Yes, there are perfectly reasonable statements in many holy books.
THANK GOD for the earthquake
- Thread starter sifreak21
- Start date
Yes, there are perfectly reasonable statements in many holy books.
you are evaluating this rediculously superficially. even most christians would not agree with you.
the values or morals as well as the teachings of the old testament are of the same god as the new testament. these teachings are condoned because of course god is considered perfect and the bible is the perfect word of god.
this means that if their god were to decide to slaughter innocents tomorrow, it is just.
besides, you seem to think that the only possible teachings of immorality or prejudice or violence are just located in the old testament.
did you not notice that one of many scripture of god's wrath against non-christians was located in psalms?
of course not, you've been so busy trying to separate the old testament from the new one.
you didn't watch the video and you've been judging her??? lol.
the holy trinity is god, christ and the holy spirit. not just christ.
a christian can pick whatever they want out of the bible to follow or emulate.
it doesn't really matter if it's just christ, it still makes your beliefs and your religion evil (according to god's teachings and doctrines).
buddhism is a billion times more humane or ethical than christian teachings, even christ's teachings. christ reiterated that it's only one true god and that's the christian god. that makes every other religious belief or deity wrong even according to christ's teachings. therefore, you believe just like him as a follower. that makes you a fundy.
Last edited:
I am not trying to separate anything, just trying to make you understand something. The old testament predates christianity by maybe thousands of years.
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/When_was_the_Old_Testament_written
and it was written by "people" who believed it was the direct word of god so wtf is your point?
it's what people believe is what's the real issue when it comes to "religion." i doubt moses talked to a burning bush but christians believe it. i don't think christ was born of a virgin but that's hardly the point, is it?
how many times does it have to be reiterated to you that it doesn't matter? to christians this is their god. these are the beliefs that they subscribe to. period
you can't hold christians non-accountable because the old testament was written way before the official start of christianity.
that's like saying if i'm a christian and i believe the old testament god is right and perfect in what he did, that is still a willing and proactive agreement with those values. especially since people choose a religion. it's not like this snuck up on them. oh, that god did that in the old testament? i'm horrified. i had no idea. i'm outa here.
your point is pretty irrevelant to this discussion.
Last edited:
Birch, all the Abrahamic religions believe in that version of God. Jewish, Christians, Muslims and maybe others. What would you like for me to do?
Last edited:
and your point is what, again??
so??? the point is christians just like any other fundamental religion believes they are correct. and they also believe in the old testament. it's like i'm having to repeat myself over and over.
so what the believe in the same abrahamic god? do you think because the triad of abrahamic religion makes the abrahamic god less of an asshole?? i don't agree with abrahamic fundamental religions whether it be islam, judaism, or christianity. i think they are the worst type of religion.
i still don't get the real point you're making. it's like you are making inane and arbitrary points.
you are confused. the "issue" i've been raising is the fundamental values of religion and the actions of their god as well as his teachings, both old and new. just because they follow christ, doesn't mean that they denounce what he did or what those values are. again, because that is their god and he is perfect as well as his values, teachings, or whatever.
their god is an asshole and so is their religion, christ or not.
you are completely missing the point. the point i was making clearly was addressed long ago in a prior post.
also, i already pointed out long ago that the wrath of god against heathen nations is also found in the new testament. the god of the old testament is still their god to all the abrahamic religions. so even saying that the old testament doesn't apply for christians is still irrevelant. besides, just because some christians follow 'christ' it doesn't mean that the 'god the father' doesn't exist or doesn't do things on his own as he sees fit. even if christians follow his son, it doesn't mean christianity denounces the old testament or the crap in the new testament. those are the values of their god, religion etc. the bible is considered to be the word of god. that is their god!! wtf?
i've addressed everything i possibly could that you could be getting at. are you that dense?
Last edited:
Whoa...I am not advocating any belief system and dont read into my posts to assume i am religious. I dont pick and choose the bad deeds done throughout history and that includes followers of other (eg. far eastern) religoins or non religious too.
