If Christians Advertised The Bible Truthfully [Pic

Submitted by: lostinkorea 6 years ago in Weird

And you complain that you can"t find a girlfriend...
There are 197 comments:
Male 434
"And I`m sure you can understand their confusion, given the contradictions and errors scattered throughout."
Regardless, it doesn`t give them the right to judge or persecute.
0
Reply
Male 434
"And they have passages from the Qur`an..."
Maybe, but we`re not discussing them. We`re discussing the Bible and the message contained therein.

""Murderer" is a label we apply to a person after they have committed that act."
Yes. I understand that. My examples pointed to people we would label as such and their ability to not repeat the offense.

"If you accept Bible passages as evidence in favour of the existence of God,"
I`m not speaking of the existence of God. I`m speaking of my knowledge of the message of the bible.

"So glad I gave up on religion."
I know, right? People suck.


0
Reply
Male 5,189
So glad I gave up on religion.
0
Reply
Male 4,290
If you discount their holy books as not being valid evidence, then we must discount the Bible too, as it is just another holy book to the independent observer.

If you accept Bible passages as evidence in favour of the existence of God, you must equally accept passages from other texts as evidence of that particular deity or deities too. Otherwise it`s just special pleading in favour of the book of your choice, and again the rest of the billion can make the same extremely weak case for their own idea.

[quote]I don`t claim to be a Christian. I`ve never even claimed God Exists in the course of this discussion. All I claim is that I know what the message of the Christian Bible is, and that a lot of Christians don`t.[/quote]
My apologies then.
And I`m sure you can understand their confusion, given the contradictions and errors scattered throughout.
0
Reply
Male 4,290
[quote]Can a murderer decide not to murder? Probably. Can an adulterer decide not to...adulter? Probably as well. Then a homosexual can probably decide not to practice homosexuality (Yet still be a homosexual, just non-practicing) to honor the deity (s)he has decided to love.[/quote]
"Murderer" is a label we apply to a person after they have committed that act. You are not a murderer until you murder someone. Similarly you are not an adulterer until you commit adultery. (Unless you ascribe to the idea of thoughtcrime of course.)

Being a homosexual or a heterosexual is about what you FEEL, not what you DO. I was straight long (, long, LONG) before I actually had sex for the first time.

[quote]Yes I do. Verses from The Bible. Verses that contradict their messages. [/quote]
And they have passages from the Qur`an or the Tanakh or the Book of Mormon or Dianetics or the Book of Shadows or even just different parts of the Bible that support their message.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
Not getting into the debate this time around *takes off user hat, puts on moderator hat*, but holy crap, after almost a week this one is still smouldering... well I for one applaud that (and yes, there are those of us still reading). Interesting debates like this are the reason I love IAB. Carry on!
0
Reply
Male 434
the message of the Christian Bible is, and that a lot of Christians don`t.
0
Reply
Male 434
"You cannot seriously cite the existence of the Christian bible as evidence..."
Nope, I seriously can`t, which is why I didn`t. It exists, so I get it? No, I read it, so I get it. I cite the verses inside. I can read them. I know what they say and mean based on my understanding of the English language.

"Finally, if you`re reading it in English then you are reading an interpretation"
Ok, then I know the real message of the Bible as presented in english. The one I read. Indeed, if I cannot read the language it was translated from, it is all I have to go by.

"you have no evidence to support your particular truth over any other of the billions " Yes I do. Verses from The Bible. Verses that contradict their messages.

"I was lumping you in with everyone who claims to be a Christian. " I don`t claim to be a Christian. I`ve never even claimed God Exists in the course of this discussion. All I claim is that I know what t
0
Reply
Male 434
I missed this earlier, I apologize:
"Then the hate and suffering caused by preaching that homosexuals are immoral because of something they can`t change means every Christian church doesn`t have the right message."

That`s right, but probably not totally as there is probably some fringe group that doesn`t teach that. Let me put it to you from a different point of view though: Can a murderer decide not to murder? Probably. Can an adulterer decide not to...adulter? Probably as well. Then a homosexual can probably decide not to practice homosexuality (Yet still be a homosexual, just non-practicing) to honor the deity (s)he has decided to love.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]"Only in the sense that both you and they choose selected verses from your bibles, interpret them in a selected way and view the result as divine truth. "
I don`t have to interpret. It`s there in plain English. I don`t need faith, I have evidence. They don`t misinterpret, they miss the message.[/quote]

They would say the same thing about you and they could produce other bible verses as their "evidence".

You cannot seriously cite the existence of the Christian bible as evidence that your favoured interpretation of the Christian bible is the one and only absolute truth. You`re not stupid, so you can`t seriously be doing that.

Finally, if you`re reading it in English then you are reading an interpretation. You`ve just had someone else make it for you.
0
Reply
Male 4,290
[quote]I`m glad you agree. So why is it unlikely that I have knowledge of the truth in this matter of the message of the bible?[/quote]

Because
1) you are one person out of billions claiming to have the truth, and
2) your truth is mutually exclusive to the truths those other billions claim to have, as I have discussed, and
3) you have no evidence to support your particular truth over any other of the billions (and likewise they have no evidence to support theirs over yours), so I am therefore forced to assign equal likelihoods to each possibility, giving your particular truth a probability of no more than 1/1,000,000,000 of being correct, which is pretty damn unlikely.

And that`s assuming I accept the prior assumption that at least one of you in this billion-strong group of truth-holders is correct, ignoring the (far more likely in my opinion) possibility that every single one of you is wrong.
0
Reply
Male 4,290
[quote]I knew that and I still slipped into sloppy use of the word "proven". I should have done better, especially in a thread about science.[/quote]
I know, I meant when jadoig was referring to things like proving love, history or logic. But yes, tsk tsk Angilion :P

[quote]Must I be lumped with them? I disagree with them too.[/quote]
I wasn`t lumping you just in with bigots. I was lumping you in with everyone who claims to be a Christian.
Even at the largest level, of denominations, people can`t agree on the message of the Bible, hence why there are Catholics, Baptists, Lutherans, Anglicans etc etc etc.
And even within those, it`s rare to find that everyone agrees. Often they hold mutually exclusive opinions, and each quote Bible verses to support their own opinion. The very thing you said here - "I disagree with them too" - is a perfect example.
0
Reply
Male 434
"Then you`ve contradicted your earlier statement..."
LOL I know. That occurred to me this morning.

"There is no connection between that statement and mine. "
This is your statement right?:
"You think that your interpretation of the verses that you choose is the one and only intended meaning of your bible, which you have faith is the truth. "
If so then I was stating that it was almost correct, and that I thought it was awesome that you were so close to the mark. "The awesome part is, it almost is(right)". Then I explained how.

"Only in the sense that both you and they choose selected verses from your bibles, interpret them in a selected way and view the result as divine truth. "
I don`t have to interpret. It`s there in plain English. I don`t need faith, I have evidence. They don`t misinterpret, they miss the message.

0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Must I be lumped with them? ["the bigotty ones"] I disagree with them too.[/quote]

Only in the sense that both you and they choose selected verses from your bibles, interpret them in a selected way and view the result as divine truth.

I like your results better than theirs, but you both use the same method and it isn`t really any different to just making stuff up and proclaiming it`s true because you say so.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]BTW Love is objective.[/quote]

Then you`ve contradicted your earlier statement above love and science. If you think love is objective, you must also think that science covers it.

[quote]"Good counter, but I was making an observation rather than an interpretation:" You were making a statement of fact based on your interactions with me. [/quote]

Yes, I was. You and other people.

[quote]A statement which you have faith is true.[/quote]

I neither have nor need faith. I have evidence.

[quote]The awesome part is it almost is. I have knowledge, not just faith, and I`ve shown you some evidence straight from the bible. [/quote]

There is no connection between that statement and mine. If you think there is, you have spectacularly failed to understand my statement.
0
Reply
Male 434
A statement is either true or false and no one`s interpretation or opinion of it changes the fact that it is true or false.


Bob: Exactly.

I`m glad you agree. So why is it unlikely that I have knowledge of the truth in this matter of the message of the bible?
0
Reply
Male 434
"Must I be lumped with them? I disagree with them too." Let me clarify: The bigotty ones.
0
Reply
Male 434
"How can I possibly accept that any of you are correct about any aspect of God (or any other deity) when you can`t even agree amongst yourselves," Must I be lumped with them? I disagree with them too.

