How Christian fundamentalists plan to teach genocide to schoolchildren

May 31, 2012 | Posted by: Hedonist | Full story: www.guardian.co.uk

Good News Clubs' evangelism in schools is already subverting church-state separation. Now they justify murdering nonbelievers. This fall, more than 100,000 American public school children, ranging in age from four to 12, are scheduled to receive instruction in the lessons of Saul and the Amalekites in the comfort of their own public school classrooms.

Comments

Showing posts 1 - 18 of18

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
May 31, 2012
 

Judged:

1

Un-fracking-believable!

Since: Jan 12

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
May 31, 2012
 

Judged:

1

Forget the Taliban soon we are going to be fighting Christian terrorists who are fighting a jihad against us.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Jun 1, 2012
 

Judged:

1

Is this really a surprise to anyone? This is what the bible was written for.

Since: Sep 10

Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Jun 2, 2012
 
When videos emerge of Hamas teaching kids to kill jews, everybody has a hissyfit and says "the muslims plan to kill every kaffir worldwide!"

But when a christian teaches kids to hate others, to treat them as less than human with no right to live (never mind rights, period), the christards say, "Aw, isn't that sweet?"

.
Justin

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Jun 6, 2012
 
The narrative of Saul and the Amalekites is from the Old Testament. It's a story written down centuries B.C.(Before Christ). It's part of the collective body of work that we now call "The Bible", but it has little to do with Christ. Therefore it should have little to do with Christianity. Christ never advocated the slaughter of Amalekites, or anyone for that matter. The problem is that *some* Christians believe the entire Bible to be the direct word of God; they believe that every character and event described in the Bible has some religious significance.

In my opinion, the story of Saul and the Amalekites is a narrative (just like George Washington and the Cherry Tree or The Alamo versus Marauding Mexicans). There is a historical aspect to these narratives, but they have been sprinkled with political and religious "spice" to promote some agenda. God has little to do with it.

It's a shame that Christ has to be bundled up and marketed to the public along with so much other unrelated rubbish.

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Jun 6, 2012
 

Judged:

1

Justin wrote:
The narrative of Saul and the Amalekites is from the Old Testament. It's a story written down centuries B.C.(Before Christ). It's part of the collective body of work that we now call "The Bible", but it has little to do with Christ. Therefore it should have little to do with Christianity. Christ never advocated the slaughter of Amalekites, or anyone for that matter. The problem is that *some* Christians believe the entire Bible to be the direct word of God; they believe that every character and event described in the Bible has some religious significance.
In my opinion, the story of Saul and the Amalekites is a narrative (just like George Washington and the Cherry Tree or The Alamo versus Marauding Mexicans). There is a historical aspect to these narratives, but they have been sprinkled with political and religious "spice" to promote some agenda. God has little to do with it.
It's a shame that Christ has to be bundled up and marketed to the public along with so much other unrelated rubbish.
Without the literal truth of the O.T., the N.T. makes no sense. Without a literal Adam & Eve and a talking snake, there is no "original sin" and no reason for redemption by the blood sacrifice on the cross.

Either you accept it all verbatim or you cherry pick which parts you want to say matters and which parts don't and it all becomes meaningless.
Justin

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Jun 6, 2012
 

Judged:

1

My own beliefs on Christianity is closer to Thomas Jefferson than Pat Robertson. Perhaps there was a literal Adam and Eve, I have my doubts, but that doesn't invalidate the concept of original sin.
A rational person doesn't take an "accept it all or reject it all" approach to anything. I think we all here understand that the Bible is a collection of books from various authors and sources. Some of these books were discovered in clay pots, and we (including the Church) don't know the identity of their author. On some level, even fundamentalist Christians understand this (the better educated church leadership more so than the congregation). The Catholic church and King James edited or "cherry picked" what went into the Bible we have today in 2012. However, the fact that any single book (say the Gospel of Matthew or John for example) got bundled together with other earlier and more less verifiable volumes doesn't invalidate it's truth.
I don't have the believe the narrative of the Cherry Tree was factual to believe another narrative about George Washington leading the amry across the Delaware river at night. There are a lot of narratives about even more recent historical figures like Martin Luther King or John Kennedy that while benign and well meaning are probably not factually correct. But it doesn't change who the men were.
When I was a kid, I went to a summer camp and they gave us all a small pocket sized edition of the New Testament. It makes more sense than the full sized version. Honestly, if I were a preacher, I'd stick to the handful of books that make up the Gospels. That other stuff about Saul and the Amalekites seems to me more like ancient Jewish political propaganda and folklore. I can't believe that a Christian group would squander an opportunity in front of a classroom full of kids to quote nonsense from the Old Testament.
redneck

