Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 5/15/08 11:47 PM, raggy704 wrote: what are you going to do? assume that just cause a certain atheist kills a christian, he did it over not believing in god?

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. You didn't misunderstand that at all.

At 5/16/08 12:45 AM, Grammer wrote:

Would Hiroshima have happened if we didn't have knowledge of nuclear reactions?

Of course not.
Would it have happened if the town of Hiroshima didn't exist?
Will you blame that too?

If I'm an atheist, and I kill you because you're not atheist, well what the fuck do you think just happened?

Well let's say I go kill someone in the name of the king of France.
Are you going to blame the king of France?

It's funny, because The Bible doesn't say kill innocent people either

Well have fun with the website I posted.

I literally copypasta'd your sentence and replaced "atheist" with "Christian". And guess what? The sentence still makes sense.

yeah, grammatically. Like "I love cubic spheres". Makes sense.

You can't blame the religion because some retard is going to look at it in the completely wrong way.

I'm 100% sure no two Christians would agree on everything that is in the bible.
So There's probably one real Christian somewhere out there laughing at you guys.

Hehe, that site is so cute, it cites The Old Testament

Jesus was in favor of the old testament. And isn't the Old Testament the word of God anyway? Did he change his mind when Jesus was born?

Jesus taught his disciples to respect the Ten Commandments, that never changed.

Well ok here's the quotes:

""It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid." (Luke 16:17 NAB)" from Jesus's mouth.

Clearly says that the old testament is still valid. Sorry, you lose, Jesus said it.

""For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven." (Matthew 5:18-19 RSV) "
And he's not talking about the actual list of 10 commandments either :o He's talking about the whole thing.

More?

ok :

""Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place.""

""All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness..." (2 Timothy 3:16 NAB"

""Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation, for no prophecy ever came through human will; but rather human beings moved by the holy Spirit spoke under the influence of God." (2 Peter 20-21 NAB)"

No PROPHECY or SCRIPTURE that is a matter of personnal interpretation. Hear that? That's from the new testament. How on EARTH could you think that means "you can ignore the old testament"???

"Mark.7:9-13 "Whoever curses father or mother shall die" (Mark 7:10 NAB)" ( from Jesus again, who what a nice guy )

Jesus is criticized by the Pharisees for not washing his hands before eating. He defends himself by attacking them for not killing disobedient children according to the commandment: "He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death." (Matthew 15:4-7)

It goes on and on and on.
That's in the bible. You can't call upon "biased sources" here, this is from the bible, the book which you yourself use to preach to others.

Sorry.

Do you blame Ploppleism? All it did was say earn money.

Correction: here's how you defined it:
"Ploppleism is a set of beliefs that says money is really really good, and you should always strive to acquire more. "

So yes, clearly, I would blame that set of rules for his actions. Also you need to add " God said that..." in there as well to really make it into a religion like Christianity.
You can easily interpret that as saying "Whatever you have to do, you MUST acquire more money, always".

Is it ploppleism's fault that Lemmy disobeyed his religion's teachings and stole?

When did you say it said "don't steal"? You just added that right now :o
And then it would contradict itself ( like christianity does ) so yes I would still blame it.

If it says like:
"Do WHATEVER YOU CAN to get more money"
"Don't steal"

But in like elaborate and obscure stories, it would be extremely easy to never even read the "don't steal" bits, sort of like you haven't read the "the Old Testament still applies" parts of the bible apparently.

To parralel this to atheism, you'd have to say something like "John doesn't believe money is the most important thing" or something like that, which I don't see could make him really do anything.

Religious people don't follow good morals because they just think it's good, they follow it based on what Jesus said. So in that way, they don't believe the morals, they believe the guy who taught them.
It's the difference between simply following what confucius says without having ever heard of him and following what he says BECAUSE he's confucius, which is what a christian does. They don't follow Jesus' teaching for any other reasons than because he' s the son of God. All other reasons are accessory to that all-important fact.

At 5/16/08 01:11 AM, poxpower wrote:

At 5/16/08 12:45 AM, Grammer wrote:

Would Hiroshima have happened if we didn't have knowledge of nuclear reactions?

