| Author | Message | ||
     Blake |
>>> *I do not have one. I wouldn’t listen to much jesus has to say because he is ‘god’ and ‘god’ does some horrific stuff in the bible. I don’t consider rape, murder and domestic abuse good character traits. Apparently you consider willful ignorance, lies and fraud good traits. You state that you've read the bible, but then state that you "wouldn’t listen to much jesus has to say because he is ‘god’ and ‘god’ does some horrific stuff in the bible." You and truth are strangers. You put yourself above our creator. That is your right I suppose. Your justifications however are dishonest and willfully ignorant. I have no inclination to attempt to teach a blaspheming hostile unbeliever truth. You've demonstrated that you are unwilling to hear it. We intentionally killed millions of Germans and Japanese during WW-II. Why haven't you shunned your country? Is it because those actions, as horrific as they were, were justifiable for the greater good of humanity? You hold God to a higher standard? LOL! You are the child rebelling against the wisdom of loving parents, the creation denying the creator. If you had millions of brothers and sisters and your father found some of them to be destructive and of evil intent behaving as an infection festering and threatening the health of the family, why would you question his eliminating or punishing them for your sake, for the sake of preserving that which is good and desirable for all? Again, your ignorance and false claim about reading the entire bible has been well proved, at least if reading means to actually comprehend and consider what is written. The principle of the new covenant is central to the Christian faith. That which was decreed under the old covenant was left behind once the new covenant had taken effect. Just as children who become adults no longer are held to the strict rules of their youth imposed by their parents, so too God through Jesus Christ has allowed humanity similar latitude. Educate yourself and drop your premise that God is behaving badly in the bible whenever people suffer. Study the history and context and try to learn why that suffering occurred. Then read the Gospels and learn what Jesus taught. Then come and talk to me. Until then, you are wasting my time, as there is no point in me having to teach you scripture line by line. It's there if you truly care about learning. If not, then I'm not interested in further debate. I reject that you cannot have a favorite parable. Fact is you didn't know what a parable was. You seem to think that a parable can be a portion of the bible, parts of it that some may not accept literally. That is false. A parable is a story told to illustrate a point. Okay, I'll change the question: Which of Jesus' parables did you find most troubling? Did you read them or not? Of course not. You haven't actually read the bible. You've been led down the thorny path and smothered with lies. Not a good way to live. | ||
| Slaughter |
Whisperstealth - My comment should have ended with a smiley - I am afterall an ATHEIST Go figure | ||
| Blake |
>>> If my ignorance is ‘bewildering’ this should be an easy question for you to answer. Aready stated and proved. Your very first reference claimed that "God ordered two bears to kill 42 children." That was false and ignorant on three levels. The scholarly analysis indicates that "children" is not the best translation as the Hebrew word used is also used to describe young men elsewhere in the old testament. The young men were not said to have been killed, and nowhere was it stated that god ordered the event. Much of your diatribe follows suit in that your accusations/characterizations of events are neither accurate nor honest. (Message edited by blake on January 14, 2011) | ||
| Tom_b |
Superdave.. You REALLY need to get outside more dude. I didn't even want to read all that blather. I REALLY would not want to type it GEEZE.. Away from religious blathering.. I'm glad to hear that AZ is passing a buffer law. It takes a tradgedy like this before they do. Like i was saying until a groundswell or something happens before people realy care nothing happens | ||
| Blake |
>>> *why the ultimatum? If I don’t believe what you do then I’m less of a person somehow and not worthy of the respect of a ‘christian’? Not my point. In any debate, honesty, integrity and some level of accurate knowledge of subject matter are required. Doesn't matter what the subject may be. It's also obvious that you have a litany of cut and past blurbs that you pride yourself in presenting en mass. That is not what comprises respectful debate. That is blogging. Go find your own web site to start your own anti-Christian, anti-God blog. I'm not interested in spending my time answering a litany of cut and paste ignorance. (Message edited by blake on January 13, 2011) | ||
| Slaughter |
If we're not already in HELL - how do you explain THIS???  | ||
| Xdigitalx |
Who thought of this law?? and Are they running for POTUS?? | ||
| Whisperstealth |
