"Good" and "bad" are value judgements, and as such are relatively useless mental constructs, Shambles. People's judgements of what or who is "good" or "bad" are totally based on time, place, and context. What is "good" in one century in one culture (say, sacrificing a calf to Yahweh) is often considered "bad" in a neighbouring culture (ie for the Hindus in India, cattle were sacred) or even a few centuries later in the same culture. I don't know any Jews today who still sacrifice their livestock to a god of war.

We have covered this ground earlier in the this thread. But it is often convenient for those organised religons who wish to try confuse us - to claim that concepts of good and bad are far too simplstic concepts to be of any practical use and I would totally disagree with this. These are very BASIC concepts that most of have no trouble living our lives by and are only too aware when we do not.

The German Catholic clergy, while strongly objecting to certain aspects of NAZI racial policy, has always taken care to emphasize the duty of every Catholic to his country as loyal Germans in the present war.

Perhaps your mentioning 'Jews who still sacrifice their livestock to a god of war' was not a very good one? For in this case an organised religion that teaches that killing one's fellow human beings is a bad thing is then telling its followers that to do so when those you are killing what are said to be your country's enemy - is just loyally doing your duty. Perhaps not to your God but that seems to become a secondary consideration.

When a few million of your own countrymen, women and children are also labled as the enemy (though perhaps not being of the same organised religion) - is this bad thing also to be thought and excused and then become a good thing in the eyes of this organised religion or is it to be thought a necessary sacrifice to a god of war?   

To me both the God of organised religions and war are human constructs. Perhaps both can now be sacrificed to a personal God of peace?