"Does that question have any meaning to something which is wholly subjective?" Does the word real apply to anything that has an effect on the physical world? I`d say it does. in that case if love is subjective, then yes. BTW Love is objective. Anyone can witness love and recognize it for what it is, unless they`re broken and that`s a whole other ball of wax.


"Good counter, but I was making an observation rather than an interpretation:" You were making a statement of fact based on your interactions with me. A statement which you have faith is true. The awesome part is it almost is. I have knowledge, not just faith, and I`ve shown you some evidence straight from the bible.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Firstly, nothing can be proven except pure mathematics. Everything else is down to what the evidence suggests.[/quote]

I knew that and I still slipped into sloppy use of the word "proven". I should have done better, especially in a thread about science.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]You`re right about the gravity stuff, except maybe that we`ll understand how it works some day. No one can know that. I can just as easily say that Science will one day explain that there is a God.[/quote]

You could, but there`s a very big difference. Gravity can be observed to exist. It`s a thing that happens. It`s therefore open to explanation using science. One god picked from the thousands of gods various people have believed in in various places at various times isn`t.

[quote]Let me modify my love example a little: Science can`t prove love exists.[/quote]

Science could do so by observing behavioural and possibly physiological changes (e.g. elevated levels of oxytocin).

Science can`t prove that love is *objectively* real...but is it? Does that question have any meaning to something which is wholly subjective?
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]I don`t see where I claim he wrote something he didnt.[/quote]

What he wrote:

[quote]How do we go about determining what is true and what is false?
And the most tried-and-tested effective answer humanity has discovered to date to that question is the scientific method.[/quote]

What you wrote in reply:

[quote]Don`t tell me science is the only way to determine truth.[/quote]

[quote]Using your own argument, you only think you understand based on your own interpretation of things.[/quote]

Good counter, but I was making an observation rather than an interpretation:

[quote]You think that your interpretation of the verses that you choose is the one and only intended meaning of your bible, which you have faith is the truth.

Exactly the same is true of the Christians who have different interpretations and/or use different verses.[/quote]
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]This is cliche but Science (or people claiming to be science) told people the earth was flat at one point.[/quote]

No, it didn`t and they didn`t. The earliest recorded proto-scientists(*) published papers showing the Earth to be spherical (which was well known before then, but not formally shown) and even calculated its size. They thought Earth was a perfect sphere because their observations could not be accurate enough to show that it`s a bit flattened, but they certainly didn`t tell people it was flat.

Only religion has done that, and only rarely.

There are a lot of things said about science that are not true.



* Ancient Greek natural philosophers weren`t strictly speaking scientists, but they had the same goal and partially used the scientific method.
0
Reply
Male 4,290
Firstly, nothing can be proven except pure mathematics. Everything else is down to what the evidence suggests.

Secondly, the scientific process always accepts that new evidence can arise which overturns the current theories. The fact that our knowledge is constantly improving and becoming more accurate is a sign of the strength of the scientific method, not a weakness.

Thirdly, we have known the Earth was round since the days of ancient Greece.

[quote]I don`t take The Bible the same way Christians do.

[...]

A statement is either true or false and no one`s interpretation or opinion of it changes the fact that it is true or false.[/quote]

Exactly. How can I possibly accept that any of you are correct about any aspect of God (or any other deity) when you can`t even agree amongst yourselves, and hold mutually exclusive opinions which you each utterly believe is "the correct one"?
0
Reply
Male 434
"So, for example, science has proven the historical truth that Britain used to be part of mainland Europe." Good example. I can`t argue that. Now use Science to prove the historical truth that the Egyptians used slaves.

Anyway, I posit that the nature of truth is this: There can be only one. A statement is either true or false and no one`s interpretation or opinion of it changes the fact that it is true or false.
0
Reply
Male 434
A lot of science is belief as well. There`s so much we take Science`s word for or someones word that it is science. Do you remember being taught that there are different taste areas of the tongue. Remember seeing the "tongue map" in your textbook and your teacher explaining it? This was false but we believed it because science told us so, or so we thought.
This is cliche but Science (or people claiming to be science) told people the earth was flat at one point.
As K said in Men in Black (Gospel truth, LOL): Imagine what we`ll "know" tomorrow.
0
Reply
Male 434
"as opposed to what you wrongly claim he wrote" which was what exactly? I don`t see where I claim he wrote something he didnt.
The point I was trying to make with my rant was that the scientific method does not always answer "what is truth" because there is so much truth it can`t detect.

"I`ve no need to grasp, because I understand." Using your own argument, you only think you understand based on your own interpretation of things.

You`re right about the gravity stuff, except maybe that we`ll understand how it works some day. No one can know that. I can just as easily say that Science will one day explain that there is a God.

Let me modify my love example a little: Science can`t prove love exists.

I can`t question the reliability of science and the scientific method, but the people involved usually mess it up. How much bad research is out there? How many funded studies are there that show what the people funding t
0
Reply
Male 4,902
I`m shocked that you are still debating on a thread that is now 4 days old, that`s rare for IAB. Rage on folks.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Science cannot prove any historical truth, as it cannot happen again.[/quote]

In many ways, it can. Science is part of archaeology, geology, paleontology, etc. So, for example, science has proven the historical truth that Britain used to be part of mainland Europe.

[quote]Science cannot prove logic to be true because it assumes and requires logic in order for it to work.[/quote]

Can logic be said to be true or false in itself? When logic is said to be false, what is meant is that it has been applied incorrectly.

[quote]Science cannot prove that murder is evil, but we here probably all believe it is.[/quote]

Belief is not truth. It is belief.

[quote]Don`t tell me science is the only way to determine truth.[/quote]

An irrelevant comment, as nobody has done that.

It is far and away the most reliable method of determining truth that humanity has ever devised, but that`s not the same thing.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Science also cannot explain gravity.[/quote]

Which has nothing to do with what almightybob1 actually wrote (as opposed to what you wrongly claim he wrote).

You can use the scientific method to test whether or not gravity exists, to quantify it and to uncover information about it. In time, it will be used to explain how gravity works.

[quote]Science can`t prove that you love your Significant Other, if you have one, and if you love them, but you probably claim to.[/quote]

A better example. Science can`t yet prove if a person actually believes what they say they believe. Which is quite different to matters of what does and doesn`t exist in the universe and how the things that do exist work - that is objective reality, not subjective feelings. Which could potentially be proven by science, through biology.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]You`re still not grasping. There is ONE truth, regardless of what I or anyone says or thinks.[/quote]

I`ve no need to grasp, because I understand.

You think that your interpretation of the verses that you choose is the one and only intended meaning of your bible, which you have faith is the truth.

Exactly the same is true of the Christians who have different interpretations and/or use different verses.
0
Reply
Male 434
Bob:
"Did Jesus ever mention it? No. That quote is in a letter written by Paul. "
You`re preaching to the choir. I don`t take The Bible the same way Christians do. What Jesus says, or doesn`t, overrides Paul`s opinions.

Science also cannot explain gravity. Science can`t prove that you love your Significant Other, if you have one, and if you love them, but you probably claim to. Science cannot prove any historical truth, as it cannot happen again. Science cannot prove logic to be true because it assumes and requires logic in order for it to work. Science cannot prove that murder is evil, but we here probably all believe it is. Don`t tell me science is the only way to determine truth.

0
Reply
Male 4,290
[quote]What is truth?[/quote]
An excellent question. My answer would be: that which verifiable evidence suggests actually happened.

An even better question is: How do we go about determining what is true and what is false?
And the most tried-and-tested effective answer humanity has discovered to date to that question is the scientific method.

And it has shown no evidence for the existence of any deity.
0
Reply
Male 4,290
[quote]The fact that it is specifically mentioned in a few places in the new testament is important to a lot of people. Romans 1: 26 is a good example.[/quote]
Did Jesus ever mention it? No. That quote is in a letter written by Paul.
You know what else Paul specifically mentioned in a letter he wrote? Women are to be subservient to men. 1 Timothy 2:12.

