I Am Bored

Loads of viral videos, games, memes, lists and social networking for when you're bored. Updated every day, so visit often.
LatestPopularMost BookmarkedMost EmailedTop RatedMy FavoritesRandomChat
AllGamesFunnyEntertainmentQuizzesWeirdTechLifestyle, Arts & Lit.News & PoliticsScienceSportsMisc
Submit Content  





rss

friendsmore friends | add your site
Gorilla Mask

Extreme Humor

Funny Games

Free Samples

123 Games

Oddee

Fresh Pics

FreeGame Heaven

Viva La Games

Gig Posters

Funny Videos

Funny Videos

Not Healthy

Crazy Games

Crazy News



Back to Listing

If God Was A Fire Fighter...

Hits: 10520 | Rating: (2.3) | Category: Funny | Added by: Dead_mind
Page: 1 2 3 Next >   Jump to: Bottom    Last Post
Otto67
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
 438 Posts
Wednesday, February 15, 2012 9:32:47 AM
sexytexan876:

I think some theists also get the misconception that an atheist is claiming no god exists when really the atheist is denying the definition of god that that particular theist is arguing for, but since the theist has the belief 'their god is the only possible god' they conclude the atheist is therefore making the claim no god exists.

Otto67
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
 438 Posts
Wednesday, February 15, 2012 9:14:53 AM
CrakrJak:

I agree it was clever wording, but other Christian churches do the same thing, and the ones that are specific and don't hedge their words tend to end up on the WBC side of faith, the nutty side.

sexytexan876
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 42 Posts
Wednesday, February 15, 2012 9:14:17 AM
@CrakrJak: I don't see how he was trying to censor anybody. He simply stated that by shutting down a discussion with "you just have to have faith" that person is being unreasonable.

It's like when you argue with your girlfriend or wife. You can throw the logic of why you're right and why they're wrong right in their face, and they'll completely ignore it or change the subject.

"You just have to have faith." is to theists; as "Whatever." is to females.

I think it's funny when atheists take the gnostic stance on god. It's funny because they're taking a stance of faith.

Otto67
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
 438 Posts
Wednesday, February 15, 2012 9:04:19 AM
almightybob1: I knew it was church doctrine but I had never read it before so thanks for the post. As so many things religious it can be interpreted in more than one way. In my experience with the clergy they all had different answers but were often vague so that they couldn't be pinned down. I think they must teach that in seminary school. As an example in Vatican II that you posted where it says

"For it is through Christ's Catholic Church alone, which is the universal help towards salvation, that the fullness of the means of salvation can be obtained."

The key word being 'fullness', I think a lot of priests would focus on that word to show it could be available to others but not in "full". I am sure the Vatican choose that word for its vagueness as well. I don't know any of my Catholic friends who still practice to believe it.

CrakrJak
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
 17310 Posts
Wednesday, February 15, 2012 9:02:38 AM
bob: Yes, I know the Catholic church thinks very highly of itself as the 'universal help towards salvation', but they fall short of actually saying they are the sole means of salvation.

That was some clever diplomatic wording on their part, even for 1965, when it occurred. It's not unlike an auto repair shop saying, "We're the best in town".

CrakrJak
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
 17310 Posts
Wednesday, February 15, 2012 8:51:58 AM
sexytexan: The unreasonable part is the part about censoring those of faith. There is also a vast difference between libeling someone and discussing theological perspectives.