Slaughter, Thanks for the clarification. My Foster father loved Okra, grew it in his garden. Would eat bowls of the stuff. I guess you could say there were moments of hell in which Okra was present and accounted for  | ||
| Kenm123t |
If you want to control the protests at funerals Sell tickets. I know this sounds strange but how fast can you get a gate crasher arrested! Gate crash the Super Bowl and you spend at least a few hours locked up on a trespassing charge. Once you sell tickets its a private venue and we don't need a special new law that can be overturned. Public 1st admendment rights do not include treaspassing. | ||
| Liquorwhere |
To be insulting is not my intent, however I have no problem being irreverent when it comes to religion as see no need to respect something that has proven to be harmful to society time and time again. I could use terms like b*llsh*t etc etc but while I’m fine being irreverent, I do not care to stoop to derogatory name calling just to get a rise out of people. Just to be clear. I am an atheist. Confirmed, not changing, atheist. Now I must take exception to your stated remark. Just to be clear, there would be no society without religion. All societies, either poly-theistic or mono-theistic were based around the common belief in the God or Gods the community ascribed. That is the glue that held them together. Christianity, whether you believe it as fact or not, is a guide on how to live properly from food to eat, to the way we organize our laws to how we assemble and distribute wealth and power and wage war and the list goes on and on and on. I think what you may want to look at is that towns or cultures, city states or nations have a common identity from the earliest recordings of historical data up to current day models that show religious worship as the basis of all successful societies. You can choose not to believe, but it is disrespectful to try and belittle another's belief's as fairy tales. Like it or not the Bible, Torah and even parts of the Koran are historical documents recounting the time of their writing and related to posterity how they found it best to live in peace in their society. Some get twisted, yes. That happens, but that does not invalidate the original intent of the message. PS I really have a problem with Islam, but that is another thread and another time.... | ||
| Blake |
Steve, That okra appears to be frozen. Ruh-Roh! | ||
| Littlebuggles |
Funerals should never be a place for "protest". What these people do is wrong and should not be allowed. It's not free speech, it is interfering with another's mourning and laying to rest what remains of the loved one they have lost. It's very sad for the family and friends of her and all others involved in this tragic event. I believe it's worse for us as a nation if we allow this sort of impropriety to go on. A nine year old girl was killed because she was part of her student council and wanted to meet someone in the system, one of the leaders. This is perhaps an argument for another soap box but I feel inclined to share it here because it seems appropriate: Many are against the death sentence. I've seen a few of very good men corrupted by the evil they protect society against, and are brought low by it. Intelligent, productive members of society who somehow loose themselves by their association with the criminals that have been placed in facilities to keep the rest of our society safe. The truly wicked continue to have a very negative impact on society from inside the jails and prisons. The only way to stop their leeching of morals is to remove them from the living, so that those who live can continue to have good lives. Whether they believe in God, or not. I know you guys are trying to steer this conversation back to the point as well as make it civil but I feel it’s important to address these issues. Dave, you want to call wickedness a difference of opinion: "How do you defend a deity that condones murder for someone with a differing opinion?" But you quote these scriptures(excerpts for ease of communication): “...that hath wrought wickedness...” and “Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die.” The act of violence that took the lives and brought pain and suffering into the lives of so many others could very well be called wickedness. By definition though, perhaps we should argue that the shooter simply had a difference of opinion in the right to life of those he murdered and attempted to murder? By following your argument it is easy to reach that conclusion. However I trust that you aren't saying that, are you? You’ve got the right to not believe in God, you can even use really poorly translated scripture as your basis if you want to. That shouldn’t make you feel angry towards those who will continue to worship. As the scripture quoted above states, some people people truly need to be removed, because of their wickedness (or they will destroy the lives of others). This little girl could not have been one of them. | ||
| Superdavetfft |