[quote]If someone comes along, says they have the right message, and the result is hate and suffering, guess what? They don`t have it.[/quote]

Then the hate and suffering caused by preaching that homosexuals are immoral because of something they can`t change means every Christian church doesn`t have the right message.
0
Reply
Male 434
"That`s your seed. It isn`t necessarily someone else`s." I see what you`re saying. Toltec philosophy teaches us that we all have different visions of the truth, we are all running around in our own realities. Let us discuss truth a moment. What is it? Is it subjective? Is my truth different from yours? Can it even be applied that way? To me, truth is a constant. If something is true, it is true. Truth does not depend on anyone believing in it to be so. It just is. What do you think? What is truth?
0
Reply
Male 434
"And they might well say the same about you. They might well also say that you read your bible but you don`t see what it`s saying."
You`re still not grasping. There is ONE truth, regardless of what I or anyone says or thinks. Have I got it down? Maybe, maybe not. I haven`t been shown I`m wrong yet. Don`t take my word for it, read for yourself. Of course, you already have your mind made up so that`s moot too. LOL

"And everyone picks the seed they like and sees that it`s the truth. Because it`s the one they expected to see. " Yes, people see what they want and pick the parts that allow them power. That`s not the intended message though. Anyone with a REAL desire for truth will find that.

0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]"There`s no way to tell if the right method is to pick the "seed" you like and be sure it`s the right one."
What is truth? You don`t pick the seed you like, you see the truth.[/quote]

And everyone picks the seed they like and sees that it`s the truth. Because it`s the one they expected to see.

[quote]If someone comes along, says they have the right message, and the result is hate and suffering, guess what? They don`t have it.[/quote]

That`s your seed. It isn`t necessarily someone else`s. Besides, which is worse? Temporary suffering on Earth or eternal suffering in Hell? Obviously, any degree of suffering imposed on people on Earth is far better than allowing them to suffer eternally in Hell and not even trying to save their souls. The Westboro loonies might even think they are doing their victims a favour - they wouldn`t be the first theists to think so.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]"The problem with that approach is that it allows anyone to see whatever they want to see and be sure that`s the real message of the bible,".

It`s like you read, but didn`t see what I was saying. Or maybe I wasn`t clear. My sentence: "If you`re going to let all these distractions work, if you`re going to swim in the pond because you didn`t know the ocean was over the next hill, that`s your problem." takes care of that. They are getting stuck by the little things too. They are not looking for the truth, just what they want to see.[/quote]

And they might well say the same about you. They might well also say that you read your bible but you don`t see what it`s saying.
0
Reply
Male 434
"The problem with that approach is that it allows anyone to see whatever they want to see and be sure that`s the real message of the bible,".

It`s like you read, but didn`t see what I was saying. Or maybe I wasn`t clear. My sentence: "If you`re going to let all these distractions work, if you`re going to swim in the pond because you didn`t know the ocean was over the next hill, that`s your problem." takes care of that. They are getting stuck by the little things too. They are not looking for the truth, just what they want to see.

"There`s no way to tell if the right method is to pick the "seed" you like and be sure it`s the right one."
What is truth? You don`t pick the seed you like, you see the truth. If someone comes along, says they have the right message, and the result is hate and suffering, guess what? They don`t have it. Westboro: Nope.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
You might like this quote from Queen Elizabeth I, who came to the throne during a time of sustained, brutal conflict between sects of Christianity:

[quote]There is only one Christ, Jesus, one faith. All else is a dispute over trifles.[/quote]

Although she later brought in harsh laws against Catholics, so she failed to live up to her own statement. She did try, though. It took years of Catholic plots to kill her before she changed her position.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]But here`s the kicker: None of it matters. The small stuff. The debate over contradictions and where did the dinosaurs go and where`s the ark and show me proof are all moot. Forget that stuff and find the seed of truth in the bullpoo. The real message of the Bible is in there if you`re willing to look for and see it. If you truly want it. It`s there.[/quote]

The problem with that approach is that it allows anyone to see whatever they want to see and be sure that`s the real message of the bible, that they have divine approval of their position. You mention the Westboro Baptist Church and say they give your god a bad name, but they would also say that they have the real message of the bible, that they have looked for it and seen it. Maybe they`re right. Maybe you are. There`s no way to tell if the right method is to pick the "seed" you like and be sure it`s the right one.
0
Reply
Male 434
"Do you have any more?"
I really don`t, and I don`t agree with the point they would make enough to go looking. I had simply stated that homosexuality was a big deal because of the existence of these passages. Other people see them and use them to hate with.
You know what? So many people get it all wrong and ruin it for others so they don`t even stand a chance to know how awesome Jesus and His message are.

0
Reply
Male 434
But here`s the kicker: None of it matters. The small stuff. The debate over contradictions and where did the dinosaurs go and where`s the ark and show me proof are all moot. Forget that stuff and find the seed of truth in the bullpoo. The real message of the Bible is in there if you`re willing to look for and see it. If you truly want it. It`s there. If you`re going to let all these distractions work, if you`re going to swim in the pond because you didn`t know the ocean was over the next hill, that`s your problem. And it sucks because "Christians" Get stuck in this trap and start hating and gay bashing and going all Westboro and they give God a bad name.
0
Reply
Male 434
"Ah well, you made an attempt at a sensible argument before falling back to obviously untrue statements of faith."
I rescind that statement, citing below. I`m only human after all. LOL. I still proved my point about why Paul`s word isn`t better than Matthew`s on this point.

Here`s my real take on it. The Bible was written by men. Inspired by God, recounting true events as they saw it. Old Testament? I couldn`t tell you where that really came from. New? Those men were there and what they wrote was what they saw. Years after the fact. I barely remember where I left my truck keys. As if they remember what order anything happened in, and as if their stories would ever line up. Ask five witnesses at a crime scene what they saw and you get five similar yet different stories. Why would a perfect god allow these inaccuracies into His book? Because he gave it to people and He knows people. But he also knew there are some of us who will get it regardless.
0
Reply
Male 434
Reganom: `According to this article homosexuality in the new testament isn`t quite as clear as you`re making it out to be.`
You`re preaching to the choir on that one. Personally, I say live and let live.

`As to no contradictions in the bible...`
I have to say most of these are stupid, easily explainable, but yeah, there are some that I could try and defend, but won`t. You got me there. There are contradictions. To me, it doesn`t destroy the validity of it`s divinity or truths though. It is the story of God and the Universe and a guide on how to live and what His wishes for us are. It is by nature Divine.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
The usual next one up is 1 Corinthians 6:9. In which a word with no known meaning is currently translated to "homosexuals" and used to condemn them. The "translation" of that word is the *result* of Christian prejudice against homosexuality, not a reason for it.

Do you have any more?
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Angillion: Paul doesn`t override Matthew. There is no contradiction or paradox in The Bible.[/quote]

Ah well, you made an attempt at a sensible argument before falling back to obviously untrue statements of faith.

You have one verse saying that all the OT laws apply and one saying they don`t. That is a contradiction and it`s one of a very great number in your bible.

[quote]Romans 1: 26 is a good example. I`ll wait while you go look.[/quote]

Since I`ve debunked the classic interpretation of that verse at least a dozen times on IAB alone, I hardly need to go look at it again.

If there are any heterosexual people who have homosexual sex as part of religious rites for a religion that`s been dead for almost 2000 years, Romans 1:26 would be relevant. But only to them. And only if you take Paul as the centre of your faith, not Jesus.
0
Reply
Male 505
[quote]Angilion: "...until everything is accomplished." You forgot that part. And what were Jesus` last words on the cross ? "It is accomplished."

Why did he say that ? Because his purpose was fulfilled, he finished the job of redeeming of sins, he accomplished the prophecy and law of the old testament. [/quote]

You get all that from "it is accomplished"? "It is accomplished" could easily have meant that his death was accomplished. On top of which "all has been accomplished" is about multiple things needing to be accomplished including the passing of heaven and earth. Which as far as i know hasn`t happened.
0
Reply
Male 505
[quote]Matthew 5:17 - Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. [/quote]

Yet the very next line:
"For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."


So unless the death of Jesus was all being fulfulled and heaven and earth passing it would suggest the old laws still apply.
0
Reply
Male 505
Homosexuality

According to this article homosexuality in the new testament isn`t quite as clear as you`re making it out to be.

