Religion

[Dicknose]

It's just that when one's poor enough, it's probably better to be sold as a slave than starving to death.
That logic seems similar to saying it's better to break someone's arm than kill them.

Hard to say something is moral simply because there are worse things.

Why would it not be better to employ them than sell them as a slave?

[Crazed_Insanity]

That is still judging somebody else by a set of bullshit they don't necessarily subscribe to.

sin1
sɪn/
noun
1.
an immoral act considered to be a transgression against divine law.
"a sin in the eyes of God"
synonyms: immoral act, wrong, wrongdoing, act of evil/wickedness, transgression, crime, offence, misdeed, misdemeanour, error, lapse, fall from grace;

Divine "law" is not a thing in modern civilised society. So you don't get to claim that homosexuality is a "fall from grace" or "wicked".

So there's your cuntish behaviour again.

So who died and gave you the authority to judge my cuntish behavior? Why should anyone subscribe to your set of belief or non-belief?




You've traditionally had a problem with how you employ the word condone. The UK has a minimum wage. That completely contradicts your paper-thin suggestion that we are condoning anything approaching slavery. I don't doubt that Chinese manufacturing plants push their employees to pretty inhuman standards but I defy you find any suggestion that these "slaves" are property that can be killed so long as they survive a few days first. Remember how you tried to dispute that translation and then promptly discovered that the Chinese language bible clearly says it? That is the slavery detailed in your bible that you constantly clamour to reinterpret and that also constitutes totally cuntish behaviour.

Out of sight out of mind. How the workers are treated, how would we know? Further, the point I'm arguing is that it really isn't about being a 'property' that's evil, it's the actual abuse. I can 'own' my cat and I'm its master and I don't abuse my cat. One can abuse animals while not owning them. What's horrible about slavery wasn't really the 'property' part, but the 'abuse' part. My point had been it is possible, though very rare, that a master slave relationship can be a loving one without any abuse. If I willingly wish to be 'owned' by somebody behind closed door on personal property, why must you interfere? Again, condoning doesn't meant endorsing. Bible condone such practice, but most certainly doesn't promote such practices.



Physically disciplining a toddler "out of love" and so as "not to cause permanent injury" (your fucking words) is immensely creepy, fetishistic and obviously abusive. You wouldn't have used the word abuse because you are twisting your own words to mean something other than how the vast majority of people would define it. Cuntish behaviour? Yup.
Again, who are you to judge my cuntish behavior? Where does one draw the line a child abuse? From what I've gather from you, any sort of physical discipline constitute abuse, right? Ok. So like I've asked in earlier post, what about time outs(solitary confinement) and verbal scolding(could also still cause emotional scars)? Where does one draw the line?

Again, who are you to interfere with how I raise my kid?


When the day comes that you don't routinely make a bunch of shit up, you can suggest that people are doing this to you. Until then; suck it up, bullshitter.
I have no problems sucking it up and spitting them back at you if you haven't noticed.



Hundreds of years of the history of the religion you converted to by choice have very definitely said that. You want to support something "the whole way" or whatever stupid wording you used, you wholeheartedly have to support the bad with the good. Otherwise you are a cherry-picking, cowardly cunt.
Again, who gave you the authority to dictate how I should practice my religious faith? You don't think it's weird to be a 'Christian' and doesn't believe in Christ? IMHO, why bother?

However, as a Christian, if I am not as Christ-like as I can, that's my problem, not my religion's problem. If I don't obey all of the Old Testament rules, it's because there's now a New Testament. If I absolutely must obey all Old rules, then I'd be a Jew! Even for a Jew, it'd be difficult to practice their religion fully because the Temple of God had be destroyed! They have no place to do their sacrifices. So I'm not cherry picking anything. You just have no proper understanding of my faith.

Lastly if Christians are cunts for interfering with gay marriage, why do you think your behavior isn't?

You really don't see that you're doing exactly the same thing you accuse of Christians doing? So exactly what makes you better? At least Christians could claim their God given authority... what's your authority? Just because you can read, you're somehow the expert of Christian theology? You don't think you're too egotistic?

Further, I want to ask your professional opinion...

If you really think I'm a dangerous hateful violent person, is it really the right thing to do to provoke me to go postal and hope that will cause the authorities to intercept me?

Where is your professional ethics dude?:erm:

[Crazed_Insanity]

That logic seems similar to saying it's better to break someone's arm than kill them.

Hard to say something is moral simply because there are worse things.

Why would it not be better to employ them than sell them as a slave?

Bible never said one must not employ laborers. Bible also never restrict that one cannot offer your laborer free shelter... or shelter with some sort of pay. Bible never say you must own slaves or be owned as slaves!

It's just that slavery was common practices, bible simply included some rules saying that you can only go 'this far' and no more with slavery.

Further, 'sins' are usually just prohibited with stoning to death as sentence. Do you really think it'd be better to include 'thou shall not own any slaves or you'll be stoned to death?'

I don't think that'd work out very well.

[Dicknose]

Christianity isn't about Christians, but about Christ.

Actually it is about how Christians act.
For those outside the religion, who may not have the same beliefs, it is all about how the follows act under the influence of the religion.



I have a lot of respect for Buddhism philosophy, but don't you think it a bit unfair to compare what Dalai Lama said to what typical Christian would do?

Why?
Many Christians claim that morals can only come from their god.
So why wouldn't compare the actions of them against someone else with a different source of morals.
If Christianity was that good, why aren't all (or even most) Christians better people than mr lama?



I still think it's important to consider how a religion transforms a culture over extended period of time. If it makes little or no difference or harmful to a society, then I'd agree it's probably a good idea to give up on that religion.
Christians nations might be prosperous but I'd hardly pick them as amazing islands of virtue.
It doesn't seem to have made people nicer, less likely to kill, steal or otherwise do immoral things.

But it does seem to make them overly concerned with others sex life and attempts to control it.

[Dicknose]

Bible never said one must not employ laborers. Bible also never restrict that one cannot offer your laborer free shelter... or shelter with some sort of pay.

It's just that slavery was common practices, bible simply included some rules saying that you can only go 'this far' and no more with slavery.

Further, 'sins' are usually just prohibited with stoning to death as sentence. Do you really think it'd be better to include 'thou shall not own any slaves or you'll be stoned to death?'

I don't think that'd work out very well.

Well a moral religion would say "no slaves, hire them as workers, pay a fair wage, treat them as fellow human beings"

God endorsing slaves just shows how immoral your god is (which is not surprising since he is really just a bunch of men making up stuff to control others)
Your justification is so amazingly twisted, picking the lesser of two evils is not the same as saying it's good.

[Rob]

Brilliant. Another wall of delusional, insane shit and outright lies. I'm doing what the christians do by demanding equality? Riiiiiiiiiiiiight. That would be the exact opposite of the christian attempts to demonise homosexuals. I'm judging your homophobia? Too fucking right I am. Unless you genuinely want to be able to be a horrible person, why would you feel defensive about anyone criticising your hateful bigotry? Why would you actually want to be able to practice your brand of nasty judgemental bullshit without fear of reprisals? Because you are a vile cunt.

"Willing slaves", comparing keeping a pet animal to ownership of a human, cherry picking from whichever testament you claim not to...You make up so much shit.

You beat a child, that's where the line is drawn, you piece of shit. If you don't understand there are other options than physical violence "solitary confinement" and "verbal scolding" then you really haven't got this parenting thing down at all. You're just suggesting the easiest, most immediately discomforting/degrading type of punishment.....it's almost biblical. And given the bible's propensity for murdering children....

No cries of provocation or limp, yet mildly creepy half-threat would get you off the hook when you do actually spaz out. It'll be entirely on you. Not even "God told me to" is gonna work.

I've gotta say though, the sickest (funniest) burn was when you literally accused me of being able to read.....Like I'm supposed to regret learning....

[Crazed_Insanity]

Rob, ain't nothing wrong with reading. It's just that it doesn't necessarily make you an expert of what you've read. Maybe you think you're some sort of genius that you think you can teach a subject just by reading a book all by yourself. I guess it's obvious that all believers must have some sort of reading comprehension problem, right? Only atheists can truly see the crap in the bible?

Anyway, you still haven't answer my question. In your professional opinion, when you meet someone hateful and possibly violent, what does your professional ethics tell you to do? Only way to help is by provoking the nutcase hoping that the conservative gun owner would go postal and kill someone so that he may be apprehended by authorities? I hope you were only joking...

Luckily your analysis of me was dead wrong. No police cars or child services people have converged to my home yet... I am still crazy for Jesus! :p

I'll respond to DNs stuffs tomorrow...

[Dicknose]

Do you really think it'd be better to include 'thou shall not own any slaves or you'll be stoned to death?'

I don't think that'd work out very well.
I'd be putting that as one of the top 10 rules.
It's is one of the worst things you can do to another human being.
Compared to the number of trivial things that the bible says is punishable by death, yes owning slaves would be one rule that fits the punishment.

I don't doubt the world would be a much better place if the Abrahamic religions didn't allow slavery.

[Rob]

It's just that it doesn't necessarily make you an expert of what you've read.

It doesn't take an expert to read badly written sheep-farmer opinions containing a clear and obsolete agenda. Just because you can't come to a consistent interpretation of literally anything you encounter, it doesn't preclude others from working out what is bullshit.


Maybe you think you're some sort of genius that you think you can teach a subject just by reading a book all by yourself. I guess it's obvious that all believers must have some sort of reading comprehension problem, right? Only atheists can truly see the crap in the bible?

By definition, your "faith" in a book that demands that faith as the entire point, means that you will be ignorant to the contradictory and hateful concepts within. IF you weren't ignorant, you wouldn't have the faith. It's really fucking simple.


Anyway, you still haven't answer my question.

Yes I have. You just didn't like the answer that addressed your impotent and creepy half-threat and attempt to place the responsibility for YOUR actions onto somebody/thing else.


Only way to help is by provoking

Just like using the term "sin" to describe homosexuality, your choice of words here is telling. If you think you are being provoked, then you are in for a shock when you discover that you're responsible for your own actions. "God" or "atheists" isn't a get-out-of-jail-free card.

[Crazed_Insanity]

It doesn't take an expert to read badly written sheep-farmer opinions containing a clear and obsolete agenda. Just because you can't come to a consistent interpretation of literally anything you encounter, it doesn't preclude others from working out what is bullshit.
You can certainly think of it as BS if you want. I'm not stopping you. We just have different interpretations that's all... and all I'm saying is that you are not convincing me that you're the bible expert... that your interpretation must be better than mine. Consider that I'm trying to understand and fix my car... I read the manual... and you also read the same manual... and you've figured out that manual is BS. Okay. Fine. Personally I don't think that manual is BS because I'm able to use it to help fix my car..., you'd continue to claim that manual is BS, but you're still not showing me how to fix my car. Okay, you don't like me so you don't want to help me fix my car... fine... so how are your cars running? I don't see how you live your life, but I can see how you treat others who you don't like or disagree with. I'm pretty sure even Dalai Lama wouldn't agree with the way to deal with people you don't like.


By definition, your "faith" in a book that demands that faith as the entire point, means that you will be ignorant to the contradictory and hateful concepts within. IF you weren't ignorant, you wouldn't have the faith. It's really fucking simple.
So I'm ignorant. Ignorant people must live their lives in ways that agree with Rob? Who made you God so that you can decide how ignorant people should live? Why is your hateful concept superior to the Bible's? At least Bible offers eternal life. What do you have to offer? Again, who gave you the fucking right to hate ignorant people?


Yes I have. You just didn't like the answer that addressed your impotent and creepy half-threat and attempt to place the responsibility for YOUR actions onto somebody/thing else.
You're the creep who'd justify hatred with hatred. If you continue to engage me like this, I'm pretty sure you'll be the one who goes postal soon. Luckily UK don't allow you to own guns so hopefully the damages you caused would be minimal. My advice for you is to just fuck off... or you'll get pissed off even more. I will not be responsible for what happens to you mentally. Hopefully someday you'll turn 'ignorant' too and be able to believe. But regardless of what happens to you, I certain won't be responsible for it.


Just like using the term "sin" to describe homosexuality, your choice of words here is telling. If you think you are being provoked, then you are in for a shock when you discover that you're responsible for your own actions. "God" or "atheists" isn't a get-out-of-jail-free card.
Heterosexuality can be a sin too. Yes, fucking outside of marriage is a sin in God's eye. Heterosexuals don't get to have the license to freely fuck around. I think allowing for Gay marriage should make homosexuality okay. Scripture's emphasis is "LOVE" can cover up multitude of sins. At least that's my interpretation of the bible. Surely some Christians might disagree.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Actually it is about how Christians act.
For those outside the religion, who may not have the same beliefs, it is all about how the follows act under the influence of the religion.
Yes, how Christians act can definitely impact others... it may even impact other Christians to trip up and lose faith! No question about that. It's part of human nature..., we can definitely be affected by those around us. However, as a more spiritually matured Christian, following Christ really should mean following Christ... not following other Christian. Herd mentality is normal, but if you're in a religion only because of going with the flow, then it's kinda pointless.



Why?
Many Christians claim that morals can only come from their god.
So why wouldn't compare the actions of them against someone else with a different source of morals.
If Christianity was that good, why aren't all (or even most) Christians better people than mr lama?
God is that good, but the people aren't gods! Christ came to this fallen world to 'heal the sick'. (At least according to the bible, this world is fallen thanks to Adam and Eve's poor choices) People such as Dalai Lama or Ghandi are relatively 'healthy' compared to rest of the human population. So they probably don't see the need to see the 'Doctor'. As for most of the lousy human population, they're pretty sick and need treatment. So you can't just enter into a hospital and see all those patients laying around in all the rooms and then make a determination that... wow, there are so many sick people there... so the doctors there must suck real bad!



Christians nations might be prosperous but I'd hardly pick them as amazing islands of virtue.
It doesn't seem to have made people nicer, less likely to kill, steal or otherwise do immoral things.
This is exactly the reason why I find God impressive. There had been plenty of more virtuous nations or more powerful nations in history of mankind. However, in the end, it seems only the truly faithful nations that prevailed. Prior to Jesus, of course Israel were the ONLY faithful nation. I don't think the Jews were also the most virtuous, yet it managed to survived other great empires and became a world influence with its bible. Scripture said that God can make all things, good and evil, work together for the benefit of those who love Him. So my understanding is that if a nation or culture has more faithfuls, then naturally that region should be able to reap lots of 'benefits' somehow. To me, it seems unfair that folks in a 'hospital' with more faithfuls are seemingly doing better than adjacent office building next door. I guess that's God's doing. So anyway, if you want virtue, read the bible. Understand God better. Again, there's no command that we all must own slaves. God most certainly is NOT promoting slavery! Don't get side track by that.



Well a moral religion would say "no slaves, hire them as workers, pay a fair wage, treat them as fellow human beings"

God endorsing slaves just shows how immoral your god is (which is not surprising since he is really just a bunch of men making up stuff to control others)
Your justification is so amazingly twisted, picking the lesser of two evils is not the same as saying it's good.
Again, God does NOT endorse slavery, He only condoned it. Yes, it is kinda like lesser of the 2 evils..., but it doesn't really have to be evil at all.

Just as Christ is our Lord, and Apostle Paul has called himself a slave of Christ. Perhaps to you guys, that might appear ignorant stupid and evil too, but to me, I don't see any problems with that. Now, Paul is a willing slave, not only that, he's also a brother and friend of Christ... also a son of God. There are all these different levels of relationship with God... the 'slave' part is simply us believers willingly choose to ignore the will of self, but do the will of God.

Personally, I have to admit that I'm not a very good 'slave' of Christ..., but I try to be.

If Master slave relationship is really pure evil, then Lord Jesus and Servant Paul shouldn't work out.

For sure believers willingly being 'slaves' of God won't end up in neglect or abuse by God because He is good. If you can find a truly good Master, then I really don't think slavery is a problem.

Problem is that in this fallen world, it'd be impossible to find a 'good' master for we're all sinners. So in a world full of sinners, it is for sure good to ban slavery.

God didn't even want to give Israel their own king initially, but people demanded to be like other nations with their own kings, so God caved and allowed them a king, but warned of them the consequences. I think it's probably something very similar with slavery... considered that even Abraham had slaves, and Abraham probably was pretty dependent on the slaves... if the slaves were doing a good job and Abraham was treating them reasonably well, why should God all of a sudden tell him to let them go? Even if he does tell them to go, where would they go? I'm sure most of them would actually prefer to stay and work for Abraham. Of course even Abraham isn't perfect... his wife was barren and wants her maidservant to sleep with Abe in order to have a kid... and of course eventually one mess led to another... which also resulted in the Muslim religion... Anyway, so I agree it's probably good to have no slaves, but it was so common back then... so God condoned such practice. However, when things go too much out of line, God would intervene. God intervened when Abraham's maidservant cried out... God intervened when Jews were abused in Egypt. God intervened when Americans were abusing their slaves.

