wow.

[Sleksa]

would you prefer living in a world without science as it is now?

No, but living in a world where people admit that they might be wrong and open space to new ideas would be good :)

And religion admits that they ~might~ be wrong(some christian cults still deny the exsistance of dinosaurs 'n shit) and are open to new ideas?

Forboding; while it is true that Jesus was a real person, there are very little proof of his actual works/miracles.

Also it is generally accepted that the jesus started his religious teachings at his middle-age, It would make more sense to me if the son of god would've started his religious teaching very early on, also all his work is highly disputed, for example qur'uan shows the jesus in a different light, but then again its written by terrorist child-eaters. Whereas the People who've told you that you go to hell if you dont buy amends from them, who also canonized dante's comedy to their religious belief of afterlife, tell you that jesus indeed did use majik and multiply bread/fish, revive dead like a paladin of warcraft, give people eyesight back, and turn water into wine.

There are no absolute truths and probably not much underlying unity to the rapidly changing mess of a world we live in but you have to presuppose that there IS some unity

Well if you would be given 2 options, to believe in your sensory information, and hypothesises about the world, and accept that facts might change when new information is gained

OR to believe in something that someone said, that usually also contradicts with generally accepted information (Dinosaurs didnt exsist, world has died 3 times now, Incan belief that world destroys itself every 150 years etc etc) And accept is as a absolute fact.

[I2:Isaacment_Day]

internet forums

[Boirunner]

If you actually read the bible...

If you had actually read the thread...

It is very easy to understand. Before Christ died for the world's sins god was quite strict, especially with the jews.

I could live with a strict god, if he were just. If you are a strict parent, you punish severely in the hopes of raising a good child.

Mass genocide, indiscriminate killings and purely sadistic "tests of faith" - just to name a few - can't be described as strict. If one used the parent analogy, the word that would come to mind would be more along the lines of gruesome and malicious.

The reason that god enacted the plagues of egypt, was because pharoah refused to let my people (the jews, god's people) go. Therefore, god twisted pharoah's arm a bit.

He killed one child of every family in an entire nation! He killed babies, innocents, virgins, slaves, masters, everybody! That's not "twisting the Pharaohs arm a bit", that's - at best - a war crime, and at worst mass murder on a huge scale.

If you pay attention throughout the old testament, god gets less and less vengeful. Up until christ's death, then notice that even though occasionally miracles still happen (throughout the new testament), they start becoming few and far between as time passes.

Here it depends very much on what particular Christian faith you have. If you are catholic for example, this is not true, as there is a huge influx of new saints. Pope John Paul alone canonized more saints than all popes together in the last five hundred years, and you can only become a saint if you are proven to have performed at least two miracles.

Remember that many very important differences took place upon christ's death. Sacrifices to god were no longer accepted by god (because christ died to atone for the world's sin, at thsi point all that is needed is that the person in question ask god for forgivness), and there are a lot of other examples if you pay close enough attention.

Yes, this is true, I haven't claimed differently.

[Forboding Angel]

Boirunner, you are forgetting that the world as humanity knew it... Was very very young.

You can argue all you want, but I'm not really seeing the end result that you're looking for. For that matter, I can't completely understand why you in particular are standing out as being argumentative.

To be quite honest, you can believe whatever you want, as far as society goes (in all technicallity), that doesn't make you either right or wrong. Of course different people will look at it one way or another.

THere is one defining constant that applies to mainstream religion; as far as society goes, you will never be right, you will never be wrong. However, let your conscience be your guide.

As far as beliefs go, I am content to sit back, watch, do what i think is right, and as I said -- Religion and mythology interest me.

Edit: My fatigue is starting to show itself in the way of run-on sentences. 14 hour days are not conducive to making a lot of sense.

[Boirunner]

Boirunner, you are forgetting that the world as humanity knew it... Was very very young.

What do you want to say with that? That it was right for God to kill people because the world was young? I can't see a connection.

You can argue all you want, but I'm not really seeing the end result that you're looking for. For that matter, I can't completely understand why you in particular are standing out as being argumentative.

I find religion interesting, just as you seem to, and like to talk about it.

To be quite honest, you can believe whatever you want, as far as society goes (in all technicallity), that doesn't make you either right or wrong. Of course different people will look at it one way or another.

THere is one defining constant that applies to mainstream religion; as far as society goes, you will never be right, you will never be wrong. However, let your conscience be your guide.

I'm not arguing whether God exists or what moral standards anyone should hold to. I'm arguing to show the god presented by Christianity is not just and loving in the least if you accept the old testament.

[Forboding Angel]

SO you're here to prove a point?

What is the reason for trying to proving a point that cannot be proven conclusively except by ones who believe for or against? And even that does not provide conclusive proof...

A religion is a system of beliefs, not always 100% proveable absolute facts.

Personally I think that the quran is a crock, but I have no way to substantiate that claim, in the same way that a devout follower cannot substantiate opposite claims.

It's a belief system.