Tom_b *I completely agree, unfortunately it’s -1 outside so I’m trapped inside but that gives me time to participate in this ‘lively’ debate. I do see that people’s emotions are somewhat on the rise though which is unfortunate and wasn’t my intent. Theology is a fascinating topic whether you approach it historically or try to analyze its relationship with society. Blake… you still didn’t answer my single question. Plus you still fail to cite any evidence and if that wasn’t enough you’re slinging insults and calling me a liar. Of course while this is troubling it isn’t surprising as you are reacting as many people do when their faith is questioned. You claim its cut and paste ‘blurbs’? That’s how you cite evidence, provide the source of the information for the fact one is presenting. I’m backing up what I’m saying with proof. If you disagree with the proof I show then present your proof to the contrary. It’s too bad that grown adults cannot have a conversation about religion that doesn’t end in name calling and accusations of lying. This is another reason religion is a problem, it can’t even be discussed openly without people reacting emotionally instead of thinking. Unfortunately I agree this debate has concluded. Liquorwhere; I can’t dispute the impact religion has had on our culture, that’s actually a large part of the idea I’m trying to propose. Just think of how many wars have been fought in the same of some god? Think of the destruction and the cost, let alone the cost in human life. Now imagine if those resources would have been directed toward scientific achievement. Imagine if all the FINANCIAL resources of the church were actually given to the poor as christ instructed instead of building another massive building to worship in? Anybody have a relative with cancer, juvenile diabetes? What if those dollars given to the church went to cancer research? anyway that’s my point, just imagine a world without religion…. Littlebuggles; >>Dave, you want to call wickedness a difference of opinion: "How do you defend a deity that condones murder for someone with a differing opinion?" *no, I’m stating the bible says to kill those that do not believe in god (have a different opinion on god) and I’m stating that’s insane … >>…That shouldn’t make you feel angry towards those who will continue to worship. *On the contrary, I harbor no ill will towards any believer and the posts show that. >>As the scripture quoted above states, some people people truly need to be removed, because of their wickedness (or they will destroy the lives of others). This little girl could not have been one of them. * You say ‘removed’, god of the bible says ‘death’ so which is it? Also, who draws the line as to what is ‘wicked’? If it’s the god of the bible we’re all in trouble because I’m assuming everyone here has worked on a Sunday at least once and to do so is punishable by death according to scripture. superdave | ||
| Blake |
Dave, A willfull falsehood is a lie. If stated out of ignorance, it is misrepresentation, an ignorant mistake, but still a falsehood. Declaring that the Bible is "fairy tales" is a lie; there is no other way to state that fact. Pretending that you intend no insult is laughable. Either you are really insensitive, or really blind to your own writing. >>> If it’s the god of the bible we’re all in trouble because I’m assuming everyone here has worked on a Sunday at least once and to do so is punishable by death according to scripture. Another falsehood on at least two levels. You are way too eager to swallow the ignorant mischaracterizations of anti-Christian Bible-haters. See if you can figure out why it is a lie. Are you interested in truth, or just pushing your atheist preconceptions? The truth is that you have no idea if there is or is not a God, a creator. You certainly cannot prove that there is no God, or no creator. You follow your belief purely on faith. The faith of believers is based on evidence, namely the Bible and all of creation, truth. If you really want to have a productive discussion about the validity and truths of the Bible and Christianity, I'll oblige and make a new thread just for that. Just realize that falsehood will not be treated kindly. | ||
| Blake |
>>> Just think of how many wars have been fought in the same of some god? None of the really bad ones in our time. Aside from those waged/instigated by islamists, how many in the past 2000 years? Do tell. | ||
| Fuzzz |
I don't know about that one Blake, wasn't Hitler pushing the religion of evolution, ie the master race? | ||
| Slaughter |
Pastafarians have NEVER started a war, organized a boycott, blown up anything... but having faith in a beer volcano and midget in the afterlife... what's not to like? (oops almost forgot the stripper) | ||
| Superdavetfft |
you make a valid point mr slaughter... May His Noodly Appendage bless you! | ||
| Blake |
Don't back out Dave. Be better than that. | ||
| Blake |