And as a matter of Fact, quite a few atheists here at IAB that do state that there is no God without proof, because as they'll tell you, you can't prove a negative.

almightybob1
Male, 18-29, Europe
 4278 Posts
Wednesday, February 15, 2012 6:53:51 AM
patchgrabber: If you read the actual Book of Jonah (it's quite short), it's pretty clear that the story is about an actual whale or fish. Jonah is thrown overboard during a storm at sea, and God sends the whale/fish/sea creature to swallow him. Then when Jonah prays, the creature vomits him back up. It makes no sense as a translation error from a constellation.

almightybob1
Male, 18-29, Europe
 4278 Posts
Wednesday, February 15, 2012 6:47:59 AM
Otto: I am a "recovering Catholic" too (nice phrase by the way). I'm not sure which priests you were talking to, but it's Catholic Church doctrine that non-Catholics are not guaranteed salvation (exemptions apply if you have never been informed that the Catholic Church is the one path to salvation, or never heard of the Church at all).
This was all laid out in the Second Vatican Council, the relevant document of which I will link below:

Unitatis Redintegratio, from the Vatican archives.

almightybob1
Male, 18-29, Europe
 4278 Posts
Wednesday, February 15, 2012 6:43:01 AM
Why truncate the whole quote ?

You're right. Matthew 19:21 in full and in context:

Jesus answered, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”

When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had great wealth.

Then Jesus said to his disciples, “I tell you the truth, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.”



I think the context of the last few sentences, where Jesus talks to his disciples after the man has left, make it clear that he was talking about rich men in general, not this one rich man in particular who just happened to be asking the question.
If that isn't an instruction to all followers of Jesus, then what is?

almightybob1
Male, 18-29, Europe
 4278 Posts
Wednesday, February 15, 2012 6:39:29 AM
If that were true, which it isn't

It is. From the Second Vatican Council, just after it talks about non-Catholic Christians being brothers in Christ:

Nevertheless, our separated brethren, whether considered as individuals or as communities and Churches, are not blessed with that unity which Jesus Christ wished to bestow on all those to whom He has given new birth into one body, and whom He has quickened to newness of life - that unity which the Holy Scriptures and the ancient Tradition of the Church proclaim. For it is through Christ's Catholic Church alone, which is the universal help towards salvation, that the fullness of the means of salvation can be obtained.


I'll link to the Unitatis Redintegratio, the Vatican II document from which that quote is taken, in another post.


Regarding why they invite other clergymen, I have no idea. An attempt to convert them maybe?

patchgrabber
Male, 30-39, Canada
 5745 Posts
Wednesday, February 15, 2012 6:32:30 AM
There's a fundamental problem when people are taking a 2000-year-old (or so) book, with their own idioms, customs and sayings, and trying to "interpret" them today. For instance, the story of Jonah (or Jonas):
For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. (Matthew 12:40)
It wasn't an actual whale. Between the 21st and 24th of December the nights are the darkest and longest of the entire year and were known to ancient astrologers as the Whale's Belly. This has reference to the winter constellation Cetus, the Whale, which is just above the horizon at that time. Nowadays people just think that they meant a real whale. Kind of takes away the mysticism of it all.

sexytexan876
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 42 Posts
Wednesday, February 15, 2012 4:28:03 AM
@CrakrJak: I'll bite.

What's unreasonable about wanting to be able to prove something? What's unreasonable about not just taking everyone's word for something?

If I started a rumor about you choosing to be a homosexual for the next week, and everyone believed me- wouldn't you demand some form of proof? Or what if I said, with complete certainty, that God does not exist? You would demand proof, yes?


CrakrJak
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
 17310 Posts
Wednesday, February 15, 2012 2:03:33 AM
bob: "give all your possessions to the poor,"


Why truncate the whole quote ? A rich man said he wanted to be a disciple of Jesus and asked what he would need to do to be one. Jesus was responding specifically to that rich man and those that wished to be 'disciples', Jesus did not command all his believers to do this.

This is the sort of falsehood that makes Christians want to hate atheists, taking scripture out of context, twisting it, and flat out lying about it. Pride blinds those that claim they can see. John 9: 39-41

CrakrJak
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
 17310 Posts
Wednesday, February 15, 2012 1:38:11 AM
Zymotical: Once you stop demanding verifiable proof, or "just have faith", you lose the ability to have further reasonable discourse on the subject.


