No.10748
To send a message o algo
No.10749
>>10747Numbers 31:17–18
>Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known man by lying with him. No.10750
>>10749Ancient war practices being attributed to divine command
No.10751
>>10749Reading before it, it was after the war with the Mediianites, when the Israelites killed all the men, and capturing the women. Moses was angry at the soilders for not killing EVERYONE, as God had commanded, and ordered the death of all male children and non-virgin women.
Taking into account the fact the boys could become revengeful, it was nessisary to liquidate them. The whole reason God commanded the Israelites to annhialate the Mediianites in the first place was because they caused the Israelites to sin (among other things) and non-virgin women were sinful, so they wouldn't be good in Israelite society. Little girls and virgins are fine I guess. Different times, different needs.
No.10752
>>10751>Taking into account the fact the boys could become revengeful, it was nessisary to liquidate themThey could be revengeful out of reason because they were unaware of the sins their parents had committed. Or have they been labelled as sinners for the simple fact that their parents were sinners, rendering them unfit for repentance? They were born into an environment of sinful people with little comprehension of the impacts of their behavior. And what about the children who have not yet indulged in those practices? Those who are yet to commit those sins but are still put on the butcher list.
>Non-virgin women were sinful.What if they were raped? It was commanded that all of them be slaughtered, so not killing the raped women would be against Moses' wishes.
>Different times, different needsMoral relativism. If we accept genocide as justifiable based on temporal or cultural context, we risk undermining any objective moral standard. Would we apply that same logic to modern genocides or atrocities committed in the name of ideology or religion?
>>10750Evendoe it's literally stated right in the book that God had commanded them.
No.10754
>>10746Because they are non-white. The question is solved.
No.10755
>>10749This. Kill nons even if they are women or children.
No.10756
>>10755Ah well I mistook the verses. This is about the Midianites which were of Abraham originally. Still deserved tho (their prophet tried to bring trouble upon Israel by nons, namely Moabites iirc).
No.10758
>>10754Evendoe there's also white babies who die of illnesses upon birth aswell.
Also a lot of Christians are blkbois too btw
No.10759
>>10746So the OT God orders the 'sraelites to genocide, but in the NT Jesus says we must forgive those who trespassed against us? What happened to killing your enemies? Imagine if the Israelites just forgave the Medianiites, would they reciprocate?
But the reason for cutting down of the sinners' offspring is stated in Job 27:12.
Which I think makes sense, as the parents would in theory pass down their behavioral genes so it's better to be safe than sorry here.
No.10760
>>10759Alright then, here's a different argument, what about the suffering of baby animals? They experience pain just like we do, yet unlike humans, they can't sin—they aren't moral agents. And yet, many are mauled and eaten or die of disease shortly after birth. How is that just? What purpose does it serve for a newborn creature to be born only to suffer and die moments later? If God is truly just, how do we make sense of this kind of useless suffering?
No.10761
>>10760>If bad things happen then your God isn't a good guyReddit-tier arguments
Also it's not an argument
Imagine shittalking about how bad is the Lord that He let Eve and Adam sin on the seventh day
It's illogical
>If God is truly just, how do we make sense of this kind of useless suffering?Bcs God is just and the world is not. He saves us from the dangers of this world.
>>10758White babies dying of illnesses is not a valid argument, don't make me repeat myself.
>Muh blek bullz are xtian too!Cool, so? See the picrel.
No.10762
>>10756because they're kikes, abraham's father terah was a pagankike
No.10763
>>10761God allows animal suffering to happen in nature, without human intervention. This is different from humans as they have sinned, animals on the other hand are not rational agents. HE created the world we live in and HE allows this to occur.
>God is just and the world is not.You mean the world HE made for everyone to inhabit? He could've made a world where animals wouldn't need to be viciously maimed by eachother but chose to do the opposite. Humanity has nothing to do with this, the world God created is naturally unjust.
No.10764
>>10761>See the picrelAd hominem
No.10765
>>10762Nothingwaffel
>>10763>God allows animal suffering to happen in nature, without human interventionWell, this is since they are inferior to humans (whites), wilderness and cruelty is their nature and blah blah blah it's so because it can't be anything else. The world is imperfect and only God is perfect. This is the origin of the original sin — Adam was created in the inage of God to be His son but he's not Him so he wasn't perfect enough not to fall.