Assuming Paul have eternal life so he may eternally be a slave of Christ, but rest assured that the abusive kind of slavery cannot last. For God is good, just and loving.

[21Kid]

Went to go see the "Noah" movie and I think I may have had it all wrong. :?

Has Billi been right this whole time? :o

This whole religion thing may have something to it. I need to go study the bible. God bless.

[Rob]

Consider that I'm trying to understand and fix my car... I read the manual

Shit analogy as the bible, when taken as a straight instruction manual, clearly and obviously incites and commands violence against others for various transgressions. If you have to interpret your way around anything like that, it's a shit manual.


Ignorant people must live their lives in ways that agree with Rob? Who made you God so that you can decide how ignorant people should live?

Strawman bullshit. I don't have to agree with your way of life, but when you become an activist with an agenda to strip the rights away from other people, you will reap the consequences that I have every right to deliver.

Nobody made me god, because there's no such thing as god, you silly cunt. At least I can prove I exist.


Why is your hateful concept superior to the Bible's?

The "hateful concept" that is equality.


At least Bible offers eternal life.

You've gone full retard.


What do you have to offer? Again, who gave you the fucking right to hate ignorant people?

If I deliver on nothing at all in my life, I have performed identically to whatever totally unsubstantiated nonsense the bible claims god can do. And when people act ignorantly, they grant me the right to challenge their ignorance. So in your case, you gave me the right.


You're the creep who'd justify hatred with hatred.

It's a word salad every time you post.


My advice for you is to just fuck off

Things The Godly Say


I will not be responsible for what happens to you mentally. Hopefully someday you'll turn 'ignorant' too and be able to believe. But regardless of what happens to you, I certain won't be responsible for it.

And with this "I Know You Are But What Am I?" display, I think I've ticked off the entire bingo card.


Heterosexuality can be a sin too.

Sins only exist for the sinner. No faith in god=no sinning, no judgements of sinning, no sinners.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Strawman bullshit. I don't have to agree with your way of life, but when you become an activist with an agenda to strip the rights away from other people, you will reap the consequences that I have every right to deliver.

Nobody made me god, because there's no such thing as god, you silly cunt. At least I can prove I exist.

I'm not an activist of anything. I will deliver whatever consequences right back at ya! If you think this is fun, I can certainly play with ya. :)



The "hateful concept" that is equality.
We all have equal rights to vote. Why do you feel it justified to hate others who vote differently from you? Aren't you equally as hateful? I just don't subscribe to your kind of hatred thank you very much.


If I deliver on nothing at all in my life, I have performed identically to whatever totally unsubstantiated nonsense the bible claims god can do.
So it's all the same crap. Why can't you just let me pick whatever crap I want to pick? Why must I live my life in a way that you want me to live? If I don't, why should you get so mad? Just chill out and enjoy your life while you can rather than wasting time here with me.


Things The Godly Say
You obviously don't understand Godly languages, so I was trying to speak in a language that you can understand.



Sins only exist for the sinner. No faith in god=no sinning, no judgements of sinning, no sinners.
That's fine. If you don't believe, you really don't have to take anything I said or Bible said so seriously.

If you want to convert the believers of God to abandon their faith, you need to offer them something else better instead. If you have nothing else but hatred for them, what do you expect them to do? Your yelling, bitching, bullying won't work with me if you haven't noticed.

DN may have a better chance. Why don't you just sit back and read my discussions with DN? You're not really contributing to anything here.

[FaultyMario]

Will, like I said before, Aranofsky is not exactly worried about the facts in his characters' lives; he really, really, likes to explore the mental ramifications of their acts.

I found Black Swan discomforting and The Wrestler frustrating. He really is an explorer of the human psyche, maybe not a great story teller, but there's art to his studies of moral and intent.

[21Kid]

(I didn't really watch noah)



Atlanta archbishop apologizes over $2.2M mansion (http://news.yahoo.com/atlanta-archbishop-apologizes-over-2-2m-mansion-001953367.html)
Oh shit, I got caught!

[Rob]

I'm not an activist of anything.

You voted to forward a political agenda. Activism 101.


I will deliver whatever consequences right back at ya!

Given you previous actions, the consequences are apparently targeting the constitutional rights of innocent parties for eradication. Which simply makes your claims of how you've changed more bullshit. Predictably.


We all have equal rights to vote. Why do you feel it justified to hate others who vote differently from you? Aren't you equally as hateful? I just don't subscribe to your kind of hatred thank you very much.

Textbook false equivalence. Sure, we can all vote, but you are the on the side voting to strip away constitutional rights from some citizens based on how they are born. I am not. I guarantee you'd not be so sickeningly self-righteous if the bible and it's promoters had chosen skin colour or race to delineate marriage laws.


Why must I live my life in a way that you want me to live?

Because I'm literally the only person in the world angered by religious homophobia? You are a fucking dummy.


You obviously don't understand Godly languages, so I was trying to speak in a language that you can understand.

Gone full retard again.


If you want to convert the believers of God to abandon their faith, you need to offer them something else better instead.

Reality and Equality. Unless you are scared shitless of that. Which is entirely the point of religion.


Why don't you just sit back and read my discussions with DN? You're not really contributing to anything here.

Look at how many people have called you out IN THIS THREAD ALONE. Add the word "contributing" to the lexicon of "Words Billi Doesn't Understand So He Just Invents A New Definition Every Time He Hears Or Says It".

[Rob]

Will, like I said before, Aranofsky is not exactly worried about the facts in his characters' lives

Define "facts" in this context.

[Crazed_Insanity]

You voted to forward a political agenda. Activism 101.
Everyone votes with their own political agenda; therefore, everyone is an activist? Do you know of anyone who votes without any sort of political agenda?
You may be a good reader, but you are not very good at word definitions. This is why I find your bible interpretations unbelievable. Yeah, I believe the bible, but your interpretation of it is wacky and distorted. Just as you'd distort a voter into a political activist.



Given you previous actions, the consequences are apparently targeting the constitutional rights of innocent parties for eradication. Which simply makes your claims of how you've changed more bullshit. Predictably.
I changed my mind before the court struck it down and I have listed my own reasons, not court reasons. I wasn't blindly going with what the court decided. That point aside, a piece of law was given to us to vote. That prop should've been declared unconstitutional from the beginning, but it didn't. It was on a ballot, and it was my given right to vote how ever I wanted, so, again, in a language that you can understand fully: fuck off!


Textbook false equivalence. Sure, we can all vote, but you are the on the side voting to strip away constitutional rights from some citizens based on how they are born. I am not. I guarantee you'd not be so sickeningly self-righteous if the bible and it's promoters had chosen skin colour or race to delineate marriage laws.
Dude, just because you don't have a bible to thump at me, there's no need to just pick up any other textbooks to thump at me! Seriously, there are annoying Christian bible thumpers with judgmental attitude. You don't have any bibles, yet, you'd also use whatever books to judge others. What makes you better? Like I said, you just as bad as the annoying Christians from WBC. Anyway, to answer your question, bible didn't pick color of skins. Bible/God only picks on faith. If one believes, then he or she is of God's people. We can choose whether to be God's people or not. If you don't want to you don't have to. Segregation between eternal life and no eternal life is really up to each of us. If you're happy with your meaningless mortal existence, more power to you! Seriouslyl



Because I'm literally the only person in the world angered by religious homophobia? You are a fucking dummy.
You are a fucking asshole. Do you seriously believe only the religious are homophobic? If there's no religion, everyone would be homosexuals? Everyone would embrace homosexuality? Get a clue. Homophobes tend to hide behind religion to justify their hatred. God does not hate homosexuals. God only doesn't like homosexuality.


Reality and Equality. Unless you are scared shitless of that. Which is entirely the point of religion.
God doesn't ask us to ignore reality. We need to face up to the reality that we are sinners and we need help. God also doesn't promote inequality... for otherwise Dr King would NOT be fighting for civil liberties. Again, get a fucking clue and know what you're talking about please!


Look at how many people have called you out IN THIS THREAD ALONE. Add the word "contributing" to the lexicon of "Words Billi Doesn't Understand So He Just Invents A New Definition Every Time He Hears Or Says It".
You haven't notice any comments directed against you? You fucking blind or something?

[FaultyMario]

Define "facts" in this context.

Well, I'm still not entirely sure whether or not Natalie and Mila really did do sexy neikkid stuff together or if it was all in Natalie's head.
It's much clearer in Pi, though, where the computer printout is just a pretext.

[FaultyMario]

(I didn't really watch noah)



Shame, Thread.Derail.Fail.

[Rob]

Everyone votes with their own political agenda; therefore, everyone is an activist?

If you bother to vote, you are an activist. Definitions, how do they work?


You may be a good reader, but you are not very good at word definitions.

How can that possibly be a thing? BILLI LOGIC! That is to say....not logic...at all.


I believe the bible, but your interpretation of it is wacky and distorted.

Full Retard again.


Just as you'd distort a voter into a political activist.

No, we've been through this. Taking action with a political motivation makes you a political activist. By definition.


I changed my mind before the court struck it down

But after you voted to strip citizens of rights you enjoy on the basis of how they were born.



It was on a ballot, and it was my given right to vote how ever I wanted, so, again, in a language that you can understand fully: fuck off!

Plenty of reasonable humans realised it was a hateful proposition and didn't rely on the obsolete and irrelevant words of a sheep farmer to help them make their (in your case apparently regrettable) decision. You had a given right to vote, sure....but you chose the bigot cunt vote. That bit was on you.


You are a fucking asshole.

Because I challenge your bullshit bigotry. Things The Godly Say, indeed.


Do you seriously believe only the religious are homophobic?

Not at all, but christianity and its followers are inherently homophobic if they follow the bible properly. And sexist. And into slavery and child killing.


If there's no religion, everyone would be homosexuals?

Where do you pull this insane shit from, really?



God only doesn't like homosexuality.

CITATION NEEDED.



We need to face up to the reality that we are sinners and we need help.

Maybe you are and do. I'm not and don't because the word sin doesn't have any meaning in my existence.


God also doesn't promote inequality...

Christians do though. You, yourself, voted to promote inequality. Proof positive, right there.


You haven't notice any comments directed against you? You fucking blind or something?

Yeah, you and Z07. LOL

Any further comments actually "against" me (and not fence sitting nonsense) were from people who I actually know and respect. And they weren't remotely comparable to the distain you seem to be intent on cultivating here, even from members who would rarely post in this kind of thread.

I'll ask you again....where are all the other faithful members of the forum? They all seem to be distancing themselves from you and your bullshit.

[21Kid]

Do you seriously believe only the religious are homophobic? If there's no religion, everyone would be homosexuals? Everyone would embrace homosexuality? Get a clue. Homophobes tend to hide behind religion to justify their hatred. God does not hate homosexuals. God only doesn't like homosexuality.
To be fair... It was widely accepted to have sex with whomever you wanted before christianity. In ancient Greece, England, Egypt. There's paintings of it all over the place. It's also not a big deal in the animal world either. I'm sure there probably are other people besides your kind that don't like it. But, I don't hear them trying to take away people's rights because of their own beliefs.

[Rob]

Kid, he said "homosexuals". Apparently he thinks that I believe religion is the only thing keeping people heterosexual.

Taking that I actually would love to see religion die out, logic dictates that Billi thinks I want the world to be exclusively homosexual. Which would end human life in less than a couple of centuries unless we resort to purely artificial insemination. /slow clap

Where does he get this nonsensical shit from? How does anyone anywhere have a mind that processes things in such a ridiculously illogical and clusterfucked way?

[Crazed_Insanity]

Kid, why don't you show me proof of that? That gay marriage rights were taken away because of Jesus Christ. If it weren't for that fictional bible Jesus, gay marriages would stay intact just like how it is in the animal kingdom.

Rob, how many 'faithful' GTXFers do you know? We know we can safely exclude Mario. Further, just as some atheistic gtxfers don't want to get involved, why do you think other 'faithful' gtxfers would want to get involved in our shitfest? What benefit would they get out of that? This thread isn't really about religion, but about your obsession over me. It's better that we lock ourselves in this thread rather than we spread the hate in the rest of the forum. If you need to channel to release your hate, frustration, venom, yeah, feel free to do so here. Hopefully you can get your release here rather than channel your violent hatful tendencies else where.

[21Kid]

I have a hard time believing that he truly believes what he is saying. For someone to be an engineer, (that is what he is, right?) he has to have a fairly decent grasp on science & logic.

I don't know how he can use basic reasoning for his job, and then completely turn it off when it comes to religion.
I wonder if it spills into other aspects of his life too? Just completely making up, or "interpreting" things as he sees fit.

edit: You're kidding, right?
Kid, why don't you show me proof of that? That gay marriage rights were taken away because of Jesus Christ. If it weren't for that fictional bible Jesus, gay marriages would stay intact just like how it is in the animal kingdom.That was the entire basis for prop 8.

[Rob]

Every post contains a delusional comment.

Every post contains at least one brand new custom Billi definition for an existing word.

Every post avoids a previously asked question and attempts to turn things around onto the questioner.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Why don't you ask me about it? ;)

Obviously you guys are not concerned with trying to truly understand me. Keep on guessing and keep up with the name calling. :cool:

BTW, please remember to bring proof to show that the fictional Jesus Christ came 2000 yrs ago to take away rights of gays.

[21Kid]

:rolleyes:

LOL. Exactly what Rob said you'd do! Are you a psychic, Rob!

[Rob]

Show proof of the existence of a fictional event?

Are you using a David Bowie style random word collage to formulate your posts?

[Rob]

:rolleyes:

LOL. Exactly what Rob said you'd do! Are you a psychic, Rob!

398

[Rob]

BTW, please remember to bring proof to show that the fictional VOLTRON came BACK FROM WALMART to take away QUALITY FOOTWEAR of COALMINERS.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Okay, perhaps I should rephrase, please show proof that if it weren't for 'Christians', gay marriage rights would be safely in place all over the world.

Or just show that homophobia is something invented by the 'Christians'.

[Rob]

I'm not sure anyone ever claimed that homophobia was invented by christians. Please quote the post where that was said, I must have missed it.

As for gay rights not being impeded by christians, you must be taking the piss. You voted to strip away those rights because of your christian beliefs. You've said so. So you'll find that proof by simply looking in a mirror.

So setting aside your ridiculous straw man there, combine your very own actions with, I don't know, large chunks of Africa making it illegal to be homosexual, in some cases you'd get the death penalty for being gay, you have to agree that things would look a lot better for gay rights if christianity (and religion in general) did just die out.

[Rob]

BTW, please remember to bring proof to show that the fictional GIANT FOAM FINGER came IN TIME FOR DINNER to take away SUPPLE THIGHS of SPIDERPLANTS.

[FaultyMario]

I thought you were gonna bash my ill informed cinephilia, Rob.

:(

[Rob]

I haven't seen Black Swan or Pi.

[Crazed_Insanity]

I've seen black swan. Didn't really enjoy it. Probably won't enjoy Noah's Ark too, but I probably would watch it on DVD later... Can really go see movies anymore with a 2yr old around...

Anyway Rob & Kid, to me, it sounded like you guys believe Christianity was the sole reason why gays were oppressed or hated. Did I understand you guys correctly? If I got that wrong, then sorry for the misunderstanding and nevermind... However, if that is what you believe , then I'd like to see proof of that. That's all I was asking.

My take is that homophobia is always around and not really directly caused by religion. I think homophobes simply use religion to justify their hatred of gays. Religion doesn't really turn people into homophobes. I don't hate or fear gays prior to being Chrisitian, I also don't hate or fear gays after becoming a Christian. My feelings toward my gay friends really did not change. Yeah, some might take offense in my thinking that I now believe their 'preference' is a sin... Well, hey, I have a lot of 'preferences' that are sinful in God's eyes too... I also believe that we are all sinners. There inevitably will be things that we do that are not pleasing in God's eyes, but God still loves all of us unconditionally and would pay that wage of sin for all of us personally.

[FaultyMario]

Dude, do you have a preference for hate or is that just your orientation?

[Crazed_Insanity]

Well, I guess Rob and I probably do have similar 'orientation' that's why we hit it off so well! :lol:

For sure what I'm doing here with Rob is something Jesus wouldn't do. But it's probably better that Rob and I do our thing here in this thread and leave the rest of the board out of it. ;)

[Rob]

Calls me a cunt and tells me to fuck off then claims we are in some way alike.

