Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
(May 17, 2010 at 4:36 pm)tackattack Wrote: Yes I have read the Bible
So, where are the good parts? I've read most of it. Nothing presented to me as moral and good by any of you christians actually IS good. I'm still waiting..... Oh yeah, that one stolen sentence doesn't count about do unto others. That was stolen from other philosophies, ones that say the same thing. The bible just surrounded the sentence with cruelty and horrors and lies about magic filling the rest of the book.
Quote:As you can see it does actually say the word homosexual.. which is an improper use of modern language not in context with the closest approximation of the original, IMO. I posted thouroughly in another thread my problems with homosexuality being a sin in the Bible.
The modern translations don't use the original wordings. You wondered why the older ones had the word. They don't. The newer translations/revisions use it.
Quote:I am not forcing any theocracies on you, so lumping me with some percieved threat you feel is counterproductive. I actually wholly push for seperation of church and state when I share my political views in public.
I never said you were personally doing it. Just that your god licking buddies would, and that I think you would let them.
Quote:To answer your questions:
Why does your god bring the hellbound back to life to make them go through that? You can believe that your consciousness continues after you die or you don't you're mixing the 2 concepts here.
So, even if their minds were somehow still functional without cells and electricity, why would your god punish them? Why not just take everyone into his heaven club? And if he really doesn't want them there, just send them to wherever dogs go when they die. Why punish? The bible answers that. Your godboy is vengeful, angry, jealous, etc. Great personality points, eh? You worship the devil you believe in. You just don't realize it yet.
Quote:The consciousness though should be accountable for it's choices.
That's pretty sick that you would accept blame for stuff beyond the natural consequences of what happens during your life. There is no bad natural consequence for not feeling the love emotion about someone, yet your jealous egotistical god punishes people for not loving him.
Quote:If you would be so kind as to re-list the laws which you feel you could be stoned for doing, so I don't have to wade through all the cynical and snarky commentary then I'd be happy to address them. The only one adressed in this post was homosexuality.
Well, let's see, the homo thing only counts if I feel like being with another woman, but maybe I feel like playing with a friendly dick or two that day, what happens then? Well, I'm not married, so if I have some consentual nonharmful fun, you christians are ordered by god to kill me. Stoning or just death some other way, whatever, I'm going to count nonstoning death sentences too. Maybe I feel like holding another god before your god, so I dance and laugh publicly about my flower garden fairies. Oops, death again. Oh no, I'm wearing both hemp and cotton, death again, my field has tomatoes and basil, both next to each other, I hope my will is still in my desk. I talked back to my parents a few times. I've collected herbs and made teas out of them, making me a witch, it goes on and on. If you really have read the bible, and you don't keep deciding it means the opposite of what it actually says, you will see my imminent death many times over. There are also risks of further death even if I were to blindly follow all the godrules. Let's say I go to market and on the way I am attacked and raped. Let's say there are only 3 witnesses who rescue me afterwards. I will be killed for adultery. Why did your god make these hideous laws? Why would you follow this religion and trick yourself into thinking they don't reeeeeally mean what they say clearly in words?
May 18, 2010 at 3:20 pm (This post was last modified: May 18, 2010 at 3:22 pm by fr0d0.)
That does indeed sum up some people. You present them with sound reasoning which they ignore and then go repeat the question to someone else. No point learning all that rhetoric if you can't regurgitate it at every opportunity. We need a label so's not to waste time on these people.
May 18, 2010 at 6:51 pm (This post was last modified: May 18, 2010 at 6:59 pm by Scented Nectar.)
(May 18, 2010 at 12:07 pm)Watson Wrote: You really haven't listened to or even considered anything I or anyone else said, have you Scented? :/
What is it you think I've missed?
(May 18, 2010 at 3:20 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: That does indeed sum up some people. You present them with sound reasoning which they ignore and then go repeat the question to someone else. No point learning all that rhetoric if you can't regurgitate it at every opportunity. We need a label so's not to waste time on these people.
The sound reasoning you're referring to, well, you have to actually present it before I can ignore it.
May 19, 2010 at 2:53 am (This post was last modified: May 19, 2010 at 2:54 am by tackattack.)
