Question for freethinkers

[Godscreated]

God didn't create evil, nor does god do evil, but enough religiously schizoid fucks ARE evil and DO evil in the name of their imaginary skywizard to keep the whole bullshit rolling.

In some ways I agree, there are religious people doing things that are evil, that is evil according to God, then there are those that do evil according to man and God ie. those who would kill abortion doctors. Let me make something clear here, I in no way support abortion, I do believe that it's murder, however the law of the land see's it differently and thus I must and do tolorate this law. Those who do murder abortion doctors should be punished for their crime and will be by God. NO one has the right to take the law into their own hands and this is also what is taught in the scriptures. Just because they do evil in the name of God that does not mean that God condone's it nor that most christians or religious people are like that.

---

A better translation will always be found whenever an uncomfortable objection is raised. No two believers are reading the same book, even if they only have one book between them.

Atheist and all nonbelievers are the worst when it comes to interpreting what the Bible says, translation is writting a book, paper or ie. from one language to another, you are talking about intrepretation not translation. Scientist often take the evidence and interpret it differently, so where's the difference, the difference is that the scientist are looking at the same wording and believers might not depending on the particular Bible translation they are reading. The King James is a good translation however it is not the best, the New American Standard is generally considered the best translation of the scriptures and if you want to see the more literal wording the Inductive Study version of the NAS is very good. As with all ancient languages we are learning more about them as more writtings are discovered.

[Autumnlicious]

...I do believe that it's murder...

So in cases of legitimized "murder", as you would have it, you would stand by?

This speaks volumes of the actual value you place on your morality and less about the act itself.

[Godscreated]

...I do believe that it's murder...

So in cases of legitimized "murder", as you would have it, you would stand by?

This speaks volumes of the actual value you place on your morality and less about the act itself.

Not sure I understand your thought.

[Autumnlicious]

If you we're to stumble across a murder attempt, would you stop it?

I don't think abortion is murder, but assuming it were in the same vein as killing another sapient human, would it not be the right thing to attempt to stop it at all costs?

I take issue with the apparent weak-willed actions spouted off by some who claim very strong convictions.

[Godscreated]

If you we're to stumble across a murder attempt, would you stop it?

I don't think abortion is murder, but assuming it were in the same vein as killing another sapient human, would it not be the right thing to attempt to stop it at all costs?

I take issue with the apparent weak-willed actions spouted off by some who claim very strong convictions.

Would you have me break the laws of this country. God has not commanded anyone to stop a murder, however I believe I would try. As for abortion to me it's murder, but the law says it is not, I believe if everyone were to see a partial birth abortion minds and hearts would be changed. Do not have much more to say about abortion. I will say this about what God says about people doing something to protect someone from being murdered, "no man has a greater love than to lay down his life for another", this is a qoute from Jesus. Before someone get's into saying I don't know scriptures, yes this quote was about Jesus giving his life for us, this statement also applies to many others who have layed down their lives for others. Being weak-willed and law abiding are two different things and weak-willed I'm not. I would think most would know that by now, I've hung around this joint for a little while and many others have come and gone.

[Epimethean]

Atheist and all nonbelievers are the worst when it comes to interpreting what the Bible says, translation is writting a book, paper or ie. from one language to another, you are talking about intrepretation not translation. Scientist often take the evidence and interpret it differently, so where's the difference, the difference is that the scientist are looking at the same wording and believers might not depending on the particular Bible translation they are reading. The King James is a good translation however it is not the best, the New American Standard is generally considered the best translation of the scriptures and if you want to see the more literal wording the Inductive Study version of the NAS is very good. As with all ancient languages we are learning more about them as more writtings are discovered.

So, how would this work were a new group of Nazis to arise in a non-German speaking country, holding up Mein Kampf as the seminal text for ushering in a new Reich? Should we cede to them that, as believers, they have it all over those who do not believe and let them do as they please, since clearly, they are the ones who would interpret Uncle Adolph's intentions the best?

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

Would you have me break the laws of this country. God has not commanded anyone to stop a murder, however I believe I would try.

From memory, there is a commandment which says "love thy neigbour as thyself".In the parable of the good Samaritan, Jesus explains that every man is our neighbour. There is a moral obligation to help and protect our neighbour, so the obligation to prevent a murder if possible is implicit.

In Australia you can be charged for 'reckless indifference ' and 'failing to render assistance'. You are not expected to put your own life at risk.

One of the obnoxious problems with some dogmatic believers (of all faiths) is a narrow, arrogant and legalistic approach,insisting THEIR interpretation is ONLY 'right' one. Seems to me many entirely miss the alleged spirit of their faith,that of love and forgiveness--and insist on judging others.

The many contradictions and ambiguity of religious texts are powerful arguments that they were written by pretty ordinary human beings.In my opinion ,had such books been divinely inspired (or dictated by an angel,as the Qur'an and Book Of Mormon) the texts would be simple and easily understood by the most stupid follower who heard them. How can there possibly be any argument over the word of God?----- And how dare people kill each other over such a thing ?

[Anymouse]

Atheist and all nonbelievers are the worst when it comes to interpreting what the Bible says, translation is writting a book, paper or ie. from one language to another, you are talking about intrepretation not translation. Scientist often take the evidence and interpret it differently, so where's the difference, the difference is that the scientist are looking at the same wording and believers might not depending on the particular Bible translation they are reading. The King James is a good translation however it is not the best, the New American Standard is generally considered the best translation of the scriptures and if you want to see the more literal wording the Inductive Study version of the NAS is very good. As with all ancient languages we are learning more about them as more writtings are discovered.

Leaving aside for the moment that there are so many different translations of the Bible that it is impossible to tell which is "divinely inspired," (if any), if the Bible is meant to be the Word of God, why should it require any interpretation at all?

It opens with confusion in the two mutually-exclusive creation stories in Genesis 1 and 2 and does not stop the confusion until the "Amen" at the end of the Apocalypse (Revelation).

Why wouldn't God, who after all loves his children and only wishes them to enter Heaven, give his word with such obfuscation to the unbeliever? Why would he not want it to be clear as possible? Why write it so only learned priests and mystics can hope to glean the import of the writings, yet have his prophets such as Martin Luther insist that all should read the Bible?

When he tells you how to treat your slaves, he is telling you how to treat them, not that slavery is evil. When he says that women should keep silent in church, he is telling you they should keep silent, not that they deserve equal rights. If the inspired writers of the Bible really meant that keeping people as property was evil and oppressing the weak and powerless was also evil (oh they did say that, as long as they weren't women), why not just write that?

And anything that starts, "Well, you have to look at the times the Bible was written in" is making excuses for promoting slavery, slaughtering all in warfare, and oppressing women. Jesus and his apostles could have ended such nonsense two thousand years ago, if they were truly interested in such things as love and equal treatment of all God's children. On the other hand, that statement makes perfect sense if the Bible is not divinely inspired.

Jesus is propounded to be God. He could have Laid Down the Law. His apostles could have, too. Yet they chose to keep the system in place which Dixie used to justify their own slavery, and oppresses women in some places to this day.

James.

[The Grand Nudger]

There we go, a holy text, able to be read by all who see it (regardless of language or even literacy), requiring no interpretation, agreed by all to be word for word consistent to any two people who care to share what they've seen, appearing out of the blue with no traditions behind it, would indeed be a hell of a case for an omnipotent creator, wouldn't it.

[Epimethean]

I do love your use of modal verbs, my friend! So necessary in this context.