New ALabama governor openly asks for non-Christians to convert

[Raziaar]

God dammit, every time I keep seeing this out on the main forum page with "New Alabamba governor openly..." I keep ending the sentence with "gay".

 

[Shift]

So if you went from being a non-believer to a christian, why did you choose that one religion? What makes it more 'true' than the hundreds of others? Why is its creation myth more plausible? Or its miracles?

Well there are a few arguments that make it more plausible but I would say the most defining reason is because Christianity makes an historical claim that is open to the process of historical investigation.

That central claim is that God walked upon this earth in a specific place, at a specific time in history, which means that you are able to test Christianity by historical processes. And the evidence is compelling, that Jesus said what he said, did what he did, and is who he claimed to be. His miracles were witnessed by thousands, when he rose from the dead even a few of his disciples simply dismissed it until they saw him with their own eyes. The Bible is the only religious doctrine that is treated as a historical document, relating to actual places, actual people of the time, and actual nations of people in their specific time periods.

until you mention same sex marriage or abortion or evilution then it's all open hostility and hate

I’m not hostile to any of those items.

in my experience jews dont have air of superiority

Just don’t ask to enter their house, or expect to be invited for dinner. A true Jewish community will segregate themselves from everyone else, we have loads of them over here and you can’t escape the enormous feeling you don’t belong when you go through their areas.

and muslims have never looked upon me with hostility. in fact the muslim at work looked upon me as an equal because at first he thought I was catholic and has said that all religions are too be respected.

He hasn’t read the Quran then. About 61% of it talks about the need to hate the infidels i.e. you and me. I’ve read a lot about the Quran and spent time looking at a lot of text extracts from it, and I tell you this, there is nothing peaceful about Islam.

Winston Churchill said it best:
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_was_Winston_Churchill's_quote_on_Islam

lets be honest here. no you didnt or you would have chosen "none of the above"

Urrr, what?

 

[No Limit]

Well there are a few arguments that make it more plausible but I would say the most defining reason is because Christianity makes an historical claim that is open to the process of historical investigation.

That central claim is that God walked upon this earth in a specific place, at a specific time in history, which means that you are able to test Christianity by historical processes. And the evidence is compelling, that Jesus said what he said, did what he did, and is who he claimed to be. His miracles were witnessed by thousands, when he rose from the dead even a few of his disciples simply dismissed it until they saw him with their own eyes. The Bible is the only religious doctrine that is treated as a historical document, relating to actual places, actual people of the time, and actual nations of people in their specific time periods.

Lol, feel free to be just a bit more specific. What historical evidance is there that Jesus even existed? What evidance is there that if he did he was magical? Witness testimony? You know that can be said about most religions, right?

 

[Shift]

Lol, feel free to be just a bit more specific. What historical evidance is there that Jesus even existed? What evidance is there that if he did he was magical? Witness testimony? You know that can be said about most religions, right?

Yet you miss the crux of my post, which you do so expertly. I would love to answer your question, but the fact that it is you that wants the answer puts me off somewhat because debating with you is like debating with a wall.

 

[No Limit]

You said there is actual historical evidance Jesus existed which is why you chose christianity over all other religions. I asked you what that evidance is. Being a dick doesn't make up for the fact that you don't seem to have an answer.

 

[CptStern]

I’m not hostile to any of those items.

ya you're not all 1 billion + christians in the world ..but give it time the hate will slip out (oh look in this very post)

Just don’t ask to enter their house, or expect to be invited for dinner.

how many jews do you know? and the dentist down the road doesnt count

A true Jewish community will segregate themselves from everyone else, we have loads of them over here and you can’t escape the enormous feeling you don’t belong when you go through their areas.

methinks you're not being honest. unless you're living in a hassidic/orthodox community jews dont segregate themselves from the rest of society. my ex girlfriend's parents (also jews) had no problem inviting a goy to their house for dinner. my sister in law's parents had absolutely no problem inviting me over for dinner or that their daughter is living with a goy for almost 20 years now. they may push jewish-ness but that's expected from a community who has been persecuted for hundreds of years

He hasn’t read the Quran then. About 61% of it talks about the need to hate the infidels i.e. you and me. I’ve read a lot about the Quran and spent time looking at a lot of text extracts from it, and I tell you this, there is nothing peaceful about Islam.

post the relevant parts of the quran; 61% so there's gotta be a lot of quotes you can pull up

Winston Churchill said it best:

How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property - either as a child, a wife, or a concubine - must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen; all know how to die; but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science - the science against which it had vainly struggled - the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient" Rome.

I thought you said you werent hateful? that quote is pretty hateful even though it's 112 years old and you've justed painted every single muslim with the same ignorant brush

Urrr, what?

what what? what are you not understanding? no one uses logic when choosing to believe something based on pure faith

 

[No Limit]

Being Polish I actually know quite a bit of Jewish people. And yup, shift is talking out of his ass. Funy thing is if someone had made the claim he made about christians he would say it was an unfair generalization.

 

[Llama]

I am disappointed my own replies have not been answered.

 

[Bad^Hat]

Now am I saying that all Jews and Muslims are like that, or that all Christians are as wonderful as I've painted them? Of course not; mankind has a great ability to twist religion to his own devices. But it IS possible to find a niche of people who are not that way. I think that critics of religion focus too much on the logic (or illogic) nature of the religion, and not nearly enough on the actual changes it brings in the lives of its practitioners. I think they'd find a lot more answers if they did that. My .02

I acknowledge this to a degree, but I really hate the "it gives them comfort" argument because I'm willing to bet that's not how you or any other person of faith (what you might call a "true" follower) actually sees it. If I asked you why you believed in God, would you tell me "it makes me a better person?" No, you'd try to justify it with evidence and logic, because you want to believe that it's true rather than accept that it just makes you feel good. However, your post is leading me in the other direction - you claim to have chosen your faith based on evidence, then you point out that christianity has a niche of good people while making dismissive claims about the quality of character for practitioners of other religions. This kind of argument is easily refuted without even trying to defend those people - you're a product of your environment. You were exposed to christians who treated you kindly and so happened to only meet jews or muslims who were less kind. What does this actually prove, to you or anyone else? Would a muslim not tell you that it's a test from Allah to overcome your experiences and find that loving niche of followers within islam?

Anyway, you can just as easily point to negative as positive effects of religion on it's followers, as many people have. I really don't think this area of the discussion is being ignored as much as you think, at least not among people who take this sort of thing very seriously.

Well there are a few arguments that make it more plausible but I would say the most defining reason is because Christianity makes an historical claim that is open to the process of historical investigation.

That central claim is that God walked upon this earth in a specific place, at a specific time in history, which means that you are able to test Christianity by historical processes. And the evidence is compelling, that Jesus said what he said, did what he did, and is who he claimed to be. His miracles were witnessed by thousands, when he rose from the dead even a few of his disciples simply dismissed it until they saw him with their own eyes. The Bible is the only religious doctrine that is treated as a historical document, relating to actual places, actual people of the time, and actual nations of people in their specific time periods.

The same can, and has been said of other religious figures.

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

However, the burden of evidence for claims of miracles and divine revelation is far too heavy to ever be expressed in textual accounts. A just God would know this, unless he sought to punish those with the ability to reason such a thing out.

He hasn’t read the Quran then. About 61% of it talks about the need to hate the infidels i.e. you and me. I’ve read a lot about the Quran and spent time looking at a lot of text extracts from it, and I tell you this, there is nothing peaceful about Islam.

Except towards your religion.

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

Do you not find it a little unfair to condemn their religion based on it's holy text, when you yourself not only dismiss large swaths of your own book, but assert it to be the only true way to follow God?

 

[Shift]

I don't dismiss large swaths of my own book, I do distinctly remember saying that the entirety of the Bible was important including the Old Testament, I was however saying that the Old Testament had no relevance on my life as a Christian, I am called to follow the ways of Jesus and the New Testament or agreement.