With those conditions, that you just set, it sounds like you are the one that's being unreasonable here.

bob:
Firstly, off the top of my head it's part of Catholic dogma that the only way to salvation is through the Catholic Church.


If that were true, which it isn't, why would they invite clergy from other denominations into the Vatican for special services ? I've seen Orthodox priests, Jewish rabbis, Muslim clerics, and others sitting near the front row, left side, on EWTN many times. (btw, I'm not Catholic but I do watch it occasionally, flipping through channels.

Otto67
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
 438 Posts
Tuesday, February 14, 2012 6:08:21 PM
allmightybob: As a recovering Catholic myself I know some Catholics believe that the church is the only way to god, but I have talked to many priests who do not teach this, and that is my point, even leaders of specific denominations don't agree on major dogma. This is just one of the reasons I came to the conclusion it is made up BS and realized I am an atheist. I know I am 'preaching to the choir' here.

Zymotical
Male, 18-29, Western US
 199 Posts
Tuesday, February 14, 2012 5:50:48 PM
@bliznik You are certainly free to your interpretative view of the bible, but if one is free to pick which they interpret as parable and which to believe as historical facts then no body is reading the same book.

If I wrote a memoirs about my time-travelling and tried to publish it as non-fiction there would be quite a few people skeptical about my claims. Were I to release the same book as fiction no one would care cause it is not trying to be passed off as a real experience. It is how it is presented to others, especially the non-initiated.

Do you believe that Jesus performed miracles? (water to wine, rose from the dead, blind man seeing) or are those parables also? I can't, as a matter of your personal interpretative views of the bible, know which are and aren't parables in your eyes.

almightybob1
Male, 18-29, Europe
 4278 Posts
Tuesday, February 14, 2012 5:40:12 PM
He also says things like "give all your possessions to the poor," yet a person who took that literally could dress themselves, nor dress themselves, nor use anything of value EVER. Which, also doesn't make sense.


EXACTLY. Why is this not a problem for you and every believer? It's a very clear instruction, yet you handwave about "taking it literally" and dismiss it?
There's only one way to interpret Jesus' words. It's not a metaphor. It's not poetic language. I'm not sure how he could have phrased it more clearly.

What is your basis for refusing to follow Jesus' very simple command here? Because you don't want to? Because it's not sensible? Because your lord and saviour, who died for your sins, is making an unreasonable demand?

Otto67
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
 438 Posts
Tuesday, February 14, 2012 5:39:20 PM
bliznik: "It's not "purely" making up the religion yourself, b/c you're using the Bible and the words within it as a basis for your beliefs."

You are using SOME of the Bible, not all of it, you are picking and choosing what parts of the Bible you agree with (I am not picking on you personally, everyone who "follows" the Bible does this). Picking out the parts that one agrees with and discarding other parts is essentially the same as making it up yourself.

almightybob1
Male, 18-29, Europe
 4278 Posts
Tuesday, February 14, 2012 5:33:09 PM
not sure where you get the impression that (a) blasphemy is worse than murder

Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is the only unforgiveable sin:

Mark 3:28-29

Truly I tell you, people can be forgiven all their sins and every slander they utter, but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven; they are guilty of an eternal sin.



Hence such things as the Blasphemy Challenge.

almightybob1
Male, 18-29, Europe
 4278 Posts
Tuesday, February 14, 2012 5:30:07 PM
Otto: I've yet to hear of a Christian church that didn't believe that John 3:16 is the main tenet.

If you believe in Christ as your savior you will go to heaven. It's simple and no other religion has such a guarantee.


Firstly, off the top of my head it's part of Catholic dogma that the only way to salvation is through the Catholic Church. In their belief set, other brands of Christian will not be going to heaven. So there's one for you.

