October 20, 2011 at 6:02 pm
Let Craig defend it himself (from your link):
“By the time of their destruction, Canaanite culture was, in fact, debauched and cruel, embracing such practices as ritual prostitution and even child sacrifice. The Canaanites are to be destroyed “that they may not teach you to do according to all their abominable practices that they have done for their gods, and so you sin against the Lord your God” (Deut. 20.18). God had morally sufficient reasons for His judgement upon Canaan, and Israel was merely the instrument of His justice, just as centuries later God would use the pagan nations of Assyria and Babylon to judge Israel.”
This is not genocide. It is about moral judgment. If it were genocide, then God would not later judge Israel. Fail.
Well, my "moral judgement" is that you should be slaughtered, along with all of the other IDiotic god zombies on Earth, since you are debauched and cruel.
This is about a coward atheist who wrote a book about God and who then refuses to debate about God, (specifically the arguments he set forth in his book) in a scholarly arena in his own backyard because he does not have a sufficient argument to support his arguments. The same for his minions grayling, and polly t. This is telling. I wonder if it were the Christians hiding under their beds afraid to debate a single atheist, if the propaganda would be the same? Of course it would not be. It would be front page news in London: “Christians afraid to debate enlightened Atheist thinker!” Instead we have the opposite. I feel bad for all those that sold their faith based on Dawkins books. The man should at least have the courtesy to argue on their behalf. Instead, it is like the con-man selling snake oil at the county fair, takes your money then grins and scurries away.
That's hilarious coming from a sniveling coward who hides in the UD sanctuary with the rest of the chickenshit IDiots.
October 20, 2011 at 7:14 pm
“And having read that piece on the genocide of the Canaanites (which we must only hope is myth), I wouldn’t want to shake his hand either.”
Dawkins doesn’t need to shake his hand. Nor do you. WLC could care less where you people put your hands. WLC is calling out Dawkins to defend the arguments put forth in the book “God delusion,” in Oxford, in front of all Dawkins peers. But Dawkins, like a cockroach, knows how to survive, and is avoiding what would inevitably be a public stomping. Because the goal is not to argue and debate intellectual issues and seek truth, the goal is to sell his ideology anywhere he can with the least resistance.
And you IDiotic cockroaches don't try to sell your ideology in the UD sanctuary and on other sites that are heavily moderated or don't allow comments at all, so that you'll meet the least resistance? Tell you what, crybaby coward, why don't you come here and spew your IDiotic bluff and bluster so that I can publicly stomp you? Are you afraid? Are you shaking? Didn't your god give you any guts? Poor baby.
October 20, 2011 at 7:33 pm
“Fear or disgust? I see no reason to conclude “fear”.”
So a fighter that refuses to fight when called out does so out of disgust, not fear? A wuss is a wuss. Very simple.
Yep, very simple. You're undoubtedly a fearful wuss, hiding in the UD sanctuary.
October 20, 2011 at 8:23 pm
You have your wuss in Dawkins. enjoy.
You have your wuss in your mirror, and in the rest of the IDiot horde on UD. Enjoy, coward.
October 20, 2011 at 7:21 pm
If Dawkins is taking the moral high ground not debating WLC, then are the atheist that are standing in less moral than Dawkins?
What do you know about moral high ground? You, like your hero craig, condone and excuse the ruthless slaughter of people, in the name of your allegedly "loving", "merciful" god.
October 20, 2011 at 7:25 pm
It is amazing how atheists that have no basis for objective morality often utilize moral arguments.
Actually, what's amazing is that no one has punched what's left of your pea brain through the back of your skull yet. One can hope though.
October 20, 2011 at 7:41 pm
“Objectively, the Canaanite slaughter was evil.”
How are you determining an evil act? Based on what?
Your LACK of any understanding of morality is vividly showing.
October 20, 2011 at 7:57 pm
Was eliminating the Nazis immoral? Why or why not? Were the Nazis eliminated because they were German, and therefore evil, or were the Nazis German, that happened to be doing evil? Were the Canaanites destroyed because they were Canaanites and thus evil, or were the Canaanites destroyed because they were Canaanites engaging in evil? Do we look at WWII as the genocide of Germans and Japanese? Or the genocide of Jews? Was the destruction of the Jews moral or immoral? Was the destruction of the German Nazis moral or immoral?
Trying to divert attention away from the relevant points and questions doesn't do your condoning of ruthless slaughter any good. I think that you are evil, amoral, and immoral, so is it okay if I slaughter you, your family, and everyone else that is anything like you? Should I sharpen my sword?
October 22, 2011 at 12:04 am
In what manner should a Canaanite culture engaging in child sacrifice, (along with other nefarious activities) be dealt with? Keep in mind the department of social services, the police, the courts, foster care and the threat of nuclear exchange did not exist then.
It’s easy to monday morning quarterback this thing.
Oh, so you're admitting that your allegedly omnipotent, omniscient god couldn't think of a way to deal with the Canaanites, including their children, (people he allegedly designed and created) other than to order them to be ruthlessly slaughtered? Did your god just want to watch and enjoy a bloodbath? Was he wanking his pud while watching it? Serial killers are known to get sexual gratification from watching people suffer and die, and your chosen god, according to your own so-called holy book, is the most prolific and sadistic serial killer of all time. He must do a lot of wanking.