Besides, unfair or not, its true. Islam is not a peaceful religion, not only is this a reference to the actual actual texts which Stern, I will post on here in time, but don't you find it odd how Islam seems to centralized around some of the worst terrorist attacks in history? September 11th, 7/7 London bombings, the Lockerbie bombing?

 

[Shift]

Except towards your religion.

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

Sura 5:51: “O you who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: they are but friends and protectors to each other. And he among you that turns to them for friendship is of them.”

Sura3 3:64: “Verily Allah has cursed the Unbelievers (whom he defined as Christians in the 5th surah “Believers, take not Jews and Christians for your friends.) and has prepared for them a Blazing Fire to dwell in forever. No protector will they find, nor savior. That Day their faces will be turned upside down in the Fire. They will say: ‘Woe to us! We should have obeyed Allah and obeyed the Messenger!’ ‘Our Lord! Give them double torment and curse them with a very great Curse!’”

Yeah very special bond there...

 

[Sulkdodds]

blah blah blah stone them with stones blah blah deuteronomy 13 blah blah if your brother or son or daughter says let us worship other gods you must certainly put him to death blah blah

Islam seems to centralized around some of the worst terrorist attacks in history? September 11th, 7/7 London bombings, the Lockerbie bombing?

Err, what precisely does this mean? Islam, the global religion of millions of followers, is 'centralised' around terrorist actions? Do they take a central place in the scriptures? Why don't you conduct a broad poll of international Muslims and ask them what they see as the central tenets of their religion or the central episodes of its recent history? Do Muslims, in fact, flock and rally around these incidents? And isn't this like saying that Christianity is "centralized" around some of the worst abuses of truth and evidence in recent years? Creationism, condom-pricking, abortion-clinic killings? Or perhaps this is all just selection bias - lets not mention the terrorist attacks of the Lord's Resistance Army (Christian), the National Liberation Front of Tripura (also Christian), or arguably the IRA (Catholic)? Oh wait - two of those organisations operate in far-away India and Africa while the other was in our 'civilised' backyard.

I am in no way seeking to exonerate Islam in a more general sense. I believe its religion-of-peace shtick is rather worn out. But I would also contend that politics and economics have far more influence on the way the two religions are worshipped than the religions themselves. Scriptures and religious traditions are so intensely creatures of their time, so subject to varying interpretations, that it doesn't seem to make an enormous amount of difference - especially as both Christianity and Islam contain quite similar claims on the whole (in comparison with buddhism for example). Either way, your claim that Islam alone is "centralized around" a few hand-picked terrorist attacks is simply laughable.

 

[Eejit]

I am disappointed my own replies have not been answered.

No worries, mine are often ignored too

Well there are a few arguments that make it more plausible but I would say the most defining reason is because Christianity makes an historical claim that is open to the process of historical investigation.

That central claim is that God walked upon this earth in a specific place, at a specific time in history, which means that you are able to test Christianity by historical processes. And the evidence is compelling, that Jesus said what he said, did what he did, and is who he claimed to be. His miracles were witnessed by thousands, when he rose from the dead even a few of his disciples simply dismissed it until they saw him with their own eyes. The Bible is the only religious doctrine that is treated as a historical document, relating to actual places, actual people of the time, and actual nations of people in their specific time periods.

No, there is evidence that Jesus existed and was a religious teacher, and for some of his actions. That doesn't mean the fairy story parts of the Bible are any more likely to be true.

 

[Shift]

ya you're not all 1 billion + christians in the world ..but give it time the hate will slip out (oh look in this very post)

So you are assuming that because I’m a Christian, in time I will develop hatred to the previous items? Based on what exactly? The fact other Christians like to make it known that they hate gays and so on? Well that’s entirely up to them but it has nothing to do with me and it certainly has nothing to do with the teachings of Jesus.

how many jews do you know? and the dentist down the road doesnt count

I know no Jews myself but I know all about their rules and practices.

methinks you're not being honest. unless you're living in a hassidic/orthodox community jews dont segregate themselves from the rest of society. my ex girlfriend's parents (also jews) had no problem inviting a goy to their house for dinner. my sister in law's parents had absolutely no problem inviting me over for dinner or that their daughter is living with a goy for almost 20 years now. they may push jewish-ness but that's expected from a community who has been persecuted for hundreds of years

It’s well documented that a Jew should not sit at the table with a Gentile, those Jews you knew aren’t following their rule book very well. And you can think what you like, but the Jewish communities around here very rarely venture from their areas.

post the relevant parts of the quran; 61% so there's gotta be a lot of quotes you can pull up

There are literally loads of them, but I shall post some the prophet Mohammad himself:

“If you have made a treaty with infidels who are honorable, do not break the treaty until after the holy months are past. Then fight them and kill them wherever you find them, and take them captive, and besiege them, and ambush them.” — Qur’an 9:4-5
“Strike terror into the hearts of . . . your enemies.” — Qur’an 8:60 “And slay them wherever you find them.” — Qur’an 2:191
“Fight those who do not believe in Allah or the Last Day, or acknowledge that Islam is the religion of Truth, even if they are Jews or Christians, until they submit to slavery to you willingly and feel themselves subdued.” — Qur’an 9:29
“Allah has purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs in return is the garden of Paradise: they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth. . . .” — Qur’an 9:111
“Therefore, when you meet the unbelievers in fight, smite at their necks.” — Qur’an 47:4
“We are clear of you . . . and have rejected you; and there has arisen between us and you enmity and hatred for ever, unless you believe in Allah and Him alone.” — Qur’an 60:4

I thought you said you werent hateful? that quote is pretty hateful even though it's 112 years old and you've justed painted every single muslim with the same ignorant brush

First of all I said I wasn’t hateful to the specific items you posted, and secondly, myself and Churchill in that quote was not singling out Muslims as people, but the religion itself. I implore you to find and read quotes from the Quran and you will realize just how much hatred is in it, not just to infidels but to their own woman. The way they treat women is absolutely outrageous and as Churchill said, it could very easily be called slavery.

what what? what are you not understanding? no one uses logic when choosing to believe something based on pure faith

The fact that I used logic implies that I didn’t decide to believe something based on pure faith.

blah blah blah stone them with stones blah blah deuteronomy 13 blah blah if your brother or son or daughter says let us worship other gods you must certainly put him to death blah blah

Granted there are hateful quotes like that in the Old Testament, but then Jesus came along who remember was God incarnate, and said to love your enemies, there wasn’t a shred of hatred in him. Stark contrast the prophet Muhammad I think…

Do Muslims, in fact, flock and rally around these incidents?

During September 11th bombings my other half’s mother saw it happen on the news next to a Muslim doctor, while she stated how awful the incident was, the Muslim doctor stated ‘They probably deserved it’. They may not flock and rally around the incidents, but that doesn’t mean they don’t support the actions.

And isn't this like saying that Christianity is "centralized" around some of the worst abuses of truth and evidence in recent years? Creationism, condom-pricking, abortion-clinic killings?

Oh give me a break, because those items really do contrast well with the action of a few guys hijacking a plane full of people and flying it into a building.

Or perhaps this is all just selection bias - lets not mention the terrorist attacks of the Lord's Resistance Army (Christian), the National Liberation Front of Tripura (also Christian), or arguably the IRA (Catholic)? Oh wait - two of those organisations operate in far-away India and Africa while the other was in our 'civilised'

Regardless of what those terrorist organizations did (and IRA? What? Their violent motivations were purely politically motivated, religion had nothing to do with it) they were all in breach of Christ’s teachings. Whereas the are plenty of quotes in the Quran, including ones from Muhammad himself, that talk of hatred to unbelievers and go as far to say on many occasions, how they should be killed.

No, there is evidence that Jesus existed and was a religious teacher, and for some of his actions. That doesn't mean the fairy story parts of the Bible are any more likely to be true.

That makes absolutely no sense. So Jesus existed, but all the stuff he did didn’t happen? You could write entire books on the evidence for Jesus, historians have gone out on personal missions to disprove him and his actions and have come back with no luck (in fact there is a story of a famous atheist historian who tried, failed, and became a Christian afterwards). In fact there are entire books dedicated to the evidence, go find them.