>This is different from humans as they have sinned, animals on the other hand are not rational agentsExactly! This is what I'm waffling about. Animals can't live another way! And nature can't be not like that! They are imperfect!
>He could've made a world where animals wouldn't need to be viciously maimed by eachother but chose to do the oppositeWhy? Why He had to have make the world like this? In God there is fullness, and His gifts and grace against the background of the world's insufficiency acquire meaning. Or something like that. In any case, the food chain and its existence can't be an argument against God.
>>10764Nee, wrong. Your point is literally "here's a black chinese, therefore, you aren't right!" or "here's a black norse pagan, therefore, you aren't right!".
No.10766
soyreddit.party
No.10767
>>10763suffering and autonomy are equivalent from cybernetic point of view, but putting that aside, imagine you could genetically modify some people not to feel pain, hunger, fear etc., would they fare better in life than those who were not modified?
>>10766that's aryan
No.10768
>>10765>The world is imperfect and only God is perfect.The perfect being created an imperfect world where beings who are incapable of sin have to suffer?
>Animals can't live another way! And nature can't be not like that! They are imperfect!God is an all-powerful being, he could've made the natural world a complex ecosystem where animals do not need to maim eachother, there's examples of that with herbivores or coral reefs. And yet he decided to make a world that includes suffering?
>In God there is fullness, and His gifts and grace against the background of the world's insufficiency acquire meaning.That doesn't address why a supposedly omnibenevolent and omnipotent being would design a system where pain and violent death are necessary components of survival — millions of years before humans ever appeared.
Are you perhaps stating that God created it just so he can be glorified in offering his "gifts and grace"? Cause no suffering is better than any suffering, especially when the animal can't learn anything from it like humans.
>In any case, the food chain and its existence can't be an argument against God.Yes it can. If a god existed who wanted to make a world without needless suffering, He could have, but didn't. That does not make him all-loving since that would mean he does not love animals.
No.10769
>>10767y argument is towards animals.
The entire system could've been designed so that NO suffering would've been necessary for animals, so why didn't God do that? There's examples of ecosystems where no suffering is required, yet He chose to not make all the ecosystems like that.
Animals could've flourish without suffering from the natural world.
No.10770
>>10769My argument is towards animals*
No.10771
>>10768>The perfect being created an imperfect world where beings who are incapable of sin have to suffer?Why is living considered by you as suffering? Like, bruh, life is full of not only suffering but happiness and joy too, and life is just life, you can't live it anyhow else but so.
>God is an all-powerful being, he could've made the natural world a complex ecosystem where animals do not need to maim eachotherBecause why??? Because you are a whiny faggot that """moralfags""" about le ebil God that made nature like it is? Evendoe everything works according to its own needs, God isn't obliged to create organisms without the need for nutrition, growth, and so on.
>there's examples of that with herbivores or coral reefsNow yuo see, they live so because they don't need to do more than this unlike other creatures.
>That doesn't address why a supposedly omnibenevolent and omnipotent being would design a system where pain and violent death are necessary components of survival — millions of years before humans ever appearedAnimals don't know meanings of the bad, evil, good, etc., and they don't know God and didn't do, they just live their lives and that is all. Why do they need more?
>Are you perhaps stating that God created it just so he can be glorified in offering his "gifts and grace"?Only in the context of sin
>no suffering is better than ang suffering Death justification
>If a god existed who wanted to make a world without needless sufferingSee the picrel. God is NOT obligated to make animals not animals. Also, this suffering isn't actually needless. Everything in nature has a cause. Therefore it's not God's fault.
>That does not make him all-loving since that would mean he does not love animalsHe gave them life, and life is His gift. This is a manifestation of love. So no, He doesn't hate them. Anyway, I could rather say that He is neutral towards them, because they just exist and He doesn't have any plans for them, while there's the man who was planned to serve the Lord but became sinful, and there's also the "beast" which made him sin, and their antagonism is the main theme of the Scripture.
No.10772
>>10771Why would we try to apply neutral, secular morals to a God we couldn't possibly understand in the first place? He's got his reasons, and rest assured we'll be fine.
