Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 10/3/10 08:15 AM, satanbrain wrote: and why do you think that?

History? Because every culture ever has done it? Because that's what religion does? Take your pick. Yeesh.

so how are you explaining alliances with egyptians, philistines and other nations?

Now or in the past?

how exaclty if all humans are descendants of the same human?

They aren't. The Bible is not a history book as I pointed out. Basic genetics renders this invalid...but ok, let's say Creationism is valid, how can you hate Muslims and love your own people so much if every human being is descended from the same human and we're all related?

not it does not. it means that jews need to obey laws no one else do.

Yes, it does. If the Jews are "Chosen" by the "One True God" it means inherently Jews are BETTER then everybody else and they can (and have) used this feeling of superiority and moral righteousness to say they're actions are justifiable and correct. Just like so many other religious and geo-political groups have done in the past.

pagans aren't considered inferior only wrong,

How can they be "wrong" and not "inferior". Also, you've not answered the charge where a genocide of them was ordered.

the prophets are saying to become enslaved to babylon assyria to prevent death. a total war is not the same as genocide.

When you are clearly instructed to wipe out EVERYONE, not just soldiers, but everyone. Women, children, men, THAT is a genocide. Stop being such an apologist nitwit.

At 10/3/10 01:04 PM, SolInvictus wrote: but back to the topic, has anyone gotten any particular information on how they would plan to rectify this imbalance between Islam in Christianity in schools?....

I'd like to know that too...but considering that Texas is one of those "God and Country: In that order" kind of states I imagine it'd add way more about Islam being evil, and Christianity is good and the Superman to their Lex Luthor or something similar. I think the whole thing is a sham because while I graduated High School in 01, and college in 05, I highly doubt that in that short span of time the textbooks have created this amazing "bias" they complain of. None of the major religions were discussed that heavily in any history or social studies text I used beyond like "this is the name of the religion, this is a basic outline of what it's adherents believe". It was as neutral as you could get.

At 10/3/10 02:09 AM, SadisticMonkey wrote:

At 10/2/10 12:28 PM, Warforger wrote: While not all Christians are terrible morons, many are Evangelists who then force their beliefs down everyone's throat through the government, on top of that they indoctrinate children. Not to mention the most prominent terrorists in the US are Christian terrorists.

Sorry, how does that even come CLOSE to what Muslims do?

By this logic you should completely fucking despise Islam

You just said that there aren't any sour apple Christians in America and that they don't cause any problems.

Muslims in America aren't as bad most of the time, there are some radical Muslims just like how there are radical Christians, there were some radical Islam schools in Pennsylvania IIRC, just as bad as the Evangelists.

At 10/3/10 01:07 PM, aviewaskewed wrote:

At 10/3/10 08:15 AM, satanbrain wrote: and why do you think that?

History? Because every culture ever has done it? Because that's what religion does? Take your pick. Yeesh.

nor every, most.

so how are you explaining alliances with egyptians, philistines and other nations?

Now or in the past?

i'm talking about past, read some more.

how exaclty if all humans are descendants of the same human?

They aren't. The Bible is not a history book as I pointed out. Basic genetics renders this invalid...but ok, let's say Creationism is valid, how can you hate Muslims and love your own people so much if every human being is descended from the same human and we're all related?

i don't believe this, i'm just saying what those people are thinking while they read the bible, isn't that what it is about?

not it does not. it means that jews need to obey laws no one else do.

Yes, it does. If the Jews are "Chosen" by the "One True God" it means inherently Jews are BETTER then everybody else and they can (and have) used this feeling of superiority and moral righteousness to say they're actions are justifiable and correct. Just like so many other religious and geo-political groups have done in the past.

by now three religions are worshipping one true god, still better?

pagans aren't considered inferior only wrong,

How can they be "wrong" and not "inferior". Also, you've not answered the charge where a genocide of them was ordered.

the prophets are saying to become enslaved to babylon assyria to prevent death. a total war is not the same as genocide.