That's a pretty good indication of some industrial strength self-loathing.

[FaultyMario]

My feelings toward my gay friends really did not change. Yeah, some might take offense in my thinking that I now believe their 'preference' is a sin...

Yeah, your gay friends really ought to love having you around.


Still, it’s a quietly toxic expression. That’s because the very construct of a preference, or the verb “to prefer,” implies that the individual has a choice, that there are options available and yet, all else being equal and as a matter of taste, really, the person would rather “this one” over “that one.” Think how bizarre it would sound if we were to apply the same language to any other unalterable biological trait. “Suit yourself, and to each his own,” we might reason, “but my preference is to have hands this size, not that size.” Or perhaps, “It’s perfectly fine to go with a darker birthmark on your leg, I just preferred to get mine on my arm, and in this lighter shade of brown, too.” In fact, while we’re on skin color, this flawed logic would, of course, also extend to a person’s opting to be black, white, Asian, or any other race or ethnicity as a preference. (http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2013/06/sexual_preference_is_wrong_say_sexual_orientation_ instead.html)

[Crazed_Insanity]

Aren't we Rob? We actually have both called each other cunts and told each other to fuck off and we continue to spend helluva lot of time with each other on the forum without fail... I tried you ignore you, but I just can't. You just can't stand me, but you still follow me everywhere I go. You don't think we're in some sort of twisted loving relationship with your obsession for me and my inability to ignore you? Yes, sinners usually have certain degree of self loathing..., but we probably should learn from God... to loath the sin, but not the sinner. To loath the things that you don't like about yourself, but still be able to love yourself.

Oh, and regarding Mario's post, yeah, I 'prefer' to have sex with girls, but I can choose to defer that until after marriage. My genes won't cause me to lose the ability to choose something against my preference. Genes also might cause certain folks to be prone to become alcoholics, but one could still choose to stay sober. Gay folks could also abstain from premarital sex nowadays. Anyway, I still think it's probably not 'legal marriage' that can cover up multitude of sins, but love. If two gay people REALLY LOVE one another that deeply..., perhaps God'd think such gay sex would be okay? I dunno, I'm not God. Just that according to my interpretation of it, it's love that can make everything right. Remember people in Sodom and Gomorrah were not loving gay folks. They were out to butt rape people. I don't think God was out of line for throwing down fireballs at those people.

[Rob]

Just because you latch onto literally whatever you read and repeat it until a new word or phrase catches your attention, this doesn't indicate that you are actually anything like the original author. You can't ignore me? That's your problem. I'll treat any cunt I discover with a level of disdain and aggression as I see fit.

The penny is dropping about you beating a toddler out love though, especially if you consider open disrespect, contempt and insults as a "twisted loving relationship".

And don't think I didn't notice your nasty little suggestion in the last post that homosexuality is a choice.

You still haven't listed that quote you seemed to read about somebody stating that christianity invented homophobia.

[Fiat500]

That is pretty much my understanding of it, too. He has a very deep seated belief that works for him, and as far as I can tell lives a happy life that doesn't involve hating or trying to reduce the rights of others. To me, that shouldn't draw all the anger and vitriol that gets thrown around. Accept that he's stuck in his ways and wait for him to actually try to really harm someone before you take offense to it.

See, not too long ago you asked people to speak up against offensive posts on this board.

I find C_I's posts here to be the most offensive by quite a margin, with his little Sancho Panza a distant second.

So I reacted, but maybe that wasn't what you wanted.

Also - reading just one side of the discussion before passing judgment - bad form, tsk!

[Crazed_Insanity]

Just because you latch onto literally whatever you read and repeat it until a new word or phrase catches your attention, this doesn't indicate that you are actually anything like the original author. You can't ignore me? That's your problem. I'll treat any cunt I discover with a level of disdain and aggression as I see fit.
You have a love affair with cunts. I get it. I find you irresistible too! We make a great couple. You're also into other cunts, I get it... I'm not forcing you to commit yourself only to me! I'm okay with our opened relationship. ;)


The penny is dropping about you beating a toddler out love though, especially if you consider open disrespect, contempt and insults as a "twisted loving relationship".
I don't see how our relationship proves that I'm a child abuser. Are you a child? If anything, if a child displays cuntish behavior, are you sure you'll be able to hold back your aggression? My rule of engagement is do not fire until fired upon. (No, this is not a Bible rule, but a Top Gun rule! ;))You, on the other hand, is the type who'd initiate aggression whenever you see a cunt. Children can definitely display cuntish behavior at times. I hope you can have sufficient self discipline when misbehaving children are around.


And don't think I didn't notice your nasty little suggestion in the last post that homosexuality is a choice.
Regardless of our sexual orientation, we can choose to have sex or not have sex, right? That's all I was saying. Surely you're not suggesting that homosexuals can't help themselves BUT to have sex with each other? When 2 homosexuals have a meeting, I'm sure we can both agree that they choose to not have sex with each other if they don't want to? We all have our orientations, heteros have preference for opposite sex, homosexuals have preference for same sex. Only Bisexuals can 'choose' whatever side he or she wants I guess. I'm not going to stop using the word 'preference', just because an article tell me to not use it. I don't believe I'm using the word 'preference' in any demeaning way according to the article. I hope you can read better and be able to understand that regardless of orientation, I meant people can choose to make love and not to fuck other people. God is okay with love making, but not okay with fucking around. Both actions may appear similar from the outside, but God can see also our hearts and be able to know if we're making love or just fucking somebody.


You still haven't listed that quote you seemed to read about somebody stating that christianity invented homophobia.
Anyway, I'm glad you guys agree that homophobia was NOT started by Christianity. As long as we cleared that up, then I have no more questions regarding this point.

[Fiat500]

I had a look at Genesis 19 and the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, since I wondered how correct C_I's recollection was.


19
And there came two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground;

2 And he said, Behold now, my lords, turn in, I pray you, into your servant's house, and tarry all night, and wash your feet, and ye shall rise up early, and go on your ways. And they said, Nay; but we will abide in the street all night.

3 And he pressed upon them greatly; and they turned in unto him, and entered into his house; and he made them a feast, and did bake unleavened bread, and they did eat.

4 But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter:

5 And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may butt rape* them.

*paraphrased

Interestingly, Lot offers them his daughters instead:


8 Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof.

The very same daughters who, after they escape from that immoral cesspool, get their father drunk and have their ways with him:


30 And Lot went up out of Zoar, and dwelt in the mountain, and his two daughters with him; for he feared to dwell in Zoar: and he dwelt in a cave, he and his two daughters.

31 And the firstborn said unto the younger, Our father is old, and there is not a man in the earth to come in unto us after the manner of all the earth:

32 Come, let us make our father drink wine, and we will lie with him, that we may preserve seed of our father.

33 And they made their father drink wine that night: and the firstborn went in, and lay with her father; and he perceived not when she lay down, nor when she arose.

34 And it came to pass on the morrow, that the firstborn said unto the younger, Behold, I lay yesternight with my father: let us make him drink wine this night also; and go thou in, and lie with him, that we may preserve seed of our father.

35 And they made their father drink wine that night also: and the younger arose, and lay with him; and he perceived not when she lay down, nor when she arose.

36 Thus were both the daughters of Lot with child by their father.

37 And the first born bare a son, and called his name Moab: the same is the father of the Moabites unto this day.

38 And the younger, she also bare a son, and called his name Benammi: the same is the father of the children of Ammon unto this day.

That's some great stuff there, makes George RR Martin's characters seem positively pious.

[Rob]

Anyway, I'm glad you guys agree that homophobia was started by Christianity. As long as we cleared that up.

That never happened. Unless you can simply post the quote. There was no agreement because nobody made the statement.

You are the only person making a claim that the statement was made. Nobody else has remotely suggested it because it's a completely retarded supposition.

[Rob]

Point of note: the claimed christian invents entire statements that the atheists have made along with a sequence of events where they agreed on it.

At no point is any evidence of this occurrence presented or even in existence.

And atheists are the dishonest ones?

[Rob]

Nice edit there. Going back and inserting "NOT" to flip your bullshit 180 degrees. Kinda like how you flipped your opinion AFTER voting against gay marriage rights.

[Crazed_Insanity]

I had a look at Genesis 19 and the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, since I wondered how correct C_I's recollection was.



*paraphrased
So was my paraphrase/recollection incorrect? Why do you think my recollection is incorrect? How would you paraphrase it?

If you were God, you think you'd save the Sodomites and kill Lot instead?

I'm not trying to defend what Lot did, I wouldn't give them my daughter, but I also wouldn't give them my angelic visitors. Bible characters are only human and capable of making poor choices. That's how the story went. I do still believe Lot is more righteous than the folks outside demanding sex with visitors of the town.

Further, today, we don't have any major world relgions because of Lot... only due to Abraham. Lot isn't the focus of the main story here.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Nice edit there. Going back and inserting "NOT" to flip your bullshit 180 degrees. Kinda like how you flipped your opinion AFTER voting against gay marriage rights.

That was clearly a big TYPO on my part and not what I meant to say so I had to go back and re-edit.

My point had been that homophobia existed long ago just as homosexuality existed long ago prior to the coming of Jesus Christ or prior to the existence of the Christian church. Can you agree with this statement?

Or are you'll just never agree with whatever I said whether if I'm at 0 degree or 180 degree?

[Fiat500]

So was my paraphrase/recollection incorrect? Why do you think my recollection is incorrect? How would you paraphrase it?


Why do you answer your own question?

The original hebrew text can be interpreted as "know" (which is what most translations use) "...in a carnal way" (which some other translations use).

That's what I read on the internet, anyway. Obviously I'm not fluent in original hebrew text.

So no, I have no reason to claim your version is incorrect. In fact, you ought to write your own translation of the bible, it would probably be an amusing read.


If you were God, you think you'd save the Sodomites and kill Lot instead?

I'm not trying to defend what Lot did, I wouldn't give them my daughter, but I also wouldn't give them my angelic visitors. Bible characters are only human and capable of making poor choices. That's how the story went. I do still believe Lot is more righteous than the folks outside demanding sex with visitors of the town.

Further, today, we don't have any major world relgions because of Lot... only due to Abraham. Lot isn't the focus of the main story here.

You come across as an incoherent and rambling zealot, so I'm really not interested in your opinions on this. In fact, feel free to know* yourself with them.

*original hebrew text

[FaultyMario]

I'll go back and edit my post, as per current trends.

[Rob]

My point had been that homophobia existed long ago just as homosexuality existed long ago prior to the coming of Jesus Christ or prior to the existence of the Christian church. Can you agree with this statement?

Of course it predates the entire concept of christianity. But the christian church and its followers have widely promoted homophobia so they are still a huge part of the problem.

Racism predates everyone alive today. That doesn't give them a pass to be racist.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Why do you answer your own question?

The original hebrew text can be interpreted as "know" (which is what most translations use) "...in a carnal way" (which some other translations use).

That's what I read on the internet, anyway. Obviously I'm not fluent in original hebrew text.

So no, I have no reason to claim your version is incorrect. In fact, you ought to write your own translation of the bible, it would probably be an amusing read.



You come across as an incoherent and rambling zealot, so I'm really not interested in your opinions on this. In fact, feel free to know* yourself with them.

*original hebrew text

If you found no reason to suggest that my 'translation' is wrong, what's the problem?

Thanks for your permission to allow me to "know" these things in a religious thread.

[Crazed_Insanity]

I'll go back and edit my post, as per current trends.

I re-edit to correct typo as I do that very often when I type too fast. I don't re-edit per trend. I re-edit to try to make sure my posts say what I mean to say. You know very well I don't go with what's trendy.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Of course it predates the entire concept of christianity. But the christian church and its followers have widely promoted homophobia so they are still a huge part of the problem.

Racism predates everyone alive today. That doesn't give them a pass to be racist.

I completely agree. That's why it is my belief that there are homophobes justifying their hatred by their mis-interpretation of the bible. If WBC's interpretation is correct, then God basically hates sinners. If God really does hate sinners, then why did Jesus bother coming to save sinners at all? Might as well just flood and kill them all including Noah... for even Noah is a sinner as well.

Bible verses can certainly be cherry picked to support hateful stands... whether you're a homophobe, raciest, abusive slave owner, etc. However, if one reads the bible in context, you'd know that God doesn't hate gays or sinners in general, God is only a faithist and God intends to set people free.

[Fiat500]

If you found no reason to suggest that my 'translation' is wrong, what's the problem?

Thanks for your permission to allow me to "know" these things in a religious thread.

No problem, I just found it amusing.

...

Let me explain, since my earlier post probably was too clever for its own good:

"Know" can also be "butt rape" in old hebrew, apparently.

Here's the original King James version of Genesis 19:5


5 And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them.

In other words, feel free to stick your opinions you-know-where, I don't care about them.

[Crazed_Insanity]

I'm going to stick'em here if you don't mind... because obviously you enjoy reading them enough to respond to them. Most here couldn't care less...

Male mob demands to have sex with male visitors. What do you think would happen? You obviously agree with my interpretation and find it amusing too. So enjoy it. If you really don't enjoy it, then don't read it. Simple as that. Don't be so overly obsessed with a zealot too much. I'm really not worth your time. However, if you wish to join me and Rob to have a 3 some, you're certainly welcome to join in at any time. I'm game. Let's get to know each other better? :)

[Fiat500]

I've been thinking about this:

Several religions/ mythologies have thunder gods as their chief deity. Jupiter/ Zeus, Perun, Indra, Perkele etc.

But in northern Europe, the thunder god is a bit of a bumbling oaf, and often the object of ridicule.

Instead, we have the thunder god's daddy, the god of wisdom, magic, war and death.

Why is this?

Answers from fellow believers only, please.

[Rob]

in a religious thread.

You should probably go and find this 'religious' thread. This is the religion thread. There's a fairly obvious difference in content.

[Rob]

Billi, don't reductio ad absurdum this again by suggesting that only fringe elements of the christian faith promote and engage in homophobic behaviour.

The mainstream christian churches in pretty much every nation that had a discussion on gay marriage rights all started whining about it and protested it.

Even you voted against it. By your latest logic, you are a fringe WBC type. As is everyone you know who has ever voiced an argument against gay marriage.

[Rob]

But in northern Europe, the thunder god is a bit of a bumbling oaf, and often the object of ridicule.

I can't find it when I look now but I'm fairly certain I read that one of the origin stories for what became Thor was a large man on a cart pulled by donkeys (with their hooves evolving into thunder) and Mjolnir being his penis.

Did I dream this?

[21Kid]

The hammer is my penis?

[Rob]

I do call mine Mjolnir.

[21Kid]

You wood.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Billi, don't reductio ad absurdum this again by suggesting that only fringe elements of the christian faith promote and engage in homophobic behaviour.

The mainstream christian churches in pretty much every nation that had a discussion on gay marriage rights all started whining about it and protested it.

Even you voted against it. By your latest logic, you are a fringe WBC type. As is everyone you know who has ever voiced an argument against gay marriage.

Take slavery for example. Surely it wasn't easy to abolish slavery right away. Popular opinion at the time was that slavery was acceptable and a LOT of believers even thought it was their God given right to own/trade slaves! However, popular opinion doesn't make it right. Majority of believers could be wrong too. Christians are not Christ.

If it really were our God given right to own and abuse slaves, surely God would continue to allow us that right. Even left the Jews in Egypt to enjoy themselves as slaves. Any attempt to abolish it probably would not succeed. Bible for sure didn't include a law saying that thou shall own slaves! Having some regulatory laws doesn't mean we absolutely must own slaves. Just that if you do, you can only go thus far and not over. Anyway, so after a while, the majority of the folks realized that slavery probably ought to be banned outright so the movement began... and God obviously didn't object to us abolishing slavery.

I'd agree that yes, majority of the Christians probably are still against gay marriage, but that's not because of hatred toward homosexuals, they just think it's not right to practice homosexuality in an absolute sense. Whereas I do believe that love can make it okay. I do believe scripture supports my interpretation, but it'll certainly take time for this attitude to catch on. The tide is not going to turn over night, but the tide is beginning to turn. As more and more homosexuals began to come out of the closet, I've seen believing parents with gay child eventually embracing their kid... eventhough it was very shocking and difficult for them to accept at first. There are certainly lots of misunderstandings within the church with regard to homosexuality. But I believe things will eventually turn around. Unless my interpretation is wrong and God really hates fags..., but I'm pretty confident that I'm right and the WBC is wrong. I'm petty sure God loves ALL sinners unconditionally.