No.10773
>>10771>Why is living considered by you as suffering? That's not what I'm talkng about, something can live, suffering is when something experiences agony and pain, for example, a baby gazelle gets viciously mauled some time after it is born and painfully bleeds to death. That creature is innocent, why did the innocent have to suffer?
>Because why??? Because you are a whiny faggot that """moralfags""" about le ebil God that made nature like it is? Evendoe everything works according to its own needs, God isn't obliged to create organisms without the need for nutrition, growth, and so on.Im not stating that these creatures can't experience growth, God can give them a life with no suffering where they can grow and eventually die without harm. If God is not obligated to minimize suffering upon animals who are innocent, then that God is not all-loving.
>Now yuo see, they live so because they don't need to do more than this unlike other creatures.This fails to explain why God chose to create many species that do require extreme violence to survive. If peaceful existence is biologically possible for some, then the argument that violent survival is necessary collapses.
The very existence of non-predatory species proves predation isn't biologically required — it was a design choice, not a necessity.
>Animals don't know meanings of the bad, evil, good, etc., and they don't know God and didn't do, they just live their lives and that is all. Why do they need more? Sentience, not moral reasoning, is the basis for suffering. Animals experience pain, fear, and distress. Their lack of moral understanding doesn't diminish the reality of their suffering.
If a dog can feel pain, it doesn’t matter if the dog understands “evil”, it still suffers.
If moral understanding were the only criterion for deserving concern, infants and mentally disabled people would also not count.
>Only in the context of sinIf animal suffering predated human sin (as evolution and fossil records show), then it cannot be the result of sin. So either:
1. God designed suffering before sin (meaning it wasn’t a punishment), or
2. You must reject evolution, and accept that animals didn’t suffer until humans sinned — which contradicts massive scientific evidence.
>Death justificationStrawman fallacy
It’s not about justifying death — it’s about questioning why suffering had to be part of the system at all.
The point is not to say “death is better,” but to say that needless suffering is unjustifiable, especially if it serves no redemptive or moral purpose (e.g. that baby gazelle example)
>See the picrel. God is NOT obligated to make animals not animals. Also, this suffering isn't actually needless. Everything in nature has a cause. Therefore it's not God's fault. Suffering may have a biological cause — that doesn’t mean it’s morally justified.
If God created the system, then He is responsible for the causes. Saying “it has a cause” doesn’t absolve Him.
>He gave them life, and life is His gift. This is a manifestation of love. So no, He doesn't hate them. Anyway, I could rather say that He is neutral towards them, because they just exist and He doesn't have any plans for them, while there's the man who was planned to serve the Lord but became sinful, and there's also the "beast" which made him sin, and their antagonism is the main theme of the Scripture.Giving life doesn’t equal love. If you give life and design it to suffer, it may be cruel, not loving.
Saying “God is neutral” concedes that God doesn’t love animals which contradicts the claim that He is omnibenevolent. “He doesn’t have plans for them” makes animals sound like disposable background entities.
No.10774
>>10772The smartest mexican immigrant with the highest IQ among shitskins in the US award
>you could've just said that I misunderstood youProbably
>>10773Boooooooooring to read, will do it later or never, depends on my will, but for now I can only say that you are shitskin and this should somehow make me morally superior so I win the discussion.
No.10775
>>10772You can't say both:
>“God is morally good”>and “We can’t judge God by any moral standard we know”Just saying he has his reasons is blind faith, if God allows widespread, unjust suffering now with no clear purpose why assume that we are somehow exempt from future harm?
This undermines moral reasoning.
No.10777
>>10774>I win because, well i just did ok???Can't even put up a good argument, honestly you're the worst Christian debater I've come across so far.
No.10778
>>10776>Anti-intellectualism quote>Submit to authority without question>Can be used to excuse atrocities as "it's just God's will bro"Holy goycattle
No.10779
>>10778Bet this nigga probably thinks Trump is a long-time Christian too
No.10780
>>10774This wasn't directed to you, sorry bro I still love you. It was bait for the chink. (btw I'm a WASP)
No.10781
>>10779Don't make me geg, that's so stupid.