I've gone to a lot of trouble to answer some of your misreadings of the Bible and organized a new topic as you previously suggested. Now you are backing out? Two examples ... "God endorses rape" you said. As evidence, you offer the following quote from the Bible: >>> Judges 5:30 (NAB) They must be dividing the spoils they took: there must be a damsel or two for each man, Spoils of dyed cloth as Sisera's spoil, an ornate shawl or two for me in the spoil. (Judges 5:30 NAB) That may be talking about rape, not sure, adultery at least. But Dave, the passage you quote is about a Canaanite king, and enemy of Israel. His daughter, the princess, is answering her queen's question wondering about her king's prolonged delay in returning from battle. Unbeknown to both of them, he had been killed by the Israelites. (Read prior verses for the story of how he gets his head bashed in.) The princess basically is telling her distraught queen, oh the king is probably just getting him some conquered widow nookie (customary among Israel's enemies of the day) and gathering lots of loot. It's imperative to read the entire chapter to understand what is being said and by whom. Above all, it's a huge mistake to cut and paste such elementary misreadings--I call them lies--from dishonest, lying, anti-Christian, God-haters. They are not reliable. Mostly they are falsehoods. You're better than that. (Message edited by Blake on January 13, 2011) | ||
| Blake |
The second... >>> god himself endorses rape on more than one occasion. That is outright blasphemy, a bald-faced malicious lie. From Mosaic law prescribing the penalties/consequences for pre-marital sex you conclude that "God himself endorses rape"? >>> Deuteronomy 22:28-29 (NLT) If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her. I cannot find a translation of that verse with the word "rape" in it anywhere. The NLT translation that I find says... "Suppose a man has intercourse with a young woman who is a virgin but is not engaged to be married." Nothing in there about "rape" as you so eagerly accept from whatever source you are being duped. I notice that your cherry-picked passages are taken from a wide range of various translations. Did you read all of them? Are you choosing the wording that most tends to offend you, or are you searching to understand the most accurate meaning (truth)? I'm guessing the former. Is that a good way to seek truth? :/ No, it is the exact opposite. You are distancing yourself from truth. Actually from what you've offered here, you can't get much further from truth. Please reconsider and educate yourself on the truth. | ||
| Littlebuggles |
* You say ‘removed’, god of the bible says ‘death’ so which is it? Also, who draws the line as to what is ‘wicked’? If it’s the god of the bible we’re all in trouble because I’m assuming everyone here has worked on a Sunday at least once and to do so is punishable by death according to scripture. Well we draw the line once we've read the scriptures and judged them and their content for ourselves. Both as individuals and as societies, we also study history and it becomes rather compelling as to what is right, and what is wrong. Dave, you may have read the Bible, but you either didn't understand what you read, or I'll re-assert that you read a VERY bad translation of it. I have a good friend who has gone from being somewhat religious to being an angry atheist after his several deployments. It's difficult to see the pain and suffering that he saw and not want to place blame for it all. I believe he points the finger at God and feels angry for the horrible things he saw. I believe he also never really understood the nature of God, or the power He gave us in allowing us to make our own choices. People do some really terrible things to each other sometimes. This recent tragedy in Arizona is another event that proves that. | ||
| Superdavetfft |
Littlebuggles; First thank you for a polite response. >>Well we draw the line once we've read the scriptures and judged them and their content for ourselves * When 'we' read the scriptures and judge their content .... that infers a human interpretation and then a human judgment of that interpretation. If god is perfect the bible is the word of god then there shouldn't be much up for interpretation in the first place and that's how the extremists operate. They look at these religious texts and follow them to the letter. They don't draw a line or judge the text, they take it as 'GODS LAW' and act upon it which can then lead to tragedy. If you review the laws of the bible many of them are punishable by death, including worshiping another god (aka having a different opinion on religion) Deuteronomy 13 6 If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods …. … 9 But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. Read the entire passage, it is quite clear that this is a capital offense IMHO; http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuter onomy%2013:1-10&version=KJV What is there in this passage to misunderstand? If I have a poor version or translation of this passage please point me to an alternate website with your version of this passage. So to center our debate on a single topic, is killing someone because the bible says so the right thing to do? Is killing someone because they worship a different god just? If not, then is