Glendale, OR

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Jun 6, 2012
 
The Jewish Holocaust is an example of christian on jew genocide. Pope Pius XII was in on it.
Justin

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Jun 7, 2012
 
redneck wrote:
The Jewish Holocaust is an example of christian on jew genocide. Pope Pius XII was in on it.
Hitler obviously leveraged religion and a preexisting anti-Jewish hatred amoung Europeans as a tool. However, I don't think that Hitler, nor any of the other major players, really cared about religion or Jews one way or the other.
The real goal was the domination of Europe. The threat of evil Jewish bankers was just part of the rheteric Hitler used to bring the German population on board with the plan.
redneck

Glendale, OR

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Jun 7, 2012
 
Justin wrote:
<quoted text>
Hitler obviously leveraged religion and a preexisting anti-Jewish hatred amoung Europeans as a tool. However, I don't think that Hitler, nor any of the other major players, really cared about religion or Jews one way or the other.
The real goal was the domination of Europe. The threat of evil Jewish bankers was just part of the rheteric Hitler used to bring the German population on board with the plan.
Hitlers book tells that he believed god spared him in WWI to do 'gods work'. All of his speaches referenced god and 'Gott Mit Uns' is on the military belt buckles.
Justin

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Jun 7, 2012
 
redneck wrote:
<quoted text>Hitlers book tells that he believed god spared him in WWI to do 'gods work'. All of his speaches referenced god and 'Gott Mit Uns' is on the military belt buckles.
Chistianity is a faith and a way of life. I would argue that it's impossible for someone to lead a genocidal war and be a Christian. The two are mutually exclusive. That would be like saying:
"My sister is a vegetarian, but ironically she also eats a burger and fries for lunch every day. Vegetarians are such hypocrits."
The fact that one habitually eats hamburger would categorically make them not a vegetarian. Likewise, anyone who maliciously kills cannot categorically be a true Christian. True faith would be compatible with such action.
Just because Hitler wore a belt buckle or wrote a book that referenced God, that doesn't mean he had any real conviction. Likewise, there are many religious leaders today who profess their religious beliefs (real or phony) as a pretext for committing financial fraud or leading their congregation to do un-Christian things like bomb abortion clinics.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Jun 7, 2012
 
Justin wrote:
<quoted text>
Chistianity is a faith and a way of life. I would argue that it's impossible for someone to lead a genocidal war and be a Christian. The two are mutually exclusive. That would be like saying:
"My sister is a vegetarian, but ironically she also eats a burger and fries for lunch every day. Vegetarians are such hypocrits."
The fact that one habitually eats hamburger would categorically make them not a vegetarian. Likewise, anyone who maliciously kills cannot categorically be a true Christian. True faith would be compatible with such action.
Just because Hitler wore a belt buckle or wrote a book that referenced God, that doesn't mean he had any real conviction. Likewise, there are many religious leaders today who profess their religious beliefs (real or phony) as a pretext for committing financial fraud or leading their congregation to do un-Christian things like bomb abortion clinics.
Then why is genocide done by believers in the bible so often?
Justin

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Jun 7, 2012
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Then why is genocide done by believers in the bible so often?
Believer's in what exact?
I think I've already discussed my opinions about the Old Testament Jewish religios / political / mythological figures versus the Gospels Of Christ in the New Testament.
For example, one narrative in the Old Testament describes how King David arranged for the death of one of his generals so he could marry the man's wife. The Old Testament is a dichotomy of narratives and characters, some of it written down as prophesy from God, but a lot of it is just embellished historical accounts that seems out of context with the Gospels. There is nothing to suggest that Christ intended to hold up personalities from the Old Testament as shining examples of humanity.
Cujo

