CHRISTIANITY HATERS

[Boba Fett]

I don't understand why do you need any religion?!

I don't believe in any religion, just in myself and in other people that have proven to be trusted.

On the other hand I'm not egoist, untolerant, selfish etc.

I just simply don't need a peg to justify the events in my life...

I believe in myself and has proved several times that it's almost only myself who I can count on when my life getting filled with troubles.

...and don't say I'm communist because I'm atheist...I've lived in socialism and know a lot about it. Don't say atheism=socialism...it's false...

[Stormbringer]

Zarove:

All you arguements break down to four simple points.

1) Hitler can't be Christian because he was a bad man. He was, his words and actions bear out the fact that he was a Christian and believed he was acting according to God's will. Not suprising he was a genocidal maniac.

2) Christianity's atrocites are excused by the fact they were once persecuted. This is frankly, bullshit. If you can't see the flawed logic in that one then you're retarded.

3) Aethists have a doctrine of faith. They don't and the communist murder millions in the name of the state, not atheism. If you can't see the difference get your eyes checked.

4) You feel you can ignore any Bible passage that you don't like. Sorry, but there are plenty of exortations to violence, intolerance, and misgony. If you need to deny them, then you might want to reconsider your faith.

[Boba Fett]

Well said Stormbringer!!!

[Darth Wong]

Hey ZAROVE, go back and look at my previous post. I addressed all of your bullshit points already, and you didn't even seem to notice before typing your cut-and-paste rebuttal. CHECK THE SOURCES ON YOUR HITLER BULLSHIT. Do you know what the term "unsubstantiated hearsay" means?

[Peregrin Toker]

I have nothing against christians, as long as they worship God instead of worshipping the Bible.

[ZAROVE]

Nice to be called a fundementalist Christian, pity I am not. Oh thats roght, your eother a fundamentalist or else you dont take the Bibel ;literally.Heh, and to think Fundamentalists hate me as well..

Lets see... where to start.

) Hitler can't be Christian because he was a bad man. He was, his words and actions bear out the fact that he was a Christian and believed he was acting according to God's will. Not suprising he was a genocidal maniac.

So you quoted me as saying " Hitler cant be christian because hes a bad man" - oh wait, I never said that. well so much for honest debatte, its easier to call eme a fundamentalist and invent my arguments for me, then knock me down. to think, I was said to use a staraw man...


2) Christianity's atrocites are excused by the fact they were once persecuted. This is frankly, bullshit. If you can't see the flawed logic in that one then you're retarded.


Look , yet another staraw man!!! I never said that either!!! I said christianity is not MORE bloody than anythign else, but now it seems I am ACCUSED of saying that cristian attrocities can be excused, oh, I need remining, I am a fundamentaislist, you guts said so...

3) Aethists have a doctrine of faith. They don't and the communist murder millions in the name of the state, not atheism. If you can't see the difference get your eyes checked.


You tell me to get my eyes checked? Yet a third strawman here... rememenr I am a fundamentalist, you guys said so...( I never said atheists had a doctorine of faith...)


4) You feel you can ignore any Bible passage that you don't like. Sorry, but there are plenty of exortations to violence, intolerance, and misgony. If you need to deny them, then you might want to reconsider your faith.

Actually I aksed for versus, I never ignored anything...but yet, in this whole thread when I last posted, dispite the claim, no oen ever posted a single verse form the Bible, yet condemned it.

You have posted four strawman arguments, accusing me of a position I never actually took then knockign them down, congratulations, oh and jut to remind myself, I am a fundamentalist, you guys tld me I was...dipite the fact fundamentalists hate me so...


Now, to the verses...

First off, even thouhg I am a fundamentalists blindly followunt eh Bibel witblut queastion, and doing whatever the church and jerry falwell tellme , I o not recognise the full authority of Paul which is in queastion, however, I will clear upsome verses. ( Paul had issues with women.)


Deuteronomy saida woman shoudl marry theere rapist, clearly the Bible is cruel and evil- yes the neigh
bouring nations of Bbaylon and Mesopotamia where far better- oh wait, no they wherent.

Historical context must be consiered, as well as how people use to think. This law is reasonable and makes sence and actually protects the woman.

In the anceint world, if you wheent a Virgin you could not marry. People didnt always marry for love, and it was a much harsher world. If a man raped a virgin ( the only type of woman forced to marry her rapist, as you say, are those who where virgins until the attack) she coudl no longer hope to marry, as her value was dropped. This si not because God valued her less but man.

It was a mean of assuring her a house and protection, rather than leavign her to become a prostetute or a slave.

Yes, cruelty there, because in our modern society one need not preserve ones virginity, but in there culture where a nonvirgin coul not wed, this was a great blessing to the women. Scron if tou like, but raped women in babylon and mesopotamia, who where virgins then where raped, coul no more marry, and was that truely better?

This is a reflection of the harshities of the anceint world, and far less cruel than it appears.

Nubbers, and the war booty thing, yes, again, woudl you rather they be killed? Consider the time when this was written please, its not a modern book, there was no United nations, no cure for lepercy, and this was better than what most did.

God may be unchanging, but the society was unready to learn the higher graces.

Deutronomy- this proves that they beleived in disipline, again, better than in many cultures where they where killed if deformed.

Please note, this is an ANCEINT book, and these people wherent of the same mental development we where, the laws fit the culture of the time.

Proverbs 23/13- 13. Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die.

beat isnt always the same. A spankign is also a Beating. I got them as a child- this sint child abuse, just you stretchign the recources beyond there natural limit to exagerate a verse in order to prove a point.

I Timothy 6:1-5 So slavery is OK and anyone who teaches other wise is 'puffed with conceit'. -

OK, I know I said Paul was not authorative, but the slave issue will come up. Americans tend to think of slavery in terms of poor black peole brought over from africa. Slavery in the anceint world was radicaly different, please read up on the anceint world and its veiws and what it mean tto be a slave,, then critisise a 2000 year old book.

