RKCoon 0 Posted March 5, 2006 Religious dispute? nah. i already know nothing short of a direct hit froma nuke is gonna convince either him or me that we are wrong. however, i do enjoy the debate and proving my point. rEdaSbLood, you got it dead to rights on here - ........and i agree that religion is beyond affiliation, as well as basic metaphysics..and so on or w.e Thats precicely the point. virtually ALL these religions, Christianity, Muslim, etc, expect/want/ask/demand/etc for one to hands over thier soul, spirit, wtf ever you wanna call it, including ones allegiance, to them. So why should i NOT examine it? i dont pretend to be a master in metaphysics, but i know its there, it exists, so im gonna do the best i can to examine it. if that means i keep out of bweing a part of any/most/all religions, so much the better i think. RKCoon wrote: Again, i repeat -- i didnt mean to rule out decent, peaceful debate - just that very often that in modern history these differences are what bring much of bloodshed these days. How so in the civilized world? Good, productive religious debate has been going on for many, many years in America for instance with no bloodshed of any kind. What exactly are you talking about? That is my point. The civilised world wasnt formed from one religion, it was formed by a collective group of people of varying religions, KEEPING thier religious beleifs aside to work together. as much as the Christians/Catholics like to think, they were NOT the only ones that formed the US, Canada or other "first world" nations, but a part of it, a part of a colllective unified whole working toward a common gain on common ground. they did NOT allow thier ultimately petty religious differences from preventing this, at least nut till upwards of 300 years ago. RKCoon wrote: i was quite thurourly disturbed when i set that damned thing down. Thats MY oppinion, MY take on it, and if a reasonably well educated 25 year old can come to that conclusion, why cant others? Maybe others did more than take a cursory glance over what's arguably the most complex and powerful document in history and dismiss it with an arrogance that would make Donald Trump blush. Frankly, I wouldn't at ALL consider your conclusion here educated. Not all of mine are, ill be the first to admit -- but for jut that reason, im not gonna stop learning about any religion. it just means i refuse to JOIN any religion. and if your going to tell me i have top be part of it to fully understand it, i think ill be much happyer on the OUTside of it. RKCoon wrote: Yaya, i keep hearing the age old excuse, "No, those peopel that committed such atrocities were acting outside the faith, and were not acting in accordance with said faith." BULLSH!T!! Really? That's pretty damn arrogant of you. No, its damned ACCURATE of me. I note you didnt post the REST of that comment -- especially since Christianity itself has had a paticularly bloody history. (dont beleive me? One Word ------- CRUSADES). RKCoon wrote: i actually took some time earlyer to not fully, but QUICKLY read the bible, the one your so damned defendant of. Mark Twain was damned right, its chock full of too many lies to count, more bloodshed and demanding of bloodshedding by its writers (oh, im sorry, "god") than any propoganda leaflet from history ive EVER read. So according to your exhaustive analysis of the Bible, you've come up with some "lies?" Oh do share! It's funny, because hundreds of thousands of lifetimes of dedicated study and analysis over 2000 years haven't turned up one! Damn you're good. And you didn't even read the Greek or Hebrew! I must say I'm impressed. Well lessee, where to start? shall we start with Evolotion? or mabe the existance of god him/her/itself? or heaven and hell for that matter? or the Garden of eden? Or how bout how Incest is so BADLY slammed, yet in several verses (Genisis 17:16, 20:12, Exodus6:20) god is quite supportive of such? Or, how bout weather its ok to lie? Or, how bout Human sacrifice? Or, does god love everyone? Do you want me to go on? or have i driven the point home yet (with the sledgehammer that is your own bible)? The point is, the bible cant even agree with itself, let alone any bloody thing else. to sit there, and tell the world that the book is perfect, flawless, ad infinitum, really does not do much for your credibility here, notto those of us skeptics anyway Oh yes, and that site you were so quick to slam, www.skepticsannotatedbible.com , its VERY efficient for weeding out such little discrepancies. thats the whole point of publicizing research, - to save the people that come after you the immense headache of going over it again. But please, go ahead, spell out EXACTLY where in the bible it says "this is current, this is up to date, and this is what is expected of humanity". id be very interested in seeing it. and no, Confidence (which in your case, IMHO, is teetering on the edge of arrogance) isnt a bad thing. the fact im still firing back shows ive plenty of it myself. Now, i realise, to a Christian, this sounds rather anti religious, but in all honesty, its not. its a direct, hard look at it -- and if makes you uncomfortable to read it, maybe it would be worth your while to understand why this is so. Share this post Link to post