Regina, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
Jun 7, 2012
 
Wat the Tyler wrote:
Forget the Taliban soon we are going to be fighting Christian terrorists who are fighting a jihad against us.
You already are. But the media and government won't report an abortion clinic bombing from christians, terrorism.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Jun 7, 2012
 

Judged:

1

Justin wrote:
<quoted text>
Believer's in what exact?
I think I've already discussed my opinions about the Old Testament Jewish religios / political / mythological figures versus the Gospels Of Christ in the New Testament.
For example, one narrative in the Old Testament describes how King David arranged for the death of one of his generals so he could marry the man's wife. The Old Testament is a dichotomy of narratives and characters, some of it written down as prophesy from God, but a lot of it is just embellished historical accounts that seems out of context with the Gospels. There is nothing to suggest that Christ intended to hold up personalities from the Old Testament as shining examples of humanity.
You should read the book.

2 Peter 2:6 And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly;

Mark 7:9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
7:10 For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:
7:11 But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free.

Matthew 10:34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
10:35 For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.

Check the context, in other words, read your book. I didn't focus on just the genocide, but these are more damning, and all New Testament.
redneck

Glendale, OR

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Jun 7, 2012
 
Justin wrote:
<quoted text>
Believer's in what exact?
I think I've already discussed my opinions about the Old Testament Jewish religios / political / mythological figures versus the Gospels Of Christ in the New Testament.
For example, one narrative in the Old Testament describes how King David arranged for the death of one of his generals so he could marry the man's wife. The Old Testament is a dichotomy of narratives and characters, some of it written down as prophesy from God, but a lot of it is just embellished historical accounts that seems out of context with the Gospels. There is nothing to suggest that Christ intended to hold up personalities from the Old Testament as shining examples of humanity.
I forgot one thing that you must consider. www.400monkeys.com/God
redneck

Glendale, OR

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Jun 7, 2012
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
You should read the book.
2 Peter 2:6 And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly;
Mark 7:9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
7:10 For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:
7:11 But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free.
Matthew 10:34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
10:35 For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
Check the context, in other words, read your book. I didn't focus on just the genocide, but these are more damning, and all New Testament.
He hasn't read or he would be an atheist.

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
Jun 7, 2012
 

Judged:

1

Justin wrote:
My own beliefs on Christianity is closer to Thomas Jefferson than Pat Robertson. Perhaps there was a literal Adam and Eve, I have my doubts, but that doesn't invalidate the concept of original sin.
A rational person doesn't take an "accept it all or reject it all" approach to anything. I think we all here understand that the Bible is a collection of books from various authors and sources. Some of these books were discovered in clay pots, and we (including the Church) don't know the identity of their author. On some level, even fundamentalist Christians understand this (the better educated church leadership more so than the congregation). The Catholic church and King James edited or "cherry picked" what went into the Bible we have today in 2012. However, the fact that any single book (say the Gospel of Matthew or John for example) got bundled together with other earlier and more less verifiable volumes doesn't invalidate it's truth.
I don't have the believe the narrative of the Cherry Tree was factual to believe another narrative about George Washington leading the amry across the Delaware river at night. There are a lot of narratives about even more recent historical figures like Martin Luther King or John Kennedy that while benign and well meaning are probably not factually correct. But it doesn't change who the men were.
When I was a kid, I went to a summer camp and they gave us all a small pocket sized edition of the New Testament. It makes more sense than the full sized version. Honestly, if I were a preacher, I'd stick to the handful of books that make up the Gospels. That other stuff about Saul and the Amalekites seems to me more like ancient Jewish political propaganda and folklore. I can't believe that a Christian group would squander an opportunity in front of a classroom full of kids to quote nonsense from the Old Testament.
Eve3n the N.T. has Jesus talking about Adam & Eve and reminding you to keep ALL the O.T. commandments (which would include killing witches).

You really should read the whole thing, in order, and try really hard to understand it literally (instead of through the lens of apologetics).

You really can't just toss out pieces of it willy-nilly and cherry pick which parts you think are okay without admitting by your actions that you use modern secular society morals to filter your reading.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 1 - 18 of18
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
•••
•••