 

[Absinthe]

The Bible does not hold up well under historical scrutiny. There was in all likeliness a man named Jesus who existed on this planet and was of great historical significance. That does not mean he walked on water or rose from the dead. Nobody is really questioning whether your central religious figure existed. It's the more fantastical elements of Christian myth that require evidence, and I'd like to see if you could actually produce any.

As per usual, Wikipedia can make a decent read on the subject. I'm sure you'd bet money that Muhammed didn't get a visit from Gabriel or witness the moon split in two, but that's not to say the man didn't exist.

 

[No Limit]

You know what I love about religious people? They always use personal experiances nobody can prove or disprove as evidance that what they are saying is true.

During September 11th bombings my other half’s mother saw it happen on the news next to a Muslim doctor, while she stated how awful the incident was, the Muslim doctor stated ‘They probably deserved it’. They may not flock and rally around the incidents, but that doesn’t mean they don’t support the actions.

In this case shift really outdid himself, it's not even his own personal experiance, it's a experiance he heard about from his other half mother.

The Bible does not hold up well under historical scrutiny. There was in all likeliness a man named Jesus who existed on this planet and was of great historical significance. That does not mean he walked on water or rose from the dead. Nobody is really questioning whether your central religious figure existed. It's the more fantastical elements of Christian myth that require evidence, and I'd like to see if you could actually produce any.

As per usual, Wikipedia can make a decent read on the subject. I'm sure you'd bet money that Muhammed didn't get a visit from Gabriel or witness the moon split in two, but that's not to say the man didn't exist.

I don't want to divert this. But aside from various writings is there any real evidance Jesus even existed? I can swear I asked this here before some time ago, don't remember.

That makes absolutely no sense. So Jesus existed, but all the stuff he did didn’t happen? You could write entire books on the evidence for Jesus, historians have gone out on personal missions to disprove him and his actions and have come back with no luck (in fact there is a story of a famous atheist historian who tried, failed, and became a Christian afterwards). In fact there are entire books dedicated to the evidence, go find them.

Except you haven't been able to produce one example of evidance that shows Jesus even existed, let alone that he performed miracles. And when you say historians never proved Jesus didn't exist I'm not sure why you would find any insight in that. You can't prove that I'm wrong as far as atheism goes, so does that mean I must be right?

 

[unozero]

 

[Bad^Hat]

Shift, I know we went over this, but what exactly is your view of the old testament again, or the new one for that matter? I know you believe that Jesus said it was no longer required for his followers to adhere to old testament laws as long as they formed a covenant with him, but what do you mean when you say it's still "important?" Again I must return to the verses in the old testament that condone slavery and the subjugation of women - themes that, as I've pointed out, can also be found in the new testament. In what way are these laws important? What do they teach us? Do they have even an ounce of relevance in the modern world?

I ask because, again, you're judging Islam by it's holy book while writing off people who would do the same to you. You judge muslims based on isolated terrorist incidents and anecdotes about your half-mother's ****ing doctor, and then you say you're not judging them but only their religion. The same exact thing can be done to christianity, and as I'm sure you're aware, there are many many such verses I could pluck from either testament and throw into question. And yet, when pressed on such matters, you assert that we must not look only to the Bible but to God himself and how he's evident in creation or some waffly shit like that. Then when pressed on why your version of christianity is the true way, you say "it's all there in the bible, you just have to read it!" I just... please explain this shit to me again, because from where I'm standing it really seems as though you're willing to suspend reason to it's logical limit in order to accommodate your supremely unreasonable, antiquated belief system.

Also - I'm not trying to come to the defense of Islam, anything but. I think the "religion of peace" bollocks they like to throw around is incredibly played out, and crumbles a little more every time I see a so-called "moderate" muslim using ingratiating doublespeak to condone the slaughter of apostates, adulterers, even ****ing cartoonists. No, this doesn't account for all muslims, nor is the onus on all of them to change their world view, but as a religion they do have a bit of a monopoly on upholding medieval beliefs as law at this particular point in time.

 

[No Limit]

but as a religion they do have a bit of a monopoly on upholding medieval beliefs as law at this particular point in time.

There is a probably a pretty good reason for that. Take christians and put them in the shoes of muslims in the middle east and see what happens. They will be strapping on suicide vests in no time.

 

[Bad^Hat]

I don't think you can rule out their holy text entirely, but yeah I wouldn't say anything as obtuse as "it's Islam's fault." Anyway, we're probably not going to get anywhere by trying to prove whose fairy tale is the worst, I'm just saying I wasn't trying to completely exonerate them as a religion, and I doubt anyone else was either.

 

[Eejit]

That makes absolutely no sense. So Jesus existed, but all the stuff he did didn’t happen?

Buddha existed. Muhammad existed. There's plenty of historical evidence for that. Does this mean that the miracles attributed to them must have really happened?

 

[CptStern]

So you are assuming that because I’m a Christian, in time I will develop hatred to the previous items? Based on what exactly? The fact other Christians like to make it known that they hate gays and so on? Well that’s entirely up to them but it has nothing to do with me and it certainly has nothing to do with the teachings of Jesus.

so you'll accept same sex marriage? you're ok with abortion? and I'm not saying you'll develop hate you already have it as evidence by your ignorant ideas about muslims

I know no Jews myself but I know all about their rules and practices.

yet you believe they are completely segregated and that every jew is exactly alike. there are no reform jews or hassidic or secular or modern-orthodox or ultra orthodox etc etc. it's like saying all christians are catholic

It’s well documented that a Jew should not sit at the table with a Gentile, those Jews you knew aren’t following their rule book very well.

you're being ignorant again. and you kinda prove you have zero understanding of judiaism that didnt come from your own religious views:

http://www.godward.org/Hebrew Roots/Biblical Research/was_paul_confused_about_the_law.htm

it is quite common for non jews to sit at tables with jews even during their most sacred holidays

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passover_Seder#Interfaith_Seders

And you can think what you like, but the Jewish communities around here very rarely venture from their areas.

you can think what you like but you're still incorrect

There are literally loads of them, but I shall post some the prophet Mohammad himself:

“If you have made a treaty with infidels who are honorable, do not break the treaty until after the holy months are past. Then fight them and kill them wherever you find them, and take them captive, and besiege them, and ambush them.” — Qur’an 9:4-5
“Strike terror into the hearts of . . . your enemies.” — Qur’an 8:60 “And slay them wherever you find them.” — Qur’an 2:191
“Fight those who do not believe in Allah or the Last Day, or acknowledge that Islam is the religion of Truth, even if they are Jews or Christians, until they submit to slavery to you willingly and feel themselves subdued.” — Qur’an 9:29
“Allah has purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs in return is the garden of Paradise: they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth. . . .” — Qur’an 9:111
“Therefore, when you meet the unbelievers in fight, smite at their necks.” — Qur’an 47:4
“We are clear of you . . . and have rejected you; and there has arisen between us and you enmity and hatred for ever, unless you believe in Allah and Him alone.” — Qur’an 60:4

I can say the same about your religion:

If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.