BWare 0 Posted March 5, 2006 Thats precicely the point. virtually ALL these religions, Christianity, Muslim, etc, expect/want/ask/demand/etc for one to hands over thier soul, spirit, wtf ever you wanna call it, including ones allegiance, to them. So why should i NOT examine it? Why must you continue to harp on this? Is anyone here saying you shouldn't examine it? Are you even reading before responding? That is my point. The civilised world wasnt formed from one religion, it was formed by a collective group of people of varying religions, KEEPING thier religious beleifs aside to work together. as much as the Christians/Catholics like to think, they were NOT the only ones that formed the US, Canada or other "first world" nations, but a part of it, a part of a colllective unified whole working toward a common gain on common ground. How many Muslims, Buddhists, or Hindus were involved in formation of America? Just wondering. :roll: No matter how much you hate it, America was founded on Christian principles by Christian people. This is really of little importance, but don't go out of your way to diminish it either. Not all of mine are, ill be the first to admit -- but for jut that reason, im not gonna stop learning about any religion. it just means i refuse to JOIN any religion. and if your going to tell me i have top be part of it to fully understand it, i think ill be much happyer on the OUTside of it. Once again you make this bizarre logical leap. No one is telling you not to learn about these things! Holy cow. You're setting up a scarecrow defense here dude. How many times do I need to cover that? Also, since many of your opinions on this subject- as you admit- are not particularly educated, then how about a little humility and open-mindedness? Considering where you're coming from, I really don't think you have the authority to discredit ALL of Christianity AND the Bible AND the collective life works of thousands of scholars. See what I mean? No, its damned ACCURATE of me. I note you didnt post the REST of that comment -- especially since Christianity itself has had a paticularly bloody history. (dont beleive me? One Word ------- CRUSADES). Yes... yes the crusades. Is that all you have? :roll: If you knew that much about the history of the crusades, you'd realise that religion was only the excuse for its true economic and political motives. It was not the result of Christianity, but of a power group (the Catholic church) gone out of control. Besides, we're talking MODERN, RELEVANT issues here, okay? The crusades are long past, and don't relate to modern Christianity in any way. Get over it. Also, don't you find it odd that you're defending the claim that modern Christianity is the cause of worldwide bloodshed with a link to a history article? :lol: Well lessee, where to start? shall we start with Evolotion? or mabe the existance of god him/her/itself? or heaven and hell for that matter? or the Garden of eden? Or how bout how Incest is so BADLY slammed, yet in several verses (Genisis 17:16, 20:12, Exodus6:20) god is quite supportive of such? Or, how bout weather its ok to lie? Or, how bout Human sacrifice? Or, does god love everyone? Do you want me to go on? or have i driven the point home yet (with the sledgehammer that is your own bible)? :roll: I hate doing this dude, I really do, but you've kinda made it necessary. Just for the sake of perspective, you know next to NOTHING about the Bible, wheras I've spent the majority of my life studying it. Also, if you really want to go the science route, I'm a premed student majoring in biology. This of course isn't to say that you're not qualified to have an opinion, but please realise that I'm no idiot and at least acknowledge what I have to say. Okay, that said, you still haven't backed up any of your claims. You have done ANYTHING but "drive the point home with a sledgehammer." :roll: A sledgehammer implies substance. The point is, the bible cant even agree with itself, let alone any bloody thing else. to sit there, and tell the world that the book is perfect, flawless, ad infinitum, really does not do much for your credibility here, notto those of us skeptics anyway Trust me, you are not above anyone who believes in the Bible simply because you have a misinformed skepticism about it :roll: Also, you leaped from your shaky premise of "the Bible is flawed lolz!" to "the Bible can't even agree with itself!" pretty quickly, and with little or no support. Stop making leaps like that! It leads to very silly conclusions. Oh yes, and that site you were so quick to slam, www.skepticsannotatedbible.com , its VERY efficient for weeding out such little discrepancies. You would know, as an authority on the subject, right? Or is this really the only exposure to the Bible you've ever had? Now the reason I was "so quick to slam" that site before is because it was down and redirected me to a site of advertisements. I clearly explained this earlier. Maybe if you started reading and thinking, instead of reacting, you'd catch some of these things. That said, I did go over some of the site's material. Frankly it's full of typical misunderstandings, muddy thinking, and extrapolations on bad translations. The freaking "analysis" goes no deeper than the English translation! As a clear thinking individual, how can you take that seriously? :? But please, go ahead, spell out EXACTLY where in the bible it says "this is current, this is up to date, and this is what is expected of humanity". id be very interested in seeing it. "All Scripture is ...useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work." 2 Timothy 3:16-17 That's just off the top of my head. But yes, the Bible is absolutely relevant today. and no, Confidence isnt a bad thing. the fact im still firing back shows ive plenty of it myself. You're firing back, but how about some live rounds next time? :wink: Now, i realise, to a Christian, this sounds rather anti religious, but in all honesty, its not. its a direct, hard look at it -- and if makes you uncomfortable to read it, maybe it would be worth your while to understand why this is so. It doesn't make me uncomforatble at all. I know you love playing the "anti-conformity, in your face, deal with it card," but really you're not annoying anyone here. I'm just seeing some really muddy, misinformed thinking about something that I hold dearly, so I feel compelled to respond. If it were honsetly just a "direct, hard look at it," I would have NO problems whatsoever. It's what I do too! But your "analysis" is full of unwarranted vitriol and hostility. That plus the the lack of perspective/information is just not a good thing. Share this post Link to post
Doctor Destiny 42 Posted March 5, 2006 This went from ethics and a light discussion into BWare being his usual self. I'm sick of this arrogant **** from both sides. CUT IT OUT! Share this post Link to post