Never do it on modern precept.



Doesn't the Bible have a loophole?

In Revelations 22:18, in my version it says, "For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophey of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:"

In the next verse, it says that if you take away from the bible, then the rewards shall be taken away from you.

However, what if you were to add to the Bible something that allowed you to "Go directly to heaven, do not pass Limbo, do not go to Hell". You would not be getting any plagues, so the penalty for adding to the Bible would be voided.

Or am I a little off in this matter?


Your off- the Bible cannot be "added to" that doesnt mean if you add to it thst its Om to add to it then its Ok, its not whats in THE BOOK, but whats true that ounts, If its not Gods word then it shouln be there.

Rubbish. This is just the kind of airy-fairy bullshit that I despise. BASIC morality is pretty much a constant throughout the world- it's centered on human betterment and the prevention of human suffering.

Or are you saying that a mass-murderer like God ISN'T evil?


Human betterment- you know how speiciest you sound, what of animals. Oh thats right, I am a fundamentalist, I cant be an animal rights activist as fudndies arent, oh well.

Incedentlaly God is not a mass murderer, nice try but, if God kills you its not murder.

At this point maybe one shoudl learn this, God isnt human, when you die Go isnt rid of you, your soul rejoins him, therefore unlike a human who kills, and never more sees who they kill, God still contends with you- also, why aply humanity to a nonhuman intety?

MAss murderer ha! God is not evil, any more than J Michael Strazensky is, strazensky allowed presedent clarke to gain power, without strazenski there woudl have ben no earht civil war, in the imaginary world he made.

The Brahmansists ( damn I am siting another religion, better remind myself I am a fundamentalist) say that Braham ( God) is alsep and the Universed is hisdream, We are the prodicts of the mind of God, like a writter writing a book, God is not good or evil in conventional terms and isno mass murderer, any more than strazenski is a murderer for what he did.


Posted: Mon Dec 16, 2002 3:40 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So by defining a portion of the Bible as evil , and the work of an evil deity, who repeatedly and flagarantly violates his own rules(Thou shalt not kill) in order to satisfy his own ends , I'm somehow creating my own morality? (If Im off base here let me know)

Im just judging the rule maker by his own rules, God kills, a mortal sin , not once , but tens of thousands of times, the Great Flood, the slaying of the first born of Egypt(thousands of innocent children at a stroke, theres compassion and love for ya)and on and on and on.......and all for what?


the rulemaker also allows soldiers to kill in war- God doesnt kill unjustly, he kills those who need to be killed.

Incedentally, your mindset stops you from seeign the truth, instead of readign the Bible as it was written you read to find fault.


The flood was not to meet Gods ends and was not selfish, but an evil world was destroyed. Anyone in favour of bombing Iraq is as guilty as they say God is, God kills because it has to be done, God doesnt kill for selfish reasons, that is mans take who witsh to scron God, hardly logical.

[ZAROVE]

Oh and I am still waitign for the verse that I ignored about the earth beign flat...its in the Bible, someone said it was...

[HemlockGrey]

I was going to comment in this thread, but Zarove's spelling killed my eyes and now I'm typing by feel.

[Stormbringer]

Zarove: you are an idiot. A Fundamentalist is someone that takes the bible literally. YOU. FUCKING. IDIOT! Try to learn the meaning of the big words before you blow them off.

) Hitler can't be Christian because he was a bad man. He was, his words and actions bear out the fact that he was a Christian and believed he was acting according to God's will. Not suprising he was a genocidal maniac.

So you quoted me as saying " Hitler cant be christian because hes a bad man" - oh wait, I never said that. well so much for honest debatte, its easier to call eme a fundamentalist and invent my arguments for me, then knock me down. to think, I was said to use a staraw man...

That is the gist of your arguement and it frankly sucks. Every idiot christian tries it. Just because I stripped away all the prettty words doesn't make what I said untrue.

2) Christianity's atrocites are excused by the fact they were once persecuted. This is frankly, bullshit. If you can't see the flawed logic in that one then you're retarded.


Look , yet another staraw man!!! I never said that either!!! I said christianity is not MORE bloody than anythign else, but now it seems I am ACCUSED of saying that cristian attrocities can be excused, oh, I need remining, I am a fundamentaislist, you guts said so...

You say that because Christianity is no worse that it's okay? Fucking hell you dipshit, that's exactly what you are trying to do. Let christianity off the the hook because others did as bad.

3) Aethists have a doctrine of faith. They don't and the communist murder millions in the name of the state, not atheism. If you can't see the difference get your eyes checked.


You tell me to get my eyes checked? Yet a third strawman here... rememenr I am a fundamentalist, you guys said so...( I never said atheists had a doctorine of faith...)

Yet, you say atheists are trying to get you lovable fundies. And draw the innacurate parellel between communists and atheists.

4) You feel you can ignore any Bible passage that you don't like. Sorry, but there are plenty of exortations to violence, intolerance, and misgony. If you need to deny them, then you might want to reconsider your faith.

Actually I aksed for versus, I never ignored anything...but yet, in this whole thread when I last posted, dispite the claim, no oen ever posted a single verse form the Bible, yet condemned it.

Except you saw the posts of others that did.

And for a a short list

Intolerance and violence:

Joshua 6:17-21 (NIV): The city and all that is in it are to be devoted to the LORD ... But keep away from the devoted things ... All the silver and gold and the articles of bronze and iron are sacred to the LORD and must go into his treasury. When the trumpets sounded, the people shouted, and at the sound of the trumpet, when the people gave a loud shout, the wall collapsed; so every man charged straight in, and they took the city. They devoted the city to the LORD and destroyed with the sword every living thing in it--men and women, young and old, cattle, sheep and donkeys.

Deuteronomy 20:16-18 (NIV): However, in the cities of the nations the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. Completely destroy them--the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites--as the LORD your God has commanded you. Otherwise, they will teach you to follow all the detestable things they do in worshiping their gods, and you will sin against the LORD your God.