No.10782
>>10777Just doing fun for mijzelf alhoewel
>>10778Moralfagging about "vhy did your Gott kreat worlt dat istn't guut und pervekt enaaf" is worse btw. You know, "bad things happen therefore God is false" claims became a taboo so I have no willing to argue stuff like "uhm but your God commanded you kill le innocent people of Canaan! Including women and children! Uh oh!"
>>10779If Trump is christian, then the BoSSniak herrenvolk is orthodox. Watch the hands.
>>10780Kneeling before you, master. Sorry for being le slavtard oh Anglord
No.10783
>>10782>Kneeling before you, master. Sorry for being le slavtard oh AnglordY- y- you're gonna make me blush Bulba-kun, stop embarrassing me, ughhh…
No.10784
>>10782>Pointing out contradictions is muh moralfaggingIt's worse because it's an actual argument that debunks your God's existence? You Christians rely on submission to authority. This kind of submission has let greedy megachurches manifest and you think the fact that me pointing out the flaws in your belief which debunk your God's existence is worse? I know you don't have any arguments against my claims and will continue to follow this religion out of ignorance, like how a child may believe their parent is doing what's best for them even if they are being abused.
If pointing out these contradictions is taboo, that’s not because the arguments are weak, but because they're uncomfortable truths, dismissing them doesn't refute them at all.
I could be morally bankrupt and these contradictions would still exist.
You're a part of a cult of ignorance that ignores reason and critical thinking, you have devolved yourself to controllable cattle. You say that God is your shepherd because you are the mindless sheep that follows without questioning.
No.10785
>>10784Are you actually Veitnamese?
No.10789
>>10785Yeah I'm one of the rare Asians on here.
No.10790
>>10789Sorry for killing 1 million of you guys during the war, our fault. What's your opinion on Pubic Chin Minh?
No.10791
>>10790You mean Ho Chi Minh? Well if it weren't for him then we wouldn't be growing this fast economically, at this rate we might be China 2 in terms of flourishing. He's basically like asian Christ.
No.10792
>>10791All I ever hear about Veitnam is how passport bros love the women and rent's cheap. Are you guy actually still hardcore communists, or are you like China? I'm kinda curious about you now.
No.10794
>>10792Living conditions in Vietnam are decently good, our country is still run by a communist one-party state (the CPV) and stuff like censorship is still prevalent, but like waaay less compared to China. Economy-wise, we had a renovation that completely switched it to a semi-capitalist economy that's similar to China. So basically we're authoritarian politically, but capitalist economically.
Also yes we still despise the CCP, there was one time where they decided out of the blue to start invading our land and they STILL to this day want OUR sea territory because it's an economic hotspot that they don't have access to.
I don't think any of China's nearby countries like China, they're like the chuds of SEA.
No.10795
>>10794But Japan and South Korea pretty much would have won the East Asia Economic war if not for China, and Yeah, I think it's kinda weid China invaded Veitnam. What's you're Geopolitical relationship with the rest of East Asia anyways? Does East Asia have NATO-like alliance, or is it just a bunch of countries just by themselves? And is Veitnam friendly with Russia?
No.10796
>>10795>But Japan and South Korea pretty much would have won the East Asia Economic war if not for ChinaThat's true, but since they're greedy selfish little fucks, they want more. Their citizens have a culture that promotes greed that was developed during the famines they had, but they never got rid of it. All of them could've dramatically increased their economy further if they just worked together, but the Big Three hate eachother. Like they're situated right next door, to where a trade route could've been made where they ALL would've benefitted and surpassed America, but because of their grudges, that isn't the case.
Our country is kind of the opposite since Ho Chi Minh taught us to not hold grudges. That's probably why I'm starting to see more videos about Vietnam's growth since it correlates with all our economic partnerships.
>What's you're Geopolitical relationship with the rest of East Asia anyways? Does East Asia have NATO-like alliance, or is it just a bunch of countries just by themselves? There's no NATO-style alliance in East Asia; mostly bilateral security ties, strategic partnerships, and independent defense policies.
However we do have a regional intergovernmental organization called ASEAN that helps with political and economic cooperation and regional stability among SEA countries.