Secondly, almost all religions have a similar promise regarding their afterlife. In fact, I can't think of one that doesn't promise some sort of eternal happiness as long as you do X or believe Y.

bliznik
Male, 30-39, Western US
 509 Posts
Tuesday, February 14, 2012 4:21:27 PM
@Zymotical, not sure where you get the impression that (a) blasphemy is worse than murder or that (b) a non-literal interpretation of the translated text is blasphemous. Especially since, like, half of the lessons from the Bible are posited as symbolic parables and poetry.

Your first quote is from Jesus, who, in the exact same passage, uses hyperbolic imagery to describe a camel going through the eye of a needle. I don't think he meant to actually pull a camel through the eye of a needle. He also says things like "give all your possessions to the poor," yet a person who took that literally could dress themselves, nor dress themselves, nor use anything of value EVER. Which, also doesn't make sense.

Regarding the second quote, that particular English translation of "omnipotent" came from the word pantokrator, which is closer to "ruler of all." That word was never meant to convey "infinite power to do anything and everything."

bliznik
Male, 30-39, Western US
 509 Posts
Tuesday, February 14, 2012 4:19:59 PM
@Otto67 - You're right in that's a very real problem with people of all religions (not just Christians), and it's something I struggle with as well. It's not "purely" making up the religion yourself, b/c you're using the Bible and the words within it as a basis for your beliefs. But the question, "is my interpretation the correct interpretation" should be something any true truth-seeker should always be asking, whether you study absolute truths (science, math, physics) or non-absolute truths (beliefs, psychology, religion). All I can say is that, for myself, I try to ensure all of my interpretations are consistent and non-contradictory when adopting a world viewpoint that I believe is "true." Any interpretation I adopt needs to be consistent not only with other parts of the Bible, but my own world experiences as well.

Zymotical
Male, 18-29, Western US
 199 Posts
Tuesday, February 14, 2012 3:35:32 PM
@bliznik

Matthew 19:26
"But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible."

Revelation 19:6
"And I heard as it were the voice of a great multitude, and as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of mighty thunderings, saying, Alleluia: for the Lord God OMNIPOTENT reigneth." (emphasis added)

These may not be tenets you believe, but then you are just arguing for your own personal version of god, which couldn't possibly be the same as the Christian god, as that version is believed to be omnipotent cause it said it was omnipotent. Denying that is blasphemous, a sin worse than murder in god's eyes.

Zymotical
Male, 18-29, Western US
 199 Posts
Tuesday, February 14, 2012 2:29:26 PM
Once you stop demanding verifiable proof, or "just have faith", you lose the ability to have further reasonable discourse on the subject. No argument will sway you if you believe in something with absolutely no supporting evidence. However if you're simply willing to admit that you could be wrong then we can have an honest discussion on theology.

Anyone that is fearful of going to hell/purgatory/limbo is making decisions under extreme duress and can not be expected to make rational choices. It is akin to putting a gun to someones head except instead of a few seconds and then nothing you suffer until the end of existence.

The more religion I see on the internet the more it just seems like bad trolls trying to use irrationality to anger rational humanists.

Otto67
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
 438 Posts
Tuesday, February 14, 2012 1:11:40 PM
CrakrJak:

I know that seems like a wonderful passage but the idea that a god would punish "his children" eternally for a finite thought crime is immoral. Not to mention there are plenty of Christian churches that teach believing is not enough to go to heaven, works and asking forgivness are also necessary. Your version may be simple but they're not all that way. It is also a neat way to keep followers in line and to disparage those who don't believe Jesus is god any more than you or I are.

Page: 1 2 3 Next > 

You Must be Signed in to Add a Comment

If you've already got an I-Am-Bored.com account,
click here to sign in.

If you don't have an account yet,
Click Here to Create a Free Account
 

Back to Listing ^top


Bored | Suggest a Link | Advertise | Contact I Am Bored | About I Am Bored | Link to I Am Bored | Live Submission | Privacy | TOS | Ad Choices | Copyright Policy |
© 2014 Demand Media, Inc. All rights reserved.