When you are clearly instructed to wipe out EVERYONE, not just soldiers, but everyone. Women, children, men, THAT is a genocide. Stop being such an apologist nitwit.

how do you know the whole 'genocide' thing isn't fictive like it's justification? no evidence was found that they actually killed them all except in the biblic story, don't you think they may have found barely populated land, settled there and married the locals (like they usually did) and boasted they killed 10 nations by themselves?

At 10/3/10 03:02 PM, satanbrain wrote: nor every, most.

Really? Can you name me a group that DOESN'T make those kinds of justifications for their actions? Somebody who would admit what they're doing is purely self motivated and not "for the greater good"?

i'm talking about past, read some more.

I read a lot actually. I just was asking for a little clarification. But what would you recommend me reading as if I couldn't guess?

i don't believe this, i'm just saying what those people are thinking while they read the bible, isn't that what it is about?

Why point out the creation story and nothing but if you don't believe it? This is why you need to post more then one sentence to reply to people. This also isn't just about those who read the Bible, but those who wrote the Bible and the fact that they wrote it to glory themselves and justify their actions.

by now three religions are worshipping one true god, still better?

Yep, because Jews don't agree with Christians or Muslims even though they're worshipping pretty much the same God, each one is claiming THEY are the only ones that God is favoring.

how do you know the whole 'genocide' thing isn't fictive like it's justification? no evidence was found that they actually killed them all except in the biblic story, don't you think they may have found barely populated land, settled there and married the locals (like they usually did) and boasted they killed 10 nations by themselves?

It's possible that happened. But the fact that they BELIEVE the Bible story and don't seem to have much of a problem killing in the name of their God or killing those that are inconvenient or are perceived as a threat is the bit that troubles me. They have a religion that gives them justification for atrocity and a God that commands them to atrocity when it suits their needs and purposes. Of course it's not JUST them, but it is nonetheless troubling. Also I highly doubt in ancient times they just came into a patch of land and peacefully settled. History shows again and again that invading cultures come in and try to dominate and subjugate the existing ones.

At 10/3/10 06:08 PM, aviewaskewed wrote:

At 10/3/10 03:02 PM, satanbrain wrote: nor every, most.

Really? Can you name me a group that DOESN'T make those kinds of justifications for their actions? Somebody who would admit what they're doing is purely self motivated and not "for the greater good"?

not, but can you prove all of the groups are like that?

i'm talking about past, read some more.

I read a lot actually. I just was asking for a little clarification. But what would you recommend me reading as if I couldn't guess?

the bible, the connections between the israeli kingdom and other kingdom, prohpets' warnings, etc.

i don't believe this, i'm just saying what those people are thinking while they read the bible, isn't that what it is about?

Why point out the creation story and nothing but if you don't believe it? This is why you need to post more then one sentence to reply to people. This also isn't just about those who read the Bible, but those who wrote the Bible and the fact that they wrote it to glory themselves and justify their actions.

not in the bible, no human is mentioned as holy, all the humans are having both bad and good qualities, kings are never shown as idols, read some more.

by now three religions are worshipping one true god, still better?

Yep, because Jews don't agree with Christians or Muslims even though they're worshipping pretty much the same God, each one is claiming THEY are the only ones that God is favoring.

don't agree means they want to kill them?

how do you know the whole 'genocide' thing isn't fictive like it's justification? no evidence was found that they actually killed them all except in the biblic story, don't you think they may have found barely populated land, settled there and married the locals (like they usually did) and boasted they killed 10 nations by themselves?

It's possible that happened. But the fact that they BELIEVE the Bible story and don't seem to have much of a problem killing in the name of their God or killing those that are inconvenient or are perceived as a threat is the bit that troubles me.

but they believe that these nations were archenemy, and if that so, why did jews agreed to live absolutely peacefully under chrisitan and muslim reign?