Leviticus 20:13

If a man still prophesies, his parents, father and mother, shall say to him, "You shall not live, because you have spoken a lie in the name of the Lord." When he prophesies, his parents, father and mother, shall thrust him through. Zechariah 13:3

Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt. 3 Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass. 4 And Saul gathered the people together, and numbered them in Telaim, two hundred thousand footmen, and ten thousand men of Judah. - Samuel 15:2-4

"Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man." - Numbers 31:17

and you'll probably say hey that only happened in the OT whereas I only cherry pick what I like from the NT. so this is from the NT:

"For God said, 'Honor your father and mother' and 'Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.'" Matthew 15:4

"You tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess. By her teaching she misleads my servants into sexual immorality and the eating of food sacrificed to idols. I have given her time to repent of her immorality, but she is unwilling. So I will cast her on a bed of suffering, and I will make those who commit adultery with her suffer intensely, unless they repent of her ways. I will strike her children dead." Revelation 2:20-23

"Now I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse. And He who sat on him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He judges and makes war. 12 His eyes were like a flame of fire, and on His head were many crowns. He had a name written that no one knew except Himself. 13 He was clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God. 14 And the armies in heaven, clothed in fine linen, white and clean, followed Him on white horses. 15 Now out of His mouth goes a sharp sword, that with it He should strike the nations. And He Himself will rule them with a rod of iron. He Himself treads the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God." Revelation 19:11[/quote]

First of all I said I wasn’t hateful to the specific items you posted, and secondly, myself and Churchill in that quote was not singling out Muslims as people, but the religion itself. I implore you to find and read quotes from the Quran and you will realize just how much hatred is in it, not just to infidels but to their own woman. The way they treat women is absolutely outrageous and as Churchill said, it could very easily be called slavery.

ya the bible treated women as equals

Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee. - Genesis 3:16

Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church. - Corinthians 14:34-36

The fact that I used logic implies that I didn’t decide to believe something based on pure faith.

yes you did as there is no evidence to support your pov. there is no logic in choosing something because you believe it to be true despite any evidence to support it

Granted there are hateful quotes like that in the Old Testament, but then Jesus came along who remember was God incarnate, and said to love your enemies, there wasn’t a shred of hatred in him. Stark contrast the prophet Muhammad I think…

ya he's nothing like Muhammad

Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. - Matthew 10:34

During September 11th bombings my other half’s mother saw it happen on the news next to a Muslim doctor, while she stated how awful the incident was, the Muslim doctor stated ‘They probably deserved it’. They may not flock and rally around the incidents, but that doesn’t mean they don’t support the actions.

I know of a few white people who said the same thing after 9/11 therefore by your logic white people are worse than hitler ....oh wait

it's obvious hate towards muslims runs in your family. not surprising as that's a sentiment I've found common in religious people. it's like rooting for the home team and hating on the visiting team. herd mentality

 

[Llama]

Granted there are hateful quotes like that in the Old Testament, but then Jesus came along who remember was God incarnate, and said to love your enemies, there wasn’t a shred of hatred in him. Stark contrast the prophet Muhammad I think…

1) At what point does 'loving' your enemies have to be separate to killing them? God seemed not to have any problem killing his many 'Children' in the old testament, so we shouldn't assume otherwise here, right?

2) Furthermore, did Jesus not flat-out state that the 'laws of the prophets' were immutable?

3) At what point did we decide loving your enemies is at all a desirable thing?

That makes absolutely no sense. So Jesus existed, but all the stuff he did didn’t happen? You could write entire books on the evidence for Jesus, historians have gone out on personal missions to disprove him and his actions and have come back with no luck (in fact there is a story of a famous atheist historian who tried, failed, and became a Christian afterwards). In fact there are entire books dedicated to the evidence, go find them.

Haha. No.

 

[lord_raken]

Not to rain on you march of condemning bible quotes Stern (and boy did you find some good ones), but pretty much everything in the Book of Revelations is an extended metaphor for the fall of Rome and not a prophesy for the end of the world. Just sayin'.

 

[GreatEmperor]

The fall of Rome was quite protracted and is not really appropriate for the apocalyptic imagery. Saying its all a metaphor is a copout, a deity wouldnt need to flower it up, i could simply say that Rome would collapse from various schisms brought on by an intolerant religious system and romanized barbarians gaining military power

 

[No Limit]

2) Furthermore, did Jesus not flat-out state that the 'laws of the prophets' were immutable?

What shift will tell you is that the old testament is still god's word and infallible but when Jesus came down he fulfilled the old testament. So if Jesus contradicts his earlier teachings from the Old Testament then you need to follow what Jesus said in the new testament. If there is something in the Old Testament that hasn't been addressed in the New Testament then that still applies. Why would God has such a drastic change of heart after such a short time? Like with anything in religion the "why" is not important.

So when the OT tells you to stone sinners that's not really the case any more since Jesus said to love your enemies (as you said unless you are at war with those enemeis apparently). Or as Stern pointed out unless the sinner is a child that talks back to their parents, the new testament says that child must be put to death.

Also, when the OT says that the earth came before the sun, or that there was a talking snake, or all the other absolutely absurd fairy tales those are all still valid since it was God's word.

Atleast that's what I got from Shift the many times we talked about this and I don't think he would disagree.

 

[lord_raken]

The fall of Rome was quite protracted and is not really appropriate for the apocalyptic imagery. Saying its all a metaphor is a copout, a deity wouldnt need to flower it up, i could simply say that Rome would collapse from various schisms brought on by an intolerant religious system and romanized barbarians gaining military power

Its was written like that so the Roman government would just look at it as another crazy prophesy by those nut job jews. The 7 headed beast is a reference to the 7 hills of Rome. It was the equivalent of an encoded revolutionary propaganda.

 

[Llama]

Dare I ask where this information is coming from?

 

[Acepilotf14]

Not to rain on you march of condemning bible quotes Stern (and boy did you find some good ones), but pretty much everything in the Book of Revelations is an extended metaphor for the fall of Rome and not a prophesy for the end of the world. Just sayin'.

Have you even read Revelation? Holy shit, it is NOTHING LIKE THE FALL OF ROME

 

[Absinthe]

Either way, it is open for a lot of ambiguous reading that affords multiple interpretations. And being the absolutely infallible teachings of a powerful deity, all of them have to be treated as valid.

There's nothing that makes one's brand of Christianity more "legit" than another, let alone entire other faiths such as Islam or Hinduism. It betrays an emotional bias that you've chosen a particular avenue of worship just because it makes you feel good and "live a fuller life". Not saying those are without merit or worth pursuing, but there certainly seems to be a correlation between how many Christians are comfortable with their religion and how many nasty bits have to be neutered from it for them to be so.

 

[GreatEmperor]

Its was written like that so the Roman government would just look at it as another crazy prophesy by those nut job jews. The 7 headed beast is a reference to the 7 hills of Rome. It was the equivalent of an encoded revolutionary propaganda.

Its like Spy vs Spy where one is imaginary or something. I mean anything can be viewed as code, just ask the guy who watched taxi driver and thought Foster was talking to him through wardrobe. The coincidences would have to be OVERWHELMING for this conclusion to be reached, there were tons of beasts and events in Revelations, how many stack up as metaphors? They just threw a lot of shit on the wall which means you could find a convoluted metaphor for many happenings

 

[Shift]

Okay I shall head back and reply to any I’ve missed now I have some time. Bare with me though, I have to reply over a few posts because of the sheer scale of it all

This is the most confused statement you've made yet. "Why does anything exist?" According to you, because God made it. Are you saying God made God, or did you just accidentally use a practical explanation for his existence? You know, the same kind that can be applied to the universe.

I agree that was rather sloppy by me. To be honest I couldn’t answer the question as to why God exists because it doesn’t really have an answer, I mean its like me asking you why the universe exists without a creator, and the only logical argument would be that it was by chance, which is just another way of saying its here because it is. There is no acceptable answer to that question from either side, we just accept that it is.

But really the main question isn’t why he exists, but does he. All I know is that he most certainly does exist because there is indeed a universe around us and I think without attributing it to a creator you find inconsistency after inconsistency. And no its not just as simple as a God of the Gaps terminology, its about how I think the core details on this universe and indeed ourselves do in fact point towards God, the historical claim that Jesus walked the Earth and was risen only adds strength to this argument.

Also, science needs do no such thing. You seem to be labouring under the assumption that science seeks to, or is required to conclusively explain the mysteries of the universe, or something equally lofty. Ideally, science looks only to what is natural and draws its conclusions through observation. If a God was evident in reality, perhaps science would have an interest in it.

Yet there have been many scientists past and present who have used their expertise to try and disprove God…

This is really lovely and poetic until you introduce the concept of salvation. That a child could be born into poverty and die of naturally occurring disease before it was even old enough to formulate an understanding of God, and then be condemned to an eternity of further suffering (unless you believe in purgatory, but I don't think you do) for not paying tribute to the same God who put it into that situation, paints a grim picture of this so-called "plan." Honestly, if you find that to be either good or just, I have a hard time taking you seriously on any moral matters.