Of course not.
Would it have happened if the town of Hiroshima didn't exist?
Will you blame that too?

No, because Hiroshima existing was not the reason Hiroshima was bombed. Our knowledge of nuclear reactions was one of the reasons Hiroshima got nuked. Stalin's atheism was the reason he specifically targeted religious persons.

If I'm an atheist, and I kill you because you're not atheist, well what the fuck do you think just happened?

Well let's say I go kill someone in the name of the king of France.
Are you going to blame the king of France?

Well, let's clear up some things because I think you're not understanding me completely, and we're getting a bit off track.

- I'm not blaming atheism for killing anyone

- I don't know whether or not Stalin would've killed people if he was atheist or not, but the fact remains that he targeted people for their religion. Would a Christian do that? Would a Christian say: "Yeah, I love Jesus so much I'm going to kill his followers"? Now, if it was turned the other way around, and Stalin was a Christian, and he targeted atheists, I wouldn't blame Christianity for killing anyone (though you sure as fuck would), but I would say that Christianity was a factor in Stalin's decision to specifically target atheists, which is exactly what I said in terms of Stalin and atheism. Atheism was not at fault, but it was a factor as to why he targeted Christians. I think it's fair to say if Stalin wasn't atheist, he wouldn't have targeted religion.

It's funny, because The Bible doesn't say kill innocent people either

Well have fun with the website I posted.

You mean the shit stain of a web page posted by a biased fuck who took passages out of context, literally ripping them from their paragraphs, with no context or attribution whatsoever? You mean the site that took passages from mainly The Old Testament? Yeah, that site. Fuck that site. Read The Bible, cover-to-cover, then try to tell me what it fucking says.

I literally copypasta'd your sentence and replaced "atheist" with "Christian". And guess what? The sentence still makes sense.

yeah, grammatically. Like "I love cubic spheres". Makes sense.

Hahaha, oh wow. Way to have it both ways. Okay, so every action an atheist commits is their fault, no one else. NOT SO WITH CHRISTIANS. All of their actions are attributed to religion. Clearly, if they ascribe to a religion, then their religion is held accountable to their actions. That's not irresponsible at all.

I'm 100% sure no two Christians would agree on everything that is in the bible.

Correct.

So There's probably one real Christian somewhere out there laughing at you guys.

Thou shall not commit murder is a pretty basic tenet of Christianity. It was like, put on a rock. I mean that means something.

Jesus was in favor of the old testament. And isn't the Old Testament the word of God anyway? Did he change his mind when Jesus was born?

I'm not going through this with you. Read The New Testament, then get back to me. We've gone from Stalin, to murder, to alleged inconsistencies with the Old and New Testament. You are only worth so much of my time before I start cutting off half of your quoted text for the sole purpose of saving myself time and a headache.

Jesus taught his disciples to respect the Ten Commandments, that never changed.

Well ok here's the quotes:

""It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid." (Luke 16:17 NAB)" from Jesus's mouth.

Clearly says that the old testament is still valid. Sorry, you lose, Jesus said it.

I don't even know what he's talking about. Law of man? The Old Testament? The Ten Commandments? I have no idea, you cut out a tiny passage from a chapter of The Book of Luke, and now I'm expected to believe you?

Okay, I'm bored, you're not worth spending 45 minutes + responding to everything you say.

Bottom line:

1.) Stalin was atheist
2.) Stalin targeted religion
3.) Stalin would not have targeted religion if he was... religious
4.) Do the fucking math
5.) lol dongs
6.) ?????
7.) Profit!!

At 5/16/08 01:59 AM, Grammer wrote:

No, because Hiroshima existing was not the reason Hiroshima was bombed. Our knowledge of nuclear reactions was one of the reasons Hiroshima got nuked.

I don't see how the knowledge of nuclear bombs instructs to drop them on a town named "Hiroshima". Or instructs to drop them. Or how knowledge of nuclear fission tells you to make bombs. That's pure human.

I wouldn't blame Christianity for killing anyone (though you sure as fuck would),

Well if it said in the bible "go kill atheists" then I would. Why not?