Many many many people have tried to crush christianity, and all have failed, some very spectacularly. You for some strange reason have a drive to destroy a system of beliefs that is not hurting you, nor is it hindering you. Muslim beliefs aren't hurting me, and I don't have some sort of desire to bring the entire religion down simply because I don't agree...

The fact that you are taking things so seriously and aggressively leads me to believe that there is an underlying cause. Everything has a base reason, finding that base reason can sometimes be the most difficult part.

Regardless, you will realize at some point that a vendetta vs a religion is time consuming and pointless. Regardless of how much sense you make to yourself, there will always be people that do not agree.

[tombom]

Are you a Christian or something? You seem to be taking it completely out of the way Boirunner is intending it. As he said, he's not trying to destroy a belief system - which is ridiculous - he's just pointing out that the God of the Old Testament was not merciful, just, paternal or however you want to describe it. You're completely stopping any sort of real discussion by taking it personally and trying to put words into his mouth.

At any rate, how is the "quran crock" and not anything else?

[Forboding Angel]

In the current definition of the word, that does not make me a Christian though.

so you follow christian ethics and morales, but you are not a christian in a sense that you believe that a iron hand in the sky made women from a rib of a man.

Christianity has precisely one ethic: repent for your sins sometime before you die, and you go to heaven.

That's why I don't really like it.

Very very wrong. One thing mentioned several times is the fact that if you turn your heart away from the lord god it will become hardened against him.

Felix, what you are describing is catholocism. Christianity does not work like that. Yes you are forgiven, but unlike with the catholic belief where confessing to a priest is enough, you are expected to take the consequences for your actions.

Catholic in many ways live lives without spiritual consequences, because hell, confess to a priest say 10 hail mary's and ur good to go to heaven. heh.

BTW boirunner, I didn't mention this before, cause I figured you already knew... The people of israel knew that the penalty for disobedience was death (not in all cases), they were told many times. Blaspheming god was punishable by death whether the people or god himself did it. There was no tolerance for direct defiance.


Ok lets play the advocate here. If you were to prove that god is not merciful, what is the next step? WHy so many words to simply say "I think that the god of the old testament was not merciful"?

[Forboding Angel]

Are you a Christian or something? You seem to be taking it completely out of the way Boirunner is intending it. As he said, he's not trying to destroy a belief system - which is ridiculous - he's just pointing out that the God of the Old Testament was not merciful, just, paternal or however you want to describe it. You're completely stopping any sort of real discussion by taking it personally and trying to put words into his mouth.

At any rate, how is the "quran crock" and not anything else?

I am taking it exactly the way he is saying it, and he is saying it agressively. You ahve to realize that if one were to prove that god was not a merciful god, that would prove that god is fallible. To prove that god is fallible is to destroy a religion (many at a time actually).

I simply do not agree with the quran. Nuff said?

Actually I am an agnostic, but I take great interest in religion and mythology (as I've said 3 times now).

[tombom]

I am taking it exactly the way he is saying it, and he is saying it agressively. You ahve to realize that if one were to prove that god was not a merciful god, that would prove that god is fallible. To prove that god is fallible is to destroy a religion (many at a time actually).

I simply do not agree with the quran. Nuff said?

Actually I am an agnostic, but I take great interest in religion and mythology (as I've said 3 times now).

I don't understand entirely how God has to be merciful in order to be infallible but I do somewhat understand your point.

What I mean is why is the quran somehow worse than any other holy book?

I must have missed the agnostic bit sorry.

Very very wrong. One thing mentioned several times is the fact that if you turn your heart away from the lord god it will become hardened against him.

Felix, what you are describing is catholocism. Christianity does not work like that. Yes you are forgiven, but unlike with the catholic belief where confessing to a priest is enough, you are expected to take the consequences for your actions.

Catholic in many ways live lives without spiritual consequences, because hell, confess to a priest say 10 hail mary's and ur good to go to heaven. heh.

BTW boirunner, I didn't mention this before, cause I figured you already knew... The people of israel knew that the penalty for disobedience was death (not in all cases), they were told many times. Blaspheming god was punishable by death whether the people or god himself did it. There was no tolerance for direct defiance.

Ugh.

1) Catholicism is a denomination of Christianity. I imagine you're talking about American Christian denominations.
2) Many Protestant denominations believe that works aren't needed to get into heaven actually. Catholicism is pretty big on that you need good works as well.
3) Actually, for pretty much anything you say about "Christianity" it's hard to respond because it depends what denomination you mean.

[Forboding Angel]

I don't understand entirely how God has to be merciful in order to be infallible but I do somewhat understand your point.

What I mean is why is the quran somehow worse than any other holy book?

Actually concerning Catholicism I was laying on the sarcasm a little thick, but there is an underlying point.

God said that he is merciful. To prove him wrong is to prove him fallable. Make sense?

At the most base of reasons, I simply do not agree with the quran. I wasn't saying that it was a bad holy book (well it may be in my mind, becasue I don't agree with it, but the same could be said of any other person who doens't agree with the bible).