>And is Veitnam friendly with Russia?Yes, especially in defense, but we avoid overdependence on them because we want strategic autonomy on our foreign policies. If you wanna ask the people however, we would be on the side of Ukraine on the war like with Palestine. The Soviets literally abandoned us back then because we "weren't communist enough" geg, Ho only used communism to help his people.
https://youtu.be/HBECSvK0c-I?si=Ua16zAXYbRbJaASq No.10797
>>10796Honestly I wish our country had more european architecture. It's mostly eco-brutalist, I went to visit a side of my country that was mostly european architecture, shit was beautiful I might slowly becoming a euroboo…
No.10798
Perhaps the point of suffering is to overcome it. No point in whining about the suffering of other beings while doing nothing about it. Like it or not, this world will be filled with suffering but also strengthening. I'd say it's better to light a fire than curse the darkness. As for God, I pray to Him to lend me strength in order to overcome my troubles.
No.10801
>>10749because they are children of demon worshippers
No.10802
>>10801what the FUCK a bosnian
No.10804
>>10802We got EVERY ethnicity here
No.10805
>>10784Haha your skin is not white ahaha
No.10806
>>10763animals dont have souls or morality
>>10801to add to this, its confirmation that genetics has more of an effect on people than upbringing which is why the children of the midianites would have wanted revenge
No.10807
>>10803i am literally serbian
No.10809
>>10806Humans don't have a soul too. Afterlife is a pagan platonic heresy.
No.10810
>>10807Ok kys, you don't have a right to live
No.10811
>>10806But they DO suffer
There's a reason why people torture animals at all
No.10814
>>10811humans suffer as well because the entire world is supposed to be suffering
No.10816
>>10813slavshit on slavshit warfare
No.10817
>>10815he btfod you subhumans probably even more than poleniggers
>>10816you are the worst slavs
No.10819
>>10818you are german rapebabies nigga
No.10820
>>10817>100k commie rebels killed in combat actions>700k jews killed in different ways (including the aforementioned combat actions against the partisaners)>Minimum ethnically belarusian civil casualties Ok turczyn
No.10821
>>10819They are the purest slav on the pare with ukros tho
No.10822
*slavs
No.10823
>>10819no nigga, it's the other way around, my ancestors were taking their pleasure with aryan germanic women
No.10824
>>10820lmao they probably killed some members of your family
>>10823you were raped by germans and russians for your entire history
No.10825
>>10824you have zero knowledge of polish history and it shows
No.10826
>>10822also why are so many slavs cucks for nazis? do you not realise they would kill or expel you and take your territory you dumb nigga?
No.10827
>>10825what i said sums it up pretty good.
unlike most countries you didnt have small periods of being occupied by others, you had small periods of NOT being occupied
No.10828
>>10824They didn't, my family was "relocated" to Siberia and returned to Belarus in 90s
No.10829
>>10827as I said, you have no clue what you're talking about
No.10830
>>10828geeg so they werent even in belarus at the time of ww2? thank stalin that your parents/grandparents are alive
>>10829>polenigger has no clue of his own history because he is both uneducated and 70iqchecks out
No.10831
>>10830I know it much better than you ever will, wanna test it?
No.10832
>>10826Dumb balkanoid nigger, why should they kill white people even though being white supremacists? You just hate racism and that's all, you have zero knowledge about races and that's why you believe that slavs (not even a monogenic ethnicities group) were allegedly considered mongoloid or whatever SOG told you
>>10830You're such a czurka-lover, kys. I'm not thanking that nigger for what he had done.
No.10834
>>10831tell me how many of the last 400 years poland has been independent?
No.10835
>>10834What special happened in Poland in 1625 according to you??
No.10836
>>10832they were aryan supremacists dumbass nigger if they were just white supremacists they wouldn't have invaded white countries and genocide them.
>>10832you're absolutely right stalin should have kept your subhuman slav(e)ic family in belarus so dirlevvanger could burn them alive
No.10837
>>10835i said the last 400 years.
from 1625 to 2025, how many years did Poland spend being occupied and how many did it spend being independent?
No.10838
>>10834Also 271, so now I'm interested what kind of math they teach in former Yugoslavia.