Hahaha, oh wow. Way to have it both ways. Okay, so every action an atheist commits is their fault, no one else. NOT SO WITH CHRISTIANS. All of their actions are attributed to religion.

As I explained, atheism does not give our morals or laws, Christianity does. If you can blame a bad law, you can blame a religion.

Thou shall not commit murder is a pretty basic tenet of Christianity.

The state of Texas has the death penalty. But of course, there's always excuses to kill, right?
For instance, the witch hunts. No, not "murders", but "judgment". Right.

I don't even know what he's talking about. Law of man? The Old Testament? The Ten Commandments? I have no idea, you cut out a tiny passage from a chapter of The Book of Luke, and now I'm expected to believe you?

Well don't you have the bible? You claim to read it a lot to I assume you have it.
Here, I'll help you ( not that you need it since you've read the bible cover to cover! I sure have nothing to teach you about what's in the bible and what isn't, right? ) http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?sea rch=Matthew%205;&version=31;
BAM, ONLINE BIBLE.

Read it, it's all there and made very clear what Jesus said.
Unless you're calling Matthew a liar of course.

Woah look at that, verse 21: "But anyone who says, 'You fool!' will be in danger of the fire of hell."
Holy shit, you must be able to smell your balls roasting right now!

Haha, the bible, only someone who hasn't read it would be a christian.

Okay, I'm bored, you're not worth spending 45 minutes + responding to everything you sa

In conclusion, holy shit you've been destroyed. Yeah let's just skip all the parts about Jesus, THE SON OF GOD, contradicting what you just said about what was in the bible.
How humble of you.

At 5/16/08 01:59 AM, Grammer wrote: No, because Hiroshima existing was not the reason Hiroshima was bombed. Our knowledge of nuclear reactions was one of the reasons Hiroshima got nuked. Stalin's atheism was the reason he specifically targeted religious persons.

Absolutely not. Nothing knowledge of nuclear reactors might have enabled the bombing of Hiroshima, but, it did not cause it. And lots of things was required to enable the bombing, including air planes.

I mean, do you seriously think that if Stalin had not been atheist, he wouldn't have killed those people? Being religions has never appeared to me to be a good stopper of wars and genocides. They happen even though the people are religious.

At 5/16/08 02:16 AM, poxpower wrote: I don't see how the knowledge of nuclear bombs instructs to drop them on a town named "Hiroshima". Or instructs to drop them. Or how knowledge of nuclear fission tells you to make bombs. That's pure human.

It's not about instructing them to do it, just like Stalin's atheism didn't instruct him to kill Christians. You could not have nuked Hiroshima without the knowledge of nuclear reactions, that is a staple.

I wouldn't blame Christianity for killing anyone (though you sure as fuck would),

Well if it said in the bible "go kill atheists" then I would. Why not?

You are correct. If it said in The Bible "go kill innocent people", and Jesus never came down and said "Haha, disregard that, I suck cocks", then you would be right to blame The Bible if a Christian killed an atheist with religious motivations.

Hahaha, oh wow. Way to have it both ways. Okay, so every action an atheist commits is their fault, no one else. NOT SO WITH CHRISTIANS. All of their actions are attributed to religion.

As I explained, atheism does not give our morals or laws, Christianity does.

So every time I do something bad it's my religion's fault, even if my religion says don't do that. Right.

Thou shall not commit murder is a pretty basic tenet of Christianity.

The state of Texas has the death penalty.

Well fuck the state of Texas. Put that in your sig and smoke it.

But of course, there's always excuses to kill, right?

No, there isn't. If someone does not pose a direct threat to your life, health, and well-being, you have no reason to kill them, at all. It irritates me beyond belief when I see "Christians" pretending that God thinks killing criminals is okay, probably more so than when I see an atheist trying to convert me. It is, for all intensive purposes, douche-baggery to the Nth degree.

For instance, the witch hunts. No, not "murders", but "judgment". Right.

There is no good excuse for the witch hunts, crusades, or any such of that nonsense. All I can say is that those "Christians" weren't very attentive of what The Bible actually says.

