Love me or die!
- Thread starter Carcano
- Start date
Yes, it would. Arguments on religion in the East are generally begun with a preexisting understanding that there are no known right answers. So no one is wrong in their belief, because no one can prove that he or she is right. So arguments are based on understanding what the beliefs mean, what is defined by the religious concept under discussion, how it adds to our understanding of the world and human society. Pretty interesting if you can get it. Whether its a Hindu sabha or a Muslim majlis or a Christian sermon, its all very interesting stuff to hear the different perspectives. Atheists in India are generally true atheists. They do not involve themselves with religion.
greenburg-yes
Repo Man-God is who he is, and is thus wholly worthy of worship
Repo Man-God is who he is, and is thus wholly worthy of worship
Note: In the Bible, words having to do with killing significantly outnumber words having to do with love.
"And he smote the men of Bethshemesh, because they had looked into the ark of the LORD, even he smote of the people fifty thousand and threescore and ten men: and the people lamented, because the LORD had smitten many of the people with a great slaughter." (I Samuel 6:19)
"Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt. Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass." (I Samuel 15:2-3)
"Every one that is found shall be thrust through; and every one that is joined unto them shall fall by the sword. Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses shall be spoiled, and their wives ravished." (Isaiah 13:15-16)
Worthy of worship, indeed.
That you find such a blood thirsty, vengeful deity worthy of worship is fascinating. Horrifying, but fascinating.
If Jesus loves me, why does he want to send me to hell?
God is who God is. He is merciful enough to offer us a way to avoid negative judgement, through salvation.
What about passage after passage in the bible demonstrating your god to be far removed from being merciful? As you say, your god is who he is.
What about passage after passage in the bible of my God being merciful? Can God not extend mercy at one time and yet retract it at another? We allow for this possibility with humans, but God who is Greater we don't?
Asia includes india aswell you know, the main hindu and sikh regions. Asia has multiple faiths and the brahman beliefs are of a creator god.
peace.
We don't allow people to slaughter other people, rape women, wipe out entire cities, or even the entire population of the planet. Yet, we are to worship a god who retracts his mercy in this manner?
Would you say that we deserve to burn in hell for all eternity, but that God, in His great mercy, offers us a way to avoid that? - But bottomline, that we deserve to burn in hell for all eternity?
greenberg-yes, that is in answer to your question
Q-Don't we allow this? Stalin? Mao Zedong? Pol Pot?
greenberg again-yes. we deserve to burn in hell for eternity. God is more merciful than me, and has allowed an out for all.
Yorda-I hope not. I'm not very tolerant of humanity in general, and I fail myself more than most.
Q-Don't we allow this? Stalin? Mao Zedong? Pol Pot?
greenberg again-yes. we deserve to burn in hell for eternity. God is more merciful than me, and has allowed an out for all.
Yorda-I hope not. I'm not very tolerant of humanity in general, and I fail myself more than most.
Uh, no. :shrug:
Q-now you are talking nonsense. Stalin, Mao Zadong, Pol Pot all ruled and were not brought down by dissenting peoples and they committed/allowed the commision of innumerable atrocities.
Last edited:
*************
M*W: Why wait until we are dead? We should be facing ourselves everyday we're alive. That's the difference between living in a state of reality or one of delusion.
That does not mean what they did was allowed by society.
The fact that atrocities are committed does not mean they are acceptable. But, that would appear to be your argument.
How is this nonsense?
Why?