As to no contradictions in the bible...

Contradictions
0
Reply
Male 434
Angillion: Paul doesn`t override Matthew. There is no contradiction or paradox in The Bible.
And keep in mind this is Jesus talking:
Matthew 5:17 - Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
Nowhere here does he say the laws apply.one Definition of fulfil is: to bring to an end and also: to satisfy. To satisfy the old laws of sacrifice by being the ultimate sacrifice himself.

Paul, in Galatians was simply recounting the details, in slightly different wording, in his letters.

I`m not arguing that OT laws don`t apply, I`m stating it as fact. You`re arguing that they do apply. :) Right?

Besides homosexuality, which I touched on below to bob, what "Old Testament stuff" still applies?


0
Reply
Male 434
ROFL Tyger. Oh crap that made me laugh.

Bob: The gay issue in Christianity: The fact that it is specifically mentioned in a few places in the new testament is important to a lot of people.
Romans 1: 26 is a good example. I`ll wait while you go look. It also says that there are really no food restrictions in the Sermon of the Mount:
"Therefore I say to you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink; nor about your body, what you will put on. Is not life more than food and the body more than clothing? "
Paul spoke on it too:
1Corinthians 10:31 - So whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God.
God doesn`t care what we eat. Just love him already.



0
Reply
Male 17,511
Angilion: [quote]Do you think everyone who reads your bible and doesn`t just pick the same verses and same interpretations as you is a petty hateful bigot, or do you reserve that accolade just for atheists who do so?[/quote]

No, just those that use it as a hate filled false diatribe against Christianity. I really don`t care how you wish to interpret it so long as you don`t surmise that your atheist interpretation is the majority one, especially when you`re not a theologian.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
Angilion: "...until everything is accomplished." You forgot that part. And what were Jesus` last words on the cross ? "It is accomplished."

Why did he say that ? Because his purpose was fulfilled, he finished the job of redeeming of sins, he accomplished the prophecy and law of the old testament.

No matter how you try and twist it, you`re wrong angilion.
0
Reply
Male 297
Hey, can somebody loan me 50 shekels??
0
Reply
Male 197
I just want to say that if there`s one thing I love reading more than I-A-B political discussion, it`s I-A-B religious discussion.

I really wish I had the money to troll on billboards. That`d be so win.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]`Til all be fulfilled` doesn`t equal `In perpetuity, forever`[/quote]

`until heaven and earth disappear` does rather imply `in perpetuity, forever`.

Matthew 5:18.

Not 17.

18.

[quote]This, and other misinterpretations, makes you atheists look like petty hateful bigots.[/quote]

Do you think everyone who reads your bible and doesn`t just pick the same verses and same interpretations as you is a petty hateful bigot, or do you reserve that accolade just for atheists who do so?

You dislike homosexuality on the basis of bronze age religious rules that you argue don`t apply any more anyway...when it suits you to do so. Your position is not internally consistent.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
jadoig:

Thank you for that quote from Paul`s letter to the Galatians. You`re the first person who`s been able to post a real counter-argument, in all the years it`s been cropping up here.

As a result, I have two questions for you:

i) Why do you think that Paul`s letter about his own views overrides Matthew`s direct quote from Jesus?

ii) If, as you argue, old testament laws don`t apply to Christians, then what do you think about all the old testament stuff that is still considered current in Christianity? The most obvious example would be the big downer on homosexuality, which is very common indeed within Christianity and which is official policy in the great majority of Christian sects.
0
Reply
Male 4,290
(Incidentally, if you consider it to be merely a misinterpretation on the part of atheists, it`s a bit harsh to call us bigots as a result of a simple mistake.
Not to mention that doing so goes against Matthew 7:1.)
0
Reply
Male 4,290
You misunderstand my question CJ. It had nothing to do with Matthew 5:17. Rather it is a consequence of accepting the Galatians quote jadoing provided earlier. It goes like this:

Let`s accept that Jesus fulfilled the law. OT laws no longer apply. So why is homosexuality still not OK then? It`s in there in the middle of the other laws which Jesus fulfilled, as I just pointed out. How can you tell that Jesus didn`t fulfil that law too?

It`s clearly nothing to do with homosexuality being described as "an abomination", because men wearing women`s clothes and women wearing men`s clothes is identically described in Deut 22:5, but we never hear "hate the sin love the sinner" regarding women wearing trousers. Apparently THAT law was fulfilled, so why not the homosexuality one?

There is no reason to "hate the sin love the sinner" regarding homosexuality, but allow women to don business suits or men to play the dame in a pantomime.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
Bob: Jesus said it best, Matthew 15:11 "It is not the thing that enters the mouth that defiles a man, but the thing that proceeds from the mouth that defiles a man."

You atheists just don`t get it, Jesus fulfilled the law. His death ended the old laws meant for the Jews. `Til all be fulfilled` doesn`t equal `In perpetuity, forever` This, and other misinterpretations, makes you atheists look like petty hateful bigots.
0
Reply
Male 4,902
@almightybob1, they practice selective reading, it`s all rubbish.
0
Reply
Male 4,290
jadoig: The rules that you say no longer apply, such as not eating shellfish (Lev 11:10-12) or not cutting your hair (Lev 19:27), also contain the rules saying a man shall not lie with another man as with a woman (Lev 18:22).

So why is cutting your hair or eating prawn roostertail fine, but for gays it`s "hate the sin love the sinner"? Why don`t you "hate the sin" of women wearing trousers, which is another abomination (Deut 22:5)?
0
Reply
Male 434
"So the old testament is from God, yet doesn`t apply any more because times change but God doesn`t..."

partially correct. it doesn`t apply in the same way because: Jesus.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]If god doesnt exist to you then why are u even bothering to prove that god doesnt exist?[/quote]

I`m not. And it`s obviously gods, plural. There are thousands of them, apparently. Yours is no different to all the others in that respect.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Angilion: Do you believe in God? May seem like a silly question, but after re-reading your posts, (granted, only this page) I don`t see where you say you don`t.[/quote]

I`ll clarify:

I do not believe in any god or gods. Nor do I believe in the tooth fairy, vampires, werewolves, the Force, unicorns or a sentient teapot called Maureen who lives in a parellel universe (yes, I just made that one up). I try not to simply believe things without any reason to do so.

Short version:

I am an agnostic atheist.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Angilion: Easy of you to say my guess was wrong, after I guessed.[/quote]

You didn`t guess. You made a definite statement about both the past and the future. A statement that was wrong.

[quote]You`ve made that misinterpretation of Matthew 5:17 before, don`t deny it.[/quote]

No, I haven`t. Let me make this clear: Your statements about what you want to be true do not constitute an accurate description of anyone else or their actions.

[quote]So saying you meant Luke 16:17 instead of Matthew 5:17 is a lie, they are both one in the same.[/quote]

I never said that.

You are completely wrong in your claim about a post I made a few hours ago, a claim you made supposedly immediately after reading it.

Yet you claim to know what I have written some time ago and what I will write in the future.

The problem is that you want to believe things so badly that you hallucinate evidence of them. Or you`re just lying. One
0
Reply
Male 17,511
Angilion: Easy of you to say my guess was wrong, after I guessed. You`ve made that misinterpretation of Matthew 5:17 before, don`t deny it.

What I stated IS the most likely interpretation, I have a Strong`s Exhaustive Concordance and I know how to use, In other words I`m your worst nightmare when it comes to debating Christian theology.

Luke 16:17 is the same as Matthew 5:17, because both were written about the same instance in Jesus` life, So saying you meant Luke 16:17 instead of Matthew 5:17 is a lie, they are both one in the same.

jadoig: Thank you for quoting Galatians 3:23-25, even though most of the atheists here won`t understand it.
0
Reply
Male 813
And to your left you`ll see a bunch of retard humans.
0
Reply
Male 434
doh, just saw it.
"I`m not using any ammunition against your god. Why shoot at something that doesn`t exist?"

my bad. So...why not? Or do you have a reason?
0
Reply
Male 434
Justahuman: An atheist can no sooner disprove the existence of God to a believer than a believer can prove the existence of God to a non-believer. You either believe, or you don`t.