Misgony:

Timothy 2:11-14 (NIV): A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.

1 Peter 3:5-6 (NIV): For this is the way the holy women of the past who put their hope in God used to make themselves beautiful. They were submissive to their own husbands, like Sarah, who obeyed Abraham and called him her master.

You have posted four strawman arguments, accusing me of a position I never actually took then knockign them down, congratulations, oh and jut to remind myself, I am a fundamentalist, you guys tld me I was...dipite the fact fundamentalists hate me so...

Congratulations. You dodged ever fucking point with out actually owning up to your veiws.

Other fundamentalists no doubt hate you for not agreeing with their flavor of idiocy. A little hatred doesn't mean you're not a fundy of another stripe.

[neoolong]

Oh and I am still waitign for the verse that I ignored about the earth beign flat...its in the Bible, someone said it was...

Matthew 4:8 says, "Once again, the devil took him[Jesus] to a very high mountain, and showed him all the kingdoms of the world"

Literally he went up a tall mountain and showed him everything on Earth. Impossible on a globe.

And use spell check next time.

[Mr Flibble]

Actually I aksed for versus, I never ignored anything...but yet, in this whole thread when I last posted, dispite the claim, no oen ever posted a single verse form the Bible, yet condemned it.

That is either a bold face lie or you did not look at all the previous posts.

Evil in the bible...hmmm...let's see. A few verses that are IMHO evil.
~ I Corinthians 14:34-35 So women should be silent?
~ I Corinthians 11:8-9 So women were created for men?
~ I Timothy 2:12 So women shouldn't teach and should be silent?
~ Deuteronomy 22:28-29. So women should marry their rapists?
~ Numbers 31:1-18 So virgin women are war booty?
~ Deuteronomy 21:18-21 So a stubborn and rebellius son should be stoned to death?
~ Proverbs 23:13 So child abuse is OK according to the good book?
~ I Timothy 6:1-5 So slavery is OK and anyone who teaches other wise is 'puffed with conceit'.

You later in your response go on to address these verses, which shows that your early statement was a lie.

As to an evil portion of the Bible , way easy, the Story of Job

Whilst this does not actually state a verse, it is a very easy part of the Bible to find, given that Job has his own book.

wrote:
No man is to have sexual relations with another man; God hates that.

, Common Bible (with Apocrypha) wrote:
You shall not lie with a male as a woman: it is an abomination.

You completely ignored the fact that I and others posted verses from the Bible in response to your posts.

If you want your argument to be taken seriously:
1) READ ALL THE POSTS BEFORE SHOOTING YOUR MOUTH OFF!
2) DON'T LIE!
3) Whilst I understand you are dyslexic, could you perhaps use a spellchecker, or get someone to proof read your posts, they are very hard to read.

[Sir Sirius]

ZAROVE, Hitler was a Christian. Do you agree or disagree?

Historical context must be consiered, as well as how people use to think. This law is reasonable and makes sence and actually protects the woman.

A law that states that women must merry their rapists makes sense and is reasonable? Glad to know where you stand on womens rights.

In the anceint world, if you wheent a Virgin you could not marry. People didnt always marry for love, and it was a much harsher world. If a man raped a virgin ( the only type of woman forced to marry her rapist, as you say, are those who where virgins until the attack) she coudl no longer hope to marry, as her value was dropped. This si not because God valued her less but man.

If god though that men should have acted differently shouldn't he have attempted to correct the situation, rather then just passing cruel and arbitrary laws de-huminizing women?
And what women would like to merry her rapist, no matter what the reason?

Nubbers, and the war booty thing, yes, again, woudl you rather they be killed? Consider the time when this was written please, its not a modern book, there was no United nations, no cure for lepercy, and this was better than what most did.

Again if god wanted to protect women shouldn't he have just passed a law that states that women, children and innocent people in general shall not be killed in a war, rather then pass a cruel pro-slavery law de-huminizing women?

Please note, this is an ANCEINT book, and these people wherent of the same mental development we where, the laws fit the culture of the time.

So you are admitting that the bible is obsolete?

Proverbs 23/13- 13. Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die.

beat isnt always the same. A spankign is also a Beating. I got them as a child- this sint child abuse, just you stretchign the recources beyond there natural limit to exagerate a verse in order to prove a point.

Spanking IS child abuse and it says beating with a rod, not spanking.

I Timothy 6:1-5 So slavery is OK and anyone who teaches other wise is 'puffed with conceit'. -

OK, I know I said Paul was not authorative, but the slave issue will come up. Americans tend to think of slavery in terms of poor black peole brought over from africa. Slavery in the anceint world was radicaly different, please read up on the anceint world and its veiws and what it mean tto be a slave,, then critisise a 2000 year old book.

Never do it on modern precept.

Yeah, they enslaved their own back then or used prisoners of war as slaves. Not that that matters at all, slavery is slavery no matter how you justify it.

Incedentlaly God is not a mass murderer, nice try but, if God kills you its not murder.

At this point maybe one shoudl learn this, God isnt human, when you die Go isnt rid of you, your soul rejoins him, therefore unlike a human who kills, and never more sees who they kill, God still contends with you- also, why aply humanity to a nonhuman intety?

Empty rhetoric, blaah blaah blaah.
Where in the bible does it say that exatly, quotes please.

MAss murderer ha! God is not evil, any more than J Michael Strazensky is, strazensky allowed presedent clarke to gain power, without strazenski there woudl have ben no earht civil war, in the imaginary world he made.

Yes, JMS that horrid man, he kills imaginary people in an imaginary world. How evil. LOL.
If you belief in god then you must belief that he has killed numerous people and that millions more have been killed in his name. Real people in the real world, not some sci-fi series.

Incedentally, your mindset stops you from seeign the truth, instead of readign the Bible as it was written you read to find fault.