(May 18, 2010 at 8:50 am)Scented Nectar Wrote:
(May 17, 2010 at 4:36 pm)tackattack Wrote: Yes I have read the Bible
So, where are the good parts? I've read most of it. Nothing presented to me as moral and good by any of you christians actually IS good. I'm still waiting..... Oh yeah, that one stolen sentence doesn't count about do unto others. That was stolen from other philosophies, ones that say the same thing. The bible just surrounded the sentence with cruelty and horrors and lies about magic filling the rest of the book.
Good is of course relative, but I think all of it's good for a read, I've read worse. Do I need to quote all the exploits of Jesus/ disciples doing good deeds, healing, helping, filling the needs of the outcast and needy? Should I quote the good rulest to follow?
The court must not kill anybody on circumstantial evidence Ex. 23:7
The court must not punish anybody who was forced to do a crime Deut. 22:26
Judge righteously Lev. 19:15
The court must not punish anybody who was forced to do a crime Deut. 22:26
The court must not kill anybody on circumstantial evidence Ex. 23:7
The court must not execute through a majority of one; at least a majority of two is required Ex. 23:2
Lend to the poor and destitute Ex. 22:24
Not to press them for payment if you know they don't have it Ex. 22:24
Not to insult or harm anybody with words Lev. 25:17
Not to cheat a convert monetarily Ex. 22:20
Not to insult or harm a convert with words Ex. 22:20
plus lots more but I'm tired...
Of course it was "stolen" from previous religions. All religions are about a "God", many have different perspectives on his characteristics, or are sectioning him until he looks like a pantheon. As we learn more about the world we live in and God and Nature, our understanding grows and we keep the ideas that were right and redefine our concept of God. Similar to the way languages evlove, change meaning and grow, our undestanding of God grows. If you're going to cherry pick the parts you've read with such extreme bias, then perhaps you shouldn't use it as a reference.
Quote:As you can see it does actually say the word homosexual.. which is an improper use of modern language not in context with the closest approximation of the original, IMO. I posted thouroughly in another thread my problems with homosexuality being a sin in the Bible.
The modern translations don't use the original wordings. You wondered why the older ones had the word. They don't. The newer translations/revisions use it.
I don't wonder why the Koine Greek didn't use the word I know they didn't. The english translations from KJV on do until you get to the more very recent translation which try and get back to the original meaning. Paul was celibate and obviously saw any sexual desire as a weakness. He simply made up some words, which when seperated don't even come close to homosexual, which weren't used like that anywhere else in the language.[/tangent]
Quote:I am not forcing any theocracies on you, so lumping me with some percieved threat you feel is counterproductive. I actually wholly push for seperation of church and state when I share my political views in public.
I never said you were personally doing it. Just that your god licking buddies would, and that I think you would let them.
Several times you've had a few ad hominem attacks, both incorrect Euthyphro Dilemma and genetic fallacy. I would have no problems standing up for you and your freedoms, or anyone elses, at anytime or anywhere. Your presumptions are vapid and predictable, but you're readily welcome to have any opinions of me yoou want. If you can't get the chip off your shoulder though I'll probably be a lot less willing to communicate in the future, which is what a lot of people want I'm sure.
Quote:To answer your questions:
Why does your god bring the hellbound back to life to make them go through that? You can believe that your consciousness continues after you die or you don't you're mixing the 2 concepts here.
So, even if their minds were somehow still functional without cells and electricity, why would your god punish them? Why not just take everyone into his heaven club? And if he really doesn't want them there, just send them to wherever dogs go when they die. Why punish? The bible answers that. Your godboy is vengeful, angry, jealous, etc. Great personality points, eh? You worship the devil you believe in. You just don't realize it yet.
If you had a a perfect place to call home, then invited almost the exact opposite into it, it would no longer be a perfect place corrcect? He doesn't want to change us, he wants us to change. That's what I believe hell is, an eternity outside God's house. To some that's not all so bad, we can party on the lawn or whatever... but for me, if it's going to be for eternity.. I'd want the best. I am influenced by the Devil at times, but God and the devil are not the same being according to the book you're quoting.
Quote:The consciousness though should be accountable for it's choices.
That's pretty sick that you would accept blame for stuff beyond the natural consequences of what happens during your life. There is no bad natural consequence for not feeling the love emotion about someone, yet your jealous egotistical god punishes people for not loving him.
I'm not following your rant. Could you please define "stuff beyond the natural consequences of what happens during your life" So I have some reference as to what you're talking about.