First of all this is playing the error that God is responsible for all evil that happens in the world. The Bible states that the world we are living in now is a fallen world, a broken one, full of evil, war, destruction, injustice and death. Sin runs riot and has completely distorted God originally vision of the world, so yes, bad things do happen, people are put in bad situations, but it is ridiculous for people to put the blame on God when there are other evil powers at work that wish to undermine his authority here.

Also you seem to be regarding salvation as something ugly, when in fact it's one of the best thing God's given humanity, the fact that that child may not grow up to realise it's Christianity, doesn't mean it isn't saved. There is some debate around this but basically the bible says whoever's name is written in the book of life will be saved.
It is however very important to remember that God is just, in fact no one knows of pure justice better than he. He also knows the hearts and minds of everyone, better than people know themselves, and he knows the entire outcome of everyone’s life, even if that life is cut very short by death in reality. So if there are those who he knows never had the chance to hear the message and had they not died they would have led a good, peaceful life, or maybe even eventually heard the message of Christ, then ask yourself would God really consider it justice, to send that person to Hell?

Sorry, what? Did that baseless assertion hurt when you pulled it out of your ass? It is a rather large one.

I was hardly basing that off actual facts and statistics, just off my experience, most do tend to find their perfect match.

So why the need for a root cause to motivate your actions if the actual, tangible result is essentially the same?

Because I think there is a fine line between saying ones morality comes from God and ones morality is based on the person and the environmental factors they have been subjected to, and I think the former acts as a good argument in the context of this discussion.

Because other people are perfectly capable of judging you even if God isn't. Because the consequences of your actions are easily observable, and you'd have to be a supreme fool not to recognise, on some level, the harm you were doing. Because it feels bad.

You’re avoiding the question, how are other people capable of judging, why in our controlled, evolutionary process was it necessary for us to develop a sense of justice if all we had was one life and a bunch of instincts driving us to survive and reproduce. Why does it feel bad? If there is a God who will judge us then a complex morality system would obviously be essential, we need to have that basic understanding of what is good and bad, without there being someone to judge us then the reasons for our moral system go out the window, they are just there for some reason.

Firstly, let's consider:
- Human pregnancy is fairly long term.
- It takes a lot of effort and time to raise a human to a self-sufficient level.
- It's easier to raise a child if you have two parents.

Can you really not put these together in your head?
If it takes a lot of effort and time to raise a child, it will overall be highly beneficial to have two parents raising the child. Ergo, it makes sense to have long term partnerships from an evolutionary perspective, and something that enables that (Such as a reaction such as 'love' - Ie something that creates a strong bond between individuals) is probably going to be selected for.

What if two people come together who love each other, but have absolutely no desire to have children, or better yet, are downright petrified of the idea, but live out a full and loving relationship? You are playing on the assumption that all couples will have kids eventually, which is simply wrong.

You list rare cases where one partner is incapacitated. This makes NO difference. If something is evolutionarily selected for, it's not going to be 'switched off' because something goes wrong

Yet as I stated above, the evolutionary instinct for a couple to mate and reproduce can be switched off.

Why do you think you're so different to every other living thing on earth?

Because I, as a human, contain a complicated, moral based consciousness that allows me to deter accurately what is right and wrong and make decisions based on this? Because I have the ability to live outside the restriction of mere animalistic instincts? Because I can analyse and understand the world and universe around me? Because I can write songs and play the guitar? Shall I continue this list?

Any attempt to try and get further than that is ridiculous. We do not know anything further than that, all else is simply guesswork. It comes down to what you think is more likely: Probability, or a giant inefficient sky-fairy.

There isn’t a figure in existence for the probability you are proposing there. Also it does make me smile when people like to use colourful phrases for God, what exactly is the purpose behind this? Only reasons I see is to either somehow try and undermine the authority that the wold God gives, or it’s just down to silly name-calling.

Now, who says the universe is 'perfectly' suited to our survival? We die. We live on a cooling planet supplied with energy by a star that won't last forever. We are at the mercy of natural events beyond our control, and we need to fight for resources to stay alive. Some 'creation'.

When you look the universe, and how hostile it can be, I think you come to appreciate just how beneficial we are, to be located in our tiny little pocket in the Milky Way. We are located in a rare galaxy class, way out in the spiral arms away from the hostile centre, that doesn’t rotate the arms to clash with the centre. Our son is off perfect class, if it were even slightly larger or smaller we wouldn’t be here, we are literally the perfect distance away from it. We just happen to have the moon in our orbit that not only regulates tides, but it keeps us spinning on our axis, both vital components in regulating the temperature of the planet. Not to mention we have a near by gas giant that drags in many asteroids that may be on a collision path with Earth in via its huge gravity well, and a second and third line of defence with Mars and the Moon.

There is SO much more to it and to be honest I probably didn’t give it much justice. Should check out ‘The Privileged Planet’ by Guillermo Gonzalez and Jay Richards, goes into so much more detail.

And ‘some creation’? So you wouldn’t agree that the Earth and the universe are mind-bogglingly amazing and beautiful?

(Again, the idea that this HAS to be the only universe is ludicrous. Why must you be that important, that God created such a ridiculously large place only for you?)

So that the measure of his power is there for all to see, and to prove just how significant we are to his plans.

Stop with the 'mere' thing, it gives away a sense of self-importance and a general lack of understanding about just how incredible existence is.

Yet above you were downplaying the incredibility of existence.

What 'meaning' does something like love have, besides that which you give it yourself?
Hint: It doesn't.

By Christian understanding it has incredible and significant meaning.

Fact is, you're an animal. You are not special, the universe was not designed with you in mind, and you can't cheat death.

Oh right okay, I’ll just stop now then shall I? It is a fact after all.

Why is it a bad thing simply to be 'a bunch of chemical processes'?

Well if you had just fallen in love with someone and you would surely die for that person, and then someone came along and said, oh that feeling is just a side effect of your evolutionary instinct to have children. You wouldn’t you feel at least disheartened?

Which is beside the point really, because I know love isn’t based off that. You are right in saying it’s a very complicated array of chemical processes yes, but for which I think comes from a mind and soul that God created.

Not to pile on or anything, but it's the mentality expressed in that first statement that buggers me sometimes.

Suppose I were succeed at the impossible task of proving God doesn't exist, would you actually listen? Would any Christian or theist be receptive to that? My feeling is you'd probably turn your nose up, say it doesn't matter, and then persist in belief because "it makes your faith stronger". Competing theories, alternate explanations, straight-up logical fallacies and inconsistencies are ignored. You might play along and argue your stance on those things as well as you can, but it doesn't matter if your baseline assumption is that God (your particular version of him) exists regardless of anything else. And that effects any other religious viewpoint on science, morality, or whatever have you.

Our position, as stubborn and persistent it may be, is ultimately assailable in theory. Yours... not so much. It's not really a level playing field for debate.

No because my belief is not based purely on faith, I don’t look at things blindly; my faith wasn’t born from a family hammering it into me from a young age but from reading books on the subject for and against, from looking at the universe and making up in my mind what seemed most reasonable. I look at things as to whatever makes the most logical sense in my mind, and yes a lot will probably scoff at such a comment coming from me. But if the impossible task of disproving God was to succeed, then I would have no option but to abandon my Christianity. The very reason I am debating on here is because I want to hear the other arguments, from as many people as possible, to see how best my own understanding competes against the other side. And it weren’t a level playing field, I wouldn’t be replying to all these comments; I would have left the topic ages in full on blissful ignorance.

 

[Shift]

Indeed it can. Try arguing libertarian free market ideology here.

I pitched in a couple pages ago, but my specific faith does not gel well with a literal interpretation of the bible. However, I will say you have don a remarkable job staying consistent and your knowledge of the biblical texts is impressive. If it bring you happiness, believe and keep the faith.

