God is a Mass Murderer

[Fake Messiah]

More murders have been committed in the holy name of God than for any other reason.

Yes, the inconvenient truth

[Nay_Sayer]

No, I assume that an Egyptian in his age must've saw this -live-; I was there when it happened and I smelled the crisped corpses:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/August_201...a_massacre

so it's ironic to speak about religion, while forgetting about these army fucks. Religion is a scapegoat for murder. You keep that in mind

It was a commentary on you of all people calling anyone else's posting 'disgusting'.

Fun Fact my true faith doesn't have a pedophile prophet

[AniKoferBo]

Do you believe this just because it's written in the Bible? 

You realize that book isn't true, right? There's no reason to believe that any God has ever commanded any murder.

Most of US know that the bible, the koran, and pretty much all "holy" books were invented abd written by humans.

Unfirtubately there is a HUGE section of the population who take it as the literal word of their deity (usually picking and choosing which sections should apply) and then acting on, or at least supporting those who do act on, the texts of the book.

I have read statements from Christians who have said they would "sacrifice" (murder) their kids if they believe god told them to.

So random voice in the head and so long, kiddies.

the bible not only contradicts itself, it contradicts common decency. so do the koran and the torah . all religions have massive continuity and logic problems. i no longer believe any of them. the god of the bible (the males who wrote it) is cruel.

[WinterHold]

Do you believe this just because it's written in the Bible? 

You realize that book isn't true, right? There's no reason to believe that any God has ever commanded any murder.

Most of US know that the bible, the koran, and pretty much all "holy" books were invented abd written by humans.

Unfirtubately there is a HUGE section of the population who take it as the literal word of their deity (usually picking and choosing which sections should apply) and then acting on, or at least supporting those who do act on, the texts of the book.

I have read statements from Christians who have said they would "sacrifice" (murder) their kids if they believe god told them to.

So random voice in the head and so long, kiddies.

The Quran is not invented.
+
This verse from the Quran negates what you said:

Sura 42, The Quran:
https://quran.ksu.edu.sa/index.php?l=en#...rans=en_sh

( 51 )   And it is not for any human being that Allah should speak to him except by revelation or from behind a partition or that He sends a messenger to reveal, by His permission, what He wills. Indeed, He is Most High and Wise.

If the person claiming to receive a revelation, then how would they prove it? record it on tape?? It's impossible.

if a person claimed that God talked to them behind a partition then how would they prove it? it's impossible.

If a person claimed they contacted a messenger then how would they prove it? it's impossible.

So hearing voices should be treated in a clinic.

[AniKoferBo]

Unfirtubately there is a HUGE section of the population who take it as the literal word of their deity (usually picking and choosing which sections should apply) and then acting on, or at least supporting those who do act on, the texts of the book.

I have read statements from Christians who have said they would "sacrifice" (murder) their kids if they believe god told them to.

So random voice in the head and so long, kiddies.

Right. It's a book written by people, used by people, to justify violence by people.

The trouble is people.

bum god 

[The Architect Of Fate]

If the person claiming to receive a revelation, then how would they prove it? record it on tape?? It's impossible.

So i can't be proved so indistinguishable from non existent 

if a person claimed that God talked to them behind a partition then how would they prove it? it's impossible.

So i can't be proved so indistinguishable from non existent 

If a person claimed they contacted a messenger then how would they prove it? it's impossible.

So i can't be proved so indistinguishable from non existent 

So hearing voices should be treated in a clinic.

Yes

[Fake Messiah]

if a person claimed that God talked to them behind a partition then how would they prove it? it's impossible.

It's not impossible. If someone talked to some supreme being then that being would supposedly give him some information unknown yet to humans and not just primitive nonsense and lies that make-up Koran, Bible, Urantia, and other holy books.

[AniKoferBo]

god here = the superstitious being or the superstitious killer in the religious scripts.
the point i’m making is that the bible(and many other “religious” texts,) cannot be relied on to reveal what or who god is or how god wishes for us to conduct ourselves if we take its words at literal face value.

Well, if you're defining God that way, then you've included the conclusion in the definition.