god unjust in this case and if so then how can he be infallible and also unjust? BTW there are a number of actions that require death according to the bible; http://www.religioustolerance.org/exe_bibl1.htm How many of these would you really have somebody killed for? Some ARE evil I'll grant you that, but are all of them? Are ALL of them worthy of death? Oh and I place no blame on 'god' for the war. Wars are completely man-made phenomena. So to sum up, I believe the bible promotes violence, sometimes justly, sometimes not. The point being, if you don't agree with ALL of the bible then you're effectively saying that you do not agree with god regarding the passage you disagree with. According to the bible you are required to follow ALL of gods laws so how would you reconcile not following the ones you disapprove of? Again I believe these laws read very clearly, if you have an alternate translation that shows something different just post a link..... | ||
| Slaughter |
Bob Dylan:
| ||
| Blake |
I love that Slaughter man. LOL! Dave, >>> If god is perfect the bible is the word of god then there shouldn't be much up for interpretation in the first place and that's how the extremists operate. They look at these religious texts and follow them to the letter. They don't draw a line or judge the text, they take it as 'GODS LAW' and act upon it which can then lead to tragedy. If what you say is true, then why don't we see people being killed en mass for working on Sunday or for violating any of the other old covenant laws mandated by Moses thousands of years ago while the Israelites, a horde of escaped slaves, were wandering the desert? >>> If you review the laws of the bible many of them are punishable by death, including worshiping another god (aka having a different opinion on religion) If you understand the context (who's law was this, when and why was it enacted, for what ends, and to whom did those subject to it seek to apply it) and the principles of old covenant versus new covenant it is not difficult to grasp the truth and vital value of the Mosaic laws. To whom was God speaking via the Mosaic laws that he mandated? With whom did God establish his covenant? What was their situation such that God's very harsh, strict, unyielding laws made perfect sense? In the Mosaic laws, you are reading the equivalent of a legal contract between God and his chosen people, the Israelites. What was the intention of that agreement, and the result? What happened when the Israelites broke their end of the contract? You can no more read a few snippets of Old Testament biblical history and make sweeping generalized conclusions than if you read a Buell service manual and chose to only consider the numerous texts warning of "serious injury or death". If you did, you'd likely conclude that Buell motorcycles endorse maiming and killing people! Do you see that? Would it be an accurate statement? No, of course not. That is partly what you've done in your biased interpretation of the Bible. You're (hey I got it right!  ) doing the same with the Bible. Your idea that all the books of the bible are perfect and are the word of God is a failure in understanding. I would ask you, how can an accurate/true accounting of events--we call it "history"--not be of God (not be truth)? I set up a new topic for all this kind of discussion. Why not take advantage of it. I see an interest in truth seeking. I hope you'll rejoin the discussion. I am sorry for offending and pushing you away from thoughtful dialogue. I should count to ten before hitting the "post message" button sometimes. I think you can be a reasonable man who can recognize truth. Am I right? I hope you too can realize that some of the absolutist statements you've made that I strongly disagree with are VERY offensive. The effect is much the same as if you were making the same accusations against my father. (Message edited by blake on January 15, 2011) | ||
| Blake |
Fuzz, >>> I don't know about that one Blake, wasn't Hitler pushing the religion of evolution, ie the master race? Interesting perspective, eugenics, yes. Another of the atheist ideologies. It was actually very big in America at the time before WW-II. No telling what that war might have in the end prevented. Imagine if eugenics had taken hold here. | ||
| Blake |
Westboro wins. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110302/ap_on_re_us/us _supreme_court_funeral_protests | ||
| Xdigitalx |
if they indeed do start to play harder like they say they will... it will be their undoing. IMHO ... I guess it is up to each state now to make their own laws about protesting at/near funerals. | ||
| Xdigitalx |
I was furious when I heard about it today. I can't imagine what the family is feeling. | ||
| Firebolt020283 |
I have a question...These people are a "church" right? So if they are that means they have funerals right? that being said I wounder what they would think if people went to their funeral and protested them. I mean the supreme court gave them permission to desecrate peoples funerals so why can't people do the same to them. |