I dont appreciate the name calling either. That is uncalled for.
fundamental religions are corrupt. it's not even an opinion, it is in their texts.
christians and christianity does not just reference the god of the old testament, that is their god which is perfect. it is essentially condoning the god of his actions and his values which are inhumane and unethical. following christ is how to get people to convert by attracting them through a nicer persona. whilst christians are attracting others through this persona, their god is committing hell-fire and damnation on unbelievers and that is considered just by this religion.
it really is a wolf in sheep's clothing religion just like any fundamental religion.
UN-believable.
you don't seem to understand the difference between a book that is regarded as god's directives and commandments which is condoned by christians EVEN today (interspersed with some history supposedly) and a text that is just an account of history. what you were reading was commandments from their god/religion. they were followed because those are the values of their god. the god of abraham that christians worship today.
just because christians don't do the type of actions in the old testament today, they are truly sociopaths because they condone it but also the prejudicial reasons behind it (whatever this god is always right). the prejudicial reasons are still there but it's just not expressed in those violent terms today. but underneath it all it is still assholery. the bible both new and old testament is chockfull of nasty prejudice and judgement of anything unchristian. pay attention: this is the basis or grounds. the soft touch of jesus christ is actually a front for a prejudicial mission because anything unchristian is considered evil. it's actually passive-aggressive rather than direct (as in the old testament) but it is still an attack against anything non-christian by trying to assimilate others making them more powerful. let's 'change' those people into 'us' (that's why it's a fundamental religion). it is actually hateful because they disguise it as trying to 'save' you which appears loving. but the root basis is their rejection of what is non-christian based on all those chockfull of prejudices listed in the bible which is representative of their values minus thier belief in jesus christ to love others (which really means to be loving in hopes of converting, not true tolerance, it is an ulterior motive). do-you-comprehend-it-now?
the former is a text that is a representation for moral values and beliefs of their god/religion. the latter is just only an account of history. difference between a religious book vs soley a history book. the latter is not considered a go to guide from messages or thoughts from god. do-you-comprehend-that?
that is why the old and new testament is full of god said, god commands, or god speaking in the first person as to what he stands for.
your crazy logic is that if one subscribes to a religion where their god is a rapist and murderer, it is irrevelant because it happened in the past even though i claim even today that he was justified because that is my god.
that's why they are major assholes and very immoral in their ethics. we can be nice now because christ is here but what god did before wasn't wrong either. it's the 'the ends justify the means' value system. why is this so hard to comprehend?
this is getting ridiculous. stop trolling or i'll report you.
christians and christianity does not just reference the god of the old testament, that is their god which is perfect. it is essentially condoning the god of his actions and his values which are inhumane and unethical. following christ is how to get people to convert by attracting them through a nicer persona. whilst christians are attracting others through this persona, their god is committing hell-fire and damnation on unbelievers and that is considered just by this religion.
it really is a wolf in sheep's clothing religion just like any fundamental religion.
UN-believable.
you don't seem to understand the difference between a book that is regarded as god's directives and commandments which is condoned by christians EVEN today (interspersed with some history supposedly) and a text that is just an account of history. what you were reading was commandments from their god/religion. they were followed because those are the values of their god. the god of abraham that christians worship today.
just because christians don't do the type of actions in the old testament today, they are truly sociopaths because they condone it but also the prejudicial reasons behind it (whatever this god is always right). the prejudicial reasons are still there but it's just not expressed in those violent terms today. but underneath it all it is still assholery. the bible both new and old testament is chockfull of nasty prejudice and judgement of anything unchristian. pay attention: this is the basis or grounds. the soft touch of jesus christ is actually a front for a prejudicial mission because anything unchristian is considered evil. it's actually passive-aggressive rather than direct (as in the old testament) but it is still an attack against anything non-christian by trying to assimilate others making them more powerful. let's 'change' those people into 'us' (that's why it's a fundamental religion). it is actually hateful because they disguise it as trying to 'save' you which appears loving. but the root basis is their rejection of what is non-christian based on all those chockfull of prejudices listed in the bible which is representative of their values minus thier belief in jesus christ to love others (which really means to be loving in hopes of converting, not true tolerance, it is an ulterior motive). do-you-comprehend-it-now?
the former is a text that is a representation for moral values and beliefs of their god/religion. the latter is just only an account of history. difference between a religious book vs soley a history book. the latter is not considered a go to guide from messages or thoughts from god. do-you-comprehend-that?
that is why the old and new testament is full of god said, god commands, or god speaking in the first person as to what he stands for.
your crazy logic is that if one subscribes to a religion where their god is a rapist and murderer, it is irrevelant because it happened in the past even though i claim even today that he was justified because that is my god.
that's why they are major assholes and very immoral in their ethics. we can be nice now because christ is here but what god did before wasn't wrong either. it's the 'the ends justify the means' value system. why is this so hard to comprehend?
this is getting ridiculous. stop trolling or i'll report you.