They have a religion that gives them justification for atrocity and a God that commands them to atrocity when it suits their needs and purposes.

no it does not, 'god' gave no justification for high priests and rulers be hellenized and yet they did it.

Of course it's not JUST them, but it is nonetheless troubling. Also I highly doubt in ancient times they just came into a patch of land and peacefully settled. History shows again and again that invading cultures come in and try to dominate and subjugate the existing ones.

well, they were either runaway slaves or a small group of some ancient nation, either way they couldn't annihilate overwhelming experienced army of 10 nations (their army invades and dominates so they must have experience).

At 10/3/10 01:10 PM, aviewaskewed wrote: I'd like to know that too...but considering that Texas is one of those "God and Country: In that order" kind of states I imagine it'd add way more about Islam being evil, and Christianity is good and the Superman to their Lex Luthor or something similar.

i find that odd when i consider that i went to a Catholic high school (established by Jesuits no less) which had no issue providing fair and unbiased instruction on the basics of various faiths as well as questionable Church moments (yay for the fourth crusade!).

and religious courses were still just a tiny part of school.

At 10/4/10 09:34 AM, satanbrain wrote: not, but can you prove all of the groups are like that?

Pretty much. It's a little thing called "history" it's in books and stuff.

the bible, the connections between the israeli kingdom and other kingdom, prohpets' warnings, etc.

As I pointed out, the Bible is NOT A HISTORICAL DOCUMENT. It has been proven false (in some cases) and extremely problematic (in others) as a historical document. It is also (in the first half) written BY the Jews FOR the Jews...so are the Jews REALLY going to say anything bad about themselves? Really? Use your head...jeez.

not in the bible, no human is mentioned as holy, all the humans are having both bad and good qualities, kings are never shown as idols, read some more.

But the Jews are "chosen" if they are the "Chosen of God" how are they not "holy" and inherently "right" in all actions? They're God is the one true God, and He has said that he favors them above all others....so I turn it right back around and say you need to read some more...but also some sources other then the pro-Jewish like The Bible.

but they believe that these nations were archenemy, and if that so, why did jews agreed to live absolutely peacefully under chrisitan and muslim reign?

Is this the Bible again? Because as I've said, and I'll say more clearly: I don't accept the Bible as a valid source for history. I don't. Independently show me the Jews did this, because it seems more likely to me these things occurred because the Christian or Muslim reigns came about because they're force was superior to the Jewish force and toppled the Jewish government of the time. They didn't have a choice.

no it does not, 'god' gave no justification for high priests and rulers be hellenized and yet they did it.

God told them to commit a genocide. Told Moses and others it was cool to do. It's right there in the text. You're ignorant biased of "my people are so good..." is sickening now that you impel me to read the damn book, but then try to act like the book doesn't say what it says.

well, they were either runaway slaves or a small group of some ancient nation, either way they couldn't annihilate overwhelming experienced army of 10 nations (their army invades and dominates so they must have experience).

They weren't slaves of the Egyptians, that much is pretty well settled. I imagine they had to have SOME force because they couldn't just take that territory and hold it if they didn't. Every culture and government needed some kind of army in those days. Did they slaughter 10 nations? I doubt it yes, which again goes back to my overall point of credibility of the Bible as historical document. But it seems obvious they must have had some military might to hold off invaders until they were eventually toppled.

Schools and religion should be separated. No religion teaching at school. Only language, math, science and physical education! Maybe history class, but there all major religions get to be mentioned. Schools should also have dressing codes, which everyone must accept to be in that school. So no burkhas, shorts, mantles, or bikinis.

At 10/4/10 04:07 PM, ninjasversuspirates wrote: Maybe history class, but there all major religions get to be mentioned.

Religion has had a major effect on history since the dawn of civilization, so religion is necessary for history.

