I don't know the inner details of their belief system so it makes it impossible for me to pass a judgment on them at this time.

Beliefs are suppose to improve lives though not destroy them but there could be some extreme circumstances where you might have to sacrifice your life for a belief.

Didn't Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr. have to face that problem on a regular basis in their civil rights campaigns?

Fine, sacrifice your own life for your belief. Don't sacrifice an innocent child because of your beliefs.

Good point.

Maybe God wouldn't approve of them doing that. He hates child sacrifice.

If you remember Jesus said the Sabbath was made for people. People weren't made for the Sabbath.

God hates child sacrifice. Sacrifices his own child.

God knew He could raise him and his Son knew it, too.

It was a demonstration of faith in God's power.

You can read up on infanticide.

Judaism and Christians and missionaries today all help to wipe it out.

Didn't the Christians replace the actual sacrifice with a ritual?

Doesn't that show God's intent?

Aren't the people closest to God going to know His intentions best? Don't they study Him the most?

If both of them knew that this was just a ps3 game they were playing not "real life" then their sacrifice was idiotic. I still cannot comprehend WHY THE **** GOD would need to do **** like that, HE can create a whole universe in 6 days but he cannot forgive sins unless he kills his son and resurrects him? Dumbest story ever.

There are many reasons, not just for the propitiation of sins for mankind, but also that the god of this world is to be judged: his plan to kill the rightful heir of the "kingdom of G-d" was successful ( Yeshua was killed, both under the Jews and the Gentiles ), but the result was that the "Word of Life" was resurrected and became king of an eternal "kingdom". The Memra~"Logos" had to be tabernacled in human flesh with the Ruach HaKodesh ( "Spirit of G-d") in a unique way so that the talmidim, as servants of the "kingdom", would also be equipped with the Ruach HaKodesh after Yeshua returned to Hashem ("G-d"): that they would have the power to be able to obey the Torah according to the halakhah of Yeshua and to give the testimony of the Messiah Yeshua.

There is a story of how Ha-satan failed to corrupt every bloodline concerning Hashem's promise to Avraham, and perhaps others can elaborate.

didnt he also make some jewish dude kill his own son too?

didnt god murder all the firstborn in Egypt when he raged?
he even put it in his diary under Exodus brah

Wasn't Moses generation of males wiped out by Pharoah decades before the first Passover?

Who do you think the Pharoah represents in the bible?

Doesn't he resemble HaSatan?

Egypt is a symbol for "the world" in the bible.

im no expert so its interesting to me.

so those stories are not literal that was a metaphor?

i always assumed god thought it was ok to smite people because he owns all life. We as human beings weren't given the right to kill people it would be unjust for us to cap people but because god is justice himself, nothing he ever does is unjust.

soz for derail but if i asked a priest if that story is literal or not would most say what you did im confused

How would I know what all priests would say?

Check into the topic of spiritual warfare. Some ministers/priests say God has been at war with Satan since before the creation of Adam and Eve.

If you look at the OT each tribe has its' own stone. Then look up the word "segula". It has a precious stone connotation. Isn't every human being like a precious stone God carries next to His heart? I consider the 12 tribes as early prototypes of God's children.

In the book of Revelation it says Jesus Christ gives people a new white stone with their new name on it.

Of course, people have a lot of world surfing to do before that. The world likes to hit God's children with a lot of rough waves.

The thought of an omnipotent being at war with a non omnipotent being is pretty funny. He must like the war...its got to be a cat and mouse deal.

Not worth arguing over. The chance you can make someone see an alternative perspective by arguing over it is very limited.

Id disagree. Just about every view i have held and changed (which is many) have come form hearing other views.

Your unwillingness and/or inability to evaluate the viewpoints of others is a massive character flaw. Sadly, you appear to believe that this is actually a virtue, so I doubt this will ever change.

It's easy to get adults to accept that your argument has merit, even if they personally don't agree with your viewpoint. The reason you have difficulty achieving this lowball measure of persuasiveness is that you start with silly premises and then argue them ineffectively.

Argumentation is the least effective way of communicating.

Once competition enters the mix pride gets the better of everyone concerned.

You have to be open and receptive to another person to see their point of view.

Pride is like an adder's venom it destroys clear thinking at the outset.

True, adders confuse their prey to death.

Wrong!

Adders, the most terrifying and confusing of snakes.

Smooth...

If it doesn't bring understanding but instead stirs up a contentious spirit it's not worth a damn.

You can't have a contentious spirit and have peace.

You don't need to be an atheist to make the decision that he mad. What's the point of this thread?