[Rob]

It's eminently possible that you are both very, very wrong.

Especially when you make idiotic comments like:

"but that's not because of hatred toward homosexuals, they just think it's not right to practice homosexuality"

[21Kid]

"I'm not racist. I just don't like that you're Asian."

[Crazed_Insanity]

Homosexual is a person.
Homosexuality is something a person can practice.

I cannot practice being an Asian.

Anyway, Rob, yes, If there's no God, then of course regardless of how one interprets scripture, it'd be all in vain.

The motto had been hate the sin, not the sinner. Christian church needs to remember that motto. We're all sinners, God didn't put us here to judge one another, but to love one another. Christian church hasn't be perfect I know... and the reason is that it is made up of bunch of sinners.

[21Kid]

They can practice being who they are as much as you can. Idiot.



Meaning 0%, if you don't understand.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Not trying to limit the amount of sex a homosexual can have. The point I'm driving at is that whatever people practice, as long as it's out of love, then it should be okay in God's eyes.

When we don't do it out of love, then nothing we practice would be pleasing to God.

When we have sex, God can see whether if we're fucking or making love. If we were to film it on camera, we may not be able to tell the difference whether those 2 love birds are fucking or making love, but God knows.

[Rob]

then it should be okay in God's eyes.

Dictating how your god should behave doesn't sound very humble. Certainly not humble enough to confirm to the christian bible.

[Rob]

"I'm not racist. I just don't like that you're Asian."

Nah, more like "I don't hate you because you're black, I just hate that you do black things".

[Crazed_Insanity]

Rob, the 'should' was only intended to show that I could be wrong with my interpretation. Not to be perceived as my God should do what I want Him to do.

And regarding doing 'black things', it all depends... If those 'black things' were done out of love, then there's no reason to hate it. If those 'black things' were done to fuck somebody over, then yeah, we definitely should hate those 'black things'.

[21Kid]

Not trying to limit the amount of sex a homosexual can have. The point I'm driving at is that whatever people practice, as long as it's out of love, then it should be okay in God's eyes.
That's not at all what you were talking about. But, okay.

When we don't do it out of love, then nothing we practice would be pleasing to God.
So, you're god is into watching?

When we have sex, God can see whether if we're fucking or making love. If we were to film it on camera, we may not be able to tell the difference whether those 2 love birds are fucking or making love, but God knows.
WTF does that have to do with anything? :? Or does he just enjoy watching?

[Rob]

If those 'black things' were done to fuck somebody over, then yeah, we definitely should hate those 'black things'.

Oh right. So now anything that you don't place under your really fucking weird definition of 'love' is 'fucking someone over'?

Every post....cuntier than the last. It's incredible.

Also, "we" should hate anything Billi doesn't deem 'love'. Vile, egotistical and not remotely "christian".

[Crazed_Insanity]

Kid, God can see and know all things of course. He enjoys that we love Him and love one another.

Besides defining sin and doing things God doesn't like, I was simply illustrating a point of sin is basically doing anythings without love.

Take "thou shall not kill" for example. Killing is supposedly a sin according to the bible. It'd be kinda hard to kill somebody perfectly healthy and justify that as a loving act. But if somebody were sick or injured and suffering and there's just not much medical help you can provide, then perhaps putting him out of his misery is the best thing to do. Under such circumstance, I don't believe God would see it as a sin.

[Rob]

Wait, that bit about killing was Old Testament. You said that those words didn't count anymore because of the New Testament.

Cherry-picking again.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Oh right. So now anything that you don't place under your really fucking weird definition of 'love' is 'fucking someone over'?

Every post....cuntier than the last. It's incredible.

Also, "we" should hate anything Billi doesn't deem 'love'. Vile, egotistical and not remotely "christian".

You don't have to use my definition of love. feel free to use yours.

Is it possible to do anything wrong if you do things out of Rob kinda love?

[Rob]

Don't try and deflect. Your definition of love purports to be that of your god. Mine doesn't. Mine is irrelevant to a discussion about religion.

Also, stop saying "we" when all you can vouch for is you.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Wait, that bit about killing was Old Testament. You said that those words didn't count anymore because of the New Testament.
Never said OT laws can be completely ignored. Jesus didn't come to abolish the old, but the fulfill the old. Nobody's perfect and therefore nobody can completely obey all of the laws in OT, so if wage of sin is really death, then all deserve to die. But the perfect Jesus died for us and paid our wages instead so we can have a chance to live.

My example also illustrate that OT laws are not as absolute and rigid as you think. Since we sinners can't be as perfect as God, most of these laws were in place to draw the line at the low points... Some of the bars are set pretty low... please just don't cross those lines!

If you can't love somebody, at least don't kill that somebody just because you hate him! But if you really Do have loving justifications for crossing that killing lines, I'm sure God can understand why you killed a suffering person.

This religion isn't just about letter of the laws, but the spirit of the laws.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Don't try and deflect. Your definition of love purports to be that of your god. Mine doesn't. Mine is irrelevant to a discussion about religion.

Also, stop saying "we" when all you can vouch for is you.

Not trying to deflect. Just thought you don't recognize bible's version of love so I invited to just consider your own kind of love. NT also tells us that Jesus taught that we should love others as we love ourselves. So even Jesus' not demanding that we go strictly by bible's definition of love. Whatever kind of love you can mustard, whatever you have to offer is good enough for Jesus. He's not demanding perfection here.

[21Kid]

Kid, God can see and know all things of course. He enjoys that we love Him and love one another.

Besides defining sin and doing things God doesn't like, I was simply illustrating a point of sin is basically doing anythings without love.

Take "thou shall not kill" for example. Killing is supposedly a sin according to the bible. It'd be kinda hard to kill somebody perfectly healthy and justify that as a loving act. But if somebody were sick or injured and suffering and there's just not much medical help you can provide, then perhaps putting him out of his misery is the best thing to do. Under such circumstance, I don't believe God would see it as a sin.

I think you're confused to what a 'sin' is.

sin/noun
1.an immoral act considered to be a transgression against divine law.

It has nothing to do with 'love'.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Jesus said the greatest Divine Laws are these: Love God and love one another.

I believe in Jesus.

[Rob]

Prove it. Without referencing the bible in any way as it is the very definition of Unreliable Narrator.

Also, whilst you are at it, explain where in either of our nation's laws that "divine law" applies.

Furthermore, you could show us how judging the actions (you don't like) of others constitutes either "loving god" or "loving one another" because I don't see the link.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Okay, I can only prove it using the Bible as source:

Mat22:36 “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”

37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

I believe both of our nations are not theocratic... so none of our laws are divine laws, but our secular laws certainly were most likely based on some of those divine laws in OT. With regard to these 2 greatest divine laws, our current legal system can't even cope with it... for just like God, it'd be difficult to prove love in any court of law. How can we present evidence for love? Can't.

If we could, then our legal system definitely would not be as messed up and we wouldn't need a thick freaking law book. Students in law schools only need to learn these 2 laws Jesus showed us. ;)

[Rob]

Prove it. Without referencing the bible in any way as it is the very definition of Unreliable Narrator.


Okay, I can only prove it using the Bible as source:

:lol:

Go back and answer the challenge as it was asked instead of doing your usual bullshit routine of ignoring everything asked of you.

[21Kid]

Take "thou shall not kill" for example. Killing is supposedly a sin according to the bible. It'd be kinda hard to kill somebody perfectly healthy and justify that as a loving act. But if somebody were sick or injured and suffering and there's just not much medical help you can provide, then perhaps putting him out of his misery is the best thing to do. Under such circumstance, I don't believe God would see it as a sin. :lol: I just can't get over the irony here. I don't even have to point out how ridiculous this is because you do it yourself.

[Crazed_Insanity]

:lol:

[Rob]

Don't distract him. I genuinely want to see if he can answer anything without "BECAUSE BIBLE".

EDIT: Oh no, he's just going to adopt his smokescreen belligerence and facetiousness because he's fucked royally over a barrel. Again.

Either that or he's sitting at a computer, loudly laughing at just how fucking stupid and insane he really is.

[Crazed_Insanity]

I've tried to used Einstein's theory of relativity to explain how 6 days could be 14 billion years.

I've tried to show you guys how the God blessed the Christian nations during the post bible days with modern day history... that Europeans are just as sinful if not more than the rest of the world, but due to their faith God still blessed them more.

I've also shown that people ought not to pick on Jews, God's chosen people. If you don't believe in the Moses story, hopefully Jew haters remembered what happened to the Nazis.

I've also shown how much we love one another even if it's in some sort of distorted kinda way. ;)

Seriously, I love you guys! Well chat again tomorrow? I need to get some work done. :P

[Rob]

I've tried to used Einstein's theory of relativity to explain how 6 days could be 14 billion years.

Irrelevant to my request.


I've tried to show you guys how the God blessed the Christian nations during the post bible days with modern day history... that Europeans are just as sinful if not more than the rest of the world, but due to their faith God still blessed them more.

Irrelevant to my request and just mad, coincidental bullshit.


I've also shown that people ought not to pick on Jews, God's chosen people. If you don't believe in the Moses story, hopefully Jew haters remembered what happened to the Nazis.

Irrelevant to my request and, likewise, entirely coincidental without material proof of any divine intervention.


I've also shown how much we love one another even if it's in some sort of distorted kinda way. ;)

Irrelevant to my request, untrue and a very dishonest definition of the words "we" and "love".


Seriously, I love you guys! :P

Irrelevant to my request and the entire discussion.

Try again.

If somebody purported to be as famous as the son of god said those words, there would be a multitude of recorded sources from all around the world. Look what happens when some reality TV cretin gets a new hat or some bullshit these days...

Very strange how the only "source" to corroborate for these claims is also the only record of the events themselves.

[tigeraid]

"Answer this question with irrefutable evidence and facts."

"Okay, let me just open my copy of The Hobbit and read from Chapter 12." :mad:


Edit: sorry. The Hobbit is more credible than The Bible. Lemme fix that.

"Answer this question with irrefutable evidence and facts."

"Okay, let me just open my copy of Twilight and read from Chapter 12." :mad:

[Rob]

I didn't even wall him in by demanding facts, I just asked for him to not reference the only place where you find the claim.

It's just so incredibly dishonest.

[Rob]

Well chat again tomorrow? I need to get some work done.

Or..."I have no intention of answering your request because I don't possess the intellect, resources, honesty or integrity to research it".

[FaultyMario]

I know the question was not directed at men, but I suppose there'd be theological or philological studies which do not reference the bible.
But that means taking the time to go thru them, and it'd suck to be told "not true ______ enough". So yeah, I'll just grab the popcorn.

[Rob]

I'd like the person making the claim to provide the substantiation.

It's already apparent that he made the claim blindly and with no prior knowledge, I'd just like to see if he has the integrity to actually go and educate himself or if he's just going to post irrelevant shit in an attempt to sidestep it.

There's something of a trend with his behaviour...

But given the debate over whether or not the man who claimed to be the son of god actually existed as a single person (and not just assorted charlatans/confidence tricksters over the years) in the first place, I would be genuinely amazed if there was anything approaching a reliable record of anything he said.

[21Kid]

If somebody purported to be as famous as the son of god said those words, there would be a multitude of recorded sources from all around the world. Look what happens when some reality TV cretin gets a new hat or some bullshit these days...

Very strange how the only "source" to corroborate for these claims is also the only record of the events themselves.

That's the thing that I find amusing. With how fast and available information is now-a-days. If anything happened anywhere in the world, we'd know it within minutes. Or even seconds. But, not a word in 2000 years? :erm: And only in the book that claims itself as evidence. Weird, huh? :rolleyes:

[Crazed_Insanity]

Okay, guys, this faith based stuff is what it is- faith based. Not evidence based. But of course the faith is still gotta be based on something, not just whatever some guy said. So that something for the believers is called the Bible. You don't have to believe it if you don't want to. God could still be doing His work and using prophets to give some prophetic sayings, but again, how can anyone really prove it's really from God?

If something good happened to you miraculously and you think God did it..., great, thank and praise God for it. If you believe it's just your luck and purely by chance..., that's fine too. It all depend on what you believe. There's no way to prove any of it.

The only ultimate proof is that supposedly someday Jesus will return and wrap everything up. If humanity ended up extincted like dinosaurs without ever seeing Christ return, then whoever the alien archaeologist studying human history can know for sure that Jesus Christ is indeed a fictional character. Now, if Jesus really were to make a return flying in from the sky, surely we'll be able to find out instantly from Facebook. Hopeful if someday you are face to face with Jesus, you'll be more willing to repent and believe. For now, if it's just too hard for you to believe..., that's okay. Take your time. God loves you and God has all the time there is to wait for you to return to Him. If you know with absolute certainty that you don't want to return to your Maker, that's fine too. God won't force us to love Him if we don't want to. It's all part of His design. I really have to get back to work now! Later. :p

[Rob]

I really have to get back to work now!

Yeah, that toddler isn't going to beat itself.

Uses the term "ultimate proof" and follows it with "supposedly".

Seems legit.

[sandydandy]

The only ultimate proof is that supposedly someday Jesus will return :?

Your "ultimate proof" is something supposedly happening?

[Fiat500]

I can't find it when I look now but I'm fairly certain I read that one of the origin stories for what became Thor was a large man on a cart pulled by donkeys (with their hooves evolving into thunder) and Mjolnir being his penis.

Did I dream this?

Heh, that's new to me, but I'm no expert. I'd follow that guy into war though.

In the mythology, Thor's chariot is pulled by two billy (hah!) goats, and their hooves and the general racket creates the thunder.

The name Mjolnir is related to the english "mill", in that it grinds/ smashes Thor's enemies to dust.
It was made by two dwarves, he did not rip it from his groin, although how cool wouldn't that be?

[tigeraid]

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m2lvyykv7k1rp8cq1o1_500.jpg

[Rob]

407

[21Kid]

:?

Your "ultimate proof" is something supposedly happening?

Some farmers wrote a book about it. So... there's that.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Yeah, although I'm a believer, surely I could still doubt, right? It's not like it's impossible for believers to doubt.

Just as when God promised Abraham that he'll be father of many nations at the time when he and his wife were pretty old and still childless! Abraham had great faith, but understandably still doubted a bit so they tried to have a child with a younger maidservant of his wife(with wife's permission of course). Eventually God did allow Abraham and his wife to have a child of their own, but even during his lifetime, Abraham saw himself having 2 sons, 1 born with the servant woman(under the law by flesh) and 1 born under God's promise by faith. Two is still not quite the # as numerous as the stars or sand on the seashores as promised by God..., but if Abraham can to look down from heaven today, he can certainly see great # of his descendants. Whether biologically related to him by genes or spiritually related to him by faith(we're all one big family as God's children).

Anyway, so although I believe Jesus will return based on what the bible said, 1st of all, Bible could be wrong, right? Surely you guys can agree to that? Of course if Bible is wrong than my faith would be based on something bogus. Further, although Jesus is supposedly returning soon, but nobody knows exactly when. If 6 days of creation was indeed about 14 billion years our time and God is resting on the 7th day..., by the time next Monday comes, who knows how many billions of years will go by? ;) Plus, # of believers we have right now, although very many, but probably still not at a level of stars in the universe or sand on all the beaches, right? So maybe God will be waiting a bit more so population of believers may increase. So I may never be able to physically witness Jesus flying back like Superman or Neo within my lifetime. Anyway, I just don't know I guess. If I do get a chance to see it, great. If I don't and I'll just meet him after I die. No biggie. If he is indeed fictional, then after I die, I wouldn't even find out I'd been fooled all these time! :p

But anyway, if after you guys pass away and if you actually end up facing Jesus or see Jesus flying back to earth like Neo, please do remember to repent and try to believe, okay? Of course, if you're pretty sure you're not going to like Jesus described in the bible, then maybe eternity with him would be too unbearable for you... then maybe you can just tell him that yeah, you'd rather perish than to live under his loving rule. Jesus really wants to give us eternal life, but we certain can refuse if we want.

And if I die and end up seeing Thor face to face instead..., then of course I'd ask nicely to play with his hammer if he's wiling. (And I meant the real hammer!) ;)

[21Kid]

...So I may never be able to physically witness Jesus flying back like Superman or Neo within my lifetime. Anyway, I just don't know I guess. If I do get a chance to see it, great. It's funny how you reference two other fictional characters in the same light, since neither is going to happen.



If I don't and I'll just meet him after I die. No biggie. Except you'll have wasted your entire life believing in something fictional. And living your life based on a lie.


If he is indeed fictional, then after I die, I wouldn't even find out I'd been fooled all these time! :pexactly.