I will add this. While I do believe in a personal god, when it comes to religion and science I take the Deists approach. Which is, God created the universe, but let it develop according to the laws of nature that came into being at the birth of our universe. These forces eventually lead to us and the universe we know today. Discovering and understanding how we got here is important. In this view evolution, the big band theory, and the idea of a universe billions of years old in NO way conflicts with the idea of God.

That is just how I see it.

The problem with the Deistic approach is that you still believe in the personal God. To believe in the personal God and not follow his word i.e. the Bible, is illogical because then you will know nothing of the God you believe in. Because if you do read the word of God you will come to understand that God did in fact create everything, from the origin of the universe itself right up to Earth and indeed us. You will also learn that God actively engages in this world, he has done in the Old Testament and continues to do so today.

Belief in God but not his word simply doesn’t work, its like trying to drive a car without first learning how to drive.

You know what I love about religious people? They always use personal experiances nobody can prove or disprove as evidance that what they are saying is true.

In this case shift really outdid himself, it's not even his own personal experiance, it's a experiance he heard about from his other half mother.

Stern was using personal experiences too…

I don't want to divert this. But aside from various writings is there any real evidance Jesus even existed? I can swear I asked this here before some time ago, don't remember.

Are you actually serious?

Except you haven't been able to produce one example of evidance that shows Jesus even existed, let alone that he performed miracles. And when you say historians never proved Jesus didn't exist I'm not sure why you would find any insight in that. You can't prove that I'm wrong as far as atheism goes, so does that mean I must be right?

It’s an historical fact that Jesus existed, and denying his miracles and his resurrection would also be an act of complete ignorance of the historical evidence. William Lane Craig provides a quick but good answer here:
http://www.philvaz.com/apologetics/p96.htm

Shift, I know we went over this, but what exactly is your view of the old testament again, or the new one for that matter? I know you believe that Jesus said it was no longer required for his followers to adhere to old testament laws as long as they formed a covenant with him, but what do you mean when you say it's still "important?" Again I must return to the verses in the old testament that condone slavery and the subjugation of women - themes that, as I've pointed out, can also be found in the new testament. In what way are these laws important? What do they teach us? Do they have even an ounce of relevance in the modern world?

The Old Testament is important because it is God’s word and it had relevance at the time, but more importantly the coming of Jesus is mentioned as a constant theme all the way through it until he did eventually arrive. You are right in implying that the Old Testament no longer has any relevance on modern society, which is one of the reasons a new covenant was established, or the New Testament, to talk about the life of the messiah that the Old Testament constantly prophesises about, and to give Christians from that moment something to look to in forming a basis of how live their lives.

I ask because, again, you're judging Islam by it's holy book while writing off people who would do the same to you. You judge muslims based on isolated terrorist incidents and anecdotes about your half-mother's ****ing doctor, and then you say you're not judging them but only their religion. The same exact thing can be done to christianity, and as I'm sure you're aware, there are many many such verses I could pluck from either testament and throw into question.

The Old Testament does indeed have violent verses, ones most would rather ignore, but it also has the New Testament (and I’m sorry but there are no verses in there that deserve to even be on the same page of the hatred of verses in the Quran or indeed the violent verses in the Old Testament) which is a gospel of peace, about a man who didn’t hate anything or anyone, but loved. The New Testament also gives Christians a new outlook into how to live; providing them with the chance to live in the ways of Jesus because we were simply incapable of living in the ways that God wanted, and thus making the Old Testament obsolete. It is still there as an act of study, but it doesn’t have relevance to my life as a Christian. Does the Quran have a parallel to this? Not that I can see. The prophet Muhammad was just as hateful as the rest of the text, to deny that is just being plain ignorant.

And I certainly don’t judge Muslims as people, I judge the text at which is driven into them that can cause them to hate, so in that respect I can judge their scripture, because that is the source of the hatred.

And yet, when pressed on such matters, you assert that we must not look only to the Bible but to God himself and how he's evident in creation or some waffly shit like that. Then when pressed on why your version of christianity is the true way, you say "it's all there in the bible, you just have to read it!" I just... please explain this shit to me again, because from where I'm standing it really seems as though you're willing to suspend reason to it's logical limit in order to accommodate your supremely unreasonable, antiquated belief system.

Why is it so hard to grasp? I read the New Testament and I base my life of the teachings of it. There is nothing in the New Testament against abortion, its not even mentioned, so I am not against abortion. The scripture goes against sexual activities of homosexuals, but it doesn’t say to openly hate them and rightly so, so I don’t hate them. My version of Christianity is based solely of what is right there in scripture, if other Christians want to condemn gays, or kill abortion doctors, and then I fail to see the instruction of this on Jesus’s part. [/QUOTE]

Buddha existed. Muhammad existed. There's plenty of historical evidence for that. Does this mean that the miracles attributed to them must have really happened?

The abilities of Buddha are not considered miracles by those who understand them and they fall within the ability of any person who trains his mind through meditation and mental concentration to very high levels, or so true Buddhists believe. They weren’t considered abilities directly passed down from God, not to mention levitation and mind reading doesn’t hold up to the weight of raising the dead and calming storms with the power of word.
As for Muhammad, read this:
http://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Azmy/mhd_miracles.htm
It’s still beside the point as neither of the claims holds as much historical weight as that of Jesus and his actions.

 

[Shift]

so you'll accept same sex marriage? you're ok with abortion? and I'm not saying you'll develop hate you already have it as evidence by your ignorant ideas about muslims

Yes I am okay with those ideas, and what are you talking about? I won’t develop hate? Where did I claim I wouldn’t?

yet you believe they are completely segregated and that every jew is exactly alike. there are no reform jews or hassidic or secular or modern-orthodox or ultra orthodox etc etc. it's like saying all christians are catholic

As a Jew, if you aren’t following the fundamental rules depicted by your religion, then what’s is the point of being a Jew? So you are saying there are laid back Jews or something? They might as well be Christian then, after all Jesus was the one urging all Jews to come away from all the laws of Pharisees and come to accept that all they needed was to accept him as their messiah.

I accept that there are different types of Jews, in that case I was being ignorant, but what I will say is that I really fail to see the point.

you're being ignorant again. and you kinda prove you have zero understanding of judiaism that didnt come from your own religious views:

http://www.godward.org/Hebrew Roots/Biblical Research/was_paul_confused_about_the_law.htm

Yet you are being ignorant in regards to the gospels, because Paul wasn’t the only one to comment the teachings of Judaism. Matthew was a stern Jew before he came to know Jesus and knew all about their way of life and teachings and thus crafted his entire chapter to appeal to all Jews reading it. Oh yeh, and Jesus himself grew up the Jewish practices and faith…

you can think what you like but you're still incorrect

I’m incorrect based on what? What I said was true about the Jewish communities around here, what do you want me to do, grab a bunch of witnesses and get them to testify this on the forums?

I can say the same about your religion:



and you'll probably say hey that only happened in the OT whereas I only cherry pick what I like from the NT. so this is from the NT:

As I have explained many times, it isn’t cherry picking at all, to call it so is just being blatantly ignorant of what Jesus himself, the person the entire faith is based on, taught.

"For God said, 'Honor your father and mother' and 'Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.'" Matthew 15:4

Just snatched up from the Internet was that? If you actually knew what you were doing, you would come to understand that Jesus was here quoting a law directly from the Old Testament while debating with Pharisees, showing that no matter how well they claimed to follow the law, they will always slip up.