Well don't you have the bible? You claim to read it a lot to I assume you have it.
Here, I'll help you ( not that you need it since you've read the bible cover to cover! I sure have nothing to teach you about what's in the bible and what isn't, right? )

I have read The Bible cover-to-cover, but you're supplying a single quote from a fucking 1,400 page book with no context or attribution and you expect me to know exactly what you're talking about.

BAM, ONLINE BIBLE.

I believe Jesus is referring to the Ten Commandments.

Woah look at that, verse 21: "But anyone who says, 'You fool!' will be in danger of the fire of hell."
Holy shit, you must be able to smell your balls roasting right now!

If it's any consolation, I didn't call you anything that's not true ^.~

Haha, the bible, only someone who hasn't read it would be a christian.

Quoted for stupidity

Okay, I'm bored, you're not worth spending 45 minutes + responding to everything you sa

In conclusion, holy shit you've been destroyed.

That's sort of what cd6 would say. Yeah, you've been wasting 30minutes+ having an argument on the internet, but you cut it short because OMFG YOUR ARGUMENT HAS BEEN DESTROYED YOU INFERIOR RETARD. That's the kind of pathetic bickering I'd expect from a troll, not you. Yeah man, you "destroyed" me. I have nothing to say, you've totally put me into intellectual checkmate. I mean, don't even consider that you're boring, NOT EVEN FOR A SECOND. Obviously if I don't respond it means I can't, not that I don't want to.

Yeah let's just skip all the parts about Jesus, THE SON OF GOD, contradicting what you just said about what was in the bible.

I'm sure whatever you said was misinformed and generally in the dark about what The Bible says. Read The Bible, and I'll take any arguments you can make seriously. Until then, you're just taking little snippets

How humble of you.

I'm sorry, you've mistaken me for someone who cares what you think.

At 5/16/08 03:23 PM, Grammer wrote:

You could not have nuked Hiroshima without the knowledge of nuclear reactions, that is a staple.

Of course. But you need tons and tons of other things that you'd never blame. You need a pilot training program.
Bombers. Steel mills. Uranium mines.
Where does the blame end?

You are correct. If it said in The Bible "go kill innocent people",

It never says "innocent poeple" but the "crimes" of the people you are supposed to stone are RIDICULOUS. Adultery, pagainism, working on the sabbath, being gay etc.
You could argue that none of these people are "innocent" if you want and then say correctly that the bible indeed never says to kill innocents.

So every time I do something bad it's my religion's fault, even if my religion says don't do that. Right.

Only if you based yourself from a text in your religion or from what a religious person told you to do.

Well fuck the state of Texas. Put that in your sig and smoke it.

So states that have a death penalty aren't real christians?
right...

There is no good excuse for the witch hunts, crusades, or any such of that nonsense.

Well there aren't any if you don't read the bible, but if you had a 12th century bible in your hands, you could find plenty of reasons, or a 12th century Q'Ran ( or whatever ).
The bible then was not the same as the bible now, and it was written in latin, not english.
So then you have a big big problem on your hands because if you say that they weren't christians then, how do you know you're a real christian now? Since the bible could change a lot in 500 years?

Would you be so bold as to say "people before me weren't real christians, and people after me, if they alter the bible, won't be real christians" while you yourself basing 100% of your christian life on a bible that is 2000 years old and ultra-edited, translated, trimmed etc.?

I believe Jesus is referring to the Ten Commandments.

Where? He doesn't ever refer to it.
And what about the other quotes?

http://www.evilbible.com/do_not_ignore_o t.htm
look at this: " 27"You have heard that it was said, 'Do not commit adultery.'[e] 28But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. 30And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell."

Jesus said this. JESUS SAID THIS. If you ever jerked off, it it the contention of Jesus that you should chop off your hand. Holy shit he's crazy.

Then he said: don't marry a divorced woman because it's adultery. HOLY SHIT.
Then he says to never swear, as in " I swear on my honor/life/mother/home/house" etc.

I can't believe this nonsense.

That's sort of what cd6 would say

You bailed out when I was showing you that Jesus says HORRIBLE things, straight from the bible.
You HAVE NOT read the bible. And even if you did long ago, you did not take it all in and you don't remember most of it. Admit it. No one could remember so much text.