Hmmm...I really don't know what to say, the stupidity of that comment is mind-bogling.
How do you know how the bible was meant to be read? Your way of reading appears to require a rather creative and imaginary interpretation of the content of the verses.

Note to ZAROVE. You have not addressed the issue of the bible's lack of scientific accuracy at all and you ignored most of the examples of evil in the bible.

PS try using spell check the next time.

I have seen a few stupid fundies in my time, but this takes the cake.

[Darth Wong]

Frankly, it's obvious that Zarone is not just an idiot, but a fucking liar as well. He has now resorted to claiming that he's "still waiting" for evidence which we have already presented, and that he never used the "Hitler = bad, Christians = good therefore Hitler != Christian" argument. Anyone can see that he's full of shit.

[ZAROVE]

ZAROVE wrote:
Actually I aksed for versus, I never ignored anything...but yet, in this whole thread when I last posted, dispite the claim, no oen ever posted a single verse form the Bible, yet condemned it.

That is either a bold face lie or you did not look at all the previous posts.


Actually I sad in my last post before that one, No one had sited verses.

You say that when I later address those verses I prove I am a liar, not so, those verses where posted AFTER the "last post" - and beign addressed in my current post.

Instead of calling me stupid, maybe you should actually read what I say... I never said no verses where psosted after seveal had been, I said no verses had been posted at the time of my last post.In that post that was the ttruth, the verses I addressed where posted after my comment was made, proving, as wong said, I am a liar by quoting scriptire after I said that no scriptire had een quoted is not proof that I lied, but rather htat you did.


As to what the definition of a fundamentailist is, here goes...


fundamentalism : "A movement or attitude stressing strict and literal adherence to a set of basic principles."
A fundamentalist christian is one not defined by talign the Bible literally as most do not, they rewirte it, they are fundamentalists because they take literally and strictly there beleifs in certain things that define the premise for there worship, and often do NOT follow the Bible. In fact literaly translating the Bible as a history book does not make one a fundamentalist, rather, adhering to the church rules of order makes you a fundamentalist.


Quote:
) Hitler can't be Christian because he was a bad man. He was, his words and actions bear out the fact that he was a Christian and believed he was acting according to God's will. Not suprising he was a genocidal maniac.

So you quoted me as saying " Hitler cant be christian because hes a bad man" - oh wait, I never said that. well so much for honest debatte, its easier to call eme a fundamentalist and invent my arguments for me, then knock me down. to think, I was said to use a staraw man...


That is the gist of your arguement and it frankly sucks. Every idiot christian tries it. Just because I stripped away all the prettty words doesn't make what I said untrue


No, that was the gist of the imposed argument, I said Hitler said christianity will nto stand in the third riech. A far cry form saying " Hitler is bad, christians are good, so hitler cant be christian"- If hitler was a christian why woudl he want to see an end of the faith which he called an absurdity that went agaisnt nature?


Quote:

2) Christianity's atrocites are excused by the fact they were once persecuted. This is frankly, bullshit. If you can't see the flawed logic in that one then you're retarded.


Look , yet another staraw man!!! I never said that either!!! I said christianity is not MORE bloody than anythign else, but now it seems I am ACCUSED of saying that cristian attrocities can be excused, oh, I need remining, I am a fundamentaislist, you guts said so...


You say that because Christianity is no worse that it's okay? Fucking hell you dipshit, that's exactly what you are trying to do. Let christianity off the the hook because others did as bad.


Also not true, I said that Christian history is not more bloody than the rest. it was claimed in anothe rthread and I think this one, that christianity has doen more harm than any single force in existance, which isnt true.

It wasnt an excuse for anything, it was an example of flawed thinking.


Quote:
3) Aethists have a doctrine of faith. They don't and the communist murder millions in the name of the state, not atheism. If you can't see the difference get your eyes checked.


You tell me to get my eyes checked? Yet a third strawman here... rememenr I am a fundamentalist, you guys said so...( I never said atheists had a doctorine of faith...)


Yet, you say atheists are trying to get you lovable fundies. And draw the innacurate parellel between communists and atheists.


It is not innaccurate, its whats hapening now. Atheists on this board are using swear words and force, callign me stupid, and tryign to subvery whatever I say rather than put up a logical argument. You distort events, lie, say i am lying, call me an idiot, and use ridcule and slam tactics, exactly what causes problems in the first place.

Communism was an atheistic idea. Reguardless of how " its a false analogy" the truth is the state was atheist.

Thus showing that to do away with religion dosnt do away woth corruption. And that atheisim dosnt lead to a happier healthier mindset.

Quote:
4) You feel you can ignore any Bible passage that you don't like. Sorry, but there are plenty of exortations to violence, intolerance, and misgony. If you need to deny them, then you might want to reconsider your faith.

Actually I aksed for versus, I never ignored anything...but yet, in this whole thread when I last posted, dispite the claim, no oen ever posted a single verse form the Bible, yet condemned it.


Except you saw the posts of others that did.

And for a a short list

Actually no, I didnt, they where made after my post. That is simpley a lie.

Quote:
Joshua 6:17-21 (NIV): The city and all that is in it are to be devoted to the LORD ... But keep away from the devoted things ... All the silver and gold and the articles of bronze and iron are sacred to the LORD and must go into his treasury. When the trumpets sounded, the people shouted, and at the sound of the trumpet, when the people gave a loud shout, the wall collapsed; so every man charged straight in, and they took the city. They devoted the city to the LORD and destroyed with the sword every living thing in it--men and women, young and old, cattle, sheep and donkeys.


A time of war and you object? If we use Nuclear force, as Bush wants, then wont we be doign the same nowadays?


Quote:
Deuteronomy 20:16-18 (NIV): However, in the cities of the nations the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. Completely destroy them--the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites--as the LORD your God has commanded you. Otherwise, they will teach you to follow all the detestable things they do in worshiping their gods, and you will sin against the LORD your God.
The above explains itsself.