Angilion: Do you believe in God? May seem like a silly question, but after re-reading your posts, (granted, only this page) I don`t see where you say you don`t.
0
Reply
Male 434
Let me show something else the Bible says:

Galatians:
23 Now before faith came, we were held captive under the law, imprisoned until the coming faith would be revealed. 24 So then, the law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith. 25 But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian.

Because Jesus came to fulfill the law, or make it perfect, it is no longer the same. The Ten Commandments, in a condensed form (Christs Laws) apply, but the micromanaged details such as the verse this sign is referring to are irrelevant as a true believer and lover of god would have no need.
Romans 10:4
4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.

He did this by ending the system of law with its commandments and regulations. He made peace between Jews and Gentiles by creating in himself one new people from the two groups.


0
Reply
Male 109
"I`m not using any ammunition against your god. Why shoot at something that doesn`t exist? It`s a silly thing to do.

I am using your religion`s own holy book as a source of ammunition against your religion. If you don`t want that part of it used, don`t use it. If it`s part of Christianity, it`s part of Christianity.

By "context" you mean "my interpretation, ignoring all the bits I don`t like". Bollocks to your "context". It`s just an excuse."

If god doesnt exist to you then why are u even bothering to prove that god doesnt exist?You got life all figured out my friend,just sit back and relax have some lolz at all the bible thumpers.Are you trying to prove something to everyone? or just yourself,because it bothers you that u cant really disprove gods existence.
0
Reply
Male 2,419
If the Old Testament doesn`t matter, why is it INCLUDED in the bible? There`s a difference between having a history book on your shelf and including slavery in modern laws.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Old testament=Athiest main source of ammunition against god,because its very old and extremely easy to take out of context.[/quote]

I`m not using any ammunition against your god. Why shoot at something that doesn`t exist? It`s a silly thing to do.

I am using your religion`s own holy book as a source of ammunition against your religion. If you don`t want that part of it used, don`t use it. If it`s part of Christianity, it`s part of Christianity.

By "context" you mean "my interpretation, ignoring all the bits I don`t like". Bollocks to your "context". It`s just an excuse.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]"Then there`s the new testament verse claimed to be a direct quote from Jesus in which he states that every single one of the old testament rules must be obeyed in every detail forever."

Find me that verse.[/quote]

I see that Regamon already has. Luke 16:17 would also work, though it isn`t quite as explicitly stated.

If pressed, some Christians will say that Heaven and Earth have already passed and we`re now on Heaven 2.0 and Earth 2.0. There`s always an excuse for ignoring bits of a religion`s books that a follower of that religion doesn`t like.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]jadoig: Angilion is going to try and quote Matthew 5:17 "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil."[/quote]

Wrong.

[quote]But he`s misinterpreted this to before. Jesus came to fulfill the law, meaning the old covenant of Jewish law would be fulfilled with his death.
Jesus was the word made flesh, John 1:14, so that he could bring us the truth and a new covenant.[/quote]

Excellent.

You select a verse, pretend it`s one I selected, choose a possible but unlikely interpretation of it and claim that proves me wrong in the past and the future.

Fascinating. Do you believe the rubbish you write?
0
Reply
Male 17,511
jadoig: Angilion is going to try and quote Matthew 5:17 "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil."

But he`s misinterpreted this to before. Jesus came to fulfill the law, meaning the old covenant of Jewish law would be fulfilled with his death.
Jesus was the word made flesh, John 1:14, so that he could bring us the truth and a new covenant.
0
Reply
Male 109
Old testament=Athiest main source of ammunition against god,because its very old and extremely easy to take out of context.
0
Reply
Male 505
[quote]Find me that verse. [/quote]

"For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." Matther 5:18. I think that was the line Angilion was talking about.

[quote]Times change, man changes. God doesn`t though, and the Old Testament applied to the world in which it was created, not the one we know now, or even 2000 years ago. [/quote]

So the old testament is from God, yet doesn`t apply any more because times change but God doesn`t...

Seems quite odd that someone that knows everything and is all loving changes his mind about right and wrong as time goes on...Does he kick a few souls out of heaven when he decides what was fine is now bad?
0
Reply
Male 2,855
finally a book with true wisdom!
0
Reply
Male 434
Angilion, you`re right. Religion is not harmless, just as any other weapon isn`t. It is often used as a tool to hurt. You cannot blame religion for that though, or God, but the people using it as such.
0
Reply
Male 434
Angillion:"Then there`s the new testament verse claimed to be a direct quote from Jesus in which he states that every single one of the old testament rules must be obeyed in every detail forever."

Find me that verse.

Stickman: well said.

Therealpixie: "You Christians who are saying the Old Testament is out of date are forgetting you also say it`s Divinely inspired. " Just because it`s divinely inspired doesn`t mean it`s applicable forever. Times change, man changes. God doesn`t though, and the Old Testament applied to the world in which it was created, not the one we know now, or even 2000 years ago.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]so why does religion bother you?yes i agree its caused much misunderstanding death wand war[/quote]

I think you answered yourself there, but that`s far from the whole story.

If religion had no effect on my life and was only ever a free choice made by adults, I`d ignore it. If people want to give their own ignorance a name or names and worship it, well, OK. It`s weird, but if an adult freely chooses to do it, that`s their business.

But that`s not how it is. It`s imposed on children. It affects the lives of other people, even when it isn`t taken as far as killing them.

Religion is *not* harmless. That`s why it bothers me.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Did anyone ever teach those atheists that the Old Testament is just that? The OLD one? It`s history class. Do we still teach that it`s proper to own a slave? No, but we still acknowledge it in our history classes. The New Testament in which Jesus lays down our current law. Bill & Ted sum it up best. Be excellent to one another.[/quote]

That would be a good argument if it wasn`t for the fact that almost all Christians and almost all Christian sects disagree with you.

In fact, I`d bet a penny to a pound that you don`t agree with yourself. For example, do you completely dismiss the famous ten commandments?

Then there`s the new testament verse claimed to be a direct quote from Jesus in which he states that every single one of the old testament rules must be obeyed in every detail forever.

You can cherry-pick only the bits of your bible that you like, but it`s silly to claim that they`re the only ones that exist and anyone who thinks otherwise
0
Reply
Female 2,674
mil578, if every christian would stop referring to the old testament at all, then you`d have a point...
0
Reply
Male 59
Deuteronomy 22:28-29
King James Version (KJV)
28If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found;

29Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel`s father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days.

28 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels[a] of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.

To me, that doesn`t say what the above sign says.
0
Reply
Male 26
Did anyone ever teach those atheists that the Old Testament is just that? The OLD one? It`s history class. Do we still teach that it`s proper to own a slave? No, but we still acknowledge it in our history classes. The New Testament in which Jesus lays down our current law. Bill & Ted sum it up best. Be excellent to one another.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
Draculya: Yes, Churches do hand out New Testament Bibles like These

You must not go to church much.
0
Reply
Female 92
@Cuppsworth

Yeah i`d love being forced to marry a guy who raped me and then have sex with him every night till I died. Definitely justice in my eyes *SARCASM*
0
Reply
Female 127
Rape then didn`t mean what it means now. To rape something basically just meant to take it. Ever heard of the fable of the Rape of Lock? It`s about a guy taking a lock of hair. He didn`t shove his penis into the lock of hair, he just took it.
0
Reply
Female 295
I looked it up and depending on the location the amount of money this billboard would cost is anywhere from $75-2,500.

I think we can all agree the guy who felt the need to spend that much money on a point is kind of a loser.
0
Reply
Male 18
Men wrote the Bible... not God. He spoke the 10 Commandments to Moses... That is all. If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels[a] of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.
0
Reply
Female 11
I take it you didn`t read the context?
0
Reply
Male 58
Read the whole damn verse. Since he`s married her he must provide food, shelter, and pleasure her sexually. This was pretty good justice back then.
0
Reply
Female 54
You Christians who are saying the Old Testament is out of date are forgetting you also say it`s Divinely inspired. So, it the old God not the new God? I thought you said there was only one God. Get a grip. You can`t have it both ways. Either it`s God`s word forever, or it`s not. (Guess which I choose.)
0
Reply
Female 188
*Putting it all out there really screws up the point the sign was making.*

sooo..the girl must be married with a man who violated her for the rest of her life. ooh the truth just opened my eyes! i am saved now! ty insane.
0
Reply
Male 15,261
"So the Old Testament is out-of-date and useless in the context of today`s life. That`s why it`s called the Old Testament."