You don't know what's in the bible. You don't know what Jesus said. As far as I can gather, the only thing you think Jesus ever said was "forget about the old testament except the 10 commandments, and obey the golden rule".

But Jesus was a person of his time and preacher all sorts of horrible barbabric laws.

I'm sure whatever you said was misinformed and generally in the dark

It's from the bible... so... you can't argue your way out of it. We can all go check it. It's right there, in the same bible that you say contains none of these horrible things and contains only the loving laws od Jesus.

Sorry, you didn't read it. It shows.

But Jesus was a person of his time and preacher all sorts of horrible barbabric laws.

Compared to the Romans, or who?

At 5/16/08 01:59 AM, Grammer wrote: No, because Hiroshima existing was not the reason Hiroshima was bombed. Our knowledge of nuclear reactions was one of the reasons Hiroshima got nuked. Stalin's atheism was the reason he specifically targeted religious persons.

I just got here but grammer- i call fail. Stalin supported atheism (and was an atheist) but the reason he disliked religion was because communism calls for state worship alone- were nothing else can get in the way. His atheism was not the reason- even if he was a full blown christian with the same motive for power- he would've tried to end all religions who didn't worship the state!

- I don't know whether or not Stalin would've killed people if he was atheist or not, but the fact remains that he targeted people for their religion. Would a Christian do that? Would a Christian say: "Yeah, I love Jesus so much I'm going to kill his followers"? Now, if it was turned the other way around, and Stalin was a Christian, and he targeted atheists, I wouldn't blame Christianity for killing anyone (though you sure as fuck would), but I would say that Christianity was a factor in Stalin's decision to specifically target atheists, which is exactly what I said in terms of Stalin and atheism. Atheism was not at fault, but it was a factor as to why he targeted Christians. I think it's fair to say if Stalin wasn't atheist, he wouldn't have targeted religion.

I don't- if he was a christian he would've had OTHER sources of motives other than following the bible, ie. greed- wonder- curiosity- strong support of communism.

Hahaha, oh wow. Way to have it both ways. Okay, so every action an atheist commits is their fault, no one else. NOT SO WITH CHRISTIANS. All of their actions are attributed to religion. Clearly, if they ascribe to a religion, then their religion is held accountable to their actions. That's not irresponsible at all.

REALLY? If you claim this then thank you- i didn't think i could blame christianity for the iraq war, the salem witch trials, the holocaust, The tyranny before the american revolution, the protestant revolution, every war led by a christian i haven't named, and just about every murder any christian has ever commited. Thank you so much

Thou shall not commit murder is a pretty basic tenet of Christianity. It was like, put on a rock. I mean that means something.

Is it murder if you think it will help the lives of people so unbelievably much? Is it murder if you truly believe god is leading you to do it? Is it murder when forced by circumstance?

I don't even know what he's talking about. Law of man? The Old Testament? The Ten Commandments? I have no idea, you cut out a tiny passage from a chapter of The Book of Luke, and now I'm expected to believe you?

On the verse just before that he speaks of the laws of the prophets gram.

Okay, I'm bored, you're not worth spending 45 minutes + responding to everything you say.

Bottom line:

1.) Stalin was atheist

True

2.) Stalin targeted religion

true

3.) Stalin would not have targeted religion if he was... religious

False- he had other motives than his religious conviction.

4.) Do the fucking math

2+2=murder?

5.) lol dongs

true

6.) ?????

true

7.) Profit!!

excuse me it's spelled "prophet" and they made laws- which jesus claimed were infallible

At 5/16/08 05:06 PM, LazyDrunk wrote:

But Jesus was a person of his time and preacher all sorts of horrible barbabric laws.

Compared to the Romans, or who?