The rest are paul, and I do nto see paul as authorative as he was not a disiple. ( now you wll say picking and chosing, but its true.)


Matthew 4:8 says, "Once again, the devil took him[Jesus] to a very high mountain, and showed him all the kingdoms of the world"

Literally he went up a tall mountain and showed him everything on Earth. Impossible on a globe.


Not really, two problems, one you assume "world" means the same as planet. it didnt back then. Seocndly you assume that he needed to be on the mountiantop to see these things because it was high, and it assumes a flat earth, it doesnt, Satan showed Jesus, but satan, like Jesus, had certain powers as a spirit that required no eyes to see...

In short, could have been the euicvolent of a hologram. Nice try though.


ZAROVE wrote:
Actually I aksed for versus, I never ignored anything...but yet, in this whole thread when I last posted, dispite the claim, no oen ever posted a single verse form the Bible, yet condemned it.

That is either a bold face lie or you did not look at all the previous posts.

Sir Sirius wrote:
Evil in the bible...hmmm...let's see. A few verses that are IMHO evil.
~ I Corinthians 14:34-35 So women should be silent?
~ I Corinthians 11:8-9 So women were created for men?
~ I Timothy 2:12 So women shouldn't teach and should be silent?
~ Deuteronomy 22:28-29. So women should marry their rapists?
~ Numbers 31:1-18 So virgin women are war booty?
~ Deuteronomy 21:18-21 So a stubborn and rebellius son should be stoned to death?
~ Proverbs 23:13 So child abuse is OK according to the good book?
~ I Timothy 6:1-5 So slavery is OK and anyone who teaches other wise is 'puffed with conceit'.



You later in your response go on to address these verses, which shows that your early statement was a lie.


As stated earlier, my statement was that : at the time of my last post no one had posted any verses."

which was true. I later addressed the verses that had sence been added in my new post, which I now defend. You say it proves I am lying, I say it proves how useless your logic is if it cant read my posts and not disrort them.

Mr Flibble (yeah me) wrote:
Leviticus 18:22, Good News Bible wrote:
wrote:
No man is to have sexual relations with another man; God hates that.



Leviticus 18:22 wrote:
, Common Bible (with Apocrypha) wrote:
You shall not lie with a male as a woman: it is an abomination.


I suppsoe if I say Homosexuality is wrong I will be laughed at, I also will be laughed at if I say its not genetic or inate and people have changed form it.


Quote:
Historical context must be consiered, as well as how people use to think. This law is reasonable and makes sence and actually protects the woman.
A law that states that women must merry their rapists makes sense and is reasonable? Glad to know where you stand on womens rights.

I am not the one makign sex jokes.

I merely stated it was better treatment than they got in other parts of the world in that time period. No need to assume its my take on womans rights, unless you are being a bigoted closed minded fool.

The rest of your psot is just a rant that ignores the point, that in the anceint world this was the way women could be protected, as no one woudl marry them after there virginity was lost.

Frankly, it's obvious that Zarone is not just an idiot, but a fucking liar as well. He has now resorted to claiming that he's "still waiting" for evidence which we have already presented, and that he never used the "Hitler = bad, Christians = good therefore Hitler != Christian" argument. Anyone can see that he's full of shit.


By the words " clearly " and "Obviosuly" beign used, you try to make yourself sound intelegent when your psot lacks it.

Oh nice jab in the Hitler=evil, christian=good so hitlers not a christian thing, as I never said Hitler was evil thus not a christian, its nive to know you can lie and be seen as honest, and if you warp my words, can call me a liar.

[neoolong]

Matthew 4:8 says, "Once again, the devil took him[Jesus] to a very high mountain, and showed him all the kingdoms of the world"

Literally he went up a tall mountain and showed him everything on Earth. Impossible on a globe.


Not really, two problems, one you assume "world" means the same as planet. it didnt back then. Seocndly you assume that he needed to be on the mountiantop to see these things because it was high, and it assumes a flat earth, it doesnt, Satan showed Jesus, but satan, like Jesus, had certain powers as a spirit that required no eyes to see...

In short, could have been the euicvolent of a hologram. Nice try though.

I see you are as much of a liar as people have been saying.

1. Considering that the world is our planet it doesn't work to say it only worked back then, also considering you are supposed to take the Bible literally.

2. And it would be pointless to go to the top of a mountain if it was just a vision. Also, it didn't say that in the Bible. You are the one interpreting it. Looks like you aren't as much of a literalist as you claim to be. Liar.

3. An equivalent of a hologram? And this is backed up in scripture how? Or is it something you are pulling out of your ass again? Moron.

[weemadando]

I note a lot of coments agaisnt christianity, like " if I could go back in time and stop Jesus then no christians yaay"- things along those lines are bogoted statements, rathe rthan logical ones.

Actually most of those comments have been taken out of context. Though admittedly the "Would you fuck the mother of god" question could be construed as being a little blasphemous. But being and atheist I really don't worry about that.

I know in your defence you can post things likke " christinity brings evil and destruction" then site stupid arguents about the dark ages, lump everythign that was ever connected with christianity togather, ignore cercumstances and ohilosophies and say " Aha its wvil see" ( Like if oy said hitler was a christian, and thus shows its evil, incedentally he as not.)

Most academic circles tend to look at historical evidence as highly reliable. So why wouldn't we cite (its spelt with a C just so you know for the future) them as evidence to support our case? As for circumstances and philosophies, most of these can be directly traced back to Christianity, so you're just creating a vicious cycle by trying to argue that point.

fact is, Pagans, nowadays thought of as a tolerent nature based religion, killed christians and each other quietrapidluy.

Where? Rome? If I may, I'll point out that Rome was very tolerant towards the Christian religion, allowing it to operate on a small scale with minimal interference. And only a remarkably small amount of Christians were killed by the Romans during "loyalty" tests. Why? Not because they were Christian, but because they refused to swear allegience to Rome.