But anyway, if after you guys pass away and if you actually end up facing Jesus or see Jesus flying back to earth like Neo, please do remember to repent and try to believe, okay?I've been telling you this all along. Give me 1 piece of evidence that your (or any other) religion is real and I'll become a 'true believer' right there. You'd think it would be easy considering how many people there are in the world and how easy information is accessible. Yet, no one has ever seen anything. It's pretty telling, to me, that out of the entire population of the world, no one has seen anything at all.
One would think that would have some effect on the remaining believers. I guess it is having an effect actually since the % of people that believe in religion is falling faster and faster every year.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Like I've said, God Himself wanted this to be 'faith based'. Meaning He basically wants to choose people who'd choose to 'believe' Him. God is not quite like Santa, if you're good then you goto heaven and if you're bad then you goto hell. Faith is His only main criteria. If we can really prove it with solid evidence, what is there to 'believe'? You will have absolutely no choice but to accept! If we can mathematically prove that 1+1=2. Why would you need faith to believe that 1+1=2? How can you even deny that 1+1=2? Now if you don't really know math and somebody asks you what does 1+1 equal to? And if your daddy says '2' and you believe him..., then you'd answer '2'! And think about it, can atheists really live comfortably in heaven where people supposed all know the existence of God? God knows they'll be uncomfortable, so God won't force them to come to heaven if they don't want to.

Further, scripture also stated that God is love. So similarly, can we really prove love? Not scientifically or logically or in any reasonable fashion, right? If a girl says she loves you and you're rich..., how can you prove that she really loves you? If you love a gal with all your heart..., so how can you prove your love to her scientifically, logically or in any reasonable manner that she'd actually know without doubt? What evidence can you provide? Big diamond? But what if you can't afford it? What else do you have to show for that you'll love her forever and ever or at least for all of your life? You can't, can you?

However, as abstract as love can be, we can still do things to show how much we love somebody. Those 'things' cannot conclusively prove without a doubt, but it's better than nothing.

Similarly, there are 'things' that I see that seems like it's God's doing. Bible has a long history. Longer than the Matrix or Superman comic book. Dead Sea scrolls confirm that Bible wasn't just made up recently. It's been around for a long time... and amazingly it is still relevant to many believers today.

Other things such as people better not mess with God's chosen people, the Jews, seems to be true... whether if you're ancient Egyptian Pharaoh or relatively modern Nazi. You mess with Jews, you're basically messing with God. You're not going to end up well... and chances are you'll be extincted and Jews will continue to flourish. I've also mention how God blesses Christian nations if you look at secular history.

But of course my claims cannot conclusively proven that it's really God who did it. They are just some clues. One can still believe that Jews just got lucky that they didn't get wiped out... with so many people hating them, it's only a matter of time? Or the Western nations' superiority is all due to perfect alignment of guns, steel and germs working in their favor. Historians can have many speculations, but no historian can really know the real truth with absolute certainty, right?

And don't forget my personal experiences with God. (Which of course you guys can also discount if you want, but at least I believe it's God's doing...)

So I don't think my faith is entirely baseless. I'm not so dumb to be willing to actually believe in Superman or FSM, but based on the Bible's heritage and based on recent secular Jewish and Christian history and based on personal experience... although I have no solid evidence that can prove anything, I'm more willing to give God the benefit of the doubt. Plus, Christ's teaching isn't bad. It is not as anti-science, pro-slavery and gay bashing or child abusing as most think it is. Even if I got my faith wrong, I think I can still live a very happy and fulfilling life by following Jesus' teachings.

[21Kid]

Like I've said, God Himself wanted this to be 'faith based'. convenient.

I'm not so dumb to be willing to actually believe in Superman or FSM... So, you're not dumb enough to believe in something with no proof of it being real, while believing in something with no proof of it being real? :lol:

[Crazed_Insanity]

How convenient you choose to ignore my other points and continue to pretend that Bible is exactly like any other comic books. Anyway, like I said, you are certainly free to choose whether to believe or not to believe. It's all part of the design. There will be folks who choose to believe and there will be folks who choose to not believe. In time, we'll all find out the real truth. In the mean time, enjoy life while we can! :)

[sandydandy]

Some farmers wrote a book about it. So... there's that. That's why I prefer Marvel's cosmic universe.

Then again, even that's become too convoluted.

[Rob]

In the mean time, enjoy life while we can! :)

Or at least until some religion campaigns to deny you of your rights or even turn them into crimes.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Even in a world full of atheists, hateful campaigns that target a certain group can still be started.
Even in a world full of atheists, surely there'll continue to be crimes.

Yes, WBC folks twisted Christ's teaching to bring forth something hateful, but it's not really Jesus' fault. Even if we can prove without any doubt that Jesus is fictional, homophobes will continue to exist.

[Rob]

Even in a thread full of evidence-based questions, Billi will still strawman them all.

[LHutton]

He thinks it's okay to abuse children, because of his religious beliefs.
And where did he say that?


He believes women are inferior to me, because of his religious beliefs.
:lol:

On a more serious note. The reason women got equal rights wasn't for the right reason and there is obviously a 'right reason'. The reason they got equality was to double the labour supply and reduce wages whilst increasing output, hence moving things slightly closer to slave-like conditions. Then by basing the official inflation figures on things like netflix instead of food and accommodation, they make damn sure there's no good reason for the minimum wage to ever rise. All pro-equality moves have a hidden financial incentive.

The other thing I'm getting a lot in this thread is that if the Bible says something bad, it's taken literally but if some foreign government or cult draws on an interpretation to justify persecuting 'sinners' (which the Bible actually specifically says you shouldn't), then the Bible is still to blame for their interpretation. Then there's randomly blaming things on religion like this child abuse thing:

http://biblehub.com/mark/9-42.htm

Aside from the fact that 'smacking' is something generally condoned by the 'older' population and they see the absence of it as contributory to declining standards of child discipline. They also recommend bringing back 'national service', something else not specifically mentioned in the Bible. It's also apparent how many contributors seem to have completely overlooked anything good it says in the Bible to find specific bad points and when they can't, just making random allegations of blame.

I only tend to briefly look in here at weekends but most of the arguments I see on both sides are horseshit based on opinions/hate.

[LHutton]

That's exactly the issue though. If you look at the horrible shit he's spouted for years, it's not about him "budging" it's about him spreading a disease that humanity needn't put up with.

.....THEY are what is wrong with society.....
Urr hurr... Zeig Heil atheist Hitler.

[Kchrpm]

Very interesting discussion with a science and religion nerd who has always loved science, but had an up and down relationship with religion.

http://www.nerdist.com/2014/04/you-made-it-weird-201-science-mike-mchargue/

His website: http://mikemchargue.com/

[Rob]

Urr hurr... Zeig Heil atheist Hitler.

And you'll see how I, as the atheist Hitler, have caused not even the tiniest fraction of death, pain and suffering as the historically recorded christian Hitler.

Otherwise, great point.

[tigeraid]

No no no, all those damn facts about Hitler are wrong, listen to your pastor! He was a filthy atheist!

[LHutton]

And you'll see how I, as the atheist Hitler, have caused not even the tiniest fraction of death, pain and suffering as the historically recorded christian Hitler.

Otherwise, great point.
1st Commandment - Thou shalt not kill.....

Otherwise great point, thanks for playing.

[Rob]

1st Commandment - Thou shalt not kill.....

Otherwise great point, thanks for playing.


http://www.goddiscussion.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/we-tolerate-no-one-in-our-ranks-who-attacks-the-ideas-of-christianity-our-movement-is-christian-adolf-hitler1-330x244.jpg

I guess Hitler must have been the same sort of christian Billi keeps talking about. A sinner by default but since his sin was in the Old Testament, it doesn't count.

Furthermore, there's a bit in Matthew that certainly implies that if you believe and have faith, you get whatever you ask for....I would imagine, due to no obvious clauses or caveats, that would include forgiveness.

So by their own rules, actual Hitler, not atheist Hitler, is probably in the heaven christians rattle on about. Cognitive Dissonance, how does it work?

And you still seem to be parroting words and phrases you just read without any sense of comprehension. A bit Aspergers are you?

[Rob]

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/--f-PfPOPibw/To-Tn2iF_VI/AAAAAAAACaU/KWv7NTAVg6g/s400/christian_hitler.jpg

http://lh3.ggpht.com/_6-Uxg3BTLvg/TZdhjlVRLyI/AAAAAAAACfU/aRaFhqABExQ/hitler-1.jpg?imgmax=800

I guess he didn't realise that the interpretation of the bible held by Billi and Z07 overrides his own beliefs and that he was somehow barred from being christian based on their valuable insight into the word of god.

[LHutton]

http://www.goddiscussion.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/we-tolerate-no-one-in-our-ranks-who-attacks-the-ideas-of-christianity-our-movement-is-christian-adolf-hitler1-330x244.jpg

I guess Hitler must have been the same sort of christian Billi keeps talking about. A sinner by default but since his sin was in the Old Testament, it doesn't count.

Furthermore, there's a bit in Matthew that certainly implies that if you believe and have faith, you get whatever you ask for....I would imagine, due to no obvious clauses or caveats, that would include forgiveness.

So by their own rules, actual Hitler, not atheist Hitler, is probably in the heaven christians rattle on about. Cognitive Dissonance, how does it work?
Cognitive dissonance works by attempting to associate one person's misinterpretation with what is actually in the religion. I.e. "Thou shalt not kill." "Judge not lest ye shall be judged." "Vengeance is mine sayeth the Lord." "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

All of these statements say that what Hitler did was wrong, but because he said he was Christian, that makes him a Christian problem? I suppose when a football hooligan with a union jack tattoo causes trouble that's our fault somehow. Just stop the bullshit dude.

[LHutton]

I guess he didn't realise that the interpretation of the bible held by Billi and Z07 overrides his own beliefs and that he was somehow barred from being christian based on their valuable insight into the word of god.
More horseshit (see above). I suppose Communist oppression was the fault of religion too.

[Rob]

We aren't talking about the cause of Hitler's murderous decisions. We are comparing atheist Hitler with actual Hitler.

Keep up. You even started this particular conversation.

[LHutton]

We aren't talking about the cause of Hitler's murderous decisions. We are comparing atheist Hitler with actual Hitler.

Keep up. You even started this particular conversation.
"Spreading their disease"..... "they are what's wrong with society".....

I hope you can see why I brought atheist Hitler into this.

FWIW Hitler didn't kill anyone personally either. He just provided some dangerous words.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Very interesting discussion with a science and religion nerd who has always loved science, but had an up and down relationship with religion.

http://www.nerdist.com/2014/04/you-made-it-weird-201-science-mike-mchargue/

His website: http://mikemchargue.com/

This guy seem to have the right balance of reason and faith. Thanks for the link.

[Crazed_Insanity]

http://www.goddiscussion.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/we-tolerate-no-one-in-our-ranks-who-attacks-the-ideas-of-christianity-our-movement-is-christian-adolf-hitler1-330x244.jpg



So when US fought against this Christian movement, does it mean USA was an anti-Christian nation?

Even from within US, when we have our civil war, was it really the atheist north against Christian south?

Are u really THAT simple minded?

Yes, WBC is supposedly a Christian church too. However, that does not prove that they're really doing God's will. Can you really prove Hitler is not a liar? Billi is a liar yet you believe Hitler's words without demanding any proof?

[Crazed_Insanity]

I only tend to briefly look in here at weekends but most of the arguments I see on both sides are horseshit based on opinions/hate.
I think your time would be better served if you'd just let Rob go and engage in discussions with me. I'd like to know what I said which you think is horse shit.

[Rob]

I think your time would be better served if you'd just let Rob go and engage in discussions with me. I'd like to know what I said which you think is horse shit.

It probably won't be the bit about beating children, Z07 threatened Nigel's kids at the old place before he got banned.

[Rob]

FWIW Hitler didn't kill anyone personally either. He just provided some dangerous words.

Technically incorrect. He killed himself. But if we're talking dangerous words, religious text has easily the biggest death toll associated with its "words" compared to literally anything else.

[LHutton]

Technically incorrect. He killed himself. But if we're talking dangerous words, religious text has easily the biggest death toll associated with its "words" compared to literally anything else.
Only due to misinterpretation, or really exercising practice that specifically conflicts with the text to be more accurate. So really, no it doesn't. Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot, all completely went against religion doctrine. WWI religious? Nope. Vietnam religious? Nope. Sino-Vietnamese War religious? Nope. Korean War religious? Nope. So another completely invalid point then.

[Rob]

Or actually by its direct alleged actions. The entire population of the planet barring two humans was killed in the floods, as detailed in Genesis.

The religion you are trying to absolve of murder actually boasts about the huge numbers of people killed in the name of its god in the first book of the only recorded "history" that it claims is the only true word of god.

If the bible is true, then every Abrahamic religion that grew from it has an entire planet's worth of human blood on its hands BEFORE the end of the first book.

The alternative is that it's not true. So everything done in the name of god as per the bible is a lie.

The largest incident of genocide ever or the longest standing crock of shit.

Choose your side.

[Fiat500]

I think your time would be better served if you'd just let Rob go and engage in discussions with me. I'd like to know what I said which you think is horse shit.

Ooh, this has potential. Make it so!

[Dicknose]

Genocide is ok if it's done because of love.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Genocide is ok if it's done because of love.
Is that really possible or you are going to be just like Rob now?

[LHutton]

Or actually by its direct alleged actions. The entire population of the planet barring two humans was killed in the floods, as detailed in Genesis.

The religion you are trying to absolve of murder actually boasts about the huge numbers of people killed in the name of its god in the first book of the only recorded "history" that it claims is the only true word of god.

If the bible is true, then every Abrahamic religion that grew from it has an entire planet's worth of human blood on its hands BEFORE the end of the first book.

The alternative is that it's not true. So everything done in the name of god as per the bible is a lie.

The largest incident of genocide ever or the longest standing crock of shit.

Choose your side.
So because people were killed in a flood, you believe that instructs Hitler to conduct the Holocaust? Convenient how when it comes to specific instructions not to kill, judge or take any kind of vengeance against other people (even 'sinners'), you choose to ignore your own policy of taking everything literally and resort to the kind of obscure 'interpretation' you've previously criticised,

Personally I blame Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism too. After all, his entire army was adorned with the swastika.:rolleyes:

Rob logic:

"Thou shalt not kill" -> 6 million person Holocaust

"Judge not..." -> Supremacism

"Vengeance is mine alone..." -> Revenge for WWI and financial oppression

As regards the 'choices' made by 'God', there are so many ways of looking at that. If you could go back in time and kill Hitler before WWII, would you? Or supposing you were back in time and you could see the future would you? Since the Bible alleges that God has this kind of ability, every decision he makes can be assumed to be correct because of this unique perspective. Of course half the shit probably didn't happen and the book was written by mortals but that is the essence of it. Since man doesn't have this unique capacity, this is probably why the Bible instructs them not to take vengeance into their own hands.

I'm not saying I buy into this book at all, just don't try to twist everything to fit your agenda and start using Nazi-esque discriminatory phrases to describe religious people.

[Crazed_Insanity]

LHutton, I'm really curious exactly what's preventing you from buying the Bible? Can we talk about it?

Seriously, Rob is only in this argument just for the sake of arguing. I made a typos and said something opposite of what I meant and Rob ended up disagreeing with that. After I fixed the typo, Rob still disagreed with my 180 degree opposing view. I can go all 360 degrees and Rob's not going to agree with me... chances are, he's going to disagree with whatever you said too. If you enjoy chatting with Rob as much as I do, yeah, sure you can continue..., but I'd really like to hear exactly what's holding you back from actually believing the Bible.

[Rob]

Seriously, Rob is only in this argument just for the sake of arguing. I made a typos and said something opposite of what I meant and Rob ended up disagreeing with that. After I fixed the typo, Rob still disagreed with my 180 degree opposing view. I can go all 360 degrees and Rob's not going to agree with me... chances are, he's going to disagree with whatever you said too. If you enjoy chatting with Rob as much as I do, yeah, sure you can continue..., but I'd really like to hear exactly what's holding you back from actually believing the Bible.

Still maintaining that 100% delusion-per-post hit rate, I see.

Debating Z07 is utterly pointless. His constant attempts to straw-man the conversation and make completely irrelevant comparisons contribute nothing at all to the topic. Nobody else cares a toss about politically motivated killings in this thread because we already have a politics thread. Take it there and get completely destroyed by josh/stabs like you did last time.

There was even a hastily deleted post from him a day or so ago saying words to the affect of "hi I'm the government, give me your money." without a single mention of any religion related concept.

