Yeah but the difference between Peck and Hitchens is Peck would never enable an alcoholic to destroy himself.

Hitchens said "distrust compassion". That sounds like a Bakunin idea to me. People that "distrust compassion" will kill in the name of their ideas quicker than a more rational man would imo.

Truly rational men's minds are aimed more at building things up then tearing them down.

There's already a Christian dying for his beliefs somewheres in this world every 5 minutes and Hitchens and his ilk aren't improving their chances of living.

Who would want to live in a world without compassion? A know it all controlling merciless Bakunin...that's who.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikhail...ictatorship.22

The Bakunins of this world are more interested in vindicating themselves through their own ideas than interested in doing mankind a service. Read some of Lenin's last quotes. He knew the ends didn't justify the means he'd allowed at the end of his life. He most likely would have turned back the clock if he could have.

What if I'm in the midst of averting a social crisis?

Meh. You just want me to go away so you can stay unenlightened. But it's ok with me if God publicly humbles me. I'm still going to give the glory to God.

Quite right too. Peck was a Psychiatrist, it was his duty to do all he could to prevent alcoholics from destroying their lives - harm reduction. Whereas, Hitchens was a Journalist. Also, I can't be sure but did Hitchens sadistically aid other alcoholics in their downfall? I don't agree that Hitchens was lacking empathy and compassion for others, just intolerance for dogma. He wasn't a terrible person, neither was Peck.

I did not think it was possible for you to get any crazier.

nvm. sigh.

Hitchens wasn't a mere journalist though. Mere journalists don't attempt to change the world they just report it as realistically and unbiasedly as they can.

Hitchens was intent on a revolution. But who was at the head of his revolution if it was godless?

We already saw the results of a supposedly godless revolution in China, Russia and Cambodia.

I see Hitchens as a man being angry with current world conditions. Everyone should be angry but it doesn't mean you can act like a vigilante and take the law into your own hands as if you are a law unto yourself.

No man is an island.

Read Psalm 14. Hitchens looked everywhere for happiness except at the true source of it. A lot of people do that. Happiness comes from holiness. It's not a stand alone state of being. Psalm 14 shows men turning away from God and the resulting corruption.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...14&version=NIV

The world is crazier without God than it is with Him.

Christianity and Judaism wiped out worldwide infanticide?

Is there anything crazier than worldwide infanticide?

Why don't you do a study of the world's greatest saints down through time (instead of dabbling in modern politics) to see genuinely godly character.

Focusing on social issues like most atheists do is confusing (and most atheists aren't historians or political scientists). It doesn't allow you to find God at work in the world because it is too broad a comparison if you seize on the wrong issue. Seizing on the wrong issue will skew your perspective of God terribly.

I seem to remember God killing more than a few babies in the OT.

Thanks for the response splendour - hope you have a peaceful and enjoyable holiday season - sending my well wishes to you and those close.

Thank you. You, too.

And who killed these babies?

Acts 7 in the words of Stephen, the first Christian martyr:

17 “As the time drew near for God to fulfill his promise to Abraham, the number of our people in Egypt had greatly increased. 18 Then ‘a new king, to whom Joseph meant nothing, came to power in Egypt.’[c] 19 He dealt treacherously with our people and oppressed our ancestors by forcing them to throw out their newborn babies so that they would die."

Throwing out babies wasn't uncommon in the ancient world. The ancient Greeks were still doing it when Christianity came along and stopped the practice.

Ashurnasirpal Inscription

Assyrian Cruelty

One of the ancient monuments discovered in the ruins of ancient Assyria has this inscription by King Ashurnasirpal II (reign began in 883 BC.) of a conquered city:

"Their men, young and old, I took as prisoners. Of some I cut off the feet and hands; of others I cut off the noses, ears, and lips; of the young men's ears I made a heap; of the old men's heads I built a minaret."


Hawlinson's "Five Great Monarchies" vol. 2, p85, note.

She claims to know the bible but remains ignorant of god killing babies. Maybe she needs cliff notes?

Rom 8:5 For they that are after the flesh (things of the physical realm) do mind (think) the things of the flesh (things of the physical realm); but they that are after the Spirit (things of the spiritual realm) (do mind (think)) the things of the Spirit.

Rom 8:6 For to be carnally (fleshy, physically) minded (thinking) [is] death; but to be spiritually minded [is] life and peace.

To have a mind that feeds only upon the physical information and knowledge is spiritual suicide to a christian believer, and their are many of them who do not renew their minds to the spritual realm, and do not have a spiritual mind. When they make decisions, they are based on the circumstances and situations, instead of based on the word of God which is spiritual...

Rom 8:7 Because the carnal mind [is] enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

The physical mind, the carnal mind, is naturally at lagerheads with the spiritual mind, just like water and oil, cannot mix, or light and dark cannot be in the same place at the same time, occupying the same exact space.

The word of God, is light, its spritual, and all mens minds even many Christians have lots of dark in their minds, because they have not got the light of Gods word living in their heart and thinking processes.

I'd recommend you find a different translation if the one you're using is so unclear you have to add anything(with some exceptions, like clarifying an established pronoun). To me, transparency and clarity is more important than it sounding cool and poetic. For example:

[5]For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit. [6]For to set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace. [7]For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God's law; indeed, it cannot. [8]Those who are in the flesh cannot please God.
(Romans 8:5-8 ESV)

Also not sure why you posted consecutive verses separately if you weren't going to comment on each of them specifically. Anyway I just found the way you posted curious and possibly troublesome.

So it's okay that God killed babies because it wasn't uncommon at the time?

I think you should stop being so judgmental.

God can turn life on and off any time He wants. He is in charge of the switch and when He assigns life to people.

There is a first resurrection and a second one and He gets to decide which people get turned on and off first and when that happens.

Just like He gets to decide who's minds get enlightened and who's don't.

If you think you're going to argue with Him over that good luck. The only people I can think who dared petition (note they never argued with Him) Him were Abraham, Moses, Elisha and Elijah and Jesus Christ and maybe a few other saints.

Moses knew to fall flat on his face in one of his petitions to God to spare the Israelites and he knew better than most how to talk to God.

God could have started over and replaced the Israelites with another people any time He wanted.

It's absurd arguing with Him. He's much too Holy and Powerful to be trifled with.

That's fine. But do you see the issue I'm having with the following statements you've made...

1. The world is crazier without God than it is with him.
2. Infanticide is possibly the craziest thing in the world.
3. God commits infanticide

?

Study Jesus and answer your own questions.

Jesus is called the author of life.

Jesus didn't make the claims I'm asking about, you did.

I would never claim God commits infanticide.

God is not a human to be compared with humans in negative human terms.

His Ways Are Higher.

Anybody that can resurrect you should never be compared to a murderer.

A common murderer can't restore life to anyone.

God giveth and God taketh away....and God can give again...a murderer can't give life again so the negative comparisons are absurd.

Would you kill someone even if you knew you could bring them back to life? Say you knew you had the ability to perform CPR w/ a 100% success rate. Would you drown a baby and then bring it back to life?

No because I don't have that kind of confidence in myself but I have that kind of confidence in God.

Jesus Christ came to demonstrate we can have that kind of confidence by his death and resurrection.

I see. I wouldn't do it because its bad to drown babies in the first place.