|
Stop it with the spoiler tags |
The man was a devout Christian, and police speculated that his "deep religious faith" may have helped him endure "immense pain."
Ah, is that so. Apparently his faith wasn't even strong enough to let him endure the mild annoyance life can be.
|
On May 20 2011 16:07 Dagobert wrote:Show nested quote +The man was a devout Christian, and police speculated that his "deep religious faith" may have helped him endure "immense pain." Ah, is that so. Apparently his faith wasn't even strong enough to let him endure the mild annoyance life can be.
Or perhaps his ritual wasn't suicide due to mild annoyance; maybe it was either annoyance or not suicide to escape, but (in his beliefs) to transcend?
|
On May 20 2011 15:35 Olinim wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2011 15:01 flowSthead wrote:On May 20 2011 13:47 Olinim wrote:On May 20 2011 12:42 flowSthead wrote:On May 20 2011 08:37 Demon Hunter wrote:On May 20 2011 07:53 Olinim wrote:
Who cares what completely insane rationalization they used within Christianity to justify this? And let me assure you that rationalization is indeed completely insane.
How does it make sense for a being that is basically God to die on a cross to absolve the sins of humans...how can someone else pay the price of our sins, that is in complete opposition of any sense of justice that has been adopted in the modern world. Ahh, you just asked him an open question allowing him the opportunity to give you more of his insane Christian rationalisations on the next question you have asked... Let me assure you, Christians have insanely retarded rationalisations in anticipation for any logical questions. You are such a troll, it actually physically ails me. Let's get some things straight right now. I am an atheist. I don't and have never believed in organized religion. I don't particularly care about religious people, and I don't particularly care about this story. But the amount of lack of knowledge of religion, not just in this thread, about among the internet in general is just astounding. I mean according to DemonHunter, Christians are stupid and are unable to answer logical questions. Never mind all of the famous logicians in history that happened to be Christian, like for example Hegel, Francis Bacon, or mathematicians like Leibniz. No, according to the Christian-haters, religion has only brought evil into the world, and that you could certainly not just blame individuals for their stupid actions and stupid ideas. I hate this line of thought because it is completely illogical, and fallacious. The Westboro Baptist Church is not Christianity, and is not a good representation for the average Christian. For that matter, neither is Hegel or Francis Bacon. With Christianity being the largest religion in the world (according to CIA World Factbook), there is nothing that will describe all Christians, or their thoughts or feelings or relative rationality. This guy in the original article had certain beliefs and acted upon them. If we assume everything in the article to be true, then he probably acted upon those beliefs under the impression that it would provide him with a better position in the afterlife. The course of his actions led him to self-mutilation which led to his death. While I completely disagree with his beliefs, I actually admire his will and at least self consistency (even if I also think he has probably misread the Bible, but it is a difficult book to read so alternate interpretations are very common). To most of us, this seems like a very crazy thing to do. For him, his soul was on the line. I find it relatively comparable to Mohamed Bouazizi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohamed_Bouazizi) who lit himself on fire after dousing himself in gasoline. His actions started revolutions in Tunisia, Egypt, and the civil war in Libya. For Mohamed, he was worried about his survival in this life, his economic survival. For the man in the article, he was worried about the state of his immortal soul. Either way, both of them acted in the manner they thought best. I happen to disagree with their thought process, but hating on a religion is an extremely poor way to show your disagreement. It just shows your ignorance, of both history and alternate lifestyles to your own. I would ask you to imagine what it would be like to be worried over an immortal soul, but you seem clearly incapable of empathizing with the religious. It is pretty much the exact same situation any time a fundamentalist is incapable of empathizing with someone of a different religion. Obviously not every Christian is stupid, though I believe their train of though to come to that conclusion was poor. Yes, there are countless numbers of different types of Christian which is why people mostly talk about the ones that simply follow the Bible literally the most basic form of it, and you know what, the Westboro Baptist Church does. Also, your arguments in this post are ridiculous, honestly. You say there is nothing in the world that will describe all Christians, does this make them immune to criticism? No. Secondly you say that he acted upon what his beliefs, what he thought was right...so what? EVERYONE DOES THAT. Oh yeah...Hitler may have murdered millions of people, but in his eyes he was purifying Germany. Doesn't excuse the poor logic this man used, and his blatant mental health issues. I can empathize with them, they are frightened they will go to hell, but that fear is completely irrational. No, that fear is not completely irrational. Do you have knowledge of what happens to you after you die? Because I sure don't. I would really love to hear about the time you spent dead in the afterlife or in utter oblivion. I also never said that Christianity is not immune to criticism. I was responding to the dirty way in which criticism is often levied at Christianity from people with a poor understanding of history. Saying the Westboro Baptist Church follows the most basic form of the Bible is a very poor understanding of both Christianity, and its history. From Christianity's beginning issues were not clearly defined and taken at face value within just the Bible. To say that is to completely miss the point. Just as an example, most people when they mention how Christians went on the Crusades to kill Muslims often leave out a pretty important self-justification the Christians had. Namely, that war is possible if a Christian loved their enemy. Do I agree with the Crusades and buy into their justification? No. But I also don't ignore it. The Westboro Baptist Church is one of the most hateful organizations in all of Christian history. It is decidedly on the fringe of Christianity and a very poor representation of what it has meant to be a Christian historically and in the majority. I should also point out that Hitler killing millions of people and acting upon his beliefs is decidedly different than this man killing himself. In one situation, a man acts upon MILLIONS of other people, and acts as judge and jury, or "casts the first stone" in Bible-speak. In the other situation, a man acts only upon himself, not causing harm to anyone else. So when I say that I don't mind that this Korean man acted upon his beliefs, I mean I really don't care in the slightest because he did what was best for him without harming anyone else in the process. Thank you for comparing that to Hitler though, showing another poor understanding of Christianity. Clearly self-mutilation is exactly like genocide, and the desire for rapture and saving of an immortal soul is equally as stupid as the hate of entire races of people. Yes the fear is completely irrational. It's just like not going outside because you are afraid that there is a psycho bunny monster that will bite your head off, CAN YOU PROVE THAT THERE IS NO PSYCHO INVISIBLE BUNNY MONSTER THAT WILL BITE MY HEAD OFF HUH HUH????? There is no sufficient evidence to believe that there is any type of hell, to say there is, is absurd. And what are you saying with the Crusade? You said you don't agree with the justification but you don't ignore it? If the justification wasn't right then that means the Christians were in the wrong...so I really don't see what you're getting at. And I didn't compare his actions to Hitler, I compared your justification of his actions, I was simply showing that doing what you think is right is meaningless because that's what everyone does. Sorry if it sounded like I thought he was as bad as Hitler was just using it as an example for your justification, not comparing him with the victim. The foundation of Christianity is the Bible, the Bible promotes genocide, homophobia, and slavery this is a fact, so how is the Westboro Baptist Church a poor representation of Christianity, it doesn't represent the majority, but it represents the Bible.
I don't think you really know what the meaning of the word irrational is. I can believe something and be rational about it if given proof I stop believing in it. Seeing as I have left my house for many years without having my having my head bitten off, there is most likely no invisible psycho bunny monster. Seeing as no one has ever died and come back, there is 0 proof one way or the other on what happens to you after you die. So a belief in hell is not irrational. Comparing it to an invisible psycho bunny monster is ridiculous.
I also want to point out your lack of knowledge by making it clear that it is not 100% decided that Hell exists in Christianity. Heaven exists for most Christians definitely, but Hell has at times, and perhaps still, been thought of as inconsistent with Christianity and God. So not all Christians necessary believe in it (just some food for thought).
What I was getting at with the Crusade is that the justification for going into a holy war was loving your enemy. That ideally love was the basis for many different sets of actions that Christians have, and that their God has primarily love as his big thing (love of your neighbor). So I find it a pretty logical conclusion to assume that the Westboro Baptist Church is a poor representation of Christianity what with their enormous lack of love for their neighbor.
Doing what you think is right may be meaningless, but there are certainly different shades in doing what you think is right. You attacked my justification of his actions, but my justification was based on the idea that he was acting alone and only upon himself. I think suicide is as equally irrational in any circumstance as religion, but that doesn't mean I don't see the justification. And as long as there are no ramifications upon others (the way there is in murder) then I have no problems with it.
The Bible also does not promote genocide, homophobia, and slavery. The bible certainly does not have a good picture of homosexuality, but to say that the Bible promotes the hate of gay people is an extremely ignorant view of the Bible. How many times do I have to stress this? What part of homophobia is consistent with the message of loving your neighbor? The Westboro Baptist Church does not represent the Bible, and the Bible is not strictly Christianity. It is Christianity's main text, but that doesn't mean that there are not other aspects involved in Christianity, and comparing the Westboro Baptist Church with say Catholocism or Orthodoxy is ludicrous.
|
On May 20 2011 21:40 flowSthead wrote:
I don't think you really know what the meaning of the word irrational is. I can believe something and be rational about it if given proof I stop believing in it. Seeing as I have left my house for many years without having my having my head bitten off, there is most likely no invisible psycho bunny monster. Seeing as no one has ever died and come back, there is 0 proof one way or the other on what happens to you after you die. So a belief in hell is not irrational. Comparing it to an invisible psycho bunny monster is ridiculous.
Here are a few things you can do then to prove that faith is not irrational:
"If you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain: 'Move from here to there' - and it will move. Nothing will be impossible for you" - Matthew 17:20.
"And these signs will accompany those who believe - in my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well." Mark 16.
|
On May 20 2011 15:53 Hinanawi wrote:
I'd just like to point out that this guy is way more hardcore than Jesus. Jesus had like, a dozen people helping him die, this guy did it all on his own and it sounds like it was a lot more painful too.
Next time someone on the street tells me that Jesus suffered and died for my sins, I'm going to regale them with the tale of Mr. Kim who managed to suffer and die for my sins in an even more impressive fashion.
Oh man oh man, this is so messed up lol (:
Really, go read the beginning of the New Testament the book of Matthew, or if you're lazy just start from Chapter 27 onwards.
Or if you're EVEN MORE LAZY just download "The Greatest Story Ever Told", any Easter movie in general, or the easiest and most immediately accesible "The Passion of the Christ".
There is a difference between a group of people celebrating Easter by simulating the Passion of Christ and his crucifixion, and a single guy somitting suicide by crucifying himself.
The former is ok, and is an even more intense and hardcore experience of the suffering you can watch in "The Passion of the Christ".
The latter is a messed up and deluded guy who is totally confused about what being a follower of Christ means. Loving and obeying Christ IS NOT FUCKING COPYING HIS DEATH. It is living and rejocing that his love for you is everlasting and has overcome all judgement and punishment for you.
Can this quit or do need to continue bashing my head on my keyboard
|
On May 20 2011 21:40 flowSthead wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2011 15:35 Olinim wrote:On May 20 2011 15:01 flowSthead wrote:On May 20 2011 13:47 Olinim wrote:On May 20 2011 12:42 flowSthead wrote:On May 20 2011 08:37 Demon Hunter wrote:On May 20 2011 07:53 Olinim wrote:
Who cares what completely insane rationalization they used within Christianity to justify this? And let me assure you that rationalization is indeed completely insane.
How does it make sense for a being that is basically God to die on a cross to absolve the sins of humans...how can someone else pay the price of our sins, that is in complete opposition of any sense of justice that has been adopted in the modern world. Ahh, you just asked him an open question allowing him the opportunity to give you more of his insane Christian rationalisations on the next question you have asked... Let me assure you, Christians have insanely retarded rationalisations in anticipation for any logical questions. You are such a troll, it actually physically ails me. Let's get some things straight right now. I am an atheist. I don't and have never believed in organized religion. I don't particularly care about religious people, and I don't particularly care about this story. But the amount of lack of knowledge of religion, not just in this thread, about among the internet in general is just astounding. I mean according to DemonHunter, Christians are stupid and are unable to answer logical questions. Never mind all of the famous logicians in history that happened to be Christian, like for example Hegel, Francis Bacon, or mathematicians like Leibniz. No, according to the Christian-haters, religion has only brought evil into the world, and that you could certainly not just blame individuals for their stupid actions and stupid ideas. I hate this line of thought because it is completely illogical, and fallacious. The Westboro Baptist Church is not Christianity, and is not a good representation for the average Christian. For that matter, neither is Hegel or Francis Bacon. With Christianity being the largest religion in the world (according to CIA World Factbook), there is nothing that will describe all Christians, or their thoughts or feelings or relative rationality. This guy in the original article had certain beliefs and acted upon them. If we assume everything in the article to be true, then he probably acted upon those beliefs under the impression that it would provide him with a better position in the afterlife. The course of his actions led him to self-mutilation which led to his death. While I completely disagree with his beliefs, I actually admire his will and at least self consistency (even if I also think he has probably misread the Bible, but it is a difficult book to read so alternate interpretations are very common). To most of us, this seems like a very crazy thing to do. For him, his soul was on the line. I find it relatively comparable to Mohamed Bouazizi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohamed_Bouazizi) who lit himself on fire after dousing himself in gasoline. His actions started revolutions in Tunisia, Egypt, and the civil war in Libya. For Mohamed, he was worried about his survival in this life, his economic survival. For the man in the article, he was worried about the state of his immortal soul. Either way, both of them acted in the manner they thought best. I happen to disagree with their thought process, but hating on a religion is an extremely poor way to show your disagreement. It just shows your ignorance, of both history and alternate lifestyles to your own. I would ask you to imagine what it would be like to be worried over an immortal soul, but you seem clearly incapable of empathizing with the religious. It is pretty much the exact same situation any time a fundamentalist is incapable of empathizing with someone of a different religion. Obviously not every Christian is stupid, though I believe their train of though to come to that conclusion was poor. Yes, there are countless numbers of different types of Christian which is why people mostly talk about the ones that simply follow the Bible literally the most basic form of it, and you know what, the Westboro Baptist Church does. Also, your arguments in this post are ridiculous, honestly. You say there is nothing in the world that will describe all Christians, does this make them immune to criticism? No. Secondly you say that he acted upon what his beliefs, what he thought was right...so what? EVERYONE DOES THAT. Oh yeah...Hitler may have murdered millions of people, but in his eyes he was purifying Germany. Doesn't excuse the poor logic this man used, and his blatant mental health issues. I can empathize with them, they are frightened they will go to hell, but that fear is completely irrational. No, that fear is not completely irrational. Do you have knowledge of what happens to you after you die? Because I sure don't. I would really love to hear about the time you spent dead in the afterlife or in utter oblivion. I also never said that Christianity is not immune to criticism. I was responding to the dirty way in which criticism is often levied at Christianity from people with a poor understanding of history. Saying the Westboro Baptist Church follows the most basic form of the Bible is a very poor understanding of both Christianity, and its history. From Christianity's beginning issues were not clearly defined and taken at face value within just the Bible. To say that is to completely miss the point. Just as an example, most people when they mention how Christians went on the Crusades to kill Muslims often leave out a pretty important self-justification the Christians had. Namely, that war is possible if a Christian loved their enemy. Do I agree with the Crusades and buy into their justification? No. But I also don't ignore it. The Westboro Baptist Church is one of the most hateful organizations in all of Christian history. It is decidedly on the fringe of Christianity and a very poor representation of what it has meant to be a Christian historically and in the majority. I should also point out that Hitler killing millions of people and acting upon his beliefs is decidedly different than this man killing himself. In one situation, a man acts upon MILLIONS of other people, and acts as judge and jury, or "casts the first stone" in Bible-speak. In the other situation, a man acts only upon himself, not causing harm to anyone else. So when I say that I don't mind that this Korean man acted upon his beliefs, I mean I really don't care in the slightest because he did what was best for him without harming anyone else in the process. Thank you for comparing that to Hitler though, showing another poor understanding of Christianity. Clearly self-mutilation is exactly like genocide, and the desire for rapture and saving of an immortal soul is equally as stupid as the hate of entire races of people. Yes the fear is completely irrational. It's just like not going outside because you are afraid that there is a psycho bunny monster that will bite your head off, CAN YOU PROVE THAT THERE IS NO PSYCHO INVISIBLE BUNNY MONSTER THAT WILL BITE MY HEAD OFF HUH HUH????? There is no sufficient evidence to believe that there is any type of hell, to say there is, is absurd. And what are you saying with the Crusade? You said you don't agree with the justification but you don't ignore it? If the justification wasn't right then that means the Christians were in the wrong...so I really don't see what you're getting at. And I didn't compare his actions to Hitler, I compared your justification of his actions, I was simply showing that doing what you think is right is meaningless because that's what everyone does. Sorry if it sounded like I thought he was as bad as Hitler was just using it as an example for your justification, not comparing him with the victim. The foundation of Christianity is the Bible, the Bible promotes genocide, homophobia, and slavery this is a fact, so how is the Westboro Baptist Church a poor representation of Christianity, it doesn't represent the majority, but it represents the Bible. I don't think you really know what the meaning of the word irrational is. I can believe something and be rational about it if given proof I stop believing in it. Seeing as I have left my house for many years without having my having my head bitten off, there is most likely no invisible psycho bunny monster. Seeing as no one has ever died and come back, there is 0 proof one way or the other on what happens to you after you die. So a belief in hell is not irrational. Comparing it to an invisible psycho bunny monster is ridiculous. I also want to point out your lack of knowledge by making it clear that it is not 100% decided that Hell exists in Christianity. Heaven exists for most Christians definitely, but Hell has at times, and perhaps still, been thought of as inconsistent with Christianity and God. So not all Christians necessary believe in it (just some food for thought). What I was getting at with the Crusade is that the justification for going into a holy war was loving your enemy. That ideally love was the basis for many different sets of actions that Christians have, and that their God has primarily love as his big thing (love of your neighbor). So I find it a pretty logical conclusion to assume that the Westboro Baptist Church is a poor representation of Christianity what with their enormous lack of love for their neighbor. Doing what you think is right may be meaningless, but there are certainly different shades in doing what you think is right. You attacked my justification of his actions, but my justification was based on the idea that he was acting alone and only upon himself. I think suicide is as equally irrational in any circumstance as religion, but that doesn't mean I don't see the justification. And as long as there are no ramifications upon others (the way there is in murder) then I have no problems with it. The Bible also does not promote genocide, homophobia, and slavery. The bible certainly does not have a good picture of homosexuality, but to say that the Bible promotes the hate of gay people is an extremely ignorant view of the Bible. How many times do I have to stress this? What part of homophobia is consistent with the message of loving your neighbor? The Westboro Baptist Church does not represent the Bible, and the Bible is not strictly Christianity. It is Christianity's main text, but that doesn't mean that there are not other aspects involved in Christianity, and comparing the Westboro Baptist Church with say Catholocism or Orthodoxy is ludicrous.
Yes, and seeing as I have walked around for years without encountering any type of God, or anything relating to hell, it would be equally silly to base my life on the fact that it might exist, by his creation. Also Ican't believe people still stay that the Bible doesn't promote slavery and genocide, are you kidding me? Seriously, tell me you are?
Leviticus 25:44
"Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves."
Eph 6:5
"Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ."
Fucking clear as day, irrefutable.
Leviticus 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.
As for the genocide...
God's Death Toll
Bible 2,391,421
This is the estimated death toll from the Bible.
You constantly say I'm lacking knowledge, I'm ignorant, but I've only pointed out facts. You're trolling me right bro? Obviously you've never so much as touched the Bible. So let's see now, Those 2 verses promote, oh yes slavery that's right. Then oh look though shalt not lie with mankind, it is an abomination, oh yes very tolerant of homosexuality. Calling them abominations.
Surely no genocide, for the loving God of the desert right? Oh wait... 2.4 million death toll...
|
On May 20 2011 22:12 bITt.mAN wrote:
Loving and obeying Christ IS NOT FUCKING COPYING HIS DEATH. It is living and rejocing that his love for you is everlasting and has overcome all judgement and punishment for you.
I'm going to create an arbitrary legal system that you possibly cannot live up to but subject you to it against your will, then I'm going to say I'm going to pass judgment and punish you for not living up to it unless someone takes the rap for you.
+ Show Spoiler +On Wednesday I wrote a study for my little youth group kids about the origins of evil according to Christianity and all that, and came across the following conundrum, which I have puzzled over before, and which I wonder if any of you can help me with:
My argument was that God allowed evil to enter the world as part of the risk He took in giving humanity free will. i.e. He loved mankind so much that He wanted to give us the chance to grow and mature and choose Him and the good life for ourselves, rather than being set on auto-pilot. All of which I'm sure you're all familiar with. I think it's a nice idea - the end goal being that God gets a family of children who have developed hearts and wisdom like His, and turned away from evil.
Obviously there are questions as to whether it was fair of Him to allow us to stuff things up so badly when a little more guidance might have spared us a lot of pain, and might have made His 'family' rather bigger. But I guess I'm basically willing to give Him the benefit of the doubt on that one, and assume He knew what He was doing, and has some kind of plan to tie up the loose ends. We'll see.
My real conundrum, though, is about the actual story in Genesis 2-3 - and please note I don't wish to open the debate on the literal/metaphorical nature of this story, which I think I pretty much know all your various opinions about. Rather, I'm going to assume that, either way, the story has an emblematic status which somehow applies to theology.
My question is, if God wanted us to develop maturity and discernment, doesn't it seem slightly backward that the tree they were forbidden to touch was said to offer that very thing - the knowledge of good and evil? God says 'if you eat from it you will surely die'. Which is true of course - when they figure out they can try things their own way they pretty much immediately start stuffing things up and killing each other and things. The serpent says of it "You will not surely die, for God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil." And perhaps that's true too - there's no certainty they'll die; there's a slim chance they'll get it right themselves and not ruin everything. In any case the serpent is just trying to incite them to rebellion - don't listen to everything Mr Big says; don't submit to being His slave. Do what you want.
Some possible solutions to the puzzle:
1) My argument is wrong: God didn't want us to develop maturity etc.; He wanted us to get everything right, and for the world to stay perfect, and therefore when He said He didn't want them to eat the fruit, He meant it.
>>Question: so why put it there? To give them the choice? But if they're better off without the choice, isn't that kinda stupid?
2) God knew all along that they'd take the fruit, and put it there intentionally, so that they'd take it and learn some important lessons - painful though it would be for all concerned - which would ultimately be to their/humanity's betterment.
>>Question: so why does He forbid them to touch it?
>>Question: is it even plausible to say we're somehow better off in a post-fall world? Is that kind of sick and sadistic? Or is that like saying it's sadistic of a parent to take the training wheels off their kid's bike, knowing they'll fall off the first time, but will eventually acquire a new skill?
3) Perhaps it wasn't so much that He was forbidding them, but just that He had to warn them, in all fairness, that it would be a path of suffering, even though it would ultimately be the best.
>>But in that case, why not just say 'kids, you have the following two options - you decide'? Instead, He says 'you must not take option 2'.
4) Perhaps in their auto-pilot state they're not able to make decisions like that anyway, so He has to trick them, and maybe overstate the case a little just to make it more interesting.
>>Hm, oh dear, interesting questions arise as to the nature of God. Though potentially it could be seen as a parallel to a parent who tells his kid not to cross the road on her own, not because he never wants her to cross the road, but because she's not ready yet, and in this stage of her development what she needs is set rules that will keep her safe. So, uh, we're currently in the state of having disobeyed, strayed onto the road, been hit by a bus, and are now very slowly recovering, and very slowly figuring out how to conduct ourselves better in future - possibly mixed with a good deal of angst directed towards our dad who should have protected us better.
|
On May 19 2011 04:56 MangoTango wrote:
Religion: promoting voluntary insanity since, forever, really.
Science flies people to the moon. Religion flies people into buildings.
User was warned for this post
Well said.
|
On May 20 2011 23:06 Liberate wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2011 22:12 bITt.mAN wrote:
Loving and obeying Christ IS NOT FUCKING COPYING HIS DEATH. It is living and rejocing that his love for you is everlasting and has overcome all judgement and punishment for you. I'm going to create an arbitrary legal system that you possibly cannot live up to but subject you to it against your will, then I'm going to say I'm going to pass judgment and punish you for not living up to it unless someone takes the rap for you. + Show Spoiler +On Wednesday I wrote a study for my little youth group kids about the origins of evil according to Christianity and all that, and came across the following conundrum, which I have puzzled over before, and which I wonder if any of you can help me with:
My argument was that God allowed evil to enter the world as part of the risk He took in giving humanity free will. i.e. He loved mankind so much that He wanted to give us the chance to grow and mature and choose Him and the good life for ourselves, rather than being set on auto-pilot. All of which I'm sure you're all familiar with. I think it's a nice idea - the end goal being that God gets a family of children who have developed hearts and wisdom like His, and turned away from evil.
Obviously there are questions as to whether it was fair of Him to allow us to stuff things up so badly when a little more guidance might have spared us a lot of pain, and might have made His 'family' rather bigger. But I guess I'm basically willing to give Him the benefit of the doubt on that one, and assume He knew what He was doing, and has some kind of plan to tie up the loose ends. We'll see.
My real conundrum, though, is about the actual story in Genesis 2-3 - and please note I don't wish to open the debate on the literal/metaphorical nature of this story, which I think I pretty much know all your various opinions about. Rather, I'm going to assume that, either way, the story has an emblematic status which somehow applies to theology.
My question is, if God wanted us to develop maturity and discernment, doesn't it seem slightly backward that the tree they were forbidden to touch was said to offer that very thing - the knowledge of good and evil? God says 'if you eat from it you will surely die'. Which is true of course - when they figure out they can try things their own way they pretty much immediately start stuffing things up and killing each other and things. The serpent says of it "You will not surely die, for God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil." And perhaps that's true too - there's no certainty they'll die; there's a slim chance they'll get it right themselves and not ruin everything. In any case the serpent is just trying to incite them to rebellion - don't listen to everything Mr Big says; don't submit to being His slave. Do what you want.
Some possible solutions to the puzzle:
1) My argument is wrong: God didn't want us to develop maturity etc.; He wanted us to get everything right, and for the world to stay perfect, and therefore when He said He didn't want them to eat the fruit, He meant it.
>>Question: so why put it there? To give them the choice? But if they're better off without the choice, isn't that kinda stupid?
2) God knew all along that they'd take the fruit, and put it there intentionally, so that they'd take it and learn some important lessons - painful though it would be for all concerned - which would ultimately be to their/humanity's betterment.
>>Question: so why does He forbid them to touch it?
>>Question: is it even plausible to say we're somehow better off in a post-fall world? Is that kind of sick and sadistic? Or is that like saying it's sadistic of a parent to take the training wheels off their kid's bike, knowing they'll fall off the first time, but will eventually acquire a new skill?
3) Perhaps it wasn't so much that He was forbidding them, but just that He had to warn them, in all fairness, that it would be a path of suffering, even though it would ultimately be the best.
>>But in that case, why not just say 'kids, you have the following two options - you decide'? Instead, He says 'you must not take option 2'.
4) Perhaps in their auto-pilot state they're not able to make decisions like that anyway, so He has to trick them, and maybe overstate the case a little just to make it more interesting.
>>Hm, oh dear, interesting questions arise as to the nature of God. Though potentially it could be seen as a parallel to a parent who tells his kid not to cross the road on her own, not because he never wants her to cross the road, but because she's not ready yet, and in this stage of her development what she needs is set rules that will keep her safe. So, uh, we're currently in the state of having disobeyed, strayed onto the road, been hit by a bus, and are now very slowly recovering, and very slowly figuring out how to conduct ourselves better in future - possibly mixed with a good deal of angst directed towards our dad who should have protected us better.
There are no logical solutions to the "puzzle" because it's completely nonsensical, just like anything else God did in the Bible.
|
On May 20 2011 23:02 Olinim wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2011 21:40 flowSthead wrote:On May 20 2011 15:35 Olinim wrote:On May 20 2011 15:01 flowSthead wrote:On May 20 2011 13:47 Olinim wrote:On May 20 2011 12:42 flowSthead wrote:On May 20 2011 08:37 Demon Hunter wrote:On May 20 2011 07:53 Olinim wrote:
Who cares what completely insane rationalization they used within Christianity to justify this? And let me assure you that rationalization is indeed completely insane.
How does it make sense for a being that is basically God to die on a cross to absolve the sins of humans...how can someone else pay the price of our sins, that is in complete opposition of any sense of justice that has been adopted in the modern world. Ahh, you just asked him an open question allowing him the opportunity to give you more of his insane Christian rationalisations on the next question you have asked... Let me assure you, Christians have insanely retarded rationalisations in anticipation for any logical questions. You are such a troll, it actually physically ails me. Let's get some things straight right now. I am an atheist. I don't and have never believed in organized religion. I don't particularly care about religious people, and I don't particularly care about this story. But the amount of lack of knowledge of religion, not just in this thread, about among the internet in general is just astounding. I mean according to DemonHunter, Christians are stupid and are unable to answer logical questions. Never mind all of the famous logicians in history that happened to be Christian, like for example Hegel, Francis Bacon, or mathematicians like Leibniz. No, according to the Christian-haters, religion has only brought evil into the world, and that you could certainly not just blame individuals for their stupid actions and stupid ideas. I hate this line of thought because it is completely illogical, and fallacious. The Westboro Baptist Church is not Christianity, and is not a good representation for the average Christian. For that matter, neither is Hegel or Francis Bacon. With Christianity being the largest religion in the world (according to CIA World Factbook), there is nothing that will describe all Christians, or their thoughts or feelings or relative rationality. This guy in the original article had certain beliefs and acted upon them. If we assume everything in the article to be true, then he probably acted upon those beliefs under the impression that it would provide him with a better position in the afterlife. The course of his actions led him to self-mutilation which led to his death. While I completely disagree with his beliefs, I actually admire his will and at least self consistency (even if I also think he has probably misread the Bible, but it is a difficult book to read so alternate interpretations are very common). To most of us, this seems like a very crazy thing to do. For him, his soul was on the line. I find it relatively comparable to Mohamed Bouazizi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohamed_Bouazizi) who lit himself on fire after dousing himself in gasoline. His actions started revolutions in Tunisia, Egypt, and the civil war in Libya. For Mohamed, he was worried about his survival in this life, his economic survival. For the man in the article, he was worried about the state of his immortal soul. Either way, both of them acted in the manner they thought best. I happen to disagree with their thought process, but hating on a religion is an extremely poor way to show your disagreement. It just shows your ignorance, of both history and alternate lifestyles to your own. I would ask you to imagine what it would be like to be worried over an immortal soul, but you seem clearly incapable of empathizing with the religious. It is pretty much the exact same situation any time a fundamentalist is incapable of empathizing with someone of a different religion. Obviously not every Christian is stupid, though I believe their train of though to come to that conclusion was poor. Yes, there are countless numbers of different types of Christian which is why people mostly talk about the ones that simply follow the Bible literally the most basic form of it, and you know what, the Westboro Baptist Church does. Also, your arguments in this post are ridiculous, honestly. You say there is nothing in the world that will describe all Christians, does this make them immune to criticism? No. Secondly you say that he acted upon what his beliefs, what he thought was right...so what? EVERYONE DOES THAT. Oh yeah...Hitler may have murdered millions of people, but in his eyes he was purifying Germany. Doesn't excuse the poor logic this man used, and his blatant mental health issues. I can empathize with them, they are frightened they will go to hell, but that fear is completely irrational. No, that fear is not completely irrational. Do you have knowledge of what happens to you after you die? Because I sure don't. I would really love to hear about the time you spent dead in the afterlife or in utter oblivion. I also never said that Christianity is not immune to criticism. I was responding to the dirty way in which criticism is often levied at Christianity from people with a poor understanding of history. Saying the Westboro Baptist Church follows the most basic form of the Bible is a very poor understanding of both Christianity, and its history. From Christianity's beginning issues were not clearly defined and taken at face value within just the Bible. To say that is to completely miss the point. Just as an example, most people when they mention how Christians went on the Crusades to kill Muslims often leave out a pretty important self-justification the Christians had. Namely, that war is possible if a Christian loved their enemy. Do I agree with the Crusades and buy into their justification? No. But I also don't ignore it. The Westboro Baptist Church is one of the most hateful organizations in all of Christian history. It is decidedly on the fringe of Christianity and a very poor representation of what it has meant to be a Christian historically and in the majority. I should also point out that Hitler killing millions of people and acting upon his beliefs is decidedly different than this man killing himself. In one situation, a man acts upon MILLIONS of other people, and acts as judge and jury, or "casts the first stone" in Bible-speak. In the other situation, a man acts only upon himself, not causing harm to anyone else. So when I say that I don't mind that this Korean man acted upon his beliefs, I mean I really don't care in the slightest because he did what was best for him without harming anyone else in the process. Thank you for comparing that to Hitler though, showing another poor understanding of Christianity. Clearly self-mutilation is exactly like genocide, and the desire for rapture and saving of an immortal soul is equally as stupid as the hate of entire races of people. Yes the fear is completely irrational. It's just like not going outside because you are afraid that there is a psycho bunny monster that will bite your head off, CAN YOU PROVE THAT THERE IS NO PSYCHO INVISIBLE BUNNY MONSTER THAT WILL BITE MY HEAD OFF HUH HUH????? There is no sufficient evidence to believe that there is any type of hell, to say there is, is absurd. And what are you saying with the Crusade? You said you don't agree with the justification but you don't ignore it? If the justification wasn't right then that means the Christians were in the wrong...so I really don't see what you're getting at. And I didn't compare his actions to Hitler, I compared your justification of his actions, I was simply showing that doing what you think is right is meaningless because that's what everyone does. Sorry if it sounded like I thought he was as bad as Hitler was just using it as an example for your justification, not comparing him with the victim. The foundation of Christianity is the Bible, the Bible promotes genocide, homophobia, and slavery this is a fact, so how is the Westboro Baptist Church a poor representation of Christianity, it doesn't represent the majority, but it represents the Bible. I don't think you really know what the meaning of the word irrational is. I can believe something and be rational about it if given proof I stop believing in it. Seeing as I have left my house for many years without having my having my head bitten off, there is most likely no invisible psycho bunny monster. Seeing as no one has ever died and come back, there is 0 proof one way or the other on what happens to you after you die. So a belief in hell is not irrational. Comparing it to an invisible psycho bunny monster is ridiculous. I also want to point out your lack of knowledge by making it clear that it is not 100% decided that Hell exists in Christianity. Heaven exists for most Christians definitely, but Hell has at times, and perhaps still, been thought of as inconsistent with Christianity and God. So not all Christians necessary believe in it (just some food for thought). What I was getting at with the Crusade is that the justification for going into a holy war was loving your enemy. That ideally love was the basis for many different sets of actions that Christians have, and that their God has primarily love as his big thing (love of your neighbor). So I find it a pretty logical conclusion to assume that the Westboro Baptist Church is a poor representation of Christianity what with their enormous lack of love for their neighbor. Doing what you think is right may be meaningless, but there are certainly different shades in doing what you think is right. You attacked my justification of his actions, but my justification was based on the idea that he was acting alone and only upon himself. I think suicide is as equally irrational in any circumstance as religion, but that doesn't mean I don't see the justification. And as long as there are no ramifications upon others (the way there is in murder) then I have no problems with it. The Bible also does not promote genocide, homophobia, and slavery. The bible certainly does not have a good picture of homosexuality, but to say that the Bible promotes the hate of gay people is an extremely ignorant view of the Bible. How many times do I have to stress this? What part of homophobia is consistent with the message of loving your neighbor? The Westboro Baptist Church does not represent the Bible, and the Bible is not strictly Christianity. It is Christianity's main text, but that doesn't mean that there are not other aspects involved in Christianity, and comparing the Westboro Baptist Church with say Catholocism or Orthodoxy is ludicrous. Yes, and seeing as I have walked around for years without encountering any type of God, or anything relating to hell, it would be equally silly to base my life on the fact that it might exist, by his creation. Also Ican't believe people still stay that the Bible doesn't promote slavery and genocide, are you kidding me? Seriously, tell me you are? Leviticus 25:44 "Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves." Eph 6:5 "Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ." Fucking clear as day, irrefutable. Leviticus 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. As for the genocide... God's Death Toll Bible 2,391,421 This is the estimated death toll from the Bible. You constantly say I'm lacking knowledge, I'm ignorant, but I've only pointed out facts. You're trolling me right bro? Obviously you've never so much as touched the Bible. So let's see now, Those 2 verses promote, oh yes slavery that's right. Then oh look though shalt not lie with mankind, it is an abomination, oh yes very tolerant of homosexuality. Calling them abominations. Surely no genocide, for the loving God of the desert right? Oh wait... 2.4 million death toll...
Your first paragraph is nonsensical. One does not "run into God" anymore than one "rocks into Mordor".
As for your quotes, the first one is from Leviticus, which is part of the Old Testament. There are plenty of things in Leviticus which are later contradicted in the New Testament. But let us take your full New Testament example from Ephasians: + Show Spoiler +5(CT) Slaves,[c] obey your earthly masters[d] with fear and trembling,(CU) with a sincere heart,(CV) as you would Christ, 6not by the way of eye-service, as(CW) people-pleasers, but as servants[e] of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart, 7rendering service with a good will as to the Lord and not to man, 8(CX) knowing that whatever good anyone does, this he will receive back from the Lord,(CY) whether he is a slave or free. 9Masters, do the same to them,(CZ) and stop your threatening, knowing that(DA) he who is both their Master[f] and yours is in heaven, and that(DB) there is no partiality with him.
I'm pretty sure the point of that quote was not to promote slavery, but to address slavery. Slavery was not a choice two thousand years ago. It's not like people were going around having debates about the morality or legality of slavery. It just was. Here Paul addresses the question of slavery by pointing out that God does not discriminate whether you are a slave or Master.
And you cannot point out the death toll in the Bible as an argument for promoting genocide. You could say the Bible describes genocide, but not promotes it. To promote it, it would have to say "Hey guy, go out and kill millions of people". Instead, the Bible says "thou shalt not kill". I think even you should be aware of that.
I also never said the Bible was cool with homosexuality. It isn't. But the Bible also doesn't promote homophobia, since hating gay people isn't very Christian. It really depends on your definition of homophobia. If you mean fear and disgust, then yeah it probably does. But if you mean hate and violence, then no, the Bible, or at least the New Testament, does not promote that type of homophobia.
|
On May 20 2011 23:31 flowSthead wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2011 23:02 Olinim wrote:On May 20 2011 21:40 flowSthead wrote:On May 20 2011 15:35 Olinim wrote:On May 20 2011 15:01 flowSthead wrote:On May 20 2011 13:47 Olinim wrote:On May 20 2011 12:42 flowSthead wrote:On May 20 2011 08:37 Demon Hunter wrote:On May 20 2011 07:53 Olinim wrote:
Who cares what completely insane rationalization they used within Christianity to justify this? And let me assure you that rationalization is indeed completely insane.
How does it make sense for a being that is basically God to die on a cross to absolve the sins of humans...how can someone else pay the price of our sins, that is in complete opposition of any sense of justice that has been adopted in the modern world. Ahh, you just asked him an open question allowing him the opportunity to give you more of his insane Christian rationalisations on the next question you have asked... Let me assure you, Christians have insanely retarded rationalisations in anticipation for any logical questions. You are such a troll, it actually physically ails me. Let's get some things straight right now. I am an atheist. I don't and have never believed in organized religion. I don't particularly care about religious people, and I don't particularly care about this story. But the amount of lack of knowledge of religion, not just in this thread, about among the internet in general is just astounding. I mean according to DemonHunter, Christians are stupid and are unable to answer logical questions. Never mind all of the famous logicians in history that happened to be Christian, like for example Hegel, Francis Bacon, or mathematicians like Leibniz. No, according to the Christian-haters, religion has only brought evil into the world, and that you could certainly not just blame individuals for their stupid actions and stupid ideas. I hate this line of thought because it is completely illogical, and fallacious. The Westboro Baptist Church is not Christianity, and is not a good representation for the average Christian. For that matter, neither is Hegel or Francis Bacon. With Christianity being the largest religion in the world (according to CIA World Factbook), there is nothing that will describe all Christians, or their thoughts or feelings or relative rationality. This guy in the original article had certain beliefs and acted upon them. If we assume everything in the article to be true, then he probably acted upon those beliefs under the impression that it would provide him with a better position in the afterlife. The course of his actions led him to self-mutilation which led to his death. While I completely disagree with his beliefs, I actually admire his will and at least self consistency (even if I also think he has probably misread the Bible, but it is a difficult book to read so alternate interpretations are very common). To most of us, this seems like a very crazy thing to do. For him, his soul was on the line. I find it relatively comparable to Mohamed Bouazizi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohamed_Bouazizi) who lit himself on fire after dousing himself in gasoline. His actions started revolutions in Tunisia, Egypt, and the civil war in Libya. For Mohamed, he was worried about his survival in this life, his economic survival. For the man in the article, he was worried about the state of his immortal soul. Either way, both of them acted in the manner they thought best. I happen to disagree with their thought process, but hating on a religion is an extremely poor way to show your disagreement. It just shows your ignorance, of both history and alternate lifestyles to your own. I would ask you to imagine what it would be like to be worried over an immortal soul, but you seem clearly incapable of empathizing with the religious. It is pretty much the exact same situation any time a fundamentalist is incapable of empathizing with someone of a different religion. Obviously not every Christian is stupid, though I believe their train of though to come to that conclusion was poor. Yes, there are countless numbers of different types of Christian which is why people mostly talk about the ones that simply follow the Bible literally the most basic form of it, and you know what, the Westboro Baptist Church does. Also, your arguments in this post are ridiculous, honestly. You say there is nothing in the world that will describe all Christians, does this make them immune to criticism? No. Secondly you say that he acted upon what his beliefs, what he thought was right...so what? EVERYONE DOES THAT. Oh yeah...Hitler may have murdered millions of people, but in his eyes he was purifying Germany. Doesn't excuse the poor logic this man used, and his blatant mental health issues. I can empathize with them, they are frightened they will go to hell, but that fear is completely irrational. No, that fear is not completely irrational. Do you have knowledge of what happens to you after you die? Because I sure don't. I would really love to hear about the time you spent dead in the afterlife or in utter oblivion. I also never said that Christianity is not immune to criticism. I was responding to the dirty way in which criticism is often levied at Christianity from people with a poor understanding of history. Saying the Westboro Baptist Church follows the most basic form of the Bible is a very poor understanding of both Christianity, and its history. From Christianity's beginning issues were not clearly defined and taken at face value within just the Bible. To say that is to completely miss the point. Just as an example, most people when they mention how Christians went on the Crusades to kill Muslims often leave out a pretty important self-justification the Christians had. Namely, that war is possible if a Christian loved their enemy. Do I agree with the Crusades and buy into their justification? No. But I also don't ignore it. The Westboro Baptist Church is one of the most hateful organizations in all of Christian history. It is decidedly on the fringe of Christianity and a very poor representation of what it has meant to be a Christian historically and in the majority. I should also point out that Hitler killing millions of people and acting upon his beliefs is decidedly different than this man killing himself. In one situation, a man acts upon MILLIONS of other people, and acts as judge and jury, or "casts the first stone" in Bible-speak. In the other situation, a man acts only upon himself, not causing harm to anyone else. So when I say that I don't mind that this Korean man acted upon his beliefs, I mean I really don't care in the slightest because he did what was best for him without harming anyone else in the process. Thank you for comparing that to Hitler though, showing another poor understanding of Christianity. Clearly self-mutilation is exactly like genocide, and the desire for rapture and saving of an immortal soul is equally as stupid as the hate of entire races of people. Yes the fear is completely irrational. It's just like not going outside because you are afraid that there is a psycho bunny monster that will bite your head off, CAN YOU PROVE THAT THERE IS NO PSYCHO INVISIBLE BUNNY MONSTER THAT WILL BITE MY HEAD OFF HUH HUH????? There is no sufficient evidence to believe that there is any type of hell, to say there is, is absurd. And what are you saying with the Crusade? You said you don't agree with the justification but you don't ignore it? If the justification wasn't right then that means the Christians were in the wrong...so I really don't see what you're getting at. And I didn't compare his actions to Hitler, I compared your justification of his actions, I was simply showing that doing what you think is right is meaningless because that's what everyone does. Sorry if it sounded like I thought he was as bad as Hitler was just using it as an example for your justification, not comparing him with the victim. The foundation of Christianity is the Bible, the Bible promotes genocide, homophobia, and slavery this is a fact, so how is the Westboro Baptist Church a poor representation of Christianity, it doesn't represent the majority, but it represents the Bible. I don't think you really know what the meaning of the word irrational is. I can believe something and be rational about it if given proof I stop believing in it. Seeing as I have left my house for many years without having my having my head bitten off, there is most likely no invisible psycho bunny monster. Seeing as no one has ever died and come back, there is 0 proof one way or the other on what happens to you after you die. So a belief in hell is not irrational. Comparing it to an invisible psycho bunny monster is ridiculous. I also want to point out your lack of knowledge by making it clear that it is not 100% decided that Hell exists in Christianity. Heaven exists for most Christians definitely, but Hell has at times, and perhaps still, been thought of as inconsistent with Christianity and God. So not all Christians necessary believe in it (just some food for thought). What I was getting at with the Crusade is that the justification for going into a holy war was loving your enemy. That ideally love was the basis for many different sets of actions that Christians have, and that their God has primarily love as his big thing (love of your neighbor). So I find it a pretty logical conclusion to assume that the Westboro Baptist Church is a