I don`t see any churches issuing new testament only bibles.
0
Reply
Female 64
So the Old Testament is out-of-date and useless in the context of today`s life. That`s why it`s called the Old Testament.
0
Reply
Male 1,866
If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels[c] of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.

Putting it all out there really screws up the point the sign was making.

I reject your faulty perception and replace it with truth.
0
Reply
Male 1,735
Just came back to say something else I forgot to mention....

Why is it they always pick something out of the Old Testament when today`s Christians live the New Testament?

That is the same as picking up a history book and attacking a country based on what it did many generations ago. Specially when you know damn well that is not the way they are. It`s grasping at straws.
0
Reply
Male 2,220
Justahumans comments remind me of the bible.

tl;dr
0
Reply
Male 255
@TypicalJerk: A christian telling me that I claim superior morality? Now that did make me laugh.. i`m sorry but the moral high ground is the raison d`etre of most religion.
.."and then excused or justified for a variety of reasons" My point exactly, religion was used to excuse or justify. Do you really think that the Incas would come up with another reason for mass sacrifice, the Catholic church would have come up with another reason for the Inquisition than heretical thought...seriously?
0
Reply
Male 1,735
F`ck it, I`ll say it.

If you were raped you were considered unpure and therefore no man would marry you. His punishment is to take care of her since she`s now useless by their standards. (Muslims would just kill you to deal with this).

The man has to treat her well or risk further punishment from the town elders. Women were allowed to bring issues up to them dealing with their husbands.

So that`s the reasoning, not saying I agree with it, I`m just sick of these things being taken out of context.
0
Reply
Male 1,582
Thumbs up. Two of `em
0
Reply
Male 12,138
I repeat, if a user trolled the same way on any other group (religious, racial, or otherwise), they would be (and have been) asked to stop too or face potential ban.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
For those complaining about Heureux being banned for "calling atheists names" or "saying something we don`t like", that`s not what he was banned for. He was banned for *trolling*, repeatedly and predictably, across multiple boards on just about every vaguely relevant thread, despite repeated warnings to reign it in.

Please conduct a simple google search on Heureux atheism site:i-am-bored.com for those who have the time. I make it 191 hits, the vast majority trolling and responses to his trolling.
0
Reply
Male 93
I realize being anti religion is what`s cool these days but these sorts of things are getting old.
0
Reply
Female 65
Heh...funnies
0
Reply
Male 109
@Revolutioniz-You really cant say that the stuff posted on this site is fuel for the rage machine against religion?...im trying to reason with you... create facts, work with me?If i tried to post something religious on here it would get torn to pieces in the matter of seconds(or not get posted at all),just because this site is predominantly atheist you plug your ears to anything other than what u believe in,if u listened instead of arguing then maybe you would understand.But the next thing you will say is something to prove me wrong or make me seem stupid just to build your ego over the internet,instead of expanding your mind.
0
Reply
Male 109
Stop separating each other on basis of religion,were all people we all make mistakes its time to fix it not argue of how it broke apart.
0
Reply
Male 109
@At all the people claiming im Heureux 2,which made me lol,i havent been on this site for more than a few months.i enjoy this site for laughs and some good viral videos, pics and whatnot but i constantly see alot of Prejudice propaganda that bashes religious people.Just standing up for what i believe in, i respect you!Please give me the same courtesy.at the links given that condemned Heureux to the ban hammer i didnt really see anything that offensive.....if what he said shook your beliefs or made you think twice about what u believe in then your just a bunch of cowards.Ive seen what u guys and lady`s say about what i believe in and it only makes me stronger.If you are so comfortable with your athieism then yeah your right...about everything im wrong..you got everything figured out,so why does religion bother you?yes i agree its caused much misunderstanding death wand war,stop wondering why the clock is broken we know it is...lets find out how to fix it.
0
Reply
Male 414
haha zing!
0
Reply
Male 15,832
Yeah, but you gotta give her old man about $650 worth of silver. I guess that`s not a bad deal if she can cook and make sammiches.
0
Reply
Male 3,482
You know... With Heureux gone, I have no brick walls to scream at anymore...

Can`t say I don`t miss it already. I actually kind of enjoyed being able to get on here and go all-caps against someone on a consistent basis...

[quote]So he gets thrust outta here for calling atheists names, but what about the people that call Christians names?[/quote]
Well, for starters, we`re in a vast majority. And unfortunately, until the owner of the site says otherwise, what the majority says goes, considering that we get the site more hits and, by extension, make the owners more money.

Unless you`re like me and use an ad-blocker so they don`t make money. In which case, you`re an assh*le, but you`re still with the majority opinion-wise so they can`t really do much.

That`s right. I`m an assh*le. And not a single f*ck was given this day.
0
Reply
Male 10,338
"like most theists was a moron to the highest degree."

Case in point.
0
Reply
Male 4,902
With some of the horrible sh*t I`ve seen in this life, I just can`t wrap my head around the concept of blind faith.
0
Reply
Male 910
@Justahuman Heuteux, like most theists was a moron to the highest degree. he never spoke of fact or even tried to form real arguments. He just spouted bullpoo, which is the M.O of most people like him, such as yourself. once i read your "atheists produce hate breeding propaganda" i knew you were not the very educated type.
0
Reply
Female 1,008
Justahuman:
Heureux 2 Electric Boogaloo.
or maybe
Heureux: Return of the Browneye.

Ha. No, I`m only kidding. I see you only created your account just today, but I don`t want to assume you haven`t been lurking here for a while. Still, you can only get a taste of how much of a troll Heureux was. He would swoop in like a swarm of locusts whenever there was a religious debate and practically SPAM the page to death with hate-speech. Sometimes the topic would have nothing to do with religion and he would just have to come in with his two bits (or five or eighty) about how an ENTIRE GROUP OF PEOPLE is immoral and prejudice. If that`s not hate-speech, I don`t know what is.

Heureux was a troll and an attention whore, and he was just begging to get banned for a very very long time.
0
Reply
Female 1,008
Heureux is banned? Damn. I can`t say I didn`t see it coming.

I`m glad I was never stupid enough to get into it with him.
0
Reply
Male 109
"Heureux wasn`t standing up for his beliefs. He was being a brat. I read those threads and as an athiest and with him comparing to them to rapists, bigots and what not that is pretty offensive. People like him cause hate in the world."

This site is 90% Athiest that constantly bash Religion,constantly bombard yourselves with prejudiced hate breeding propaganda so u can jerk to it.....one guy speaks up ,says something u dont like and he gets kicked off the site for trolling....you guys are real sad, your the trolls,talking about how offensive he is when u constantly disregard what offends others.
0
Reply
Male 109
@davymid-You banned someone only cause u didnt like to hear what he had to say.....but i didnt need to tell you that.
0
Reply
Male 10,338
Okay. So he gets thrust outta here for calling atheists names, but what about the people that call Christians names?
0
Reply
Male 101
Heureux wasn`t standing up for his beliefs. He was being a brat. I read those threads and as an athiest and with him comparing to them to rapists, bigots and what not that is pretty offensive. People like him cause hate in the world.
0
Reply
Female 245
"Oh and lets not pretend atheists don`t start any conflict *Cough Soviet Union, North Korea."
Leader-worshiping is not atheism.
0
Reply
Male 10,338
Wait a sec. Heureux was banned for standing up for his beliefs?
0
Reply
Male 5,004
"For those who follow such things on this site, and for the sake of transparency, Heureux has been banned on grounds of trolling."

Davymid, I don`t understand what Heureux did that was so bad.
0
Reply
Male 145
This is so true because the Catholics clearly practice this... No? They don`t? Then the Baptist must... What did you say? Well heck, there is no way the Evangelicals don`t obey this word for word... Now you`re just blowing my mind. I saw this on IAB.