Compared to us.
I haven't read the bible, it's a waste of my time. Every time I see it quoted by religious people, it's empty speeches, and every time I see it quoted by atheists, it's simply appailing what you find in there.
But yeah, go look for yourself: http://www.biblegateway.com/

Just reading Matthew 5 really betrays that Jesus was an ancient jew
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?sea rch=matthew%205&version=31

You could make a career out of laughing at the things he said in the new testament, yet all you hear from religious people is that somehow the old testament is "fiction" ( except whatever science proves later on to be true or for whatever science hasn't yet dis proven, which is highly hypocritical of course ) except for the 10 commandments, which a STAGGERING amount of Christians cannot recite. A lot even have trouble with the golden rule!
How can these people call themselves "followers of Christ" when they obviously have never read or paid attention to what Christ said and are just regurgitating the same 3-4 phrases everyone already knows about Jesus.
like "Jesus died for you" and "Jesus said to love your enemies" and stuff like that. But there's a LOT of OTHER things he said :O

A lot of horrible things.

At 5/16/08 06:13 PM, poxpower wrote:

At 5/16/08 05:06 PM, LazyDrunk wrote:

But Jesus was a person of his time and preacher all sorts of horrible barbabric laws.

Compared to the Romans, or who?

Compared to us.

Only on Newgrounds are you allowed to compare a dead culture or a dead man 2000 years old to the current moral codes of the Western World.......

At 5/16/08 06:26 PM, Imperator wrote:

Only on Newgrounds are you allowed to compare a dead culture or a dead man 2000 years old to the current moral codes of the Western World.......

I think it takes far less stupidity to compare myself to him than to follow his moral teachings 2000 years later as if nothing had changed.

At 5/16/08 06:28 PM, poxpower wrote:
I think it takes far less stupidity to compare myself to him than to follow his moral teachings 2000 years later as if nothing had changed.

You'd be wrong. Do you mind NOT talking out of your ass when it's clear you don't know jack shit about what you talk about please?

I cringe every time you make a comment about history, and get it absolutely wrong.

At 5/16/08 06:32 PM, Imperator wrote:

You'd be wrong. Do you mind NOT talking out of your ass when it's clear you don't know jack shit about what you talk about please?

It says right there in your link that Jesus didn't come up with it.
And dear lord I can't believe I've been stupid enough to answer your remark in the first place.

At 5/16/08 04:56 PM, poxpower wrote:

At 5/16/08 03:23 PM, Grammer wrote:

You could not have nuked Hiroshima without the knowledge of nuclear reactions, that is a staple.

Of course. But you need tons and tons of other things that you'd never blame. You need a pilot training program.

EVERYTHING THAT WAS USED IN THE BOMBING OF HIROSHIMA, IN PART, IS AT FAULT FOR THE BOMBING OF SAID CITY

It never says "innocent poeple" but the "crimes" of the people you are supposed to stone are RIDICULOUS. Adultery, pagainism, working on the sabbath, being gay etc.

And then Jesus said don't kill people anymore.

So every time I do something bad it's my religion's fault, even if my religion says don't do that. Right.

Only if you based yourself from a text in your religion or from what a religious person told you to do.

Even if I do my best to follow what The Bible says, to say everything I do is influenced by The Bible is ridiculous.

So states that have a death penalty aren't real christians?
right...

Yeah that's totally what I fucking said.

There is no good excuse for the witch hunts, crusades, or any such of that nonsense.

Well there aren't any if you don't read the bible,

There aren't any references to any such thing at all because they didn't happen at the time The Bible was written.

but if you had a 12th century bible in your hands, you could find plenty of reasons, or a 12th century Q'Ran ( or whatever ).

I don't have a 12th century Bible and neither do you so it'd be irresponsible for either of us to say what stories would and wouldn't be in it. We don't know.

So then you have a big big problem on your hands because if you say that they weren't christians then, how do you know you're a real christian now? Since the bible could change a lot in 500 years?

You are correct it could have. In fact after I made my last post I was thinking about this, and came to the conclusion that it's not out of the scope of imagination that a book, while inspired by divinity, was passed down to man, a flawed creature, then copied by hand for a good portion of it's time in circulation, spread throughout a few good generations or so, translated 30+ different ways, might have been altered in one way or the other. In fact it'd be irresponsible of me to sit here and pretend The Bible has said the exact same thing, always, and forever will.

