What's not to love?

[Minimalist]

Make the fuckers play defense, Cinj. Their miracles are absurd enough....how much more ridiculous are they without any sort of godboy?

[Disciple]

....
Hmm? "thought crimes" not so much. What he said was "if you look at a woman to lust after her, you have commited adultery with her already in your heart" He didnt say you cant admire the beauty of a woman. What he meant by that was, we shoulnt look at a woman and think... "man, id like to fuck that, and i think im gonna try" He knew that thoughts lead to actions. Im not a woman but im pretty sure they dont want to be objectified as sex objects anyway. I dont see where there should be a problem with this.

...

This isn't directly related to the conversation at hand but anyways...

The verse you're referencing, Matt 5:28, probably wasn't originally meant to be taken as being against "lusting." The word translated "lust" really means "desire" or "covet" and it's used in a positive light in the NT several times. The word translated "woman" in Greek I'm told can mean either woman or wife. If it's used in the context of marriage, it means wife, not woman. Well guess what. Adultery in the biblical sense always means specifically sex with another man's wife, not simply fornication. The verse probably should be read something like "But I tell you that anyone who looks at another man's wife with desire has already committed adultery with her in his heart." Otherwise, if it meant "any woman" that would include your own wife, and the entire book of Songs would be sin. There's even an early church father who interpreted this verse as being against coveting a man's wife (not "lusting" at women in general).

The More You Know!

thanks for your imput sir. Im sure the bible is written as it should be. Some parts are to be taken literal some are to be taken metaphoriclly usually you can tell the diffenence by the context in which its used. Like when jesus said " I have come to save the world" world means the people. When paul says " do not comform to the world" he means the world system. What jesus says here is pretty plain and easy to understand. Dont over complexify it. (yeah thats a word) You should not look on a woman to lust after her. I think this is a good idea wheather jesus said it or not. peace.

[radorth]

Rad doesn't understand the concepts of "historical fiction", "divine geneologies", "legendary exaggerations", and "mythicized tradition". To him, myths and legends are facts and procedurals (except, of course, everyone else's).

John Locke believed in pink unicorns too?

Speaking of myths, "John Locke was a deist" takes the prize.

Unbelievable

---

So, in this one area, it would behoove all atheists to accept the "historical" Jesus.

Most atheists (not all) prefer to live in denial and claim they are facing reality.

It is the devil in the details per the NT that is really the rough part to swallow, which I, of course, as an atheist, do not.

Of course it is hard to swallow. The Sermon on the Mount and some of Jesus' parables would wreck more lifesyles and worldviews than anything ever said or written. So even the atheist H.G. Wells admitted, but he was an intellectually honest person with a grip on reality. The details themselves prove the truth of the NT. Mere inventors would have left them out, i.e. Jesus' lack of omniscience, changing his mind on at least one occasion, etc.

Disbelief has nothing to do with evidence, as I have proved over and over. Most atheists would not serve Jesus if he came down healed their mother of stage 12 cancer.

"Thanks, what took ya, and why did you kill all those babies in the flood?", yada yada. God knows that, so he doesn't bother.

[Tea Earl Grey Hot]

thanks for your imput sir. Im sure the bible is written as it should be. Some parts are to be taken literal some are to be taken metaphoriclly usually you can tell the diffenence by the context in which its used. Like when jesus said " I have come to save the world" world means the people. When paul says " do not comform to the world" he means the world system. What jesus says here is pretty plain and easy to understand. Dont over complexify it. (yeah thats a word) You should not look on a woman to lust after her. I think this is a good idea wheather jesus said it or not. peace.

You may read what you like into it. I'm just saying the meaning you get from it probably wasn't the intended meaning. And I would hope a Christian would be careful to know the true meaning of Matt 5:28 because it's really the only verse in the entire Bible that Christians use to come up with all of this strange and unnatural averting the eyes business (some might appeal to Job 31, but that was really about not looking at a certain pagan idol).

[Cinjin]

thanks for your imput sir. Im sure the bible is written as it should be.

and you're sure why? Simply because you want it to be?

Some parts are to be taken literal some are to be taken metaphoriclly

And only the True Christians™ can tell us when that takes place right? *facepalm*

You should not look on a woman to lust after her. I think this is a good idea wheather jesus said it or not.

First of all - No one gives a fuck what some 2000 year-old dead jewish con-man had to say about women.
Secondly, fighting your natural inclination to procreate is fool-hearty. Men are genetically programmed to have sex and fighting those urges only leads to pent up aggression and unhealthy sexual misconduct.

You sir are an idiot and anyone who follows your instruction is taking advice from a person educated by a religious cult ........... ALWAYS a bad idea.

[Faith No More]

I love how anyone who doesn't think Jesus was a great guy isn't 'intellectualy honest.'

[Zen Badger]

So, in this one area, it would behoove all atheists to accept the "historical" Jesus.

Most atheists (not all) prefer to live in denial and claim they are facing reality.

Well, when you produce some contemporary accounts of his life and ministry we will stand corrected, won't we.

But as usual,and like every over theist given this challenge, you will ignore it.

Because like every other theist, you have fuck all.

[DeistPaladin]

Of course it is hard to swallow. The Sermon on the Mount and some of Jesus' parables would wreck more lifesyles and worldviews than anything ever said or written.

What lifestyles and worldviews do you suppose we preserve by not being Christians? The only moral command in Christianity is to be gullible.

Jesus will forgive everything other than rejection of Christianity. From murder to watching internet porn, Jesus will absolve any sin I could possibly have committed and then do it all over again every day for the rest of my life. All I have to do is believe without evidence and against all evidence in order to accept even that which makes no sense.

and Christians say I have no basis for my morality?

[Godscreated]

I see by your signature you have no scruples. If you had a standard you would give it up to do away with the church, so what makes you any different than what you believe the church to be.

Huh? I have standards. My sig just states that if the church starts a religious war, I will be against it.

No my friend, your sig says if a war begins and the church is on one side..., to me this says nothing about the church starting a war.

[downbeatplumb]

You should not look on a woman to lust after her. I think this is a good idea wheather jesus said it or not. peace.

It is not a good idea.

lust is a 'thought crime' it does no harm at all.
But how many adherents of your cult have punished themselves for this 'crime' how many thought less of themselves,how many considered themselves doomed to hell.

And most of he time its unconsious, you find yourself glancing at a nice pair of legs under a mini skirt or noticing a pert pair of breasts. Without any thought going into the action at all, its not my fault, I'm a man and we notice these things, so this 'good idea' is setting people up to fail so the preacher can say 'you are all sinners' in the confident knowledge that there is no way they can't be.