That's why most Christians in history have not read the Old Testament at literal face value. They've devoted a lot of effort to figuring out who god is or how he wishes us to conduct ourselves, beyond literal readings.

time and time again jesus clearly states that the old laws are not to change, and that he has come to uphold these laws. so all murder, slavery, childabuse and so forth should still apply.
without old testament jesus = nothing.
jesus is slightly different. it’s not so much that jesus ran around smiting and killing in full unrighteousness, like the god of the old testament. it’s a combination of several other things.Let's just assume jesus existed for argument's sake.
he was the one who introduced the concept of a hell, which is probably the sickest idea of all. yes the god of the old testament spent all of his time killing and urging his people on through acts of genocide – but there was no punishment for the dead, until the ‘gentle’ jesus came along and picked the slack up from where his father left off.to this day, this hell concept has been responsible for the mental abuse of countless children and adults alike. 

the idea that there’s a set of rules (immoral ones) that one must not break, and if you break these, no matter how trivial, nonsensical or absurd they may be; with ‘not loving him’ being the number one crime, you will be punished and tormented for eternity. it’s morally abominable.

[brewer]

Unfirtubately there is a HUGE section of the population who take it as the literal word of their deity (usually picking and choosing which sections should apply) and then acting on, or at least supporting those who do act on, the texts of the book.

I have read statements from Christians who have said they would "sacrifice" (murder) their kids if they believe god told them to.

So random voice in the head and so long, kiddies.

Right. It's a book written by people, used by people, to justify violence by people.

The trouble is people.

Are you saying that people would be better off without the bible god fantasy. That if people were honest they should reject god(s)?

Or is this just a cherry pick statement, reject the bad, believe the good.

[Belacqua]

time and time again jesus clearly states that the old laws are not to change, and that he has come to uphold these laws. 

That's true. And then he seems to change some of them. So it's not black and white. As you point out, the Bible seems to contain contradictions. 

It also depends on what we interpret the Old Testament stories to mean. Did Jesus take the genocides to be literal or figurative? Interpretations have varied. Paul gives examples of interpreting Old Testament history figuratively.

Let's just assume jesus existed for argument's sake.
he was the one who introduced the concept of a hell

I think you would have a difficult time proving this. Experts who read Hebrew and Greek and know the contemporary literature better than you or I disagree on this point. 

Early church fathers also disagreed. Origen, for example, thought that no one would spend eternity in hell. Consensus seems to have been reached officially around the year 400. But there are substantial minority traditions which disagree. Some Christians continued to believe that while the fires of hell are everlasting, the punishment there couldn't be. 

Much of the debate centers on some ambiguous Greek. Lewis Carroll, and others of his time, devoted many pages to philology attempting to prove that punishment could not be eternal. More recently a well-known scholar, who reads and translates from the originals, and teaches at Notre Dame, has published a book arguing that the original sources do not point to such punishment. 

So your confident statement here about Jesus and hell is certainly the view of some Christians, but not all of them. 

the idea that there’s a set of rules (immoral ones) that one must not break, and if you break these, no matter how trivial, nonsensical or absurd they may be; with ‘not loving him’ being the number one crime, you will be punished and tormented for eternity. it’s morally abominable.

You overstate the case. 

First, not all the rules are immoral. There are 613 of them, and some of them are just common sense. Others are just performative. Others are not things that modern people can agree with. Times change. 

The Jews knew that keeping all the rules all the time would be unreasonable, and had various ceremonies and rituals to make up for things. No one was expected to be perfect. They wrote a famous book about the only guy in history to have kept all of them. 

Christians say various things about the law. One of the big ones is that it is a stumbling block for the Jews, since it is impossible to keep. Jesus, they say, "fulfilled" the law by changing it from 613 detailed rules into one big one: love everyone as oneself. By following this one, they say you will do what is right without having to obey each of the OT prescriptions. It seems like a much more difficult rule to follow, since how we are to love everyone is ambiguous. A Christian would have to think for himself and work to obey one big difficult rule rather than the more detailed version.

However no Christian I'm aware of says that breaking one of these 613 is guaranteed to bring eternal damnation. Christians tend to be big on forgiveness, and even if a lot of them aren't as forgiving as we would like, that doesn't mean that the whole teaching is immoral. Just that they're not doing a good job. 

You're reducing the whole thing to something so simple it's really a caricature. Christianity is full of various ideas, to the point where almost nothing we can say about it is true of every Christian.