massacraes, leaving NO SOULS ALIVE. I wonder what Christians have to say to this? They cannot say anything, they believe this happened, and they believe in this God who they claim to be Jesus.

Judges 1:21-35

The tribe of Benjamin, however, failed to drive out the Jebusites, who were living in Jerusalem. So to this day the Jebusites live in Jerusalem among the people of Benjamin. The descendants of Joseph attacked the town of Bethel, and the LORD was with them. They sent spies to Bethel (formerly known as Luz), who confronted a man coming out of the city. They said to him, “Show us a way into the city, and we will have mercy on you.” So he showed them a way in, and they killed everyone in the city except for this man and his family. Later the man moved to the land of the Hittites, where he built a city. He named the city Luz, and it is known by that name to this day. The tribe of Manasseh failed to drive out the people living in Beth-shan, Taanach, Dor, Ibleam, Megiddo, and their surrounding villages, because the Canaanites were determined to stay in that region.

When the Israelites grew stronger, they forced the Canaanites to work as slaves, but they never did drive them out of the land. The tribe of Ephraim also failed to drive out the Canaanites living in Gezer, and so the Canaanites continued to live there among them. The tribe of Zebulun also failed to drive out the Canaanites living in Kitron and Nahalol, who continued to live among them. But they forced them to work as slaves. The tribe of Asher also failed to drive out the residents of Acco, Sidon, Ahlab, Aczib, Helbah, Aphik, and Rehob. In fact, because they did not drive them out, the Canaanites dominated the land where the people of Asher lived. The tribe of Naphtali also failed to drive out the residents of Beth-shemesh and Beth-anath. Instead, the Canaanites dominated the land where they lived. Nevertheless, the people of Beth-shemesh and Beth-anath were sometimes forced to work as slaves for the people of Naphtali. As for the tribe of Dan, the Amorites forced them into the hill country and would not let them come down into the plains. The Amorites were determined to stay in Mount Heres, Aijalon, and Shaalbim, but when the descendants of Joseph became stronger, they forced the Amorites to work as slaves.

Not much to be said, verses explain themselves.

Zephaniah 2:12-15

“You Ethiopians will also be slaughtered by my sword,” says the LORD. And the LORD will strike the lands of the north with his fist. He will destroy Assyria and make its great capital, Nineveh, a desolate wasteland, parched like a desert. The city that once was so proud will become a pasture for sheep and cattle. All sorts of wild animals will settle there. Owls of many kinds will live among the ruins of its palaces, hooting from the gaping windows. Rubble will block all the doorways, and the cedar paneling will lie open to the wind and weather. This is the fate of that boisterous city, once so secure. “In all the world there is no city as great as I,” it boasted. But now, look how it has become an utter ruin, a place where animals live! Everyone passing that way will laugh in derision or shake a defiant fist

Not much to be added, verses explain themselves.

Leviticus 21:9

A priest’s daughter who loses her honor by committing fornication and thereby dishonors her father also, shall be burned to death.

hmmmmmmm

1Samuel 6:19-20

And he smote of the men of Beth-shemesh, because they had looked into the ark of Jehovah, he smote of the people seventy men, `and’ fifty thousand men; and the people mourned, because Jehovah had smitten the people with a great slaughter. And the men of Beth-shemesh said, Who is able to stand before Jehovah, this holy God? and to whom shall he go up from us?

Wonder what Christians say to this. Isnt Jesus Jehovah? I thought Jesus never killed.

1 Kings 20:35-36

Meanwhile, the LORD instructed one of the group of prophets to say to another man, “Strike me!” But the man refused to strike the prophet. Then the prophet told him, “Because you have not obeyed the voice of the LORD, a lion will kill you as soon as you leave me.” And sure enough, when he had gone, a lion attacked and killed him.

What?!

Ezekiel 9:5-7

“Then I heard the LORD say to the other men, “Follow him through the city and kill everyone whose forehead is not marked. Show no mercy; have no pity! Kill them all ? old and young, girls and women and little children. But do not touch anyone with the mark. Begin your task right here at the Temple.” So they began by killing the seventy leaders. “Defile the Temple!” the LORD commanded. “Fill its courtyards with the bodies of those you kill! Go!” So they went throughout the city and did as they were told.”

Another massacare.

Jeremiah 51:20-26

“You are my battle-ax and sword,” says the LORD. “With you I will shatter nations and destroy many kingdoms. With you I will shatter armies, destroying the horse and rider, the chariot and charioteer. With you I will shatter men and women, old people and children, young men and maidens. With you I will shatter shepherds and flocks, farmers and oxen, captains and rulers. “As you watch, I will repay Babylon and the people of Babylonia for all the wrong they have done to my people in Jerusalem,” says the LORD. “Look, O mighty mountain, destroyer of the earth! I am your enemy,” says the LORD. “I will raise my fist against you, to roll you down from the heights. When I am finished, you will be nothing but a heap of rubble. You will be desolate forever. Even your stones will never again be used for building. You will be completely wiped out,” says the LORD.

Another massacre, same old story.

Isaiah 13:15-18

Anyone who is captured will be run through with a sword. Their little children will be dashed to death right before their eyes. Their homes will be sacked and their wives raped by the attacking hordes. For I will stir up the Medes against Babylon, and no amount of silver or gold will buy them off. The attacking armies will shoot down the young people with arrows. They will have no mercy on helpless babies and will show no compassion for the children.

It seem it gets from bad to worse!

1 Kings 13:1-2

At the LORD’s command, a man of God from Judah went to Bethel, and he arrived there just as Jeroboam was approaching the altar to offer a sacrifice. Then at the LORD’s command, he shouted, “O altar, altar! This is what the LORD says: A child named Josiah will be born into the dynasty of David. On you he will sacrifice the priests from the pagan shrines who come here to burn incense, and human bones will be burned on you.”

Very sick indeed.

Leviticus 25:44-46

However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way.

This is how Christians made it okay for slavery, theyre Bible allows it, so why shouldnt they do it? They are just doing what theyre book allows them to do.

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.

This is a sex slave. If she doesnt please the master? How is she supposed to please him? Now you know why the sex trade is so popular in Europe and Christian countries, because their book allows it! They are merely doing what their book allows.

Exodus 21:20-21

When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property

So you can beat the hell out of your slave as long as the slave does not die, this is straight from the Bible. What is this madness?

I think that should do, this withouth a doubt proves that the Bible that the Christians hold is nuthing but a terror book without a doubt. I challenge any Christian to come and tell me those verses which I posted are not evil and not terrorism, I CHALLENGE YOU TO SAY IT! This is a filth book which must be banned!

Reply