I think I made my point.
0
Reply
Male 10,338
Take the bible out of context? Take it literally? You`re an idiot. - God

THE OLD TESTAMENT IS NOT THE CHRISTIAN BIBLE! 22:28-29
0
Reply
Male 95
Oh and lets not pretend atheists don`t start any conflict *Cough Soviet Union, North Korea.
0
Reply
Male 95
You know recently I have been studying Biology in college and the more I learn of how life is created, the more I know that it would have been impossible for life to develop without divine intervention and that is just for life to develop. Then one has to factor in all the mutations that brought about more complex organism and scientist want me to believe it happens all by chance? I would say the odds of it happening by chance are about the same as a working computer being made just by throwing all the necessary parts in to a volcano.
0
Reply
Male 533
--"You do realise that there has been more blood spilt, vitriol and hatred generated over the interpretation of the words of God/Gods than anything else. "

No, and the continued use of this lie by atheists refutes their claims of intellectual superiority or morality. The majority of all wars have been over property, resources, land or people, and then excused or justified for a variety of reasons, including religion. --

From the Crusades, to the modern day G.W`s and their Christian agenda to wipe Muslim followers out of the picture, as a threat. . prove it wrong. , I dare you.
0
Reply
Male 533
Rapist were put to death under the Mosaic law.

Sure, if the woman came out about it being rape. The community would put the men put to death, but in doing so, she would be seen as a fornicator. A slut, a prostitute. No one would marry her, they would just go around raping her because she was already unclean in gods eyes.
0
Reply
Male 52
We only take Christianity more seriously than, say, Hinduism, because it`s such a large part of our culture, and because nobody talks about the weird little footnotes like that.
0
Reply
Male 33
Live & let live! What happened to that?
0
Reply
Female 11
God is a lie.
0
Reply
Female 295
@krisley, what makes a `healthy percentage` and where are the sources to verify this claim? I don`t believe religion makes people crazy. I think people start out crazy.

Anyways, what business is it of yours what other people believe in?
0
Reply
Male 1,084
@francakes LOL
0
Reply
Male 129
Aedran: good point! Still, the sign shows an obvious lack of any fundamental understanding of the Bible, or the law of Moses. Rapist were put to death under the Mosaic law.
0
Reply
Male 526
@Aedran because a billion do believe, and a healthy percentage of those are batpoo crazy.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
For those who follow such things on this site, and for the sake of transparency, Heureux has been banned on grounds of trolling.

See HERE and HERE and HERE for recent warnings.
0
Reply
Male 28
@ aikiman Sure they were carried out IN THE NAME OF religion. We humans always like to put some justification of our favorite sport... killing other humans in the nastiest ways we can think of. After all, if there is no religious or political justification then we have to resort to mere life-taking... and what fun is that?
0
Reply
Female 295
Why are atheists wasting their time and money on a God they don`t believe in?
0
Reply
Male 434
Oh, also, this sign is still a FAIL.
0
Reply
Male 1,449
@nadia61: WELL SAID!!
0
Reply
Male 109
Through all the justifications objections,and badmouthing atheist do toward religion...they are definitely trying to prove something,not to others but to themselves.Haha they think about god more than i do.
0
Reply
Male 434
Archer, ahhh, and what did He do exactly, besides punish those He saw deserved it?
0
Reply
Male 434
g`night aik. Sleep well. Say your prayers :)
0
Reply
Male 525
@jadoig: It doesn`t matter that the Old Testament is just history and the New Testament is what matters; the benevolent god of the New Testament is the exact same vengeful god of the Old Testament.

Your aliens-holocaust hypothetical doesn`t make any sense. It would be irrational to judge an entire species for the action of a group while it would be very rational to judge an individual (god) for all the actions he did.
0
Reply
Male 35
@nadia61 a "decent" human being is subjective. Depending on who you talk to, a "decent" human being will differ.
0
Reply
Male 255
@jadog: Thansk for the sparring...I am no longer bored..but it`s time for my bed. Goodnight
0
Reply
Male 109
Out of context,hateful propaganda.keep hating something you have no knowledge of....yea that will change the world right??
0
Reply
Male 255
@Heureux: You`re denying that the Islamic conquests, the French Huguenot wars, the crusades, the reconquista, Jihad, Milkhemet Mitzvah, the Inquisition, thuggee murders, witch trials, Sacrifice, the anabaptist slaughters.... I could go on... where not carried out in the name of religion?
0
Reply
Male 434
tubby: I understand your reluctance. I enjoy any topic anywhere. People are fun to talk to.
0
Reply
Female 14
@heureux: it doesn`t condemn or reject any of those things because atheists rely on morals and being a decent human being, instead of a religion that forces them to keep to the straight and narrow.
0
Reply
Male 1,440
I don`t touch religion on Iambored with a 10-ft pole.
0
Reply
Male 434
aikiman: Yup. That`s what I`m saying.
0
Reply
Male 1,054
Bear in mind, atheism does not condemn rape.

It does not condemn bestiality. It does not condemn murder. It does not condemn prejudice, and actively promotes prejudice against people of faith.

Atheism does not reject stealing, lies, or any other wrongdoing known to man.

But does reject all of the religions that do condemn rape, murder, theft, etc.
0
Reply
Male 1,054
more hate speech proving that atheism is just a prejudice.

"You do realise that there has been more blood spilt, vitriol and hatred generated over the interpretation of the words of God/Gods than anything else. "

No, and the continued use of this lie by atheists refutes their claims of intellectual superiority or morality. The majority of all wars have been over property, resources, land or people, and then excused or justified for a variety of reasons, including religion.

"I prefer to be a kind and decent human being "
One cannot be an atheist and be a kind and decent human being, actually. One can at best, pretend to be kind and decent.
0
Reply
Male 255
@jadog: "You`re still referring to things people have done." - No, I`m referring to things christians like yourself believe ie that killing is ok as long as it can be justified
0
Reply
Female 157
You break it you buy it.
0
Reply
Male 434
Also: Catholicism does not mean Godly. Christianity does not mean Godly. Mormonism does not mean godly.Judaism does not mean godly, nor does any ism. No "religion" with a name means Godly. What does? God.
0
Reply
Male 255
@jadog: So the old testament is a `dusty old tome` yet the 2000 year old New Testament isn`t. And as far as I rememember, the Old Testament is made up of various parts, some historical, some legalistic and some didactic.
0
Reply
Male 434
abrxax: I don`t doubt what you say is truth, which makes this sign even more ridiculous as they are taking words of men, pretending they are words of God and twisting them against God, who`s sitting there going:"Huh? I didn`t say that!"

Amazing, isn`t it, that throughout the bullpoo changes and oppressions, the REAL message, the awesome stuff Jesus had to say, still got through.
And really, who here is willing to say that everything Jesus said were lies and bullpoo and not worth listening to?
Treat people well. HA, WHY WOULD I WANT TO TO THAT?! DURRRRR
0
Reply
Male 434
morimacil: I still challenge you: show me where it says rape. I have five examples that don`t.

aikiman: You`re still referring to things people have done. Not things God has commanded. IMHO "real" christians are pacifists. Warmongers fighting in the name of God are charlatans and well...warmongers. They pretend to interpret it a certain way and twist the words to suit their evil.

SmilinSam: You have the right idea. I agree. Pushy Christians suck and are not what they say they are either. FTR I am not trying to push or force views, just like no one here is trying to push me ;). Just "debating" and presenting my opinion and point of view.
0
Reply
Male 75
furthermore.... The bible as we know it is garbage. 13 disciples. 4 books. Lets use some logic here.
1)The bible has been translated and retranslated multiple times. Look at the difference between the King james version and New living testament.
2)The bible was kept in a language that the common people could not understand by the CATHOLICS! who also burned books, sold forgiveness and touches little boys (and still do)
3)As the Catholics were the authority on faith for a long long time. They could at their will, add, remove and rename anything in the bible to suit their political needs at that time.