Quote:If you would be so kind as to re-list the laws which you feel you could be stoned for doing, so I don't have to wade through all the cynical and snarky commentary then I'd be happy to address them. The only one adressed in this post was homosexuality.
Well, let's see, the homo thing only counts if I feel like being with another woman, but maybe I feel like playing with a friendly dick or two that day, what happens then? Well, I'm not married, so if I have some consentual nonharmful fun, you christians are ordered by god to kill me. Stoning or just death some other way, whatever, I'm going to count nonstoning death sentences too. Maybe I feel like holding another god before your god, so I dance and laugh publicly about my flower garden fairies. Oops, death again. Oh no, I'm wearing both hemp and cotton, death again, my field has tomatoes and basil, both next to each other, I hope my will is still in my desk. I talked back to my parents a few times. I've collected herbs and made teas out of them, making me a witch, it goes on and on. If you really have read the bible, and you don't keep deciding it means the opposite of what it actually says, you will see my imminent death many times over. There are also risks of further death even if I were to blindly follow all the godrules. Let's say I go to market and on the way I am attacked and raped. Let's say there are only 3 witnesses who rescue me afterwards. I will be killed for adultery. Why did your god make these hideous laws? Why would you follow this religion and trick yourself into thinking they don't reeeeeally mean what they say clearly in words?
All the laws you quoted are mosianic laws. Messianic Judaism is adherent to those laws verbatim, Christianity is adherent to them where they agree with the heart and societies laws. Where the different sects of Christianity differ is in their doctrine, some (I would say few) but not a majority adhere fundamentally and literally to every word in the Bible both New and Old testament. My God didn't make theese laws... man did. You're confusing Moses' law and the "royal law" of God. Moses added the "Laws of Moses" for transgressions of the people and were supposed to be temporary and Christ was supposed to replace them. Christ came and said. .no no keep those laws you need something when I'm dead and gone.. but don't be such hard asses and uses your brains silllies. Of course that wasn't a direct quote just a vicodin, nyquil, coffee translation, but I think you get the idea.
"There ought to be a term that would designate those who actually follow the teachings of Jesus, since the word 'Christian' has been largely divorced from those teachings, and so polluted by fundamentalists that it has come to connote their polar opposite: intolerance, vindictive hatred, and bigotry." -- Philip Stater, Huffington Post
always working on cleaning my windows- me regarding Johari
(May 19, 2010 at 2:53 am)tackattack Wrote: Good is of course relative, but I think all of it's good for a read, I've read worse. Do I need to quote all the exploits of Jesus/ disciples doing good deeds, healing, helping, filling the needs of the outcast and needy?
Sure, if these good acts cancel out the bad ones. They say Hitler treated dogs well, you know. Does that make everything else he did ok?
Quote:The court must not kill anybody on circumstantial evidence Ex. 23:7
It actually says "Keep thee far from a false matter; and the innocent and righteous slay thou not: for I will not justify the wicked." Where do you see anything about circumstantial evidence? Maybe you should stop listening to the preacher man and read the thing yourself. So far, that quote fully upholds killing people for bible 'crimes'.
Quote:The court must not punish anybody who was forced to do a crime Deut. 22:26
It says nothing of the sort. It says "But unto the damsel thou shalt do nothing; there is in the damsel no sin worthy of death: for as when a man riseth against his neighbour, and slayeth him, even so is this matter:" They are referring to not punishing a woman for being a rape victim only if she is betrothed. If she is not, then she is still murdered by the godlovers.
Quote:Judge righteously Lev. 19:15
That completely upholds the immoral laws, since they are considered righteous and god-commanded. "Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment: thou shalt not respect the person of the poor, nor honor the person of the mighty: but in righteousness shalt thou judge thy neighbour."
Quote:The court must not execute through a majority of one; at least a majority of two is required Ex. 23:2
It actually says "Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil; neither shalt thou speak in a cause to decline after many to wrest judgment", the last part sounding like an order to not speak out against what the multitude have judged.
Quote:Lend to the poor and destitute Ex. 22:24
That one actually says "And my wrath shall wax hot, and I will kill you with the sword; and your wives shall be widows, and your children fatherless." Wow! Nice example of goodness. What lesson do we learn from this? Will the wrathfully killed person become meat lent to the poor as charity? WTF?
Quote:Not to press them for payment if you know they don't have it Ex. 22:24
That is the same verse as above. Should I infer that after feeding the dead body to the poor, to tell them not to bother about paying you back someday?