For all his delusions, Billi will at least engage in the topic as per the thread title.

[Rob]

I've got to say though, if the Jews are god's chosen people, he looks mighty cuntish for standing around with his arms folded, doing nothing whilst 6 million of them were slaughtered by a force (according to apologists/Z07) misusing his name.

It's almost like he doesn't actually exist...

[LHutton]

Debating Z07 is utterly pointless. His constant attempts to straw-man the conversation and make completely irrelevant comparisons contribute nothing at all to the topic. Nobody else cares a toss about politically motivated killings in this thread because we already have a politics thread. Take it there and get completely destroyed by josh/stabs like you did last time.
Yeah..... don't know what you're talking about.



There was even a hastily deleted post from him a day or so ago saying words to the affect of "hi I'm the government, give me your money." without a single mention of any religion related concept.

Which I expanded on the following day, when sober, in post 367. Basically religion has become inconvenient for governments now and so they make all kinds of nasty PR until people, who genuinely believe they're thinking for themselves, hit out at it.


I've got to say though, if the Jews are god's chosen people, he looks mighty cuntish for standing around with his arms folded, doing nothing whilst 6 million of them were slaughtered by a force (according to apologists/Z07) misusing his name.

It's almost like he doesn't actually exist...
Free will is a bitch isn't it? Lucifer apparently thought it was a shit idea too.

Another episode of Rob logic:

When God intervenes in the Bible - he's a genocidal maniac.

When God doesn't intervene - he's mighty cuntish.

Religion involved - God's fault.

Religion not involved - still God's fault for not intervening, "mighty cuntish" of him.

It's great that you're using religion to absolve humanity of their sins but this really isn't quite how it's supposed to work.

Fuck only knows what you'd do if you saw someone cycling away from church on the pavement and then jumping a red light. Probably kill them and then blame God for not intervening and religion for putting the church there for the cyclist to cycle from, and for them cycling on the pavement and jumping the red. You may not be religious but you certainly have a firmly grounded belief in absolution. Why take responsibility when you can blame religion?

Anyway I'm done for this weekend, I'll leave you to continue your religious cleansing unobstructed until I get bored again.

[Rob]

Which I expanded on the following day, when sober, in post 367. Basically religion has become inconvenient for governments now and so they make all kinds of nasty PR until people, who genuinely believe they're thinking for themselves, hit out at it.

Saudi Arabia and most of the Middle Eastern nations sort of contradict your assertion. And by 'sort of', I mean completely.


When God intervenes in the Bible - he's a genocidal maniac.

When God doesn't intervene - he's mighty cuntish.

See, the bible is allegedly the indisputable word of god. You don't get to question it as that makes you a heretic, punishable by death. This purported character involves himself to kill millions and millions of people in total over a wide variety of situations.

Then, when people (his "chosen" people, no less) are being murdered by the millions IN REAL LIFE, he does nothing.

Technically, the only logic in this is that he loves seeing humans die, regardless of who or how. So yeah, I said he was cuntish.

Either that, or the whole thing was down to humans and he doesn't exist at all, especially since there's actually no recorded or reviewed historical data to suggest that any of his claimed interventions ever happened.


Religion involved - God's fault.

Religion not involved - still God's fault for not intervening, "mighty cuntish" of him.

Can't have religion without an object of worship. Especially true when that object is seemingly full of insane, vengeful and judgmental violence upon those apparently created in his image. Take away the god bullshit and the religion nonsense follows.

Again, if he existed, he could be doing a hell of a lot more than the nothing-at-all that he achieves now. If he exists, he's a cunt. But he doesn't.


It's great that you're using religion to absolve humanity of their sins but this really isn't quite how it's supposed to work.

That's the very definition of how christianity is supposed to work, you twit.

You are born sinners and by employing ultimate faith and belief in your god, you are absolved of all sin.


Fuck only knows what you'd do if you saw someone cycling away from church on the pavement and then jumping a red light. Probably kill them and then blame God for not intervening and religion for putting the church there for the cyclist to cycle from, and for them cycling on the pavement and jumping the red.

Irrelevant speculation and opinion based on a conversation about an entirely different topic. You suggest that I'd "probably kill them" but that just shows you have absolutely no reading comprehension. Nowhere have I suggested I'd murder anyone, for anything. If that thought exists in your head, I'd suggest you take a long look at yourself because you seem to make leaps of logic and conclusion that simply don't exist.

There's another thread for the cycling aspect of your retarded ramblings which you know exists because you commented in it with this gem:

"It's not deflection, it's just re-focusing the debate".

You're proving my point about not being able to stay on topic, constantly making irrelevant comments about nothing related to the discussion. I guess you're just "re-focusing the debate" again.

[Rob]

Why take responsibility when you can blame religion?

http://i2.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/012/132/thatsthejoke.jpg

[LHutton]

http://i2.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/012/132/thatsthejoke.jpg
Impressive - a 3 word JPEG with a grammatical error.


Saudi Arabia and most of the Middle Eastern nations sort of contradict your assertion. And by 'sort of', I mean completely.
Yeah I was clearly talking about religious governments in the Middle East because naturally they would be spreading PR against themselves.:rolleyes: You've somehow managed to get the wrong end of the stick there and by 'somehow managed' I mean 'deliberately'.



See, the bible is allegedly the indisputable word of god. You don't get to question it as that makes you a heretic, punishable by death.
Which is again not something the Bible actually told anyone to do.



This purported character involves himself to kill millions and millions of people in total over a wide variety of situations.
Already covered that. 12,000,000 Germans and Japanese had to be killed to win WWII including 4,000,000 civilians. The purported character is also able to see the end from the beginning, isn't prone to rash action and is infallible. So using the Bible to prove God's actions to be wrong is impossible simply because it says he can't be wrong based on future consequences that only he could foresee.

What it also says (for the second, third or fourth time) is, "leave it to me FFS", paraphrased of course.



Then, when people (his "chosen" people, no less) are being murdered by the millions IN REAL LIFE, he does nothing.
How 'mighty cuntish' of him. Maybe people criticising his earlier mass-murders put him off. Of course absolutely no soldier on the Allied side was Christian or religious in any way and if they were you're choosing not to associate their courage with their faith.



Technically, the only logic in this is that he loves seeing humans die, regardless of who or how. So yeah, I said he was cuntish.
Yes outstandingly logical.:? If he does nothing, he's watching people die, if he intervenes he's killing people and watching them die. On the same basis both Chamberlain and Churchill were wrong for completely opposing stances on Nazi aggression. Very logical. I think I could learn a thing or two here. Perhaps he should have used the 'Freeze Gallifrey' approach.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0n6Op9J313k



Either that, or the whole thing was down to humans
You don't say? Does that mean we can blame them now?



Can't have religion without an object of worship.
Sorry but you've just made that up.


Especially true when that object is seemingly full of insane, vengeful and judgmental violence upon those apparently created in his image. Take away the god bullshit and the religion nonsense follows.
Only if someone intent on 'cleansing society' of religious people chooses to work on the basis that, if God exists everything is his fault regardless. Oh and if a person purporting to be religious does something wrong, it's because of their religion, even if said action is contrary to that religion. Wouldn't it be fantastic if we applied the same logic to race, gender and sexuality?



Again, if he existed, he could be doing a hell of a lot more than the nothing-at-all that he achieves now. If he exists, he's a cunt. But he doesn't.
Again same old bullshit 3-pronged argument structure re-fabricated anew. If he intervenes - madman. If he doesn't intervene - cunt. If he doesn't exist - religion is to blame for all mankind's failings.



That's the very definition of how christianity is supposed to work, you twit.
But not how absolution is supposed to work, which is what I actually said.



You are born sinners and by employing ultimate faith and belief in your god, you are absolved of all sin.
Not by simply blaming everything you do on religion and/or God? You were doing such an efficient job there too.



Irrelevant speculation and opinion based on a conversation about an entirely different topic.
Mind-blowing hypocrisy, an opinion based on your observed behaviour.



You suggest that I'd "probably kill them" but that just shows you have absolutely no reading comprehension. Nowhere have I suggested I'd murder anyone, for anything.
I was only extrapolating your Bible analysis logic. Simply by finding religion and cyclists morally repugnant in some way, you are automatically green-lighting their execution surely?


If that thought exists in your head, I'd suggest you take a long look at yourself because you seem to make leaps of logic and conclusion that simply don't exist.
Ya, don't you just hate it when people pull that shit? :lol:


There's another thread for the cycling aspect of your retarded ramblings which you know exists because you commented in it with this gem:

"It's not deflection, it's just re-focusing the debate".

You're proving my point about not being able to stay on topic, constantly making irrelevant comments about nothing related to the discussion. I guess you're just "re-focusing the debate" again.
"Come in kettle, this is pot. You are black. Over.":lol:

[Rob]

Anyway I'm done for this weekend

Credibility. In six words.

[Rob]

Yeah I was clearly talking about religious governments in the Middle East because naturally they would be spreading PR against themselves.

You said "governments". You didn't specify which. You made a nebulous statement which you then had to contradict yourself.


Which is again not something the Bible actually told anyone to do.

Exodus 20 1:26


So using the Bible to prove God's actions to be wrong is impossible simply because it says he can't be wrong based on future consequences that only he could foresee.

What it also says (for the second, third or fourth time) is, "leave it to me FFS", paraphrased of course.

Actually, it just proves that this god is either impotent, cuntish or doesn't exist. See also The Black Death, Cancer, famine etc.

Isaiah 45:7
King James Version (KJV)
7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.


Maybe people criticising his earlier mass-murders put him off.

What a wonderfully balanced character he is too. Not remotely petty or unable to take criticism. Sounds cunty. Sounds like a man-made construct.


Of course absolutely no soldier on the Allied side was Christian or religious in any way and if they were you're choosing not to associate their courage with their faith.

Courage is a personal trait. Take the silly beliefs away and you still have a courageous person.


Yes outstandingly logical.:? If he does nothing, he's watching people die, if he intervenes he's killing people and watching them die.

Far more rational to believe that he doesn't exist then.


Perhaps he should have used the 'Freeze Gallifrey' approach.

Dr Who? Really? The Dane Cook of sci-fi? What's next? A Big Bang Theory reference?


Does that mean we can blame them now?

We could blame them all along. Especially those cunts who base their bigoted actions on the word of a non-existent sky fairy. Unfortunately, they (and their banal supporters) pass those beliefs on and poison their children to the world.


Sorry but you've just made that up.

Name some religions that don't feature an object of worship.


Oh and if a person purporting to be religious does something wrong, it's because of their religion, even if said action is contrary to that religion.

You are not the judge of a faithful person's motives. If they say their actions are based on their beliefs, then they are. Regardless and (actually, looking at the most popular Christian bigotries) in spite of the rules of their religion. Christianity only asks for faith.


Again same old bullshit 3-pronged argument structure re-fabricated anew. If he intervenes - madman. If he doesn't intervene - cunt. If he doesn't exist - religion is to blame for all mankind's failings.

Whole lot of straw in here. Are you planning on keeping horses?


Simply by finding religion and cyclists morally repugnant in some way, you are automatically green-lighting their execution surely?

Ladies and gentlemen; The thought processes of a religious apologist and 'spergy internet warrior. Projecting much?

[Crazed_Insanity]

Sigh, looks like LHutton loves Rob more than Billi. Stealing my lover away from me while never even respond to me at all... :(

Anyway, here's last sunday's message for those interested.

http://www.go2faith.com/video-on-demand.html

[LHutton]

You said "governments". You didn't specify which. You made a nebulous statement which you then had to contradict yourself.
I think I assumed too much on the abilities of the reader. I apologise.



Exodus 20 1:26
"You shall not commit murder."



Actually, it just proves that this god is either impotent, cuntish or doesn't exist. See also The Black Death, Cancer, famine etc.
Isaiah 45:7
King James Version (KJV)
7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.
Wouldn't be much of a life without trials and struggle.



What a wonderfully balanced character he is too. Not remotely petty or unable to take criticism. Sounds cunty. Sounds like a man-made construct.
You criticise action and inaction the same. The "cunty" bit is that either is necessary. Who's to blame for that?



Courage is a personal trait. Take the silly beliefs away and you still have a courageous person.
True courage requires belief in a cause. Who can determine what is "silly" or not.



Far more rational to believe that he doesn't exist then.
Yes, the universe created itself from fluctuations in vacuum energy. That sounds logical to me. Check in box.



Dr Who? Really? The Dane Cook of sci-fi? What's next? A Big Bang Theory reference?
It was a compromise between doing something and doing nothing. You abhor both, so I thought "simply" freezing time would provide you with an agreeable solution to those of great cuntishness, i.e fucking humans.



We could blame them all along. Especially those cunts who base their bigoted actions on the word of a non-existent sky fairy. Unfortunately, they (and their banal supporters) pass those beliefs on and poison their children to the world.
Are you talking about the media or religion? I get so confused. It's like paddling in a pool of horseshit from where I'm sitting.



Name some religions that don't feature an object of worship.
Monotheism. Now name any other ideology, "capitalism etc." that doesn't feature an object of worship/bullshit.



You are not the judge of a faithful person's motives. If they say their actions are based on their beliefs, then they are. Regardless and (actually, looking at the most popular Christian bigotries) in spite of the rules of their religion. Christianity only asks for faith.
Yes, actions are based on beliefs but if religious text runs counter to those beliefs, then how is religion to blame? You're evading the question. My only point here is that you can't blame religion for shit it specifically says not to do. Just as you can't blame the law for criminal activity. I'm happy to see people question the moral code of the Bible but blaming it for the holocaust is seriously far-fetched and like blaming capitalism for theft. In fact, given that the Bible is an Abrahamic religion, blaming it for the slaughter of Jews is like blaming Marvel for the bombing of a Spiderman convention.



Whole lot of straw in here. Are you planning on keeping horses?
Give me a valid argument and you shall see no straw.



Ladies and gentlemen; The thought processes of a religious apologist and 'spergy internet warrior. Projecting much?
Simply applying your Bible analysis logic in a more generalised sense. I'm glad you see it as retarded. I'll take that as a win. Thanks.

In summary. Happy to hear questioning of Bible morality. Unhappy to see accusations wrt the Bible and the Holocaust.

[LHutton]

Sigh, looks like LHutton loves Rob more than Billi. Stealing my lover away from me while never even respond to me at all... :(

Anyway, here's last sunday's message for those interested.

http://www.go2faith.com/video-on-demand.html
Terrorist.:mad:

[LHutton]

Hitler references - Rob x2.

Hitler refers to Christianity and government/media refers to "humanity" or "freedom", which in their context means fucking neither.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Dude! Enough of stealing my lover Robbie! Leave him alone!

Anyway, so do you believe in God or not?

[FaultyMario]

21, F, London.

[Cam]

I've been ignoring this thread and will after this post. I feel it's appropriate to put this anecdote here.

I participated in an anonymous survey for a group in the Psych department the other day. There were hundreds of questions, but one of them asked my religious affiliation or something to that effect. I put "Infidel" in the blank.

Back to your regularly scheduled puerile debate.

[overpowered]

Alabama’s chief justice: Buddha didn’t create us so First Amendment only protects Christians (http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/05/02/alabamas-chief-justice-buddha-didnt-create-us-so-first-amendment-only-protects-christians/?onswipe_redirect=no&oswrr=1)

[Dicknose]

Scary that this person is a judge.

[tigeraid]

Well, isn't he a piece of shit.

[overpowered]

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc1/t1.0-9/10177454_441733839305216_4966651046157179362_n.jpg

[LHutton]

So what if someone saw his beard and fucked him, thinking he was a goat. Is that lust, sin, or tainted goat?

[Rob]

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/pregnant-christian-woman-sudan-sentenced-death-apostasy-n105961

Religion; so good for the world.

[Dicknose]

The Khartoum embassies of the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom and Holland expressed their opposition to the case in a joint statement.

"We call upon the government of Sudan to respect the right to freedom of religion, including one's right to change one's faith or beliefs," the statement said.

Unfortunately there is no such right - not in a country that decides its controlling your religion.

How are these countries allowed to be part of the UN, when its clearly against UN declaration of human rights?
I know the UN can be a bit of joke, but kick them out and encourage other countries to boycott them. Worked (slowly) with apartheid in Sth Africa.

[LHutton]

Sad to hear but then Africa has never needed religion to justify killing each other.

[Rob]

Here we go lads, Z07 is making sweeping statements about entire continents, the overt racism and threats to children can't be too far off!

[FaultyMario]

:smh:

[Crazed_Insanity]

Wow. Faith is strong with that woman! Sudan really should learn from the Roman Empire that Christianity cannot be killed off.