So. the bible can`t be trusted. What can? One must rear all of the books available,Christan, Muslim and Jewish. Then in the grey of it all will the truth emerge.

one other thing. GOD PARTICLE...LOL
0
Reply
Male 434
Archer: just like non-Christians forget the opposite, the New Testament is also a part of the Bible, the most important part, as it has the good stuff and the real instruction. The Old Testament is just History. Using it to judge the morality of the God it honors or the world within is like using our History to judge us. If aliens came and read our history books, they`d be all: Wow, how many Jews did you kill? that`s awful. How many black people did you enslave? you don`t deserve to live. you must be the same as these people therefore you deserve to die. We wouldn`t have a leg to stand on. They`d keep referring to this dusty old Tome that spoke of awful things that happened years ago to discredit us. If you ask me, God got tired of playing daycare and said "get along, respect me, or GTFO" in the end. Not that anyone here is interested in hearing another side of it.You guys already know everything.;) (I keed)
0
Reply
Female 3,598
@jadoig: I prefer to LOVE people without somebody telling me I have to. I prefer to be a kind and decent human being because i love my fellow humans, not because i fear an all knowing all powerful daddy-figure that will sentence me to HELL FOR ALL ETERNITY IF I DIDN`T GET BAPTISED OR SAY SOME SPECIAL WORDS...
0
Reply
Male 255
@jadog: No, I would make sure there would be no misunderstanding over what my `word` meant. This would see the end to religious wars, religious hatred etc. You do realise that there has been more blood spilt, vitriol and hatred generated over the interpretation of the words of God/Gods than anything else.
Though it`s amazing what Christians can subvert when they try. "Thou shalt not kill` seems pretty emphatic....oh but that doesn`t apply to wars right?..or for murderers in certain countries right?
0
Reply
Male 171
"Anyway, this sign is FAIL. It doesn`t say rape in those verses."
Hm, so christians edited the more recent editions of the bible to alter its meaning, and therefore make it sound less gruesome, and so its all fine?
Plus, even if the newer versions make it sound nicer, it doesnt change a thing. Rape still counts as intercourse.
0
Reply
Male 434
No, not selective. I read the gruesome things too, all caused by or consequences of terrible things people do, and still got that the message was love. Pretty selective reading on your part if you missed it.
0
Reply
Male 171
And ofc theres a ton of others.
Jericho, thats a nice story, they run around the city, and blow the trumpets, and on the 7th day, the walls fall, the end!
Oh wait, it seems I left out the part where they then proceed to murder every single man, woman, child, and animal within the city.
0
Reply
Male 525
Christians sometimes forget that the Old Testament is equally a part of the Bible as the New Testament.
0
Reply
Male 171
"hey argue semantics to avoid the point: LOVE.
Love God, and love all others as you love God. And for God`s sake, love yourself."
Thats very selective readin there. Sure, theres parts about love in the bible (mostly in the new testament), but most of it is pretty gruesome.

Sodom and gomorrah were not loved, david did not show love when he killed goliath, abraham almost being forced to kill his son isnt love, everyone but noah and his family getting drowned isnt love, and so on.
The bible is gruesome, ppl just like to downplay it. Noah`s arc, thats a fun story for kids! Lets just leave out the part where hundreds of thousands of ppl get drowned...
0
Reply
Male 75
Well granted Deuteronomy is in the Christan bible, it is actually a jewish text. Most of the old testament books are taken from the Masoretic Texts. The Nag Hammadi library books have some very interesting stuff in them. So do the dead sea scrolls.
0
Reply
Male 434
Ha, people in general see what they want. That would be pretty heinous to make a rape victim marry her assailant. Let me read..
Ahh, first off, this was Moses talking. Not God. God gave the Ten Commandments. Moses doesn`t say God said everything else in Deuteronomy.
Second, the Bible I read (New Living testament) says has intercourse with, not rape. Rape is mentioned in prior verses, but not this one. Even other versions don`t specifically say rape or forced on but the wording (seize, lay hold on, seduce) could possible be seen to mean that, if a rapist or idiot saw it and wanted to assume these people were barbaric..or just troll. Anyway, this sign is FAIL. It doesn`t say rape in those verses.
0
Reply
Female 2,674
"People on this website see what they want to see I guess."
Including you, apparently. You posted that as if this post was misunderstanding the passage, but it clearly states that he must force the rape victim into marriage. That`s never okay; I don`t care what time it was written in.
0
Reply
Male 434
HolyGod: Debate implies thought out and respectful counterpoints. That`s hard to find online.
0
Reply
Male 25,416
something says thats shopped
0
Reply
Male 514
yeah quoting old testament law is pretty noob for athiests
0
Reply
Male 434
AngryAsian: Welcome to the Internet. Prepare to be offended, wherever you go. Especially if you love God, but isn`t that the Christian burden?

TKD: I can see by the respectful tones of your responses that you are doing quite fine without God. Keep up the good work, Trolly McTrollface.

aikiman: If you were God and wanted to talk to your people, would you use their cultural norms or your own terms to get the point across?

Everyone: Stop sweating the small stuff. When it comes to The Bible and Christianity, people refer to passages such as this that no longer apply or the old "What about dinosaurs?" argument or others like it (If Adam and Eve were the only two people, are we all committing incest?) to discredit God and those who believe in and love Him. They argue semantics to avoid the point: LOVE.
Love God, and love all others as you love God. And for God`s sake, love yourself. I know how many blind eyes this is falling on, but I feel this bears
0
Reply
Male 53
@Hightech90 Stop trying trying to justify your silly little book of fairy tails.
0
Reply
Male 2,220
@Angryasian - this is i-am-bored. Not i-am-religious. Duh.

@hightech90 "think about it" Now that *is* funny.
0
Reply
Male 9,745
What? Someone is having a religious debate? On the internet? Intriguing....
0
Reply
Male 255
@Hightech90: I`d like to think of it more as a humerous hyperbole to emphasise the point.
After reading your repsonse to TKD, I`m suprised that the will of an omnipotent being has to rely on the vagaries of cultural norms.
0
Reply
Female 1,203
Applause TKD__Master. That will be my come back to ignorance from this day forward: your god is a noob.
0
Reply
Male 122
is really getting sick of all these religous posts that just spit in the face of people with faith
0
Reply
Male 72
@aikiman I see that you were trying to be funny there, but all I can say is look to my response to TKD. If you want a further response than what I can give, go ask someone that knows more about this than me.
0
Reply
Male 72
@TDK Master
No, God first punished Adam and Eve (and the entire world really) by allowing sin to enter the world and many other bad things including death, sickness, etc. This occurred for a while until the arrival of the Messiah (Jesus, predicted throughout the Old Testament) that would be there to save all of mankind. Which with his crucifixion can now happen because he died so the entire world can seek salvation through him.

On your 2nd post, you have to realize this was written over 2000 years ago in a different time period where culture norms are totally different. If you read the passage you would see that the man had to pay money to the victims family to pay for what wrong he had done. Also you need to realize that the man doing this is already married so he has to live with two wives and I would have to say that his first wife would not like what he had done either causing him more problems.

I am happy to answer your questions, like I said, think about it
0
Reply
Male 255
@Hightech90: I see what you`re saying and presumably, with God being non-sexist and all, if you were raped by a huge ugly psycho woman she should be married to you for life. I agree that that`s a fitting punishment for her.
0
Reply
Male 4,793
@Hightech90 you are a dumbass. In what world is it even kind of acceptable to force a man to marry his rape victim (and thus, force the rape victim to marry the rapist)? Go kill yourself please.
0
Reply
Male 4,793
"Jesus changed all the rules with his message. So even if it did apply it does not apply any longer."

Why would he change the rules? Did his first set not turn out the way he wanted? But didn`t he know that? Why not just skip to the perfect rules? Perhaps, maybe, he doesn`t exist. Otherwise, a Perfect god wouldn`t make such noob mistakes. Yeah, I called your god a noob. Also, i`ll kill the evil bastard should we ever meet.
0
Reply
Male 540
Time to get my stalking pants on... err off?
0
Reply
Male 72
Also I just looked up the passage myself. It says "If a man happens to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay the girl`s father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the girl, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives."

So basically God is making the man pay for what he has done (wrongfully) to the girl and her family. He has to show his shame to everyone for what he has done and pay for it the rest of his life. People on this website see what they want to see I guess. So many misunderstand the Bible and its teachings and the wrong message is put across on websites. All I ask is that you think before posting, or just ask someone.
0
Reply
Male 4,793
PWNT. noobs.
0
Reply
Male 72
Jesus changed all the rules with his message. So even if it did apply it does not apply any longer. Silly atheists on this website
0
Reply
Male 171
Religion is great if you only believe the good parts.
0
Reply
Female 3,726
Link: If Christians Advertised The Bible Truthfully [Pic [Rate Link] - And you complain that you can`t find a girlfriend...
0
Reply