Religion: pros & cons pt1 (Religion)

by Balance_Maintained , U.S.A., Friday, October 24, 2014, 22:59 (3681 days ago) @ dhw

TONY: What if the God they worshiped burned their children alive on the alter? Would you kill them then? Would it be considered "vicious" to eradicate those people? [...] You do realize that there are specific nations mentioned in Chapter 7, right? These were Baal worshiping nations. (Burning their kids in the fire and all that.) Those nations were indeed committed to complete and utter annihilation.
> 
>DHW: Which I assume includes annihilating mothers and their children, since Chap. 20 also says: “you must not allow any breathing thing to live”. Much better for them to be slaughtered wholesale by the Jews than individually by their own people, I suppose. Chap. 7 talks about them serving other gods, burning graven images etc. This suggests to me that by extension it is OK to slaughter people who worship any God other than the god of the OT. Such thinking has been and still is the basis of faith-based murder. You seem to approve of stoning habitual drunkards and gluttons to death, and the rest of your post appears to defend the practice of conquering foreign countries and, if they don't surrender, killing the men and using the women and children as one pleases. You also seem quite happy with the humiliating arrangements detailed in 21:10-14. Such texts can be used to justify slavery, sex slavery, child abuse....My point is that I don't regard them as a reliable guide for how we should behave, no matter what slant you put on them. 
> -Yes, utter annihilation means everyone. There was to be no opportunity for that sick practice to be revived by anyone that had been raised up in it. However, there is no 'by extension'. He was very, very specific, which was why I pointed out that he told them to deal fairly with other nations. Those other nations served other God's as well, you know, so your logic does not hold water there, neither does that same logic's use to justify incidents such as the Crusades (which were actually not about religion at all.)-Note also that he did not actually condone the practice of making war. It says, "Those making war with you." This implies defensive action. He gave the Israelites land, and actively forbid them from making war or taking lands to other people that he given them to. However, he knew that there would be wars coming, and so gave them guidelines on how to deal with it. Women were not to be killed, nor were they to be raped. Also, the children, livestock, and even the damned trees were forbidden from being killed or harmed. They could be taken as servants or slaves. They could also be taken as wives, at which time they assumed all the social status and protection afforded to a wife. -
A close examination of scriptures, however, showed that even such slaves were not without rights and legal protection, nor were they slaves indefinitely. All slaves were set free every 7 years. Here is a really good and clear explanation of biblical slavery, and it is NOTHING like the way you present it. It was more along the lines of what we would consider 'employment' these days, without the option to leave before the sabatical year. If a slave was injured bad enough by their master to be out of work for two days, or were permanently injured, they were free.-http://www.bible.ca/sin-no-jails-prisons-in-judaism-old-testament-law-of-moses-slavery-... (Be Warned, if you view the word 'slavery' in the modern context this article will seem a little weird. I think the many used poor choice of phrasing, but it is still a reasonable depiction)

--
What is the purpose of living? How about, 'to reduce needless suffering. It seems to me to be a worthy purpose.