At 10/4/10 04:07 PM, ninjasversuspirates wrote: Schools and religion should be separated. No religion teaching at school. Only language, math, science and physical education! Maybe history class, but there all major religions get to be mentioned. Schools should also have dressing codes, which everyone must accept to be in that school. So no burkhas, shorts, mantles, or bikinis.

While we're at it should we add detention centers and cancel lunch?

At 10/4/10 06:32 PM, LordJaric wrote: Religion has had a major effect on history since the dawn of civilization, so religion is necessary for history.

This is the point I'm trying to make. How are you supposed to teach history without mentioning religion? It's played a huge part in shaping the world we know today, so how can we teach history to our children without mentioning one of the key factors?

IT JUST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE

At 10/4/10 02:24 PM, aviewaskewed wrote:

At 10/4/10 09:34 AM, satanbrain wrote: not, but can you prove all of the groups are like that?

Pretty much. It's a little thing called "history" it's in books and stuff.

then put sources, if not quotes.

the bible, the connections between the israeli kingdom and other kingdom, prohpets' warnings, etc.

As I pointed out, the Bible is NOT A HISTORICAL DOCUMENT. It has been proven false (in some cases) and extremely problematic (in others) as a historical document. It is also (in the first half) written BY the Jews FOR the Jews...so are the Jews REALLY going to say anything bad about themselves? Really? Use your head...jeez.

part of the bible proven true, Kurukh Monoloith: "The Monolith mainly deals with campaigns Shalmaneser made in western Mesopotamia and Syria, fighting extensively with the countries of Bit Adini and Carchemish. At the end of the Monolith comes the account of the Battle of Qarqar, where an alliance of twelve kings fought against Shalmaneser at the Syrian city of Qarqar. This alliance, comprising eleven kings, was led by Irhuleni of Hamath and Hadadezer of Damascus, describing an improbably large force[1] led by King Ahab of Israel. The Monolith is also the first time that the Arabs make an appearance in world history, fielding a contingent containing dromedaries led by King Gindibu."

not in the bible, no human is mentioned as holy, all the humans are having both bad and good qualities, kings are never shown as idols, read some more.

But the Jews are "chosen" if they are the "Chosen of God" how are they not "holy" and inherently "right" in all actions? They're God is the one true God, and He has said that he favors them above all others....so I turn it right back around and say you need to read some more...but also some sources other then the pro-Jewish like The Bible.

because they failed to understand their god's true intention, and being lectured by prohpets that what they have done was wrong and selfish.

but they believe that these nations were archenemy, and if that so, why did jews agreed to live absolutely peacefully under chrisitan and muslim reign?

Is this the Bible again? Because as I've said, and I'll say more clearly: I don't accept the Bible as a valid source for history. I don't. Independently show me the Jews did this, because it seems more likely to me these things occurred because the Christian or Muslim reigns came about because they're force was superior to the Jewish force and toppled the Jewish government of the time. They didn't have a choice.

it is not the bible, it is history. and if jews are so extremists are supreior wouldn't they prefer to fight and die?

no it does not, 'god' gave no justification for high priests and rulers be hellenized and yet they did it.

God told them to commit a genocide. Told Moses and others it was cool to do. It's right there in the text.

Moses was not allowed to enter israel, how could he command and observe his instructions were done?

You're ignorant biased of "my people are so good..." is sickening now that you impel me to read the damn book, but then try to act like the book doesn't say what it says.

it says they were enemies just like it said they are to be killed.

Just sort of a general question about the idea of equal face time for religions in textbooks. Shouldn't the number of mentions a religion gets be based on the number of times they did something mentionable?

It seems to me that leaving out chunks of history to appease people of any religion is not separation of church and state. And also, who cares what religion gets the most mention. I have yet to meet someone who converted religion because of a textbook.

At 10/5/10 10:20 PM, TheSongSalad wrote: Just sort of a general question about the idea of equal face time for religions in textbooks. Shouldn't the number of mentions a religion gets be based on the number of times they did something mentionable?