Yet when Christianity became the dominant religion there were massive purges and thousands of killings by the Christians of people of other religions.

Atheists ran the soviet Union, and look at the carnage and bloodshed there.

And Christians ran the Crusades. Whats your point? We never said that Christianity was the source of ALL evil in the world. Just most of it. And, just so you know: Communism was a counter to the traditional Christian neo-Feudal structure of the Industrial revolution. So one could indirectly implicate Christianity again.

Christianity, as in the philosphy, is far form evil, and Jesus, if you take an honest look, is inspiting.

Yes, Jesus is quite spiting. He and his dad love nothing more than torturing and killing people.

Yet intead you hate christianity ( dotn say you hate religion, too many comments I have read are geared toward christians, not hindus for instance, IE religionists thing Jesus will come back but he wont and I know I am right")

Thats because I don't get hindu's knocking on my door and accosting me in the street trying to convert me. I don't have hindu's sending me threatening e-mails just for publically disagreeing with them. I don't have hindu's mouthing off at my friends for not being a) White, b) Christian c) Straight d) Christian. I'm not saying that hindu's are the most tolerant religion. But to be quite honest, where I am, they aren't the problem.

Hatred of Christianity is pathetic and prevents any truth form comign in. The tiruth abotu what was written, and about people. Not all christians ar eidiots, nor do all reject reason, just as there are irrational and stupid atheists.

And not all Christians can:
*Spell
*Construct a logical argument
*Listen to a logical argument

Hatred of Christianity prevents truth from coming in? Thats the biggest piece of shit I've heard in a while. I would state that belief in any religion tends to prevent truth and logic from coming in.

The truth is, the Bible is NOT filled with as many inconsistancies as is claied ( I have debunkedfar too many )

Please show us where you debunk these "inconsistinancies". And prove to me that pi=3, as the bible says.

The Bible des not teach hatred and predjudice, yet atheists who claim the church is evil do.

No. We simply state that there are branches of Christianity, like any religion that teach hatred and prejudice. We state that the bible should not be taken literally and is rife with "facts" that have been thoroughly debunked.

Please stop hating christianity, this si not about converting any of you, but abotu resepct, hatred leads to bigotry and oppression.

Then you tell Christians to stop harassing me in the streets trying to convert me. Then you fucking well tell them to give my girlfriend some fucking respect. She's Wiccan (I accept this, but it doesn't mean I have to like it) and half-asian, so the amount of shit she has to put up with from goddamn idiots who refuse to conform to your preachings of tolerance and respect puts me in a bad fucking mood with arseholes like you who claim that Christianity is the shining light in the darkness.

Atheists can be as amoral and oppressive as they say christians are.

I never said we couldn't be.

[Sir Sirius]

I hate repeating myself, but here it goes again.
ZAROVE, Hitler was a Christian. See link, it deals with the matter in detail.

I suppsoe if I say Homosexuality is wrong I will be laughed at, I also will be laughed at if I say its not genetic or inate and people have changed form it.

If you say that homosexuality is wrong you are an ignorant biggot and you have said that already, now haven't you?

I am not the one makign sex jokes.

Where did I make sex jokes?
And there is marked difference between making sex jokes and believing that women should marry their rapists.

I merely stated it was better treatment than they got in other parts of the world in that time period. No need to assume its my take on womans rights, unless you are being a bigoted closed minded fool.

You said that: "This law {women must marry their rapists} is reasonable and makes sence and actually protects the woman.". Now tell me how does that not say that it is your take on the matter.

Also that is only the explanation (execuse) for why the bible says what it says, it does not change the fact that the bible says what it does. Nor does it change the fact that the same verse's were included in the bible when the blasted thing was composed in the 5th century and that the same verse's appear in the bible even today. Nor does it change the fact that you have to ignore parts of a holy book, supposedly written by an infallible omnipotent god, just to make the damn thing sound less of an insult to every women on Earth.

And once again you are admitting that the bible is obsolete. Concession accepted.

[Mr Flibble]

Actually I sad in my last post before that one, No one had sited verses.

You say that when I later address those verses I prove I am a liar, not so, those verses where posted AFTER the "last post" - and beign addressed in my current post.

Instead of calling me stupid, maybe you should actually read what I say... I never said no verses where psosted after seveal had been, I said no verses had been posted at the time of my last post.In that post that was the ttruth, the verses I addressed where posted after my comment was made, proving, as wong said, I am a liar by quoting scriptire after I said that no scriptire had een quoted is not proof that I lied, but rather htat you did.

Firstly:I have re-read your posts and I appologise for misunderstanding what you wrote, but perhaps you could have expressed it a little more clearly than you did, I have been up all night and your post are hard to read.
Secondly: Since this part of your post seems to be addressing my response to your earlier post I assume the "Instead of calling me stupid" is to me, in which case, read my posts, never did I say you were stupid. Although after re-reading your posts, it is clear that you are an idiot.

suppsoe if I say Homosexuality is wrong I will be laughed at, I also will be laughed at if I say its not genetic or inate and people have changed form it.

Actually I wouldn't laugh at you for saying that homosexuality is wrong, I would say that you are a bigot and I would feel disillusioned in mankind to find yet another bigoted idiot (there that is twice total I have called you that now). Oh and just so you know I apply this judgement to all people who hold that view, my sister used to believe that all gays went to hell, I think that she is an idiot too. However I no longer think she is a bigot because she has realised how stupid that belief was.

Communism was an atheistic idea. Reguardless of how " its a false analogy" the truth is the state was atheist.

Thus showing that to do away with religion dosnt do away woth corruption. And that atheisim dosnt lead to a happier healthier mindset.

1) Communism advocates atheism, atheism does not advocat communism, in fact atheism advocates nothing
2) Communism never really did "do away with all religion" it attempted to but never succeeded.
3) All communism shows is that communism does not get rid of human corruption, and communism does not lead to a 'happier healthier mindset'
4)In my case atheism lead to a happy healthier mindset. Back when I was a christian I suffered from depression, and turning to my christian beliefs, which I had at the time did not help me, and in fact contributed to my feeling that everyone, including god had turned their back on me and was a factor in my first suicide attempt. After that my belief in any religion was shattered and I became an atheist. Because I no longer felt there was a God watching over me, and shitting on my life, and because it put my life in MY CONTROL, not some mystical deity, I was able to better deal with my emotions. Hence I have been happier and healthier since I became an atheist.

Right after that rant I don't really feel like addressing your other points, besides I think that the others are handling them well enough.

[HemlockGrey]

Why do you even bother? His ass is rammed so far up his mouth it's hopeless.

[THEHOOLIGANJEDI]

I would think that Judaism is probably far worse than Christianityt has ever been.

From what I know, I don't think the state of Christianity as it has been going after Christ's death was what it was meant to be. I believe it was meant to amend some of not so good aspects of Judaism.

Judaism by far is worse than Christianity. It is the most Xenophobic, racist religion. It's put itself on a high horse and proclaimed themselves the chosen people of God. That's seen prominently throughtout history. The Romans, accepted the Hewbrews, but they wanted to be free of Rome and wanted their rightful lands back b/c they are the Chosen. I think Judaism is the nastiest religion on this Planet and I'm suprised than nobody here slams that Religion as bad as Christianity.

[The Yosemite Bear]

*wham*

*Smacks Hooligan Jedi with a frying pan.*

I am Not racist, I also tend to be very open minded, now can I help the fact that my last name is "Witz" and that the fascist state of Isreal keeps trying to bribe me to move there?

Oi, fucking vey.


Folks, lets start by judging other's by their OWN actions, not by their ancestors.

[SeebianWurm]

Zarove talks too much, thinks too little

[ZAROVE]

For all information on the woman marrying her rapist, I said it made sence to the culture of the time. For that you call me an idiot, or making excuses, but do you realy see the rest fot he world back then doing any better?

As to satan, I said the world does nto mean planet, and you counter that it does, yet we live on the new world if we live in the americas, this was called " the new world" nto because people thiought it was another planet, but because the word world has changed.

As to the mountin, why not take him there?

Actually I wouldn't laugh at you for saying that homosexuality is wrong, I would say that you are a bigot and I would feel disillusioned in mankind to find yet another bigoted idiot (there that is twice total I have called you that now). Oh and just so you know I apply this judgement to all people who hold that view, my sister used to believe that all gays went to hell, I think that she is an idiot too. However I no longer think she is a bigot because she has realised how stupid that belief was

I am a bigot because I beelive a behaviour is destructive? dispite claism to the cntrary, there is no gay Gene, and gays do suffer sheroterlifespans accordign to a recent american census poll.

I am also opposed to smoking. But as to bigotry, well I wont not talk to gays becase there gay, nor do I insult them, you however insult me.

Where did I make sex jokes?
And there is marked difference between making sex jokes and believing that women should marry their rapists.


At leats get it right, its not " a woman must marry her rapist" as in any raed woman must marry her rapist, only virgins, and it was a sign of the anceint past.

Then again, askign you to look into the anceint world and seing it for what it is, is too much to ask.

Thats because I don't get hindu's knocking on my door and accosting me in the street trying to convert me. I don't have hindu's sending me threatening e-mails just for publically disagreeing with them. I don't have hindu's mouthing off at my friends for not being a) White, b) Christian c) Straight d) Christian. I'm not saying that hindu's are the most tolerant religion. But to be quite honest, where I am, they aren't the problem.

There ar emany black christians you know. Christianity isnt a white only club, and racism isnt as clear in the Bibel as you claim wither.

No. We simply state that there are branches of Christianity, like any religion that teach hatred and prejudice. We state that the bible should not be taken literally and is rife with "facts" that have been thoroughly debunked.

Facts such as...? the flat earth argument is silly, yet you will say I am an idiot for sayign otherwise. There are no facts that have been debunked in the Bible, whih is mostly narrative.


Posted: Mon Dec 16, 2002 5:24 pm Post subject: Re: CHRISTIANITY HATERS

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ZAROVE wrote:
I note a lot of coments agaisnt christianity, like " if I could go back in time and stop Jesus then no christians yaay"- things along those lines are bogoted statements, rathe rthan logical ones.


Actually most of those comments have been taken out of context. Though admittedly the "Would you fuck the mother of god" question could be construed as being a little blasphemous. But being and atheist I really don't worry about that.

Quote:
I know in your defence you can post things likke " christinity brings evil and destruction" then site stupid arguents about the dark ages, lump everythign that was ever connected with christianity togather, ignore cercumstances and ohilosophies and say " Aha its wvil see" ( Like if oy said hitler was a christian, and thus shows its evil, incedentally he as not.)


Most academic circles tend to look at historical evidence as highly reliable. So why wouldn't we cite (its spelt with a C just so you know for the future) them as evidence to support our case? As for circumstances and philosophies, most of these can be directly traced back to Christianity, so you're just creating a vicious cycle by trying to argue that point.

Quote:
fact is, Pagans, nowadays thought of as a tolerent nature based religion, killed christians and each other quietrapidluy.


Where? Rome? If I may, I'll point out that Rome was very tolerant towards the Christian religion, allowing it to operate on a small scale with minimal interference. And only a remarkably small amount of Christians were killed by the Romans during "loyalty" tests. Why? Not because they were Christian, but because they refused to swear allegience to Rome.

Yet when Christianity became the dominant religion there were massive purges and thousands of killings by the Christians of people of other religions.

Quote:
Atheists ran the soviet Union, and look at the carnage and bloodshed there.


And Christians ran the Crusades. Whats your point? We never said that Christianity was the source of ALL evil in the world. Just most of it. And, just so you know: Communism was a counter to the traditional Christian neo-Feudal structure of the Industrial revolution. So one could indirectly implicate Christianity again.

Quote:
Christianity, as in the philosphy, is far form evil, and Jesus, if you take an honest look, is inspiting.


Yes, Jesus is quite spiting. He and his dad love nothing more than torturing and killing people.

Quote:
Yet intead you hate christianity ( dotn say you hate religion, too many comments I have read are geared toward christians, not hindus for instance, IE religionists thing Jesus will come back but he wont and I know I am right")


Thats because I don't get hindu's knocking on my door and accosting me in the street trying to convert me. I don't have hindu's sending me threatening e-mails just for publically disagreeing with them. I don't have hindu's mouthing off at my friends for not being a) White, b) Christian c) Straight d) Christian. I'm not saying that hindu's are the most tolerant religion. But to be quite honest, where I am, they aren't the problem.

Quote:
Hatred of Christianity is pathetic and prevents any truth form comign in. The tiruth abotu what was written, and about people. Not all christians ar eidiots, nor do all reject reason, just as there are irrational and stupid atheists.


And not all Christians can:
*Spell
*Construct a logical argument
*Listen to a logical argument

Hatred of Christianity prevents truth from coming in? Thats the biggest piece of shit I've heard in a while. I would state that belief in any religion tends to prevent truth and logic from coming in.

Quote:
The truth is, the Bible is NOT filled with as many inconsistancies as is claied ( I have debunkedfar too many )


Please show us where you debunk these "inconsistinancies". And prove to me that pi=3, as the bible says.

Quote:
The Bible des not teach hatred and predjudice, yet atheists who claim the church is evil do.


No. We simply state that there are branches of Christianity, like any religion that teach hatred and prejudice. We state that the bible should not be taken literally and is rife with "facts" that have been thoroughly debunked.


Quote:
Please stop hating christianity, this si not about converting any of you, but abotu resepct, hatred leads to bigotry and oppression.


Then you tell Christians to stop harassing me in the streets trying to convert me. Then you fucking well tell them to give my girlfriend some fucking respect. She's Wiccan (I accept this, but it doesn't mean I have to like it) and half-asian, so the amount of shit she has to put up with from goddamn idiots who refuse to conform to your preachings of tolerance and respect puts me in a bad fucking mood with arseholes like you who claim that Christianity is the shining light in the darkness.

Yet this means? I have been harrased by wicans and atheists, gotten threatenign emails, and even a few death tthreats form wiccans, who did not repsect my beleifs.

As tot he half asian thing, you make it sonfd liek christians are all racists, and I am a fundamentalist accordgn to you, I guess I hate asiand and black peole too- nice line of logic. All christians are white supremecists now...

Also, note that i say the Philosophy is sound, not the actions of men.

1. Considering that the world is our planet it doesn't work to say it only worked back then, also considering you are supposed to take the Bible literally.

I said the meaning of the word changed. Not that things worked diffeent naturallisticaly.



2. And it would be pointless to go to the top of a mountain if it was just a vision. Also, it didn't say that in the Bible. You are the one interpreting it. Looks like you aren't as much of a literalist as you claim to be. Liar.

I said I beleive the events of the Bible are true, thus I am a literalist, just not a fundamentalist, and not a liar, and if there was a poin to it or not, many prophets and seers have been taken to mountaintops, like Moses for instance when he reieved the ten commandments.

Pointless or no, its what happened.



3. An equivalent of a hologram? And this is backed up in scripture how? Or is it something you are pulling out of your ass again? Moron.

Yes, it is, the whole strpy...

Matthew 4

1. Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil.
2. And when he had fasted forty days and forty nights, he was afterward an hungred.
3. And when the tempter came to him, he said, If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread.
4. But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.
5. Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city, and setteth him on a pinnacle of the temple,
6. And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.
7. Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.
8. Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;
9. And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me.
10. Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.
11. Then the devil leaveth him, and, behold, angels came and ministered unto him.
12. Now when Jesus had heard that John was cast into prison, he departed into Galilee;
13. And leaving Nazareth, he came and dwelt in Capernaum, which is upon the sea coast, in the borders of Zabulon and Nephthalim:
14. That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying,
15. The land of Zabulon, and the land of Nephthalim, by the way of the sea, beyond Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles;
16. The people which sat in darkness saw great light; and to them which sat in the region and shadow of death light is sprung up.
17. From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.
18. And Jesus, walking by the sea of Galilee, saw two brethren, Simon called Peter, and Andrew his brother, casting a net into the sea: for they were fishers.
19. And he saith unto them, Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men.
20. And they straightway left their nets, and followed him.
21. And going on from thence, he saw other two brethren, James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, in a ship with Zebedee their father, mending their nets; and he called them.
22. And they immediately left the ship and their father, and followed him.
23. And Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all manner of sickness and all manner of disease among the people.
24. And his fame went throughout all Syria: and they brought unto him all sick people that were taken with divers diseases and torments, and those which were possessed with devils, and those which were lunatick, and those that had the palsy; and he healed them.
25. And there followed him great multitudes of people from Galilee, and from Decapolis, and from Jerusalem, and from Judaea, and from beyond Jordan.


Less than what you say is there and more than what you know

[THEHOOLIGANJEDI]

*wham*

*Smacks Hooligan Jedi with a frying pan.*

I am Not racist, I also tend to be very open minded, now can I help the fact that my last name is "Witz" and that the fascist state of Isreal keeps trying to bribe me to move there?

Oi, fucking vey.


Folks, lets start by judging other's by their OWN actions, not by their ancestors.

*Clang*
*Blocks Frying Pan with his massive hand*

I don't mean to offend you or to insult Jewish people, or to generalize at all. But My commentary is on the Religion of Judaism. It's very abrasive when you you think of it, esp in it's early days.

I just want some equal opportunity bashing here. I can bash Catholicism and I'm Catholic.

[SeebianWurm]

Yes, I find the Judaic religion to be barely tolerable. The idea of being the chosen people sounds so egocentric and cliche...you think some desert moron could invent one with a little more creativity.