Posted on 04/10/2010 11:49:41 PM PDT by Steelfish
April 11, 2010 Richard Dawkins: I Will Arrest Pope Benedict XVI Marc Horne
Atheist campaigner Richard Dawkins RICHARD DAWKINS, the atheist campaigner, is planning a legal ambush to have the Pope arrested during his state visit to Britain “for crimes against humanity”.
Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens, the atheist author, have asked human rights lawyers to produce a case for charging Pope Benedict XVI over his alleged cover-up of sexual abuse in the Catholic church.
The pair believe they can exploit the same legal principle used to arrest Augusto Pinochet, the late Chilean dictator, when he visited Britain in 1998.
The Pope was embroiled in new controversy this weekend over a letter he signed arguing that the “good of the universal church” should be considered against the defrocking of an American priest who committed sex offences against two boys. It was dated 1985, when he was in charge of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which deals with sex abuse cases.
(Excerpt) Read more at timesonline.co.uk ...
That’s an argument you can apply to any religious text.
Thanks for proving my case.
G’dday!
The reason for killing all is given in verse two, which you have been consistently ignoring. But this was the incident to which they were referring.
The only way to blot out the memory of Amalek from under heaven was to kill them all. Otherwise they would just rise up and do it again.
*********************************************************************
Exodus 17: 8 The Amalekites came and attacked the Israelites at Rephidim. 9 Moses said to Joshua, “Choose some of our men and go out to fight the Amalekites. Tomorrow I will stand on top of the hill with the staff of God in my hands.”
10 So Joshua fought the Amalekites as Moses had ordered, and Moses, Aaron and Hur went to the top of the hill. 11 As long as Moses held up his hands, the Israelites were winning, but whenever he lowered his hands, the Amalekites were winning. 12 When Moses’ hands grew tired, they took a stone and put it under him and he sat on it. Aaron and Hur held his hands up—one on one side, one on the other—so that his hands remained steady till sunset. 13 So Joshua overcame the Amalekite army with the sword.
14 Then the LORD said to Moses, “Write this on a scroll as something to be remembered and make sure that Joshua hears it, because I will completely blot out the memory of Amalek from under heaven.”
*********************************************************************
Your turn. Explain the ritual human sacrifice of children in Hinduism for so long without even the reason of capitol punishment, but just the lousy excuse of satisfying the blood lust of some demon.
You support the ritual slaughter of children so that a tribe is extinguished? Is behaviour encoded in the DNA that allows for slaughtering children AND INFANTS, instead of adopting them?
Wow, just wow.
No child-sacrifice in the Gita. Try again.
But you were, against your own religious text.
When I called you on it, you accused me of your own error.
Because you're a troll.
Nighty-night again, troll-boy.
The Gita, you silly troll!
So you don’t use scripture to define faith? Does that mean an act of paedophilia in the Catholic Church may be interpreted as part of the religion? Or do you hypocritically use scripture to filter out what is admissible and what is not?
Read the Old Testament is not like reading your morning local newspaper where quotes can be selectively pulled out and held up as a definitive textual interpretation. In serious academic circles this would be considered “clownish”
Please review the essay below and it might put an end to this sophomoric turning around of chasing one’s own tail because as the essay details the depths of scholarly exegesis does not admit of facile references.
http://www.quodlibet.net/articles/odendaal-interpretation.shtml
They are not truely Christians, and will answer foir every word.
How would you classify this one, Hindu agent provocateur?
Cheers!
“And whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea.” — Mark 9:42
@@@@@@@@@
I wonder how many parents who needlessly provoke their children to wrath will be brought up short on that standard.
I won’t accept re-interpretations, especially not for verses that are plain, simple, and unambiguous. It is impossible for me to accept contorted, MANMADE re-interpretations of such verses, twisting them to such an extent that they are forced to mean the opposite of what they really convey.
@@@@@@@
I’m much the same way—particularly on those plainly worded verses.
If the Pope was unrighteous, then there simply will be a reward lost at the bema seat for all eternity. Discipline might occur in this life prior to the first death so that we might return to Him.
We might seek justice, but in this world, the most just thing is for us to return to Him through faith in Christ, not by any other mechanism than what He provides.
Why should we expect God to correct injustice, when all He has to do is provide by His grace what He wills, while the past unrighteousness is simply cleansed and washed away?
I've never thought of it that way. I've always viewed that as doing harm to a child. Parents are never perfect, raising children is very hard and we do make mistakes.
YES.
However,
I know of many adults who’s lives are wrecked primarily because of a childhood full of that error.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.