Trinitarian Ontology

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.

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.

    1. The Father is God.
    2. The Son is God.
    3. The Holy Spir­it is God.
    4. The Father is not the Son.
    5. The Father is not the Holy Spirit.
    6. The Son is not the Holy Spirit.
    7. There is exact­ly one God.

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.


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? 1Endmark

Cite this arti­cle as : Imran Aijaz, Is The Trini­tar­i­an Ontol­ogy Coher­ent ?,” in Bis­mi­ka Allahu­ma, Feb­ru­ary 15, 2006, last accessed May 27, 2024, https://​bis​mikaal​lahu​ma​.org/​c​h​r​i​s​t​i​a​n​i​t​y​/​t​r​i​n​i​t​a​r​i​a​n​-​o​n​t​o​l​o​g​y​-​c​o​h​e​r​e​nt/


  1. 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.

  2. 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.

  3. 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).

  4. 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, …)

  5. 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.

  6. 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.

  7. 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 13 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 ?

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

  9. 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.

  10. 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.

  11. 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.

  12. 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.

  13. 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.

  14. 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

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

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

  17. 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 ?

  18. 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”.

  19. 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”.

  20. The Ter­ror in the Bible

    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 :

    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 ?

    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 ?

    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.

    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 !

    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.

    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.

    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 ?

    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.

    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.

    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.

    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.

    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 ?

    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.

    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.


    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.


    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 !

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *