A question for atheists

[Jan Ardena]

Thersites,

Judges 1:19, where although "the lord" is with Judah the two combined cannot defeat lowlanders because they have iron chariots suggests that god is far from omnipotent there. Compare with the claims of some of the prophets.

What makes you think Judah was supposed to drive out the inhabitants of the valley?

If "life comes from life" then 'God' [or God or 'god' or god or your hypothetical demigods] came from something else, which came...

It is a misunderstanding of the concept 'God' which leads to this conclusion.

"As far as I am concerned" is not convincing evidence except to you.

I didn't say it was, you misinterpreted my point.

The bible asserts that there is only one god, that all the info you could want about it is in the bible and all other books are wrong.

Where does it assert that all other books are wrong?

the koran asserts that the koran is the absolute word of god, that the bible is corrupt and unnecessary now the koran is here and all other religious books are false and all other gods- including Vishnu- are lies and delusions.

I take your point about the absolute word of God, but all the other points are not mentioned in the Qur'an.

You may believe that Jehovah, Allah and Vishnu are the same person- as you put it- but in that case the books describing them are all inaccurate and unreliable and you must use other sources and reasons to justify your belief.

There are no holy books which state this. These are personal, bias opinions.
Read the books and understand it for yourself rather than just believing bias opinions because they suit your state of mind.

The first cause hypothesis is completely separate from the actual depicted deities in the books you cite.

In what way are they separate?

You are assuming it. Where is your evidence?

I've just told you, i'm not assuming anything, the way to worship God is set down in all of the bona-fide religious texts, including the bible. There are different ways of worship to suit the different types of people. Some, more advanced than others, all eventually lead to love of God.
Love of God is the point of all religions. So if i want to worship God, I follow the instructions for worship as set down by God, so there is no need to assume anything.
If you had any understanding of holy books, you would know that.

As for belief and worship, Jehovah and Allah are very enthusiastic for worship and threaten dire and horrible fates for those that don't worship them.

There are a couple of verses in the Bhagavad Gita which state;

Chapter 4, Verse 7.
Whenever and wherever there is a decline in religious practice, O descendant of Bharata, and a predominant rise of irreligion--at that time I descend Myself.

Chapter 4, Verse 8.
In order to deliver the pious and to annihilate the miscreants, as well as to reestablish the principles of religion, I advent Myself millennium after millennium.

If you believe in either without worshipping it you are either very heroic, very masochistic or both.

I don't get your point.

....the psychology of believers has much in common with the psychology of other believers and it is a fairly good chance that two believers will think and behave similarly in many ways.

This is an ignorant and biased statement with a strong undercurrent of dislike toward theists. However, if i am wrong i'm sure you will be able to provide a good argument to back up your claim.

Well, are you going to refrain from assuming that Jehovah and Allah and Vishnu exist and are the same god?

I believe God exists.
That the three names you mentioned above belong to the same person? One only has to read to understand this.

Are you going to abandon these generalisations, too?

How many theists here believe that Jehovah, Allah and Vishnu are the same person?

Different people do not believe in things in the way you use the word, in the way you believe in god, for example.

You know HOW I believe in God?

You acknowledge then that your beliefs are arbitrary and without reason, do you?

My beliefs aren't arbitrary, but i do use my own discretion, regarding how i understand them, and it would be silly to believe in something without reason. Maybe you can, but i can't.

In fact, most people make their choice of beliefs in a far from arbitrary way: they go by what they have been told, they judge by what they have seen and learned.

In my experience people do what pleases them unless they are forced. They may say they believe something based on what they have been told, but their actions do not necessarily follow their said belief.

Their minds are partly controlled by their families and the society they live in, which affect what they have seen and learned, but they also decide independently on the basis of what they have learned directly and indirectly.

Then as their minds are only partly controlled, they act arbitrarily, even if they decide to follow their culture. It is there own choice.

...a believer has to do what they think god wants and has to think in a way that reflects their beliefs.

This is a nonsensical statement. The problem with you is that you have no idea of the subject you are talking about. When someone believes in God, that is what they do, believe in God. One doesn't have to be religious to 'believe'. One step at a time...eh!

There are circumstances where they are more likely to make mistakes because of those trammels.

The 'trammels' only exist if one is doing something one does not want to do, othewise for a genuine religious person there are no restraints. They live life how they choose to and are happy with their lot.

On an arbitrary absurd and unsubstantiated set of assumptions and interactions betwwen those assumptions.

You are of course entitled to your opinion. But in my opinion you do not know enough to comment with any real merit. This is why i think that regarding this particular subject matter, you are ignorant and bias.

The fact that you believe that those rules are imposed by god does not make you freer from them.

I never said it did. But if God does exist, then according to Pascals wager it puts me in a better position, and if He doesn't exist then i have lost nothing, not even quality of life.

As I said, the gods depicted in the bible and the koran have pretty definite tastes and opinions and pretty definite punishments for those that do not follow their rules or please them.

That is your opinion based on your understanding or lack of. This is obvious because you clearly only cite what YOU see as negative action (of God) to boulster your belief, and purposely miss out what would be interpreted as the greatness and benevolence of God.

Why? Again, the bible and the koran both make it pretty plain that motives are impoortant- presumably motives for belief also matter.

You didn't get my point.
Your understanding of God, belief, and the scriptures, are nonsensical.

No thanks. Mad, bad and dangerous to know.

That's alright, it's not for everyone.

Jan Ardena.

 

[SnakeLord]

Oi, Don't ignore me

 

[Thersites]

Thersites,



What makes you think Judah was supposed to drive out the inhabitants of the valley?

The text says they couldn't. It is a not unreasonable inference that they tried to, otherwise there would be no reason to say that they couldn't.

It is a misunderstanding of the concept 'God' which leads to this conclusion.

How?

I didn't say it was, you misinterpreted my point.

You said "As far as I am concerned there is only one 'God'...for which there is evidence." If " As far as I am concerned" was not your point, what was your point?

Where does it assert that all other books are wrong?

I take your point about the absolute word of God, but all the other points are not mentioned in the Qur'an.

Then whyy does the koran say that the jews and xtians corrupted the message of earlier prophets? Why does it say that polytheists are to be given the choices of conversion or death?

There are no holy books which state this. These are personal, bias opinions.
Read the books and understand it for yourself rather than just believing bias opinions because they suit your state of mind.

Of course holy books don't state that they themselves are inaccurate and unreliable. As I said, the koran says that the bible is corrupt. If the bible is not corrupt, the koran is lying there. Neither refers to Vishnu at all, but both condemn other gods without qualification: if Vishnu was Jehovah or Allah in another hat presumably they would say so.

In what way are they separate?

I pointed out: if something set the universe going, it could leave the job of running it to junior less-qualified assistants. Psychologically, the extreme jealousy and egoism of Jehovah and allah fit well with this hypothesis; something with the power to set the whole universe going would not need the boosts to their vanity these require. A boastful subordinate, claiming more power than it actually has, would want all the flattery it could get.

I've just told you, i'm not assuming anything, the way to worship God is set down in all of the bona-fide religious texts, including the bible. There are different ways of worship to suit the different types of people.

Or the different types of gods

Some, more advanced than others, all eventually lead to love of God.
Love of God is the point of all religions. So if i want to worship God, I follow the instructions for worship as set down by God, so there is no need to assume anything.
If you had any understanding of holy books, you would know that.

What, you follow all the instructions? How do you know waht "type of people" you are? You could be following the wrong kind of worship.

There are a couple of verses in the Bhagavad Gita which state;

Chapter 4, Verse 7.
Whenever and wherever there is a decline in religious practice, O descendant of Bharata, and a predominant rise of irreligion--at that time I descend Myself.

Chapter 4, Verse 8.
In order to deliver the pious and to annihilate the miscreants, as well as to reestablish the principles of religion, I advent Myself millennium after millennium.

So Vishnu is just as enthusiastic as Jehovah and Allah about torturing people who don't worship or don't worship properly.

I don't get your point.

Really? Jehovah and Allah both say that people who do not worship them are going to have very unpleasant eternal futures. You say you do not need to worship them, only to believe. They disagree with you.

This is an ignorant and biased statement with a strong undercurrent of dislike toward theists. However, if i am wrong i'm sure you will be able to provide a good argument to back up your claim.

You provide it yourself. "there are different ways of worship...all eventually lead to love of god."

I believe God exists.
That the three names you mentioned above belong to the same person? One only has to read to understand this.

Read where? The primary sources of information make it very plain that each being described [God is a person? Is something that powerful a person, with tastes and foibles and vanities- all of the quirks and flaws of personality? I doubt it] is unique and no other source is to be accepted as reliable.

How many theists here believe that Jehovah, Allah and Vishnu are the same person?

Your generalisations were: "everyone believes in someone or something...everyone...arbitrarily accepts their set of beliefs. It is impossible for humans to do otherwise unless they a...brainwashed." What does your trinity have to do with that. Again, are you going to abandon these generalisations?

You know HOW I believe in God?

Certainly. As I said, different people do not believe in things in the way you use the word: "arbitrarily accepted ...beliefs" you said- that is how you believe in god, isn't it- arbitrarily?

My beliefs aren't arbitrary, but i do use my own discretion, regarding how i understand them, and it would be silly to believe in something without reason.

Indeed, then you are an exception to everyone else in your own claim?

Maybe you can, but i can't.

No, personally, I don't not disbelieve in anything without reason. You haven't given any reason except that you do believe for your beliefs.

In my experience people do what pleases them unless they are forced. They may say they believe something based on what they have been told, but their actions do not necessarily follow their said belief.

Certainly. I did not mention their actions, only their beliefs.

Then as their minds are only partly controlled, they act arbitrarily, even if they decide to follow their culture. It is there own choice.

What makes it an entirely arbitrary choice, as you seem to think? You appear to think people's choices are either forced or arbitrary, with no other options. People also choose on the basis of observation and logic.

This [ a believer has to do what they think god wants and has to think in a way that reflects those beliefs] is a nonsensical statement.

How is it nonsensical?

The problem with you is that you have no idea of the subject you are talking about. When someone believes in God, that is what they do, believe in God. One doesn't have to be religious to 'believe'. One step at a time...eh!

Either one believes or one does not believe. Does believing in god have no effect on what people do? You seem to be saying that.

The 'trammels' only exist if one is doing something one does not want to do, othewise for a genuine religious person there are no restraints. They live life how they choose to and are happy with their lot.

The most effective trammels are the ones that work so well they are not noticed.

I never said it did. But if God does exist, then according to Pascals wager it puts me in a better position, and if He doesn't exist then i have lost nothing, not even quality of life.

not at all. You have lost the ability to reason. Your benefit only applies if the really rather odd concept of god you havr devised coincides with reality- a very unlikely event.

That is your opinion based on your understanding or lack of. This is obvious because you clearly only cite what YOU see as negative action (of God) to boulster your belief, and purposely miss out what would be interpreted as the greatness and benevolence of God.

Would you care to produce some evidence for the "greatness and benevolence of God"?

You didn't get my point.

Really? Again, the bible and koran make it pretty clear that it is not only belief but motives for belief that matter. Someone who believed because of Pascal's wager, even if they believed in the right religion, would have their motives scrutinised by Big G, and- going by most of what is said in the bible- would end up going to hell anyway.

Your understanding of God, belief, and the scriptures, are nonsensical.

Well, i go by what is said in them. GIGO

 

[Jan Ardena]

Thersites,

The text says they couldn't.

It doesn't…. it says "he (Judah) drove them out of the mountains but could not drive them out of the valley." It says nothing of "they".

How?
You said "As far as I am concerned there is only one 'God'...for which there is evidence." If " As far as I am concerned" was not your point, what was your point?

You accused me of using "As far as I am concerned" as evidence of God's existence. I said no such thing.
As far as i am concerned life comes from life, if you can show otherwise then i will concern myself with that.

Then whyy does the koran say that the jews and xtians corrupted the message of earlier prophets? Why does it say that polytheists are to be given the choices of conversion or death?

Where does it say in either book, that all other books are wrong?
That is my question.

Or the different types of gods

Such as?

Really? Jehovah and Allah both say that people who do not worship them are going to have very unpleasant eternal futures.

Yes really.
Please cite the text and we’ll check the context.

You say you do not need to worship them, only to believe.

I didn’t say that, I said you can believe in God without being religious.
Belief is the first step.

You provide it yourself. "there are different ways of worship...all eventually lead to love of god."

You claimed to know “how I believe” (or something to that effect) based on the idea that the psychology of believers are the same or similar. Unless you can prove that claim, it is just an empty ignorant, emotive statement.

Read where? The primary sources of information make it very plain that each being described [God is a person? Is something that powerful a person, with tastes and foibles and vanities- all of the quirks and flaws of personality? I doubt it] is unique and no other source is to be accepted as reliable.

Show me texts.

What does your trinity have to do with that.

I don’t understand the point you are trying make.

Again, are you going to abandon these generalisations?

I don’t see it as generalisations, but as humanity. From the moment we are born we believe in someone or something. As we grow our beliefs may change from one thing to another.

Certainly. As I said, different people do not believe in things in the way you use the word: "arbitrarily accepted ...beliefs" you said- that is how you believe in god, isn't it- arbitrarily?

People who have freedom believe what they want to believe in. In the case of believing in God, they can believe without any reason, but not everybody falls into this category. I was talking with an atheist friend of mine the other day, and he confidently asserted that God does not exist, and we all came about via the process of evolution (Darwin). When I asked him to prove that claim his reply was “its obvious because God does not exist”.

Indeed, then you are an exception to everyone else in your own claim?No, personally, I don't not disbelieve in anything without reason.

Another ignorant gesture from you.

You haven't given any reason except that you do believe for your beliefs.

If you care to read my replies you will see that you are indeed mistaken.
Your perception of God is lacking in knowledge, wisdom and understanding which makes it difficult to enter into too much depth, at this moment in time.

Certainly. I did not mention their actions, only their beliefs.

As I said, belief is part of human nature, if you believe (in) something, your actions tend to follow in that belief, but what you say you believe (in) may differ to what you really believe which is etched in your actions.

What makes it an entirely arbitrary choice, as you seem to think?

I didn’t say it was “entirely arbitrary”, but as arbitrary as it can be given their individual set of life circumstances.

You appear to think people's choices are either forced or arbitrary, with no other options. People also choose on the basis of observation and logic.

The fact that they choose means they have decided that this is the right way to come to conclusions. And those same people will abandon logic if necessary, to keep those conclusions alive if they are threatened.

How is it nonsensical?

It doesn’t make sense.

Either one believes or one does not believe. Does believing in god have no effect on what people do? You seem to be saying that.

It depends to what extent one believes. If one believes that “God exists” nothing more nothing less, then he lives his life accordingly, otherwise you wouldn’t need to ask anyone if they believed in God, you would just know they do. On the other hand, there are people whose belief extends to their day to day life, how they eat, dress and so on. You don’t really have to enquire from these people whether they believe in God.

The most effective trammels are the ones that work so well they are not noticed.

How would you know that they were trammels?

not at all. You have lost the ability to reason.

I think you’ve lost the ability to reason.
So where do we go from here?

Your benefit only applies if the really rather odd concept of god you havr devised coincides with reality- a very unlikely event.

I have devised no god, this is just another ignorant statement.

Would you care to produce some evidence for the "greatness and benevolence of God"?

Read for yourself. If you’ve taken the trouble to compile what you see as negative actions from God without asking for evidence, then take the trouble to compile what you see as benevolent and greatness.

Really? Again, the bible and koran make it pretty clear that it is not only belief but motives for belief that matter.

Again, please cite the texts so that I can see for myself.

Someone who believed because of Pascal's wager, even if they believed in the right religion, would have their motives scrutinised by Big G,

Why? If the result is they believe in God, why would their motives be scrutinised.

…and- going by most of what is said in the bible- would end up going to hell anyway.

You’ve made it clear that you don’t understand what the bible says, or that you choose to understand it they way you want to, and as such, are in no position to say this or that will happen, IMHO.

Well, i go by what is said in them. GIGO

That’s just it. You don’t, you pick and choose exerts without understanding their context, and you misinterpret the words.
And I believe you do this intentionally.

Jan Ardena.

 

[Medicine*Woman]

Jan Ardena: What makes you think Judah was supposed to drive out the inhabitants of the valley?

It is a misunderstanding of the concept 'God' which leads to this conclusion.

I take your point about the absolute word of God, but all the other points are not mentioned in the Qur'an.

I've just told you, i'm not assuming anything, the way to worship God is set down in all of the bona-fide religious texts, including the bible. There are different ways of worship to suit the different types of people. Some, more advanced than others, all eventually lead to love of God.

Love of God is the point of all religions. So if i want to worship God, I follow the instructions for worship as set down by God, so there is no need to assume anything.

If you had any understanding of holy books, you would know that.

There are a couple of verses in the Bhagavad Gita which state;

Chapter 4, Verse 7.
Whenever and wherever there is a decline in religious practice, O descendant of Bharata, and a predominant rise of irreligion--at that time I descend Myself.

Chapter 4, Verse 8.
In order to deliver the pious and to annihilate the miscreants, as well as to reestablish the principles of religion, I advent Myself millennium after millennium.

I don't get your point.

This is an ignorant and biased statement with a strong undercurrent of dislike toward theists. However, if i am wrong i'm sure you will be able to provide a good argument to back up your claim.

I believe God exists.
That the three names you mentioned above belong to the same person? One only has to read to understand this.

How many theists here believe that Jehovah, Allah and Vishnu are the same person?

You know HOW I believe in God?

My beliefs aren't arbitrary, but i do use my own discretion, regarding how i understand them, and it would be silly to believe in something without reason. Maybe you can, but i can't.

In my experience people do what pleases them unless they are forced. They may say they believe something based on what they have been told, but their actions do not necessarily follow their said belief.

Then as their minds are only partly controlled, they act arbitrarily, even if they decide to follow their culture. It is there own choice.

This is a nonsensical statement. The problem with you is that you have no idea of the subject you are talking about. When someone believes in God, that is what they do, believe in God. One doesn't have to be religious to 'believe'. One step at a time...eh!

The 'trammels' only exist if one is doing something one does not want to do, othewise for a genuine religious person there are no restraints. They live life how they choose to and are happy with their lot.

You are of course entitled to your opinion. But in my opinion you do not know enough to comment with any real merit. This is why i think that regarding this particular subject matter, you are ignorant and bias.

I never said it did. But if God does exist, then according to Pascals wager it puts me in a better position, and if He doesn't exist then i have lost nothing, not even quality of life.

That is your opinion based on your understanding or lack of. This is obvious because you clearly only cite what YOU see as negative action (of God) to boulster your belief, and purposely miss out what would be interpreted as the greatness and benevolence of God.
*************
M*W: You know, Jan Ardena, I have a confession to make. I never read your posts. Not only are they bo-ring!, you are in a total state of confusion. I attempted this one, but I'm still at the same conclusion -- bo-ring!

You don't know what the hell you believe! You and I have never had a discussion because of your illogical beliefs. I suggest you take this one and shove it as far as you can up your ass and enjoy it immensely. You are not intelligent enough to debate anyone on sciforums. Get lost!

 

[Jan Ardena]

Medicine Woman,

Not only are they bo-ring!, you are in a total state of confusion. I attempted this one, but I'm still at the same conclusion -- bo-ring!

Judging by your personalised belief system, it is hardly surprising.

You don't know what the hell you believe!

You don't know what the hell i believe, to be precise.

You and I have never had a discussion because of your illogical beliefs.

So you regard belief in God as illogical, that's fair enough. But don't forget this is a religious forum.

I suggest you take this one and shove it as far as you can up your ass and enjoy it immensely.

Why the crass attitude?

You are not intelligent enough to debate anyone on sciforums. Get lost!

I'm sorry you feel that way, but i disagree with you.

Jan Ardena.

 

[Medicine*Woman]

Jan Ardena: Judging by your personalised belief system, it is hardly surprising.

You don't know what the hell i believe, to be precise.

So you regard belief in God as illogical, that's fair enough. But don't forget this is a religious forum.
*************
M*W: You are a boring person. After three years on sciforums, I have to say that you are a boring person. You don't know what you believe. I don't make a habit of dissing everybody, but in your case, you deserve to be dissed. You're boring. That's why I've never read your posts. They're too boring! Why don't you just get along little doggie? There is no place for you in this forum.

 

[wesmorris]

What I will will loose if you are correct (no god exists) and I'm (the believer) wrong?

Your smarmy attitude?

Believe what you want, just don't claim it as absolute to people who don't believe the same way.

Many atheists don't claim god doesn't exist. They just claim correctly claim that by the definition of the concept you can't know about it. So they don't. That's weak athiesm, which is the only truth that can be known in the context of "god" in the typical abrahamic definition.

 

[camphlps]

Jan Ardena: Judging by your personalised belief system, it is hardly surprising.

You don't know what the hell i believe, to be precise.

So you regard belief in God as illogical, that's fair enough. But don't forget this is a religious forum.
*************
M*W: You are a boring person. After three years on sciforums, I have to say that you are a boring person. You don't know what you believe. I don't make a habit of dissing everybody, but in your case, you deserve to be dissed. You're boring. That's why I've never read your posts. They're too boring! Why don't you just get along little doggie? There is no place for you in this forum.

Yeah

Even though a person who "apparently" regards belief in God as illogical in a religous forum is interesting. The most interesting I find in athiest is that they claim they can disprove God, but never provide proof. At the same time demand proof and refuse to believe without evidence. Even some people wont believe if you prove it to their face. Not ALL athiest are this way, but I seem to always run into the ones that are.

 

[Flamerliberalvoter04]

What the fuck Senator KERRY get your Head out of Dick put it in Bush.

 

[Flamerliberalvoter04]

What the fuck is your problem.How can you say that you are normal.if you do shit like this? I knew when its time to cash in the chips I can say that I have lived a normal life.by this at least I fucked a FAT BITCH not some fat dude that looks LIKE NEWMAN.LOL

 

[Godless]

The most interesting I find in athiest is that they claim they can disprove God, but never provide proof.

You quote me an athiest here in Sci that has pronounced this notion!. Prove it or STFU. No atheist, that i've ever encountered here in sci as made such a claim. Anyhow the one who postulates an existence of such an entity is the one who has the burden of proof on his/her shoulders. the atheist simply lacks belief.

have a nice day!.

Read the thesis.
Godless.

 

[audible]

Yeah

Even though a person who "apparently" regards belief in God as illogical in a religous forum is interesting. The most interesting I find in athiest is that they claim they can disprove God, but never provide proof. At the same time demand proof and refuse to believe without evidence. Even some people wont believe if you prove it to their face. Not ALL athiest are this way, but I seem to always run into the ones that are.

why cant you morons understand something so simple, even an ameoba can understand it.
atheist do not claim they can disprove god(and you have never met any that would) they dont believe in a god/gods. making no assertions that one exist, the onus /burden of proof falls to the person making the assertion that one exists. "that being you ", comprehendi, savi, understand.
is that clear, does that clarify it for you.

 

[enton]

There is a good destination for those who accept the teachings of God. Remember I'm talking here about the God of truth, peace, mercy and loving-kindness.

I don't know what destination atheists have right now. If they live in peace, then they have God because only the Invisible God is the author of peace. I remember a certain agnostic, a fellow in my own race, he once said "You will lose all you desire in this life if you continue to walk in the old way." I also remembered that time about Job 22:15 in the Bible which says:"Hast thou marked the old way which wicked men have trodden?"

 

[Godless]

Oh yes the good old days of christianity, perhaps you Eton need to review a little history of your bull shit religion:

As soon as Christianity was legal (315), more and more pagan temples were destroyed by Christian mob. Pagan priests were killed.
Between 315 and 6th century thousands of pagan believers were slain.
Examples of destroyed Temples: the Sanctuary of Aesculap in Aegaea, the Temple of Aphrodite in Golgatha, Aphaka in Lebanon, the Heliopolis.
Christian priests such as Mark of Arethusa or Cyrill of Heliopolis were famous as "temple destroyer." [DA468]
Pagan services became punishable by death in 356. [DA468]
Christian Emperor Theodosius (408-450) even had children executed, because they had been playing with remains of pagan statues. [DA469]
According to Christian chroniclers he "followed meticulously all Christian teachings..."
In 6th century pagans were declared void of all rights.
In the early fourth century the philosopher Sopatros was executed on demand of Christian authorities. [DA466]
The world famous female philosopher Hypatia of Alexandria was torn to pieces with glass fragments by a hysterical Christian mob led by a Christian minister named Peter, in a church, in 415.
[DO19-25]
(This is just a sample of the atrocities done by the christian god fools) you may read more here

Yea! the good old days are gone, and now these idiots are kept in their place.

Godless

 

[enton]

Yea! the good old days are gone, and now these idiots are kept in their place.

Godless

Dear less:

The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good. (Psalms 14:1)
Yea also, when he that is a fool walketh by the way, his wisdom faileth him, and he saith to every one that he is a fool. (Ecclesiastes 10:3)

Verily yours,

Enton Ces

 

[Godless]

Actually the fool is the one who follows a doctrine without question, the fool is the idiot who commits atrocities as listed on behalf of their supposed truth. The fool is idiots like this bastard. Pat Robertson, who recently has called for an assasination of the Venezuelan president, and everyone redicules his coments.
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0823-32.htm

And your quotes coming from a bull shit book, who needs to believe such tripe?. You do, cause tis makes your ego flow, but your the idiot who does not question, your the idiot who believes in fary tale, your the idiot fool that would kill or comit atrocities as listed if you believed that god order you too. You have no reason in your heart, you dont have logic in your brain, you are in all matters of rationality, DELUSIONAL!.

Godless

 

[Hapsburg]

It is completely valid to judge Islam by it's results.

I could easily do the same to christianity, a religon which states to preach peace, but has a long history of violence against non-christians, to the point of mass-genocide and civil war. Sage teachings, horrible track record. The same holds true with both Islam, Christianity, and others.

 

[Crunchy Cat]

I could easily do the same to christianity, a religon which states to preach peace, but has a long history of violence against non-christians, to the point of mass-genocide and civil war. Sage teachings, horrible track record. The same holds true with both Islam, Christianity, and others.

I should rephrase my statment then. It's completely valid to judge any religion by its results (positive and negative).

 

[enton]

I should rephrase my statment then. It's completely valid to judge any religion by its results (positive and negative).

Correct. There you have a criterion already. I hope others here knew too about Criteriology.