Well, reality is that no religions can be killed off, God Himself had commanded the Jews to to stone the unfaithful as well, and it's not like such threat helped to keep people within the same faith... Even Christian crusaders have tried to kill off Muslims... without much success. Might as well to just allow religions to die of natural causes. If Christianity is bogus, surely even Christianity will eventually fade away naturally. Only the real truth can withstand the test of time.

[LHutton]

:smh:
:smh:


Here we go lads, Z07 is making sweeping statements about entire continents, the overt racism and threats to children can't be too far off!
:lol:Sierra Leone, warlords, chopping off hands etc. As they said on Blood Diamond, "Thank God they haven't found oil here yet."

Except now they have. Think on that. Not religious but political.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Not religious? Then you're in the wrong thread dude! ;)

Regarding Africa, I do agree with your view on it's political issues, but in order to get closer to topic of this thread... you have to also realize that Africa is pretty messed up or fragmented spiritually too.

I can't wait until Africa becomes mostly Christian. Take the black churches at the US as a glimpse..., imagine the wonderful new genre of soulful gospel music the Africans will be able to create...

[Rob]

I can't wait until Africa becomes mostly Christian. Take the black churches at the US as a glimpse..., imagine the wonderful new genre of soulful gospel music the Africans will be able to create...

Apart from the fact that christianity is already the dominant single faith across the continent with an estimated 45% of the population falling for it, the soul music stereotype is up there with the time you posted about black people having disproportionately large penises.

[Rob]

Sierra Leone.

Makes sweeping statement about an entire continent, names a single country as justification.

Just like you did when you quoted Greece as evidence that the EU was democratic but somehow not.

Z07/10

[LHutton]

Makes sweeping statement about an entire continent, names a single country as justification.

Just like you did when you quoted Greece as evidence that the EU was democratic but somehow not.

Z07/10
Greece, Spain, Portugal.

Africa is just an unfortunate place. Lots of tribal disputes etc. Need a hand?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hi0erY0WG6A

[Rob]

Attempting to discuss EU politics in the Religion thread and African religion in the Politics thread whilst failing to see the ridicule.

Autism in the internet age.

[LHutton]

Simply answering your own questions. Sadly it seems civility has been lost once again, so I must bid you a due.

[Rob]

so I must bid you a due.

Perfect.

Phonetically misspelling terms you only half understand. The halfwit factor just increases at an exponential rate.

[LHutton]

Perfect.

Phonetically misspelling terms you only half understand. The halfwit factor just increases at an exponential rate.
Friday night. It didn't warrant the effort. Now I will bid you adieu correctly. Y'understand?

[Rob]

Yeah, you went and googled the phrase after I corrected you. Dumb, dishonest twit.

[LHutton]

Apart from the fact that christianity is already the dominant single faith across the continent with an estimated 45% of the population falling for it, the soul music stereotype is up there with the time you posted about black people having disproportionately large penises.
Proper noun, capital letter required.


Yeah, you went and googled the phrase after I corrected you. Dumb, dishonest twit.
And you googled the phrase before correcting me. I'n't the internet fantastic eh?

[Rob]

Proper noun, capital letter required.

I'm not using it as a proper noun, more a generalised term applicable to mental illness. You don't capitalise bipolar disorder or delusional schizophrenia, for example.


And you googled the phrase before correcting me. I'n't the internet fantastic eh?

Always resorting to "I know you are but what am I?" just hammers home how intellectually bereft you are. You didn't even attempt to debate my accusation that you were too thick to understand the cliché you employed, providing tacit confirmation.

And all this after saying you were leaving the discussion. What a fucking dummy.

The internet is pretty fantastic. After all, it enables people like you to get some limited human contact without actually having to meet other people for real because they think you're a cunt.

[LHutton]

I'm not using it as a proper noun, more a generalised term applicable to mental illness. You don't capitalise bipolar disorder or delusional schizophrenia, for example.
The English language disagrees with you.




Always resorting to "I know you are but what am I?" just hammers home how intellectually bereft you are. You didn't even attempt to debate my accusation that you were too thick to understand the cliché you employed.
That's correct, I didn't. You, on the other hand, were unable to accept your mistake and instead made up some bullshit excuse.



And all this after saying you were leaving the discussion. What a fucking dummy.
Let's leave your sex life out of this, shall we?

[Rob]

Specifically not addressing my final remark about your obvious Asperger's-influenced Stockholm Syndrome there, I see.

Just like how to refuse to admit you are Z07.

[Rob]

Let's leave your sex life out of this, shall we?

Is this where stupid people say 'Bazinga'?

[LHutton]

Specifically not addressing my final remark about your obvious Asperger's-influenced Stockholm Syndrome there, I see.

Just like how to refuse to admit you are Z07.
It wasn't there when I made my initial post.


Is this sensible debate?


Sad to hear but then Africa has never needed religion to justify killing each other.


Here we go lads, Z07 is making sweeping statements about entire continents, the overt racism and threats to children can't be too far off!


:smh:




The internet is pretty fantastic. After all, it enables people like you to get some limited human contact without actually having to meet other people for real because they think you're a cunt.
It also enables one to get some limited human contact with people you think are cunts, without actually having to meet them.




Just like how to refuse to admit you are Z07.
I've offered you several chances to provide proof but so far your accusations seem to be based purely on the fact that I disagree with you.

[Rob]

I edit a post at 12:54, you reply at 12:59 and claim my edit wasn't there.

Timestamps, how do they work?

[LHutton]

I edit a post at 12:54, you reply at 12:59 and claim my edit wasn't there.

Timestamps, how do they work?
When I clicked 'reply' it wasn't there. I got caught up doing something else half-way through. I'm sure someone could probably verify that.

[LHutton]

Unfortunately there is no such right - not in a country that decides its controlling your religion.

How are these countries allowed to be part of the UN, when its clearly against UN declaration of human rights?
I know the UN can be a bit of joke, but kick them out and encourage other countries to boycott them. Worked (slowly) with apartheid in Sth Africa.
It probably wouldn't actually do any good. Economically, Sudan is nowhere near as developed and integrated with the global market as South Africa. There's just no pain for them in such a move. A carrot might work better than a stick in this case.

[Rob]

When I clicked 'reply' it wasn't there. I got caught up doing something else half-way through.

http://replygif.net/i/166.gif

[LHutton]

[IMG]http://replygif.net/i/166.gif[IMG]
Ask admins to check the DB.

It was not in the text in my reply box IIRC. If it was I'd just tell you, I've already answered that accusation several times anyway, so it's not like it's a secret. You've been going on about the same crap for over a year now. It's almost like you have a campaign budget for it or something, possibly the same one that funds your atheist extremist agenda that you keep pushing down everyone's throats at the merest hint of an opportunity.

You don't see any irony/hypocrisy here?


Here we go lads, Z07 is making sweeping statements about entire continents



http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/pregnant-christian-woman-sudan-sentenced-death-apostasy-n105961

Religion; so good for the world.

I'm sorry if it upsets you when someone counters your extremely persistent and rabid prejudice against religious people and religion. Your constant attempt to associate one evil act with a religion is outweighed in every case by another 10,000 or more people from the same religion not committing evil acts. A similar position is taken by the likes of EDL in trying to tackle the threat of extremism by telling Muslims that their religion is shit, cataloging every single act committed by extremists. Not really helpful to tolerance, society or peaceful co-existence. Let go of the stick.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Glad to finally see u trying to get back on topic.

Seriously dude, are u just in this because you enjoy Rob's company? I'm still facinated by where u personally stand with regard to your faith?

[Rob]

You don't see any irony/hypocrisy here?

Religion is a continent?


A similar position is taken by the likes of EDL in trying to tackle the threat of extremism by telling Muslims that their religion is shit, cataloging every single act committed by extremists.

That would be the same EDL that has a christian cross in their flag and pushes "British christian values".

A "British christian" racist hate organisation is similar to an atheist viewpoint?

There's false equivalence and then there's you.

[Rob]

Ask admins to check the DB.

We've seen enough of your lies to know when you are just flailing.

And you've used the phrase 'atheist extremist'.

I extremely possess no belief in a fantasy creation.

[LHutton]

Religion is a continent?
Very silly comeback that in no way negates the point made.



That would be the same EDL that has a christian cross in their flag and pushes "British christian values".
Or one could look at it as the English flag, paying attention to proper nouns, and describe their message as one of hate that isn't remotely linked to Christian values.



A "British christian" racist hate organisation is similar to an atheist viewpoint?

There's false equivalence and then there's you.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Defence_League


The EDL has separate Jewish,[113] youth,[114] women's (EDL Angels),[115][116] and LGBT divisions,[9][117] and claims to also have a Pakistani Christian division.

In 2010, the EDL's LGBT division had 115 members.[117] On 23 July 2011, the division planned to pass leaflets on Canal Street, in the gay village of Manchester, in support of the Norwegian Defence League, but the event was called off when the division realised opposition to its presence would be too great.[118] On 5 June 2012, it issued a statement saying "Gay people in Britain have far more to fear from Islam than they do from the EDL," and citing opinion polls "that reported that British Muslims have zero tolerance for homosexuality."[119]
Although they include religious groups, the diversity of their portfolio with respect to groups with conflicting life choices shows no particular affirmation to any. Pretty much just atheist extremists who see Islam (another religion) as a 'disease' that 'mankind can do without.'

Do those words ring any bells eh? Pretty soon I may have to capitalise the 'A' in atheist at this rate.



We've seen enough of your lies to know when you are just flailing.
Flailing? Is that like when you make a really crappy post, realise it's crap and then go back 5 minutes later to add some random accusation?



And you've used the phrase 'atheist extremist'.

I extremely possess no belief in a fantasy creation.
And you have described religious people as a 'disease' and as having a 'mental illness' and subtly advocated removing them from society. Thankfully we live in a country where people are free to follow any religion, or none at all, and your exceptionally bigoted and prejudicial views are in a minority.

[Rob]

minority.

Yeah. I suppose you really do have the monopoly on that term around here.

How many members of this community have you met? Or call friends in real life?

Minority indeed.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Hey, at least I have never been removed by whoever the forum owners/hosts so far due to my religious views or my mental state. So yeah, I like to believe you hold a minority view. For sure this is a pretty liberal/secular board, but I really don't think majority of folks would like to see me sent away in concentration camp or mental institution... Or perhaps people are just trying to be PC? ;)

Anyway Rob, let this thread go. Why bother discussing religion with a non-religious person?

Same for LH, if you are not religious and not looking to talk about religion, why are you even here? Why not just start a argue with Rob thread? ;)

[LHutton]

Yeah. I suppose you really do have the monopoly on that term around here.

How many members of this community have you met? Or call friends in real life?

Minority indeed.
After 8 days, is that really the best you can do? What next, a Facebook friend count? Twitter following challenge? YouTube likes received?

Poor show, poor show.

[tigeraid]

Didn't want to start a new thread just for this, but this a great documentary about the late, great Christopher Hitchens.

http://vimeo.com/94776807

[FaultyMario]

From 1925 to 961 the Irish nuns caring for unmarried women and their children, apparently had their dead infant children buried in an old septic tank. (http://news.yahoo.com/amnesty-urges-ireland-launch-probe-mass-childrens-grave-202725662.html)

[thesameguy]

Weird. I literally don't know how to feel about that - other than the obvious continued disdain for Catholicism in general.

[Crazed_Insanity]

I'm not a Catholic, but somehow I don't think those dead children were caused by Catholicism.

I mean, even Catholic priests who've molested little kids..., I don't think that kind of things are taught in the Catholic church, right? Or even if past Popes did turn a blind eye on those kind of things, for sure the scripture doesn't teach them to do those kind of things, right? One can argue that scripture is perhaps homophobic, racist, pro-slavery, but killing or molesting children while in your care is definitely not something Bible teaches. Jesus actually warned very sternly against doing evil against children.

Society took a dump on those people and eventually their dead bodies got dump into those tanks. Were those evil nuns? Or perhaps they did the best they could and just couldn't afford proper burial when so many children were dumped onto them? Lord knows.

[FaultyMario]

You can't help yourself about making things up, Am I right?

For once in these discussions, read up on what specialists think what happened and why NGOs are upset. Please, read before you comment.

[LHutton]

You can't help yourself about making things up, Am I right?

For once in these discussions, read up on what specialists think what happened and why NGOs are upset. Please, read before you comment.
And lets not comment on all the atheists who buried children under the patio.

Silly discussion is silly.

[FaultyMario]

Yes, because well, actually, NO!, because you analogies don't work. In fact, they're so far fucking apart they're not even analogies, they're like, two phrases on the train of ideas, and one of them simply forgot which station it was supposed to get off at.

Unwelcomed deluder is not welcomed.

[FaultyMario]

You are an Idiot, Z07.

[LHutton]

I'll take that as a compliment.

[FaultyMario]

You're welcome, homes!

[thesameguy]

At my previous job we had a NAS that was all the home directories for all our users, and the server was named homes. Cracked me up every time I thought about it, because for the first year I worked there I never made the connection that someone named homes server homes. I just thought some rockin' sysadmin came in every morning and said something like, "What up homes, how's your logfile today?"

[LHutton]

At my previous job we had a NAS that was all the home directories for all our users, and the server was named homes. Cracked me up every time I thought about it, because for the first year I worked there I never made the connection that someone named homes server homes. I just thought some rockin' sysadmin came in every morning and said something like, "What up homes, how's your logfile today?"
:lol:

[overpowered]

St. Louis Archbishop Carlson claims to be uncertain if he knew sexual abuse was a crime (http://www.stltoday.com/lifestyles/faith-and-values/archbishop-robert-j-carlson-claims-he-was-unaware-sexual-abuse/article_4215ecea-3409-53b3-813b-545c81a1b793.html)

[tigeraid]

Yup.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Yes. Isn't that just like Clinton didn't know what the meaning of the word 'is' is? When put under pressure like that, people say all kinds of stupid shit. BTW, Clinton is also a Christian and has also even delivered a sermon!

Anyway, whether Catholics or Christians or atheists or whatever..., as long as you do the crime, you must also do the time or perhaps more than time... I think it's plenty obvious that Catholic church leadership, including the Pope, are not gods... and only human. It's always sad to hear these kind of stories at churches or at schools or even at people's homes sometimes. We certainly need to deal with it accordingly, but I hope people can also understand that we don't have to destroy the entire home, school, or church because of a few scumbags.

[FaultyMario]

I've given up debating religion recently. :p


Hallelujah!

[Crazed_Insanity]

Amen! :)

[FaultyMario]

Oṁ Shāntiḥ, Shāntiḥ.

[Rob]

What next, a Facebook friend count? Twitter following challenge? YouTube likes received?

Asperger's making you compare the only form of interaction you can comprehend with real life again?

[LHutton]

Asperger's making you compare the only form of interaction you can comprehend with real life again?
Two months it's taken you to come up with that. Two months!? Grow up.

[Sad, little man]

Thinking of taking up Buddhism as it seems to actually have something meaningful and concrete to offer, and is based on actual science, as opposed to most other religions, which seem to be largely based on fairy tales.

Any thoughts?

[Kchrpm]

Give it a try, see how it fits you and your life. What can go wrong?

[21Kid]

I follow the Dalai Lama (https://www.facebook.com/DalaiLama?fref=pb&hc_location=profile_browser) on Facebook. I like a lot of things he has to say.


From my point of view all things originate with the mind. The quality of our actions depends on our motivation. A real appreciation of humanity, compassion, and love are crucial to this. Whether we work in science, agriculture, or politics, if we’re good hearted about it, our contribution will be positive.

I don't think I'd ever devote practice Buddhism personally... But, I respect a lot of what they teach and stand for.

[sandydandy]

Yeah he's great. It's sad that China has driven him out of Tibet and even 'disappeared' the kid he chose to become the next Dalai Lama, and have or are going to, replace him with their own choice.

[21Kid]

Fist of Jesus (http://www.joystiq.com/2014/10/20/fist-of-jesus-is-an-over-the-top-historically-inaccurate-brawle/?ncid=rss_truncated)

http://www.joystiq.com/screenshots/fist-of-jesus/#!slide=3035760

:lol:

[Crazed_Insanity]

Give it a try, see how it fits you and your life. What can go wrong?

Had been a buddhist... and although I'm now a Christian, I can agree with this quote.

In terms of 'doing evil', I don't think anyone can ever find a buddhism extremist... worst case scenario is probably chinese Shao-lin monks killing for self defense. Even with that, I'd think only very few would regard that as 'doing evil'. So for sure in this regard, it's definitely the most respectable religion we have. Trumps even Christianity.