[Boirunner]

Felix, what you are describing is catholocism. Christianity does not work like that.

Sorry, you'll have to tell me which denomination you take to be the true Christianity. I myself was baptised a catholic, but most people here are in the Reformed Churches, a descendant of the Calvin-Zwingli movement. Zwingli lived and worked in my hometown, by the way. He was pretty cool too.

Yes you are forgiven, but unlike with the catholic belief where confessing to a priest is enough, you are expected to take the consequences for your actions.

In Catholicism, you have to do penance after confessing. Or do you mean consequences in the afterlife?

Catholic in many ways live lives without spiritual consequences, because hell, confess to a priest say 10 hail mary's and ur good to go to heaven. heh.

If you regret your act, and believe in Jesus, pretty much, yeah.

But wait, you are basically destroyed their belief system. You even said "heh" after it, laughing. But didn't you just take offence to the fact that I was "destroying a belief system"?

BTW boirunner, I didn't mention this before, cause I figured you already knew... The people of israel knew that the penalty for disobedience was death (not in all cases), they were told many times. Blaspheming god was punishable by death whether the people or god himself did it. There was no tolerance for direct defiance.

In what possible way could the dead children and babies have been defying god? Or the children on the walls, they weren't mocking God, they were mocking some dude they didn't even know, but they got mauled for it. The same thing with Noah and the Ark: Was really every single human being but them an evil sinner? What about the children, babies, mentally retarded? Did they all deserve to die?

to condense my point to its absolute minimal form:

God killed people who couldn't have broken his rules. He killed people for the sins of others. He killed children for mocking an adult. And he committed the worst genocide in history, killing all but two human beings.

This means God is not loving and just.

You can argue against logic being used in this at all, or that the things didn't really happen, or are interpreted wrongly by me. But you can't really argue that someone who did the listed things could be called just or loving by any reasonable standard.

Ok lets play the advocate here. If you were to prove that god is not merciful, what is the next step?

You can believe in rationality, the old testament being true and a just god: pick two. The next step is you picking, or explaining why you don't feel there is a contradiction.

WHy so many words to simply say "I think that the god of the old testament was not merciful"?

Why so many words? Because people disagreed with me. It's called arguing a point.

[Machiosabre]

The only valid way to claim god is infallible is by saying the bible is super-fallible.

actually it would a pretty good argument, but it does sort of mean you don't need organized religion at all instead of just believing by yourself.

[rattle]

There is no god you fools. Let's abandon religion, it's for the greater good.

[Noruas]

There is no god you fools. Let's abandon religion, it's for the greater good.

Sleska is God.

[Scikar]

BTW boirunner, I didn't mention this before, cause I figured you already knew... The people of israel knew that the penalty for disobedience was death (not in all cases), they were told many times. Blaspheming god was punishable by death whether the people or god himself did it. There was no tolerance for direct defiance.

Thou shalt not kill. Unless someone blasphemes me. Then you can kill 'em all. But don't tell anyone, k?

[Michilus_nimbus]

I'd rather go to hell than worship the Christian god.

[Sleksa]

There is no god you fools. Let's abandon religion, it's for the greater good.

Sleska is God.

worship me! \o/

[Gota]

This is wrong.
You cannot say god is merciful or that he is the oposite,that is proposterous.
That is the problem with christianity,its all about needing a figure you can touch and see to believe in.
christians have Icons of holy people and they prey to them.
That is pure paganism...you have different "saints" that are responisble for different areas of life..that is polytheism.
All that helps make god more human but it should be the other way around..If god is an all mighy all knowing all capable it is in no way human or anything like it.
God is not something to read in a book about.
It is something beyond understanding.

All the messing about with the books and the rules written in them is just messing around with human rules .
People think that we take the good parts of the bible and leave the bad parts like the killing that goes on there.
It is not true.
The bible,the new testement,the koran are just books that describe possible human actions based on people's experiance.
We do not take the good parts and leave the bad ones we follow the bible in every way.
We have the good charitable parts in human society and we have wars and killing as well.
We always had them and now not less than before.
If we say An all mighty all capable all knowing entity exists lets take it out of the discussion and call the god of the books by some other name.
The God of the "holy" books is actually a story teller.
He is the culminatin of the story tellers from whom the bible,the new testement and the koran were put together.
He looks from above at humans and sometimes interfers to spice things up,he is human in every sense.
He becomes angry,vengfull,merciful and so on.

Attributing anything from our understanding to god is wrong.
If you take an atom and a human being.
Not only is the atom uncapable of imagining a human it is uncapable of imagining ...
We are much more complex than a single atom(yet that huge differance is still defined and limited) but a "god" is endlessly more "complex".
Even mentioning this supreme being is a contradiction and the mear idea of it cannot be true.
If we talk about an all mighy unlimited entity that just means it doesnt exist ass such.

[Comp1337]

long thread is long