That's the way it should be in my mind. I'd also like those who think Islam is getting "too much favorable coverage" to please give some examples...and not examples that boil down to "duuuuuh, they're evil...so anything that doesn't portray them as evil is bad".

Also to satanbrain, if you'd like to continue our sidebar discussion elsewhere, we can. Just not here, we've been pretty successfully derailing the thread and gone completely away from the central point :)

At 10/6/10 01:14 AM, aviewaskewed wrote: Also to satanbrain, if you'd like to continue our sidebar discussion elsewhere, we can. Just not here, we've been pretty successfully derailing the thread and gone completely away from the central point :)

so you're admitting the bible is not all false and you have been fooled?

or wikipedia is written 'by the Jews for the Jews'?

At 10/6/10 02:16 PM, satanbrain wrote:

At 10/6/10 01:14 AM, aviewaskewed wrote: Also to satanbrain, if you'd like to continue our sidebar discussion elsewhere, we can. Just not here, we've been pretty successfully derailing the thread and gone completely away from the central point :)

so you're admitting the bible is not all false and you have been fooled?

or wikipedia is written 'by the Jews for the Jews'?

You really are self centered and arrogant, aren't you.
1. He said continue the discussion somewhere else
2. he is not one of those "Jews control everything" people

At 10/6/10 02:20 PM, LordJaric wrote: You really are self centered and arrogant, aren't you.
1. He said continue the discussion somewhere else

i was unable to find this elsewhere so i posted in here.

2. he is not one of those "Jews control everything" people

i was offering an alternative.

At 10/6/10 02:30 PM, satanbrain wrote:

At 10/6/10 02:20 PM, LordJaric wrote: You really are self centered and arrogant, aren't you.
1. He said continue the discussion somewhere else

i was unable to find this elsewhere so i posted in here.

'elsewhere' usually refers to by PM, but that's just what I would think. I wouldn't mind if you made a thread about it though, I kinda have a couple things to say on the bible's historical accuracy etc.

At 10/6/10 01:14 AM, aviewaskewed wrote: That's the way it should be in my mind. I'd also like those who think Islam is getting "too much favorable coverage" to please give some examples...and not examples that boil down to "duuuuuh, they're evil...so anything that doesn't portray them as evil is bad".

"I do believe the 'Church of Murderous Bastards' should get the same favorable coverage as 'The Church of People Who Find Lettuce Attractive'."

We have a faith that admits that the first 5 centuries of their religion were spent in murderous barbarism, killing anyone who said 'wait'. Yet we question why people object to positive classifications to it? Nazism actually made the trains run on time. Yet we only mention the rampant slaughter of the Jews. Pol Pot cleared massive amounts of farm land. Yet again...we only mention the slaughter. Stalin thought science could be fun. Yet we only talk about the dead bodies in mass graves.

Why aren't we kinder to Islam, which has produced next to nothing, while ignoring their bigger attrocities? The horrors!

At 10/9/10 03:30 AM, WolvenBear wrote: Why aren't we kinder to Islam, which has produced next to nothing, while ignoring their bigger attrocities? The horrors!

You hit the nail right on the head! Oh... wait... you hit the wrong nail...

The point here is Texas is doing this for the sole reason of promoting Christianity. Don't even get off telling me that Christianity's horrors are less than twice as terrible as Islam's. It would be awesome if these pathetic posts actually read the prior parts of the thread...

At 10/9/10 03:30 AM, WolvenBear wrote: "I do believe the 'Church of Murderous Bastards' should get the same favorable coverage as 'The Church of People Who Find Lettuce Attractive'."

We have a faith that admits that the first 5 centuries of their religion were spent in murderous barbarism, killing anyone who said 'wait'. Yet we question why people object to positive classifications to it? Nazism actually made the trains run on time. Yet we only mention the rampant slaughter of the Jews. Pol Pot cleared massive amounts of farm land. Yet again...we only mention the slaughter. Stalin thought science could be fun. Yet we only talk about the dead bodies in mass graves.