Quote:Not to insult or harm anybody with words Lev. 25:17
Good thing it does not actually say that, since that would destroy all free speech, but let's see what it really says. "Ye shall not therefore oppress one another; but thou shalt fear thy God:for I am the LORD your God." Nothing indicating what would be oppressive, so it must be concluded that they mean anything against the god commands. The second part is a command to have an emotion, fear. Do you often love people you fear? I don't, but then again, I've never had Stockholm's Syndrome.
Quote:Not to cheat a convert monetarily Ex. 22:20
Good thing it doesn't say that, since that would make it ok to cheat non-converts. So, what does it actually say? "He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the LORD only, he shall be utterly destroyed." Wow, again! It's even worse than cheating those who are of a different religion, the real quote says to destroy them.
Quote:Not to insult or harm a convert with words Ex. 22:20
More suppression of free speech (if it's critical of converts), or it would be if that were what it actually says. It says the same as the above one.
So, what's going on here? Are you a poe? Have I been fooled by my very first poe encounter? I feel honoured.
Quote:As you can see it does actually say the word homosexual..
The english translations from KJV on do until you get to the more very recent translation which try and get back to the original meaning.
Searching the KJV on the word homosexual turned up nothing. It does not appear there.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:The consciousness though should be accountable for it's choices.
That's pretty sick that you would accept blame for stuff beyond the natural consequences of what happens during your life. There is no bad natural consequence for not feeling the love emotion about someone, yet your jealous egotistical god punishes people for not loving him.
I'm not following your rant. Could you please define "stuff beyond the natural consequences of what happens during your life" So I have some reference as to what you're talking about.
If you don't love god while alive, the worst natural consequence is nothing at all. However the religion-caused consequence that results from not having a god belief is ostracisation and possible execution depending on where you live. That's while alive. If your god were real, then on top of that would be the eternal punishment. You haven't explained why your god doesn't just let the people he doesn't want in heaven just die. Why does he make them suffer? Oh yeah, he admits that he is wrathful and jealous and all kinds of nice personality traits like that. You are a devil worshipper. I've never really conversed with one before, so this is interesting. Can you prove to me that your devildeity exists? You see, I don't believe in devils either.
Quote:All the laws you quoted are mosianic laws. Messianic Judaism is adherent to those laws verbatim, Christianity is adherent to them where they agree with the heart and societies laws. Where the different sects of Christianity differ is in their doctrine, some (I would say few) but not a majority adhere fundamentally and literally to every word in the Bible both New and Old testament. My God didn't make theese laws... man did. You're confusing Moses' law and the "royal law" of God. Moses added the "Laws of Moses" for transgressions of the people and were supposed to be temporary and Christ was supposed to replace them. Christ came and said. .no no keep those laws you need something when I'm dead and gone.. but don't be such hard asses and uses your brains silllies. Of course that wasn't a direct quote just a vicodin, nyquil, coffee translation, but I think you get the idea.
Wow, way to make stuff up. Isn't it about time you maybe read the fucking book?
May 19, 2010 at 7:34 am (This post was last modified: May 19, 2010 at 7:35 am by Watson.)
Wow, Scented, fr0do is completely right when it comes to you; you clearly have a hardcore case of selective blindness. I'm beginning to wonder if you yourself are a poe. You entirely ignored the post where tack told you he had read the book, along with many more theological philosophies and holy books, and then you went on to make up a bunch of bullshit about how you think the Bible should be interpreted and now you are even interpretting what tack said!
Isn't it about time you actually read the fucking posts you are responding to?
(May 19, 2010 at 7:34 am)Watson Wrote: Wow, Scented, fr0do is completely right when it comes to you; you clearly have a hardcore case of selective blindness. I'm beginning to wonder if you yourself are a poe. You entirely ignored the post where tack told you he had read the book, along with many more theological philosophies and holy books, and then you went on to make up a bunch of bullshit about how you think the Bible should be interpreted and now you are even interpretting what tack said!
Isn't it about time you actually read the fucking posts you are responding to?
I do mix you three up a bit. I'll try and remember that it is YOU who have never read the book you consider holy. However, Tack seems to be a bible-reader-imposter. He has been shown that everything he thinks the bible says actually says something different. Neither of you have made even the slightest case in favour of the horror book. You have just made xtianity look even worse. Baby Jesus is now crying.