No.10839
>>10837>No answerJust as expected
No.10840
>>10801With this 4 unique Serbs have been spotted on /brabant/, it's a full takeover
No.10841
>>10840meant to reply to
>>10807 No.10842
>>10838>polish mathlmao
123+45=168
400-168=232
a little more than half
No.10843
>>10842>45Random unrelated number. Also why is 1625 so special to you, still no answer
No.10844
>>10843i said 400 years as a generic amount of time i could've said 500 or 300 instead.
>45>polenigger forgets 1945-1990drunk, high and retarded
No.10845
>>10840really? i know at least 2 bosnians, there is the terrible mouse serb i think idk if you are him
No.10846
>>108452 bosnians including me
No.10847
>>10844>Poland was independent during 1939-1945Someone please post the southern europe IQ map
>generic amount of time i could've said 500 or 300 insteadrandom unrelated period and the math is STILL not mathing, IQ map please
>1945-1990Poland was more independent then by any measure than it is now (or any other EU country for that matter)
No.10848
>>10836>Invaded white countries and genocided local whitesOh nee, Xitler invaded Austria and genocided them all! NEEEEEE why did xe considered Austrians untermenschen or something :uooooooooooh: IT WAS UNFAIR AHHH
>Aryan supremacy Yeah, another euphemism for white supremacy, got you
>Stalin saved you and Dirlewanger was about to kill rape murder and shit your family alive!!!Oh yes, LE BASED NIGGER saved muh poor huwite family from being horribly genocided by LE EBIL JERMANS that wanted to destroy le yt pipo race but dankfully LE EPIC MONGOOL VHYTE-REYS-SEYVIOR SQUAD?? stopped them
No.10850
>>10848Why did the site replace my russian flag emojis with the question marks
No.10852
>>10847>1939-19456 years is pretty much irrelevant but you are right
>generic amount of timeso what? poland was NOT occupied for 238 of the last 400 years. it WAS occupied for 162.
>we wuz actually independent under communismgeg
No.10853
>>10852actually no, NOT occupied for 226/400 years
No.10854
>>10851>Invaded Poland <Genocided 3 mln jews there>Invaded Soviet Union<Genocided other millions of the jews there>Invaded Jugoslavia<Another gorillion jews diedSuch a tragedy
Also:
>Bombed Britain and invaded France>Killed many hostile soldiers (kinda bad o algo)Not an argument. Just a war. The same with the previous statements btw.
No.10855
>>10852>>generic amount of timeyou claimed Poland was occupied most of its history, took an arbitrary short period of time that doesn't even span most of Poland's history (thus automatically invalidating your claim) and STILL got it wrong, I have to admit you are exceptionally retarded even for /brabant/ standards
>>we wuz actually independent under communismtry to vote in an anti-NATO government in any western country (not necessarily in Poland) and see what happens
No.10856
>>10855Uhm, France under De Gaulle will happen
No.10857
>>10856Translating for the pole: nothing will ever happen lol
No.10858
>>10856No, Romania will happen
No.10859
>>10858What's wrong with Romania?
No.10860
>>10859/brabant/ in the nutshell
No.10861
>>10860I see no problem here sir
No.10862
>>10861I just mean this board is for people who have no knowledge about any history or politics related topic whatsoever and pointed to your post as an example of that.
No.10864
>>10796I'm honestly surprised your people would support Ukraine, considering that Russia was your main allie during the war. I mean, they pretty much supplied your entire army. I also would highly doubt the avergage person in Veitnam would give two raisins about Pigkraine or Plapistine. I could understand the anger to Russia for abandoning you doe.
>>10797Well Burma and Cambodia has (or had) plenty of European architecture, and you really didn't give the French lots of time to build alot. I'm really surprised Pol Pot kept as much as he did in Cambodia (albeit his reigeme didn't last as long as Veitnam's has). If the Communists had failed or didn't last as long as they did, and France stayed in Indochina longer, Veitnam could've had way more European architecture.
No.10868
>>10864>I'm honestly surprised your people would support Ukraine, considering that Russia was your main allie during the war. "Gratitude is a sickness suffered by dogs." ~ Joseph Stalin
No.10875
>>10867Yes I am in full support of Jewish Khazaria and Greater Israel.
>>10868Stalin was a heartless kike doe