poor representation of Christianity what with their enormous lack of love for their neighbor. Doing what you think is right may be meaningless, but there are certainly different shades in doing what you think is right. You attacked my justification of his actions, but my justification was based on the idea that he was acting alone and only upon himself. I think suicide is as equally irrational in any circumstance as religion, but that doesn't mean I don't see the justification. And as long as there are no ramifications upon others (the way there is in murder) then I have no problems with it. The Bible also does not promote genocide, homophobia, and slavery. The bible certainly does not have a good picture of homosexuality, but to say that the Bible promotes the hate of gay people is an extremely ignorant view of the Bible. How many times do I have to stress this? What part of homophobia is consistent with the message of loving your neighbor? The Westboro Baptist Church does not represent the Bible, and the Bible is not strictly Christianity. It is Christianity's main text, but that doesn't mean that there are not other aspects involved in Christianity, and comparing the Westboro Baptist Church with say Catholocism or Orthodoxy is ludicrous. Yes, and seeing as I have walked around for years without encountering any type of God, or anything relating to hell, it would be equally silly to base my life on the fact that it might exist, by his creation. Also Ican't believe people still stay that the Bible doesn't promote slavery and genocide, are you kidding me? Seriously, tell me you are? Leviticus 25:44 "Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves." Eph 6:5 "Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ." Fucking clear as day, irrefutable. Leviticus 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. As for the genocide... God's Death Toll Bible 2,391,421 This is the estimated death toll from the Bible. You constantly say I'm lacking knowledge, I'm ignorant, but I've only pointed out facts. You're trolling me right bro? Obviously you've never so much as touched the Bible. So let's see now, Those 2 verses promote, oh yes slavery that's right. Then oh look though shalt not lie with mankind, it is an abomination, oh yes very tolerant of homosexuality. Calling them abominations. Surely no genocide, for the loving God of the desert right? Oh wait... 2.4 million death toll... Your first paragraph is nonsensical. One does not "run into God" anymore than one "rocks into Mordor". As for your quotes, the first one is from Leviticus, which is part of the Old Testament. There are plenty of things in Leviticus which are later contradicted in the New Testament. But let us take your full New Testament example from Ephasians: + Show Spoiler +5(CT) Slaves,[c] obey your earthly masters[d] with fear and trembling,(CU) with a sincere heart,(CV) as you would Christ, 6not by the way of eye-service, as(CW) people-pleasers, but as servants[e] of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart, 7rendering service with a good will as to the Lord and not to man, 8(CX) knowing that whatever good anyone does, this he will receive back from the Lord,(CY) whether he is a slave or free. 9Masters, do the same to them,(CZ) and stop your threatening, knowing that(DA) he who is both their Master[f] and yours is in heaven, and that(DB) there is no partiality with him. I'm pretty sure the point of that quote was not to promote slavery, but to address slavery. Slavery was not a choice two thousand years ago. It's not like people were going around having debates about the morality or legality of slavery. It just was. Here Paul addresses the question of slavery by pointing out that God does not discriminate whether you are a slave or Master. And you cannot point out the death toll in the Bible as an argument for promoting genocide. You could say the Bible describes genocide, but not promotes it. To promote it, it would have to say "Hey guy, go out and kill millions of people". Instead, the Bible says "thou shalt not kill". I think even you should be aware of that. I also never said the Bible was cool with homosexuality. It isn't. But the Bible also doesn't promote homophobia, since hating gay people isn't very Christian. It really depends on your definition of homophobia. If you mean fear and disgust, then yeah it probably does. But if you mean hate and violence, then no, the Bible, or at least the New Testament, does not promote that type of homophobia.
I didn't say run into God, I mean to say encounter anything that was an effect from him or any reason to believe he exists. Also, you don't need to be violent towards them to be homophobic, being disgusted by them is the very definition of homophobia since its an irrational disgust. Still, it condones slavery, it freaking says "you may buy a slave" I don't care if it was commonplace at the time FREAKING GOD should know better. He said that it's ok, there's nothing more to it, the Bible promotes slavery and its A FACT. Seriously how can you try to defend this?
|
On May 20 2011 23:07 Shangiv wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2011 04:56 MangoTango wrote:
Religion: promoting voluntary insanity since, forever, really.
Science flies people to the moon. Religion flies people into buildings.
User was warned for this post Well said.
Science also created the gas chambers, and north korean "human experiments". And there was no religion involved in that part as far as I know
|
|
|
Poor guy, probably lost 20 sc matches in a row.
|
On May 20 2011 23:48 nka203 wrote:
Poor guy, probably lost 20 sc matches in a row.
wait, what, that was artosis??
|
Holy fucking shit, gotta give the guy credit for putting in so much effort but why anyone would do such a thing is beyond me.
On May 20 2011 23:50 Starfox wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2011 23:48 nka203 wrote:
Poor guy, probably lost 20 sc matches in a row. wait, what, that was artosis??
lol
|
On May 20 2011 23:07 Shangiv wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2011 04:56 MangoTango wrote:
Religion: promoting voluntary insanity since, forever, really.
Science flies people to the moon. Religion flies people into buildings.
User was warned for this post Well said.
"Science" isn't any more innocent than religion in the atrocities that has taken place during the world history. Heck, one of the most well-known trials in the world is the Nuremberg trials - which was regarding doctors who to make scientific progress tortured and killed performed trials on humans.
This whole attempt at seizing a superior position is really fucking tiring - both science and religion plays an important role in society; when morons misuse either, condemn the morons, not the subject being misused...
|
Hmmm. If it was a suicide, then thats a little misplaced isn't it? Did he gloss over the part where Jesus was sentenced to his crucifixion, not admitted willingly? I understand that some hard-core Christians want to empathize with Jesus' suffering as much as possible, but shouldn't there be a line, even among these fanatics, between suffering and suicide? I think the whole thing is out of touch. Christianity tells us to be grateful for Jesus' suffering, that by one heroic act he payed for our sins, not that we should inflict that same damage on ourselves.
If it's a murder (which it really sounds like it is) then I'm sort of perplexed/interested. Sounds almost like fiction (se7en). The mix of my recent obsession with crime solving (l.a. noire) and my lifelong interest with religion gets me sort of excited by this thing.
|
On May 20 2011 23:50 Starfox wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2011 23:48 nka203 wrote:
Poor guy, probably lost 20 sc matches in a row. wait, what, that was artosis??
Artosis race changed to Korean?
|
On May 20 2011 23:57 Ghostcom wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2011 23:07 Shangiv wrote:On May 19 2011 04:56 MangoTango wrote:
Religion: promoting voluntary insanity since, forever, really.
Science flies people to the moon. Religion flies people into buildings.
User was warned for this post Well said. "Science" isn't any more innocent than religion in the atrocities that has taken place during the world history. Heck, one of the most well-known trials in the world is the Nuremberg trials - which was regarding doctors who to make scientific progress tortured and killed performed trials on humans. This whole attempt at seizing a superior position is really fucking tiring - both science and religion plays an important role in society; when morons misuse either, condemn the morons, not the subject being misused...
Did you seriously just say that religion is as important to society as science? Really? Yeah sure, without science we wouldn't even have the internet for you to say something like that, but at least we would have Jesus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