"You tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess. By her teaching she misleads my servants into sexual immorality and the eating of food sacrificed to idols. I have given her time to repent of her immorality, but she is unwilling. So I will cast her on a bed of suffering, and I will make those who commit adultery with her suffer intensely, unless they repent of her ways. I will strike her children dead." Revelation 2:20-23

"Now I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse. And He who sat on him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He judges and makes war. 12 His eyes were like a flame of fire, and on His head were many crowns. He had a name written that no one knew except Himself. 13 He was clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God. 14 And the armies in heaven, clothed in fine linen, white and clean, followed Him on white horses. 15 Now out of His mouth goes a sharp sword, that with it He should strike the nations. And He Himself will rule them with a rod of iron. He Himself treads the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God." Revelation 19:11

Revelation? Are you serious? What difference does finding any violent quotes in there make? It’s a chapter full of metaphoric imagery and scripture in regards to a whole manner of eventualities, one of them including the second coming of Jesus and Judgement of humanity. The fact that you haven’t found any quotes of violence from Jesus himself or indeed any of the chapters based on his life and teachings means you haven’t proved anything.

ya the bible treated women as equals

Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee. - Genesis 3:16

Okay I’m ignoring quotes directly from the Old Testament because I am bored of repeating myself.

Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church. - Corinthians 14:34-36

Yet you actually missed out verse 36:

‘Or was it from you that the word of God came? Or are you the only ones it has reached?’

These sarcastic questions show that Paul is not giving general instructions of worship. Rather, he is addressing serious problems arising out of the Corinthian’s boastful arrogance.

yes you did as there is no evidence to support your pov. there is no logic in choosing something because you believe it to be true despite any evidence to support it

There is evidence to support it though. The very fact that very intelligent scientists can use there expertise and knowledge to eventually come to discover God means that belief in him can certainly be based on logic, your idea that it can’t be is your opinion.

ya he's nothing like Muhammad

Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. - Matthew 10:34

For which the chapter is talking about the fact that although Christ brings peace to the heart (Matt 11.29), embracing the gospel also makes life more difficult in some respects because of the allegiance that Jesus wants and the effect that can have over the normal ties of life. It was a metaphoric phrase to demonstrate that its not all fun games, it has nothing to do with violence or hatred, so ya he’s nothing like Muhammad.

it's obvious hate towards muslims runs in your family. not surprising as that's a sentiment I've found common in religious people. it's like rooting for the home team and hating on the visiting team. herd mentality

Even though none of my family are in the least bit religious and are downright against the fact that I’m a Christian, and that I have never heard any of them give an opinion of Islam. My Dad certainly has words to say about immigrants coming into the country, but that’s as far as it goes. No my issues with Islam are a result of my own mind, and have nothing to do with family or indeed with my Christian faith, and no I certainly wouldn't go as far as to say that I hate it, I just feel incredibly disturbed by it, especially considering it is having an increasing influence over Western society.

1) At what point does 'loving' your enemies have to be separate to killing them? God seemed not to have any problem killing his many 'Children' in the old testament, so we shouldn't assume otherwise here, right?

God is a just God, as I’ve mentioned before he knows and comprehends it far more than we can imagine, so when he smites people in the Old Testament, he isn’t just killing humans willy nilly, he is attacking evil. On Jesus coming to Earth, his teachings are there for the relevance of Christians in how they live their lives, God knows that humans are incapable of living the way he wants so therefore leaves the ultimate judgement until after death whilst giving humanity an easier option into Heaven via Jesus.

God knows that it’s not our place to judge but to reflect his character in love, we don’t know and therefore cannot act on justice the way he does so therefore it isn’t our place to do so. That is why his teachings to Christians is that though we should hate sin, we should love and pray for the sinner.

2) Furthermore, did Jesus not flat-out state that the 'laws of the prophets' were immutable?

As I have countlessly tried to explain to No Limit, he did indeed state that the laws of the Old Testament, the laws of his Father, were important. But he also said in the same section of verses that he had come to fulfil them personally, by leading a perfect life of obedience to God because humanity were simply unable to. In other words, he lived the life God wanted for us, and welcomed us to believe and follow him in return for salvation.

3) At what point did we decide loving your enemies is at all a desirable thing?

Well we may not see it as desirable, but its something Jesus taught and practiced.

Haha. No.

Search for them on google, you will find many published. In fact I am reading one now called the ‘Case for Christ’ by Lee Strobel, a former journalist and atheist.

Not to rain on you march of condemning bible quotes Stern (and boy did you find some good ones)

Wow your level hypocrisy amazes me.

but pretty much everything in the Book of Revelations is an extended metaphor for the fall of Rome and not a prophesy for the end of the world. Just sayin'.

That is one of a few interpretations, Revelation doesn’t just sit with one, but is more of a collection of all of them.

 

[Llama]

What if two people come together who love each other, but have absolutely no desire to have children, or better yet, are downright petrified of the idea, but live out a full and loving relationship? You are playing on the assumption that all couples will have kids eventually, which is simply wrong.

...

Yet as I stated above, the evolutionary instinct for a couple to mate and reproduce can be switched off.

Well, they die. They don't have children. They don't pass on this un-beneficial difference.
Natural selection continues, the evolutionary justification for something like love is no weaker.
Also, if it's (the lack of a desire to have children) because of memes rather than genes, it STILL doesn't change the fact that the genetic advantage raised would still be there.

Because I contain a complicated, moral based consciousness that allows me to deter accurately what is right and wrong and make decisions based on this?

So you don't need the bible to tell you that, or a god of any kind. Excellent.

Because I have the ability to live outside the restriction of mere animalistic instincts?

You're pretty screwed if you don't eat, drink or sleep.
If you aren't a slave to your genes then meme theory might interest you.

Because I can analyse and understand the world and universe around me?

Be more specific. You take in sense date and you process it. Nothing really there that sounds different, maybe a greater degree of complexity (thank you, frontal lobe), but nothing that makes you stand out.
Tell me, if a Chimpanzee can point at a duck and sign that it's a bird, how is that not analysing and understanding part of the world around it? Come to think of it, when a sophisticated computer program can do the same, what's so different there, except an order of complexity?

Because I can write songs and play the guitar? Shall I continue this list?

Because as we know, we are the only things around that have ever created pleasing sounds, or exhibits some signs of creativity? *cough Apes*

There isn’t a figure in existence for the probability you are proposing there. Also it does make me smile when people like to use colourful phrases for God, what exactly is the purpose behind this? Only reasons I see is to either somehow try and undermine the authority that the wold God gives, or it’s just down to silly name-calling.

Well of COURSE to undermine it. The word has NO authority, and I'm simply proving to you that it's the case.

I could replace every instance of 'God' in the bible with 'Pink Unicorn' and it wouldn't change anything. I can't really do that with a chemistry textbook, can I?
Also, did I say anything about giving a probability? Or just raised the notion? You seem confused.

When you look the universe, and how hostile it can be, I think you come to appreciate just how beneficial we are, to be located in our tiny little pocket in the Milky Way. We are located in a rare galaxy class, way out in the spiral arms away from the hostile centre, that doesn’t rotate the arms to clash with the centre. Our son is off perfect class, if it were even slightly larger or smaller we wouldn’t be here, we are literally the perfect distance away from it. We just happen to have the moon in our orbit that not only regulates tides, but it keeps us spinning on our axis, both vital components in regulating the temperature of the planet. Not to mention we have a near by gas giant that drags in many asteroids that may be on a collision path with Earth in via its huge gravity well, and a second and third line of defence with Mars and the Moon.
There is SO much more to it and to be honest I probably didn’t give it much justice. Should check out ‘The Privileged Planet’ by Guillermo Gonzalez and Jay Richards, goes into so much more detail.

Yeah so out of the hundreds of trillions of combinations, we got lucky. So what?

And ‘some creation’? So you wouldn’t agree that the Earth and the universe are mind-bogglingly amazing and beautiful?

Aha, nice try. I know what you're doing, it's that sly little strawman. I didn't say the universe isn't amazing, or beautiful. I pointed out it's incredibly wasteful. They don't have to be exclusive statements, you know it, and you're hoping I'm not going to call you out on that.
It's simply an observation that if it was designed, It would be a horrendously inefficient and wasteful mess when you could support life in a far more efficient way.

So that the measure of his power is there for all to see, and to prove just how significant we are to his plans.

Some ego he must have. Some ego YOU must have, since you seem to think you matter.

Yet above you were downplaying the incredibility of existence.