Last edited:
You mean that there is a passage in the Bible that says something "This text is corrupt, and everything that is taught here is corrupt" -?
it was easy to get the message through context. it's pretty typical religious hate rhetoric. i really have no interest in listening to it if i don't have to.
so?
not if they want to be correct they can't. and neither can you.
evil in what way? i believe that the wages of sin is death. i believe that the consequence of evil is suffering. based on my experience, they're sound and rational beliefs.
believing in one god as opposed to many makes me a monotheist, not a fundy.
what the bible says, and what christ says, is that there is a god that all of us can experience and know personally. religion isn't an issue unless it for some reason keeps you from knowing god, which i think it can, and does for many religious people, christians included.
Last edited:
If you make it vague enough, then anyone who believes in anything that helps them through life and guides their morality is going along the right path.
So, an atheist who helps others, tries to live a good life, and believes in the ability of science and knowledge to help society, is living a just life (even though they don't get some reward afterwards*).
However, the bible does state that belief of Jesus is a key point to salvation. So your loose interpretation can't be so wide as to allow the above.
* Actually I think there is a reward for living a good life, and that's posterity. Not quite as direct as a heaven, but just as fulfilling as far as giving a reason to live.
you reason like a retarded child.
you fit in well with other christians, even the girl in the vid, because though you conveniently keep and condone everything in the bible, you just focus on and preach what seems the most benign so as to appear innocent.
she is not incorrect. she is just expressing what god's real sentiments are, jesus is the mode of 'action' to get followers. love them to convert them.
a wolf in sheep's clothing.
religious people don't have to use reason. they are inherently dishonest because they will defend anything and everything if it's their religion. t's a stronghold, that's why the religion is corrupt.
Last edited:
i don't really think along the lines of heaven upon death, being a reward. not that i don't believe in an afterlife, i do. i just think that what determines your destiny there is the same that determines your destiny here. i think in terms of the kingdom, "on earth as it is in heaven". it's what i can relate to. which really does come down to posterity. the problem is, we're doing a terrible job.
benign? like the apocalypse?
yes it's all a trick, love really isn't the answer. you have to be pretty cunning to figure that out. kudos.
and here's some childlike reasoning for you...you don't even believe in god, so how in the hell would you know what god's real sentiments are?
religion is corrupt because people are corrupt.
benign? like the apocalypse?
yes it's all a trick, love really isn't the answer. you have to be pretty cunning to figure that out. kudos.
and here's some childlike reasoning for you...you don't even believe in god, so how in the hell would you know what god's real sentiments are?
religion is corrupt because people are corrupt.
all i need to do is look at the reality of people who promote fundamental religions.
they are usually only friends with others of the same faith. i have met people who are of different philosophies and i respect their beliefs as long as they respect me and i will befriend them based on who they are. but when it comes to christians, it never seems to works as their beliefs are how they judge others, they don't see them as a person unless they are a christian. they see them as an object to change into them, feel pity for or look down on. it doesn't matter if the person is a good person, funny person, interesting person etc. this is because they don't really respect just real ethics or the actual qualities a person has that they preach, it's secondary. this is because it's all about power like a cult.
they are narcissistic sociopaths.
Last edited:
all you need to do is look at the reality of people in general.
do you think the idea of sin is distasteful, or is it the accusation that we are sinful, or the idea that it's physically inherent in us?
christians view the body as a temple; a vessel.
So do I, but I bet the docs at the VD clinics do frequently
It could have been just a yeast infection . I have seen a burning bush before . George Bush at the end of his Presidency !!!