Why aren't we kinder to Islam, which has produced next to nothing, while ignoring their bigger attrocities? The horrors!

When you talk like that, what has Christianity produced? Child rapists in positions of power, senseless murder in the form of 4 crusades, the destruction of millions of people and their way of life in the name of the 'white man's burden' during the colonization and exploration of the Americas, countless cases of killing heretics and ruining the lives of people who pursue science the church didn't approve of like Galileo, not to mention selling redemption for sins to peasants in the middle ages and constant overindulgence of the papacy. Christianity is one of the most bloodthirsty religions around, but you know what? I just completely ignored everything positive Christianity has done.

Just about every religion has done horrible atrocities, so don't give me that crap.

At 9/26/10 12:21 AM, conservative23 wrote: Good for them.

Islam is a violent and oppressive religion.

No it's not it's a peaceful religion that is shunned upon by many Americans. I mean sure it the people who burned down the twin towers were Muslim, but that does not mean every Muslim person is a terrorist!

At 10/9/10 03:30 AM, WolvenBear wrote:
Why aren't we kinder to Islam, which has produced next to nothing, while ignoring their bigger attrocities? The horrors!

1. Islamic scholars in the early to mid Middle Ages were prominent in advancing technology, as well as retaining the classical tradition.

2. You're actually making a case here that Christianity should be slammed....HARD. In terms of being a nasty force in the world, the Muslims are fairly new at this, but Protestants and Catholics have been murdering each other for an eternity. Muslims have a long way to go before they catch up to Christianity's death toll....

What Islam is going through now (infighting and radicalism) is what Christianity went through for the past 1000 years.

Speaking purely historically:

Discussion of the Middle Ages should paint a favorable look at the middle east, and a rather poor one on Christian Europe.

Catholics and Protestants murdering each other for 1000 years, remaining technologically and culturally stagnant in Europe. The Eastern Empire holding its own, and the Muslims undergoing a scientific revolution and Golden Age.

That's history.

Looking further ahead, you can paint today's age in fairly the opposite terms.

Of course, looking at it from purely historical perspectives, religion would have less prominence next to a whole lot of other factors for socio-political climate....

At 10/9/10 06:01 PM, Katgirl900214 wrote: No it's not it's a peaceful religion that is shunned upon by many Americans. I mean sure it the people who burned down the twin towers were Muslim, but that does not mean every Muslim person is a terrorist!

He it is Who hath sent His messenger with the guidance and the religion of truth, that He may make it conqueror of all religion however much idolaters may be averse.

how peaceful.

i believe that people should be allowed to express their culture, but not force it down anyone's throat.

Texas has always been backwards and bias towards outside thinking. Its just the way they are, it will do no good to complain about that fact. That is why most free thinkers avoid that state like the plague.

At 10/10/10 12:45 AM, satanbrain wrote: He it is Who hath sent His messenger with the guidance and the religion of truth, that He may make it conqueror of all religion however much idolaters may be averse.

how peaceful.

And I'll quote again.

2:62 As for the believers, for the Jews, the Christians and the Sabeans who believe in God and the Last Day, and who do righteous deeds-these have their wage with their Lord.(!) No fear shall fall upon them, nor shall they grieve.

Which at the time, was most of the rest of the world.

Ironically, the quote you pulled out of context, I might add, also talks about how Jesus, Mary, and Moses are trying to spread the word of God/Allah.

WHOOPS

At 10/6/10 02:16 PM, satanbrain wrote: so you're admitting the bible is not all false and you have been fooled?

or wikipedia is written 'by the Jews for the Jews'?

Not even a little...what I was saying is a discussion about the bible, wikipedia, everything you just brought up is NOT APPROPRIATE TO THIS THREAD. It's totally off topic and derails it. We can either make a separate thread for our discussion, or go somewhere else like PM with it. Reading comprehension is your friend.