Yeah, nice try. I said nothing to the sort, I've talked about the incredibly things that had to have happened and so on, I don't say I don't find it incredible. You're a sneering little liar or else incapable of reading if you're trying to say that about me.

Under the doctrine given forth by Christianity, it has incredible and significant meaning.

Right, under a set of thoughts written down by purely human authors, which you then give significance to. Thanks for reinforcing the point that it only has meaning because you give it meaning.

Oh right okay, I’ll just stop now then shall I? It is a fact after all.

This statement doesn't even make sense. Stop doing what?
You continue exist because you can. It seems to be the most fundamental point about life, that things continue to exist simply because they can.

Well if you had just fallen in love with someone and you would surely die for that person, and then someone came along and said, oh that feeling is just a side effect of your evolutionary instinct to have children. You wouldn’t you feel at least disheartened?

Not really, no. I am fairly sure it's true but it doesn't get in the way of me living my life.

Which is beside the point really, because I know love isn’t based off that. You are right in saying it’s a very complicated array of chemical processes yes, but for which I think comes from a mind and soul that God created.

That statement is...what?
So, I'm right in saying it's just chemical. Thanks.
But you think these come from a 'mind' (Chemicals? Brain matter?) or 'soul'? What, is God beaming you chemicals right now, or is this invisible intangible soul magicking them from no where?

 

[Llama]

I've taken the liberty of changing a few of the names here, Shift.
I'd like you to note two things.

How ridiculous everything you've said now sounds to you.
How none of the arguments have actually been changed at all.
Right, here we go.

Unicron is a just Unicron, as I’ve mentioned before he knows and comprehends it far more than we can imagine

Yeah, right, he moves in mysterious ways. Not that you have a shred of evidence for this claim, of course, that'd be reasonable and we can't have that. Again, such unspeakable arrogance that you claim he's incomprehensible yet you still know his will.

, so when he smites people in the Old Testament, he isn’t just killing humans willy nilly, he is attacking evil.

Some creation. Couldn't he (you know, being all powerful and all) take the evil out, you know, without killing people? (Why's he been so indirect with his smiting and talking to people since then, by the way? )

On Jeezeebeezuz coming to Earth, his teachings are there for the relevance of Christians in how they live their lives, Unicron knows that humans are incapable of living the way he wants so therefore leaves the ultimate judgement until after death whilst giving humanity an easier option into Heaven via Jeezeebeezuz.

I have a small point about that.
1) God is all loving
2) God is all knowing
3) God has always known everything, since if he didn't he couldn't be all knowing.

4) Therefore, he has always known how humans could act to get into heaven.
5) Therefore, if he was all loving, he would have told all humans how to live.

6) However, he didn't. He waited until Jesus, meaning he must have condemned potentially millions of people
to hell, simply because he hadn't told them how to act.

7) ...
8) GOD IS LOVING!

Yeah, I think I'm done with that.

Megatron knows that it’s not our place to judge but to reflect his character in love, we don’t know and therefore cannot act on justice the way he does so therefore it isn’t our place to do so. That is why his teachings to Christians is that though we should hate sin, we should love and pray for the sinner.

Yeah, yeah, he moves in mysterious ways. Come back with something that doesn't deserve my utter contempt and pity.
(Why DO you pray for sinners? Removing their responsibility would be scapegoating, so that can't be it)

As I have countlessly tried to explain to No Limit, he did indeed state that the laws of the Old Testament, the laws of his Father, were important. But he also said in the same section of verses that he had come to fulfil them personally, by leading a perfect life of obedience to Albus Dumbeldore because humanity were simply unable to. In other words, he lived the life Albus Dumbeldore wanted for us, and welcomed us to believe and follow him in return for salvation.

So if we don't, we burn in hell because we don't trust some random guy. Niiice.
Also, again, the whole I-take-your-sins isn't moral. Good luck with pretending it is.

Well we may not see it as desirable, but its something Mario taught and practiced.

Good to know the son of God was slightly morally off his rocker.


Yeah, I might have been a dick about this particular post, but hey, anything to prove a point.

 

[Shift]

Why exactly have you changed the names? If you actually thought you had strong arguments then surely you wouldn't need to try and discredit the name of God, and the fact that you haven't payed any respect to my arguments means I shall pay you the same courtesy and simply ignore your entire reply because my gut instinct is telling me that it simply isn't worth reading. Shame you couldn't be adult about it really, and shame you wasted all that time trying to be funny or whatever the hell it was you were trying to achieve...

 

[Schall]

Its just a political tactic that is umintentionaly and intentionaly used sometimes to get some groups to support that indevidual, christians ussually with them making up more than half our population

Wow, thanks for the insight!

 

[No Limit]

Are you actually serious?

Yes, I'm absolutely serious. I asked you for specific evidance that Jesus existed time and time again and you haven't given it to me, let alone that he performed miracles. So I'm not sure why you finally decided to ask if I was serious...

It’s an historical fact that Jesus existed, and denying his miracles and his resurrection would also be an act of complete ignorance of the historical evidence. William Lane Craig provides a quick but good answer here:
http://www.philvaz.com/apologetics/p96.htm

I will actually read all that if you promise me that the evidence used in that link doesn't strictly come from the Gospel, that it has other independent sources. The Gospel is not historical proof of Jesus's existence. As you know the gospel is not first hand accounts. It was written decades after Jesus died in a time where most stories were passed down orally, not written down. Actual proof would be roman records that Jesus was crucified for example. Do you have any such examples? And if the link you posted does then like I said, I will happily read it. I just don't want to go through all that to find you used the Gospels as pure evidence that he existed.

If you think the gospel is evidence that Jesus existed and he performed miracles then clearly you admit that Buddha did as well. Because by those standards there is about as much evidence for Buddha (if not more) as there is for Jesus. '

You must also admit this: that all stories, whether they come from Paul or Matthew or Luke must all be consistent. And if there is any inconsistency that you can't reconcile then you must admit the gospel is not a historical document. Deal?

I agree that was rather sloppy by me. To be honest I couldn’t answer the question as to why God exists because it doesn’t really have an answer, I mean its like me asking you why the universe exists without a creator, and the only logical argument would be that it was by chance, which is just another way of saying its here because it is. There is no acceptable answer to that question from either side, we just accept that it is.

But really the main question isn’t why he exists, but does he. All I know is that he most certainly does exist because there is indeed a universe around us and I think without attributing it to a creator you find inconsistency after inconsistency. And no its not just as simple as a God of the Gaps terminology, its about how I think the core details on this universe and indeed ourselves do in fact point towards God, the historical claim that Jesus walked the Earth and was risen only adds strength to this argument.

You know what a good rule of thumb is? When you think it is likely people will question your claims then you should be more specific. So when you say for example "I think without attributing [the universe] to a creator you find inconsistency after inconsistency" you should probably explain what specific inconsistencies you have that don't also apply to your version of a god.

 

[Llama]

Why exactly have you changed the names? If you actually thought you had strong arguments then surely you wouldn't need to try and discredit the name of God, and the fact that you haven't payed any respect to my arguments means I shall pay you the same courtesy and simply ignore your entire reply because my gut instinct is telling me that it simply isn't worth reading. Shame you couldn't be adult about it really, and shame you wasted all that time trying to be funny or whatever the hell it was you were trying to achieve...

Are you actually a total idiot?
You must be.

I told you why I did it in the first few lines, because your arguments are ****ing stupid, and they aren't devalued by changing anything. It's a wonderful way of pointing it out.

You don't deserve any respect, get the silly little notion out your mind, nothing you say deserves any more respect than the views of any dingbat conspiracy theorist or general horse shit pedaller.
Oh, of COURSE you won't read them, because you KNOW deep down you were ridiculous.

This entire thread is basically you standing up and telling us you can't think like a rational human being, and throwing temper tantrums when you're called out on it.

No Limit: I skimmed over the link he posted, and 90% seems to be gospel things, then a few stray comments from various people saying that they can't understand how the story could be correct unless the gospels are right, therefore the gospels are right.