Hugs, have you been living under a rock? How can you have never, ever, heard a single contradiction in your holy book? Even if you disagreed, you still have to be aware of them. Again, this smacks of being willfully dishonest or so disgustingly ignorant, it makes me question if it's even worth it. But here's one just to humor you.
God is supposed to be all-loving. Or such is the impression the la-di-da crowd hold. But he drowns all but 8 people at one point. Let's not forget the human sacrifices either. The plagues and taking away Pharaoh's free will, a violation of the thing apologists throw around like an endless supply of frisbees. There is ZERO excuse for any of this to still make the first sentence true. If that statement isn't true, the entire character of the subject of the book is false and should be discarded as an object of worship and adherence.
I don't give a half a fuck if you say that first statement is not actually stated in the bible. I really don't. Again, recall how subjectivity demolishes any small idea that there's any truth at all (or any truth there is in it would be so obvious it hardly merits acknowledging). What matters is that there is no belief centered around it that is not irrational and has an easily contradicted point about the evil shit and the la-di-da bits. So if it's in degrees, and god is just a so-so "yeah, I can take humans or leave them" sort of personality, again, the laundry list of atrocities is more than enough justification to say that even that is a load of shit and he's nothing but a belligerent monster, completely unworthy of worship because we are regarded as nothing more than disposable ants beneath a magnifying glass.
Neo, see the bolded part in the previous paragraph for my response about there being 'no truth', or none worth giving the book itself credit for (because it's not remotely the oldest document nor religion in history).
But you disappoint me because while your points start out sounding reasonable, you start to delve into excuses and apologetics that are just so childishly pathetic it makes me wonder how you were even capable of conceiving of the stuff at the beginning. You're basically making a claim that you have a unique truth that 99.99999% of other Christians are too deluded to understand because your understanding of the bible is the right one, out of the billions of different interpretations. Do you not get how fundamentally dishonest, not to mention IMPOSSIBLE, that is? It is absolutely, like the name says, astonishing that you must see this criticism of your arguments all the damn time and still never get it through your head that there's a good reason for that.
God is supposed to be all-loving. Or such is the impression the la-di-da crowd hold. But he drowns all but 8 people at one point. Let's not forget the human sacrifices either. The plagues and taking away Pharaoh's free will, a violation of the thing apologists throw around like an endless supply of frisbees. There is ZERO excuse for any of this to still make the first sentence true. If that statement isn't true, the entire character of the subject of the book is false and should be discarded as an object of worship and adherence.
I don't give a half a fuck if you say that first statement is not actually stated in the bible. I really don't. Again, recall how subjectivity demolishes any small idea that there's any truth at all (or any truth there is in it would be so obvious it hardly merits acknowledging). What matters is that there is no belief centered around it that is not irrational and has an easily contradicted point about the evil shit and the la-di-da bits. So if it's in degrees, and god is just a so-so "yeah, I can take humans or leave them" sort of personality, again, the laundry list of atrocities is more than enough justification to say that even that is a load of shit and he's nothing but a belligerent monster, completely unworthy of worship because we are regarded as nothing more than disposable ants beneath a magnifying glass.
Neo, see the bolded part in the previous paragraph for my response about there being 'no truth', or none worth giving the book itself credit for (because it's not remotely the oldest document nor religion in history).
But you disappoint me because while your points start out sounding reasonable, you start to delve into excuses and apologetics that are just so childishly pathetic it makes me wonder how you were even capable of conceiving of the stuff at the beginning. You're basically making a claim that you have a unique truth that 99.99999% of other Christians are too deluded to understand because your understanding of the bible is the right one, out of the billions of different interpretations. Do you not get how fundamentally dishonest, not to mention IMPOSSIBLE, that is? It is absolutely, like the name says, astonishing that you must see this criticism of your arguments all the damn time and still never get it through your head that there's a good reason for that.
Religions were invented to impress and dupe illiterate, superstitious stone-age peasants. So in this modern, enlightened age of information, what's your excuse? Or are you saying with all your advantages, you were still tricked as easily as those early humans?
---
There is no better way to convey the least amount of information in the greatest amount of words than to try explaining your religious views.
---
There is no better way to convey the least amount of information in the greatest amount of words than to try explaining your religious views.
