And they came to the place which God had told him of; and Abraham built an altar there, and laid the wood in order, and bound Isaac his son, and laid him on the altar upon the wood.

And Abraham stretched forth his hand, and took the knife to slay his son.

And the angel of the LORD called unto him out of heaven, and said, Abraham, Abraham: and he said, Here am I.

And he said, Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him: for now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son from me.

And Abraham lifted up his eyes, and looked, and behold behind him a ram caught in a thicket by his horns: and Abraham went and took the ram, and offered him up for a burnt offering in the stead of his son.

Genesis 22:9-13

I hate videos like this because I don't believe the religion is directly responsible for the act, human behavior is, the act would occur anyway under a different characterization.

If this was a murder committed by someone because 'voices' told him to, this video wouldn't be posted here. We accept that, somehow that is more 'normal'.

What I find interesting about this tragic event is the fact that once you admit the supernatural into your worldview and more specifically, the literal reality of certain ancient texts, this man's behavior becomes unimpeachable. Who's to say that he wasn't commanded by god to do exactly what he did? By what criteria does one invalidate his claim but accept as true the similar claims in the bible?

As for the concept that people who hear voices and commit violent acts are more 'normal' (they're all abnormal as far as I'm concerned - but I get your meaning), I simply consider this another example of the same thing - is there any substantive difference?

^ObsidianStorm

I think the real difference here is that when you look at this man in the interview he doesn't seem very delusional. He really only seems confused philosophically.

I've seen videos of snake handlers, specifically featured in the ethnographic book "Salvation on Sand Mountain" who have bitten by VERY poisonous snakes and refuse medical treatment then die as a result. Why did they do the things they did? "If I die it is God's will" This sounds like a similar case where if you take out the element of the irrational belief, all of a sudden their motives for their actions vanish.

The man in the video even admits that he didnt want to kill his son and he had high hopes of him growing up and becoming a good person but...that's not what god wanted, according to him.

It's sad to watch the strong love for his son be trumped by religious bullshit.

Jigga -

I totally agree - the guy sounds completely lucid. I was simply trying to refute the claim that there was somehow a difference between a delusional "someone hearing voices" and a delusional "someone hearing god" - there is no difference.

If this guy is completely sane (and again, he doesn't appear delusional - but that doesn't rule it out), then even more to the point - that is, religion was the motivator.

Religion - It's faaaaantastic!

Stay off my side Obsidian. This is the act of a crazy person, not a religious act!

Natural selection at its finest. Too bad it cost the kid his life.

Budzos -

Care to submit your case?

As said above, if the guy didn't think God told him to do it, he would have found some other reason to kill his son, because he's a crazy fuck. He seems pretty delusional in the interview to me, pretty much the opposite of lucid when he's saying he didn't want to kill his son but he had to in order to save him. In other words, I don't think this guy can be said to be "otherwise sane."

For you to frame this video as an attack on religion in general is as ineffective as attacking religion based on the actions of fundamentalists and extremists. To me, fundamentalists and extremists are wired wrong to start with, and would probably always find a way to be extreme in their world view and lifestyle, because they are all basically insane cowards or insane mental midgets who need some kind of overarching system in order to function in life. So it doesn't help the cause to point out that crazy people do crazy shit in the name of religion.

blah blah I give up I'm spending too much time on the fucking internet...

Amen (no pun intended) If you can't tell the rabid bull from the rest of the herd, you're a fucking idiot.

Why is it wrong to murder someone? The only rationally defensible answer is The Creator Commanded men not to commit murder. Exodus 20:13 and Matthew 19:18.

Abraham knew God, knew his Commands, and knew that he wouldn't actually have to kill his son:

"And Isaac spake unto Abraham his father, and said, My father: and he said, Here am I, my son. And he said, Behold the fire and the wood: but where is the lamb for a burnt offering? And Abraham said, My son, God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering: so they went both of them together."

If someone lives by the bible then why wouldn't they immediately follow through with any action they believe God wants them to do? This is not insanity, this is pure rationality for the truly faithful... those who know that you can't pick and choose which parts of the bible to believe.

This guy doesn't need evidence that what he did was wrong because he has "faith" in his belief. "Blessed is he who believes without seeing"... if he believed that the only way his son will get to heaven is through this act then that is what he had to do.

His problem is not that he misunderstands religion... his problem is that he understands it too well.

It was a religious act because the guy SAID it was a religious act. To say otherwise is to claim special knowledge of the perp's mental state.

Many people commit murder and do not qualify for the insanity defence - upon what, pray tell, are those of you who claim to know this guy's state of mental health basing your opinion on?

And if he's crazy, then be sure to apply the same label to those who have followed god's commands to similar ends in the bible...

... the bible is fucking fake dude.

It might semantically be a "religious act" but it's not the type of religious act to hold up as an example when arguing that religion is a bad thing. The guy is fucking fruit loops.

"... the bible is fucking fake dude."

You'll get no argument from me on this one...

"... the bible is fucking fake dude."

Yes, but to religious nuts it's very real. Go ahead and ask them, they will tell you. As far as I'm concerned, anyone that reads and believes that rubbish is real is nuts. This guy included.

>> ^budzos:
... the bible is fucking fake dude.
It might semantically be a "religious act" but it's not the type of religious act to hold up as an example when arguing that religion is a bad thing. The guy is fucking fruit loops.


Ok fine, religion itself isn't bad. I'll rephrase the argument:

Religion based on the bible or quran is bad.

If someone wants to invent their own religion around non-violent debate and respecting everyone's opinion then I fully support that, but that religion could in no way be based on either of those books.


If you want to argue that the guy in this video is crazy then you may have a case, but you can't possibly say that his actions go against the teachings of the bible. If you do then you haven't read it.

At least this guy isn't a hypocrite. If you are going to follow christ, how can you justify cherry picking your bible verses? If you really believe in jesus you better get your ass out in the streets and start chopping down some trollops.

Give this guy a thumbs up and paint some angels on the ceiling of the lethal injection room. Lucky for him, he'll be dead when he realizes what a mistake he made in believing in some 2000 year old dead guy's imaginary friend.