However, IMHO, religion shouldn't just be about minimizing wrong doing, but also maximizing doing things right.

For example, Dalai Lama..., surely almost everyone finds him respectable. Difficult to find anything wrong with him... On a personal level, I'm sure he's done lots of right and good things too. However, how has his religion/Buddhism helped the Tibetans? Even to consider a wider group of people... how has Buddhism influenced or altered human history? For sure there were no negative impacts, but I'm not sure if there were any significant positive impacts as well? Any historians wish to chime in on this? If it weren't for Buddhism, Indian/Chinese history would've been drastically different?

Anyway, similar to my personal experience..., personally, Buddhism had helped me attain more inner peace, but I'm not sure if I was really living my life to the full. Now, not saying I am living my life completely full now, but at least I'm now heading toward that direction. The main reason I picked Jesus over Buddha was because Jesus is directing me toward love. Buddha's more focused on enlightenment. Buddha's also not wrong about not focusing too much on love because if you love, you'll end up suffering... surely suffering is not something we want! Yes, any rational mind can agree with that, but we human beings just aren't that rational all the time. ;) I don't want pointless suffering, but I don't mind suffering for love.

[Godson]

I like what the Dalai posts on FB. very good comments and thoughts.

[speedpimp]

If there was ever a person who wouldn't be an internet troll, I'd like to think that it would be the DL.

[LHutton]

Surely you didn't think he really spent all that time meditating?:lol:

[tigeraid]

Hmph. This guy does a better job of combating the "Hitler was an Atheist" fallacy than I've seen before.


http://michaelsherlockauthor.wordpress.com/2014/10/21/the-atheist-atrocities-fallacy-hitler-stalin-pol-pot-in-memory-of-christopher-hitchens/

[21Kid]

:applause:

[Crazed_Insanity]

I think either way, it's a fallacy.

"The Religious views of Adolf Hitler were shaped by his upbringing at the hands of his anti-clerical, sceptic father and devout Catholic mother. Baptized as an infant and confirmed at the age of fifteen, he ceased attending Mass and participating in the sacraments in later life.[1] In adulthood, he became disdainful of Christianity but in power was prepared to delay clashes with the churches out of political considerations.[2] "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_views_of_Adolf_Hitler

Why even give a damn about Hitler's faith or lack of thereof? Pretty sure he wasn't motivated by faith in God or lack of faith in God. He's just an asshole... probably because he got his ass kicked pretty badly when he was young that's why he ended up so well adjusted...

Moral of the story is that if we all truly love one another, WWII or whatever other crazy shootings or beheadings or whatever other crap can probably be avoided.

[tigeraid]

"Moral of the story" is that atheism did not bring about World War II, the rise of communism or Khmer-Rouge. :rolleyes:

[Crazed_Insanity]

Real moral of the story is that Christianity also didn't bring about WWII or the rise of whatever. It's kinda stupid for theists to point fingers at atheists and vice versa.

Hitler, Stalin, Mao or whoever egomaniacs worship themselves and wants others to worship them.

Christians' take is that perhaps had those people actually worship an Almighty God, then perhaps they won't worship themselves and cause all these problems.

Atheists' take is that it's their religious faith that caused them to be crazy and consequently end up doing these crazy things.

Reality is that Christians can still do evil and sin against God. Our faith doesn't all of a sudden cure us of this sinful nature.

Reality is that people without any religious faith can still subscribe to extreme political ideologies and cause problems. We can further ban politics, but crazy people will still continue to do crazy things. You can't ban away craziness.

This kinda of blaming each other debate is a fallacy in itself.

Root of the problem isn't religion. It's that some people are just crazy. If people treated young Hitler with sufficient love and care... and had he successfully entered into the art school that he so wanted to go, he could be a very accomplished artist... or maybe not, but at least WWII might be averted. But then again, perhaps some other maniac would take over Hitler's role and continue on with the same WWII. Lord knows.

[21Kid]

You're wasting your breath tigeraid... he does not listen to your so-called "facts"

[LHutton]

Hmph. This guy does a better job of combating the "Hitler was an Atheist" fallacy than I've seen before.


http://michaelsherlockauthor.wordpress.com/2014/10/21/the-atheist-atrocities-fallacy-hitler-stalin-pol-pot-in-memory-of-christopher-hitchens/
Well it is extremely difficult to blame a religion for a guy doing everything it says not to do. E.g. if someone goes into a shopping mall with a copy of the constitution in one hand and shoots everybody, can you really blame the constitution? WWII was caused by the aftermath of WWI on the German people and the rise of ultra-Nationalism.

Stalin and Pol Pot? That's a serious stretch to even associate them with religion. They led a dictatorial cultures that expressly opposed all religion.

I really feel sorry for authors like this who try to stretch a point to blame everything on religion because it distracts people from the real causes and responsibility. Nasty beliefs and systems of thought come in all shapes and sizes and don't require a book or a preacher. Is religion to blame for Tony Blair who became a Catholic after stepping down as UK PM? I think not, he was just an idiot.

In other news.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/pope-francis-declares-evolution-and-big-bang-theory-are-right-and-god-isnt-a-magician-with-a-magic-wand-9822514.html

[tigeraid]

Hitler directly speaks as a Christian, following (whether correctly or incorrectly) his religious teachings. Which is what the author is pointing out.

As for Stalin and Pol Pot, they essentially deified themselves and created a religion (of sorts.) Which still speaks to the evil of religion as a system of control.

- A sainted leader who preaches war and death and genocide against those who don't believe, and the subjugation of various minorities (women, jews, gays)

- Or a sainted leader who preaches that you should proselytize and brow-beat unbelievers, stick your dirty bible-covered fingers into places it doesn't belong (contraception, gay marriage, the office of the president), and subjugate various minorities (women, gays).

Both are wrong and evil and have no place in civilized society. One is just worse than the other.

[LHutton]

Someone could do the same thing as an American and say they were acting in the name of the Constitution.

As for Pol Pot and the tentative links the author tries to establish with Buddhism, he should go check out the mass graves of all the Buddhist Monks he had slaughtered. You could really say the same thing about Hitler and Christians too.

Stalin - yes all dictators deify themselves, Saddam Hussein, Gadaffi etc., it's in the job description but playing God and being religious are not the same thing.

Obviously this is all wrong, that much we can agree on.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Actors can speak directly as whatever character he's playing, following a script(written by someone else or perhaps improvised). Which is what I'm trying to tell you Tiggy.

Similarly a crazy suicide bomber can scream praise Allah before detonating himself, speaking directly as a Muslim, but that doesn't prove that Islam is pure evil and must be eradicated. Are you really that simple minded? Do you really believe founding Fathers were barbaric or uncivilized for allowing freedom of religion?

Wrongful and evil things do not originate from religion only. Do you honestly believe wiping out religion is the same as wiping out evil?

Do you honestly believe atheists can never commit any kind of evil or wrong doing? Is that really what you're trying to say?

[speedpimp]

Dick Cheney is an atheist, isn't he?

[LHutton]

^Methodist says wikipedia.

[tigeraid]

Also good to see. Pope Frank continues to kill it.

http://io9.com/pope-rails-against-intelligent-design-says-god-isnt-a-1652162938



Pope Francis has declared evolution and the Big Bang theory to be real, while adding that God isn't "a magician with a magic wand." The comments, while not completely unprecedented for the Catholic Church, goes against the "pseudo theory" of intelligent design encouraged by the previous pope, Benedict XVI.


It's still batshit, but now it's kinda half-batshit. Small progress though.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Glad to see that you finally see that even someone religious like the Pope could make small progress. So do you still believe religions are evil and barbaric and must be banished from civilized societies?

Anyway, regarding to what the Pope said, I agree with him that God can cause the Big Bang, steer how life forms evolve on earth..., but according to the scripture, Jesus had clearly performed some instant "magic". Not sure how Pope can explain turning water into wine or feeding thousands with few loaves of bread and fish. Not to mention 'evolving' a dead Lazarus back to life in a relatively short time! I don't quite understand why Pope has to put a limit on what God can do.

On the other hand, I don't understand why cause the universe to bang at a specific rate of expansion... and steering how lives evolve on earth can no longer be called 'intelligent design'. If God is still in control of it all, isn't it still intelligently designed?

Anyway, I can take what Pope said as his own personal commentary. He is neither God nor Stephan Hawking. I have no problems with Big Bang and evolution, but I also have no problems of God performing miracles instantaneously if He wishes to. He's called All Mighty for a reason. ;)

[21Kid]

It's a step in the right direction at least.

[LHutton]

Also good to see. Pope Frank continues to kill it.

http://io9.com/pope-rails-against-intelligent-design-says-god-isnt-a-1652162938




It's still batshit, but now it's kinda half-batshit. Small progress though.
Interestingly:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Lema%C3%AEtre


Monseigneur Georges Henri Joseph Édouard Lemaître, (French: [ʒɔʁʒə ləmɛtʁ] ( listen); 17 July 1894 – 20 June 1966) was a Belgian priest, astronomer and professor of physics at the French section of the Catholic University of Leuven.[1] He was the first known academic to propose the theory of the expansion of the universe, widely misattributed to Edwin Hubble.[2][3] He was also the first to derive what is now known as Hubble's law and made the first estimation of what is now called the Hubble constant, which he published in 1927, two years before Hubble's article.[4][5][6][7] Lemaître also proposed what became known as the Big Bang theory of the origin of the Universe, which he called his "hypothesis of the primeval atom" or the "Cosmic Egg".[8]

[Kchrpm]

I really feel sorry for authors like this who try to stretch a point to blame everything on religion because it distracts people from the real causes and responsibility. Nasty beliefs and systems of thought come in all shapes and sizes and don't require a book or a preacher.

This.

[Sad, little man]

This pretty much sums it up for me...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-suvkwNYSQo

[Crazed_Insanity]

Fascinating. Living in the same lousy unjust universe, he's ok with Mother Nature, even okay with Greek gods, but goes bananas with God the Father. Why?

Shouldn't you also be pissed at this universe too?

Lastly, even Greeks have converted and he still prefers the Greek gods! How stubborn can he be?

Anyway, the God I believe will certainly be able to answer all of his questions. He also won't force him to enter heaven if he doesn't want to.

[Sad, little man]

Considering that it doesn't seem like he believes in an actual being called mother nature, I don't think it's fair to assume his position on that. He also doesn't say that he's fine with the Greek gods, just that he would understand it more.

Sorry, but there's no justification for little kids getting cancer. It's not all part of some amazing plan we can't comprehend, it's just bullshit. Yes, it's hard to accept that, and I understand that it's a lot easier to rationalize it by saying it's all part of some plan, but it's not.

[JoshInKC]

Fascinating. Living in the same lousy unjust universe, he's ok with Mother Nature, even okay with Greek gods, but goes bananas with God the Father. Why? He answers this exact question in the video from 1:00 to ~2:20. TL;DW : The Greek pantheon were not presented as all knowing and all powerful, but rather as powerful, magic people. Therefore, unlike the Christian God, they are not necessarily responsible for all of the horrible shit that exists in the universe, such as bone cancer in children.

Shouldn't you also be pissed at this universe too? The universe lacks intent. If all of existence is simply natural cause and effect, why would you blame / be that pissed at it. Sure, life may be a bummer, but it's not that way at someone's behest. Stated another way: it's tough to be angry with gravity, given that it has no real agency and isn't making stuff fall on purpose, it just exists.

[LHutton]

Sorry, but there's no justification for little kids getting cancer. It's not all part of some amazing plan we can't comprehend, it's just bullshit. Yes, it's hard to accept that, and I understand that it's a lot easier to rationalize it by saying it's all part of some plan, but it's not.
If there was a plan, free will wouldn't exist.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Freewill is part of the plan!!! :p

I totally agree that there's no good reason for little children getting cancer. My point is that something is definitely wrong with this universe, regardless whether or not if it has intent, if little children had to endure that kind of crap. Most atheists tend to blame this wrongness on a Creator God, if there is such a Being. If there's no such being to blame on, then they're okay with it.

I, on the other hand, blame it on all of us, since the beginning of mankind, which caused this world to fall. If Adam and Eve never sinned and little children were still born with weird diseases in garden of Eden, then I'd agree with Mr. Fry that God is a lousy Creator.

At least according to the bible, A&E's poor choices has caused the entire world to fall... including animals and even earth. This sounds very far fetched, but think about sins in monetary terms. As we borrow and borrow and incurred huge deficits. It is the future generations end up paying for it. Our advancing greed also can impact our environment and wild life. Other innocent people or wild lives or land can suffer the consequences of our actions.

Anyway, unless you are the One who can break free of this 'matrix' and get away from the evil Architect, I just think it's foolish to go against his, her or its will.

If God is for sure just a made up fictitious being, it's also a waste of energy to be so pissed at him. Mr. Fry seems genuinely pissed at God... and as do lots of atheists. I really think it's rather pointless. I don't get all upset over FSM.

Who are we to judge an all knowing and all powerful God if He does exist? If He doesn't exist, then why would anyone give a crap?

I find certainly atheists being so angry at a fictitious being fascinating.

I'm also glad the God has also sent to us a Savior to help us get back up from a fall.

[Sad, little man]

What do you mean "Who are we to judge an all knowing and all powerful god?" Does it take some special qualification to look at the situation and say "Hey, it's kind of fucked up for an all powerful being to run around giving innocent kids terminal diseases"?

And trying to pin the blame for cancer in children on humanity itself is completely illogical. But hey, let's just say we did do something wrong and that's why kids get cancer... It's still fucked up to take out the wrongs of humanity on innocent children that had nothing to do with whatever we did wrong.

[Crazed_Insanity]

When I don't know all the facts, who am I to make any judgments? If you know more than I do, wouldn't you be more qualified to make certain judgments? If I know less than you do, who am I to criticize your judgment? That's all I'm saying. Don't you think knowing more gives you more qualification?

I know it doesn't seem fair for us to be punished for the sins of previous generations. However, as we make unwise decisions to destroy Ozone layer and allow more UV to come to the surface, aren't we hurting our innocent future generations? Incurring huge amount of deficits so that we can enjoy the money now and let innocent future generation suffer under the load of the debt... yeah, it's fucked up! No question there. However, blaming a fictitious God won't help our future generations. Innocent lives can definitely suffer due to the unwise choices of others. Drunk drivers are the ones hitting and killing innocent victims. Not a fictitious God. Try to pin those things on God is more illogical.

Assuming not environmentally related, cancer can also be genetically related. Yes, it's not children's fault, but parents passed down such lousy genes to their kids. Again, does it make more sense to blame a fictitious God for that? If anything, you should blame your parents for their lousy genes, right?

If we're still inside Garden of Eden and people are dying due to cancer or whatever diseases, then Mr. Fry would be correct and I think even I would be upset at God for being such a lousy Creator.

Fortunately such 'unfairness' can go the other way too. We were all in Adam when he sinned... so we all suffered. Luckily we could also choose to be in Christ so that we may truly live. We can be in Christ by believing. He's the new Tree of Life. Of course if you really don't want to have anything to do with him and rather enjoy your mortal life in this screwed up universe, that's fine too. Love cannot be forced.

[Dicknose]

It's hard for an atheist to be pissed off with a God they they don't believe in.
It's more that they feel anger towards a world that is still strongly influenced (if not dominated) by religion.

Hard to understand the logic of why people being evil means kids should get cancer.
If God had any justice then there would be karma, do bad things you get cancer, do good or be young an innocent and you are protected from harm.
They way it is, well it looks like there is no supreme power helping or punishing.

I can see how Stephen finds the concept of a loving God even harder to believe than Greek gods. This world does not show evidence of a loving God. Unless it is also the laziest possible God. The number of horrible things that happen seems more plausible under the Greek style gods, some who do bad things, none of them with ultimate power.

That doesn't mean I believe in Greek gods. But it does seem a more likely model in some ways than the currently popular God.

[Crazed_Insanity]

There are invisible spiritual forces at work. One can be pissed at the influences of gravity, dark matter, dark energy, etc... But what would be the point?

I can understand people are upset over the likes of Westboro baptists..., but certainly they are not mainstream Christians. Can you really judge all Christians based on the actions of few?

One could also look down upon dumb Christians with contempt. That I can understand. But be upset at stupid people? Why? I suppose one could be upset at the likes of forest gump due to jealousy?

Or do you guys really believe most Christians to be dumb and evil?

Anyway, God warned us to just be good and don't go there. We chose to go there and wanted to know both good and evil and that's what we have now. It's a world that neither all good or all evil... And God can make all things, whether good or bad, work out to benefit those who love Him.