Why is There Death and Suffering if God is all Loving

[total relism]

This is the surefire recipe to increase the number of the faithful. No need to send preachers everywhere and propagate the Scripture. Just murder half of the population and the other half will agree that Yahweh Alone is God.

lol not a usual tactic is it. No but nobody had died by the sixth plague. And a preacher was sent, his name is Moses. Nobody ever had to die was the point. If they chose to openly defy the one true god than the firstborn would be killed, not half the country.

[Gilrandir]

lol not a usual tactic is it.

No lol. It WAS a usual tactic by those in Middle Ages who ostensibly served God and purported to implement his will.

If they chose to openly defy the one true god than the firstborn would be killed, not half the country.

Only the firstborn? How unusually kind and merciful! Sounds much like Communists. Or Nazis.

[total relism]

No lol. It WAS a usual tactic by those in Middle Ages who ostensibly served God and purported to implement his will.



Only the firstborn? How unusually kind and merciful! Sounds much like Communists. Or Nazis.

I would assume you are referring to the crusades. You have to understand you wont get a fair historical perspective from the secular education system that has replaced Christianity nor the liberal media. Here is a thread I did on the historical crusades.

Thank God for the Crusades
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showt...r-the-Crusades


Nah they kill the whole bunch. I would also add the situation is much different.

[Gilrandir]

I would assume you are referring to the crusades. You have to understand you wont get a fair historical perspective from the secular education system that has replaced Christianity nor the liberal media.

Not only the crusades. Inquisition, St. Bartholomew's Night, Mallēus Maleficārum and other iniquitous things done in the name of God. I doubt non-secular educational system will find those a righteous thing to have been done.

As for the crusades, one whose favorite book in the History of Crusades by Steve Runciman doesn't need any threads to try to sway him this way or that in that matter. The thing that impressed me most was that Arabs were most liberal to pilgrims (with singular exceptions when a religious fanatic ruled the Fatimids) and Outremer Christians were allowed to pray their Gods. Moreover, most of the latter were Orthodox, and they openly resented taking their temples by Latin church warriors. Eventually, local Christians ended up being much worse off when ruled by Christian monarchs of Outremer than they had been by the infidel. So the initial premise of Crusades as liberation movement was fallacious from the outset - and ended in a failure.

[Fragony]

It is just a diseaae it happens sometimes

[total relism]

Not only the crusades. Inquisition, St. Bartholomew's Night, Mallēus Maleficārum and other iniquitous things done in the name of God. I doubt non-secular educational system will find those a righteous thing to have been done.

As for the crusades, one whose favorite book in the History of Crusades by Steve Runciman doesn't need any threads to try to sway him this way or that in that matter. The thing that impressed me most was that Arabs were most liberal to pilgrims (with singular exceptions when a religious fanatic ruled the Fatimids) and Outremer Christians were allowed to pray their Gods. Moreover, most of the latter were Orthodox, and they openly resented taking their temples by Latin church warriors. Eventually, local Christians ended up being much worse off when ruled by Christian monarchs of Outremer than they had been by the infidel. So the initial premise of Crusades as liberation movement was fallacious from the outset - and ended in a failure.

I will be doing a thread on the inquisitions in time. That evil has been done in the name of god i dont disagree. That evil being done from an evolutionary atheistic worldview is a giant compared to the evils done in the name of god i dont doubt either. But i would rather defend the bible than mans sinful actions or when Christians act unlike what the bible describes such as your mentioned St. Bartholomew's Night. I cannot help but add the atheist has no moral foundation or justification to call any action "evil", that only comes from a biblical worldview. I will be doing a thread on this as well. As for your understanding of the crusades and Muslim tolerance, I suggest we speak of that on the thread dedicated to that.

[Gilrandir]

That evil being done from an evolutionary atheistic worldview is a giant compared to the evils done in the name of god i dont doubt either.

It should be confirmed with figures. Otherwise it is an arbitrary statement. IMO, both sides have a nasty record.

I cannot help but add the atheist has no moral foundation or justification to call any action "evil", that only comes from a biblical worldview.

If an atheist lives a life that God would generally approve of, but doesn't go to church - he is a lower creature than a Christian who steals, cheats, abuses drugs, but once a week goes to church to confess?

[total relism]

It should be confirmed with figures. Otherwise it is an arbitrary statement. IMO, both sides have a nasty record.



If an atheist lives a life that God would generally approve of, but doesn't go to church - he is a lower creature than a Christian who steals, cheats, abuses drugs, but once a week goes to church to confess?

Agreed, i save those stats for a thread more relevant.


I will get into this on another thread in the future as it often needs to be exsplained in more time that i would care to give on this thread.