HOWEVER. I believe the basic tenets of Christianity (golden rule, 10 commandments, Jesus' divinity), are a staple of Christianity, and I do not believe has been altered (but then again, I dunno (neither do you))

I believe Jesus is referring to the Ten Commandments.

Where? He doesn't ever refer to it.

He just says 'The Law'. That could mean anything.

And what about the other quotes?

http://www.evilbible.com/do_not_ignore_o t.htm
look at this: " 27"You have heard that it was said, 'Do not commit adultery.'[e] 28But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. 30And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell."

Jesus said this. JESUS SAID THIS. If you ever jerked off, it it the contention of Jesus that you should chop off your hand. Holy shit he's crazy.

uh, a couple things

1.) It's a metaphor to say get rid of whatever causes you to sin, get rid of. It doesn't specifically mean if you jerk off you must cut your hand off
2.) Jerking off isn't even a fucking sin... but I suppose that's another topic for discussion.

Then he said: don't marry a divorced woman because it's adultery. HOLY SHIT.

That makes sense. How is that bad?

Then he says to never swear, as in " I swear on my honor/life/mother/home/house" etc.

Right, don't make promises. What's the point of swearing by God's name? If you break your promise is God's name going to be tarnished? If you swear by your mother, if you break your promise will you kill your mother? God put it clear: don't make promises because you might just not be able to keep them

You bailed out when I was showing you that Jesus says HORRIBLE things, straight from the bible.

I got bored because your quoted text was taking up 1/6th the page. You think you're worth that much of my time? Don't give yourself so much credit. Make your points quickly, and concisely, don't give me 10minutes worth of reading material.

You HAVE NOT read the bible.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhaahh ahahahahaah

And even if you did long ago,

Hahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahah hahahaah

you did not take it all in and you don't remember most of it. Admit it. No one could remember so much text.

I still read it every once in a while today.

You don't know what's in the bible.

Hahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahah

You don't know what Jesus said.

Hahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahah

As far as I can gather, the only thing you think Jesus ever said was "forget about the old testament except the 10 commandments, and obey the golden rule".

Hahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahaha

But Jesus was a person of his time and preacher all sorts of horrible barbabric laws.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah

Sorry, you didn't read it. It shows.

Hahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahah ahahahhaah

At 5/16/08 06:42 PM, poxpower wrote:
It says right there in your link that Jesus didn't come up with it.
And dear lord I can't believe I've been stupid enough to answer your remark in the first place.

Which is fantastic, because that's what Jesus said too!!

I can't believe you talk about things you DON'T KNOW ABOUT.
You've never read the Bible, but claim things about it.
You've never studied history worth a damn, but spout things like you're a Ph.D in it.

And you argue for science while yourself going against it's very principles. Doesn't the scientific method teach that you investigate and research things before making claims?

And yet you're Mr. "I've never read the Bible, but I'll still talk like I'm an expert on it".

way to challenge his points Imperator

what is your actual response, other than attacking his personality?

At 5/16/08 08:34 PM, Earfetish wrote: what is your actual response, other than attacking his personality?

"I take a few things from the Bible and ignore other things. I have justified this somehow. My religion is still Christianity."

At 5/16/08 07:15 PM, Grammer wrote:

EVERYTHING THAT WAS USED IN THE BOMBING OF HIROSHIMA, IN PART, IS AT FAULT FOR THE BOMBING OF SAID CITY

Well I don't see the use of expanding the blame that far. DAMN YOU FIRST SELF-REPRODUCING LIFEFORM FOR EVOLVING INTO THE GUY WHO BUILT THE PHONE FOR THE GUY WHO CALLED IN THE STRIKE!!!

And then Jesus said don't kill people anymore.

What about self-defense? As a christian, you should let yourself die. "Turn the other cheek".
What about wars?
What about indirectly killing people by banning stem cell research? If you like to blame lots of things for hiroshima, then let's blame lots of things for people who might die from not getting the benefits of stem cell advances in time!

Even if I do my best to follow what The Bible says, to say everything I do is influenced by The Bible is ridiculous.

Well not everything, but whatever things you use the bible to justify doing, then I could blame the bible for you doing them.

Yeah that's totally what I fucking said.

You said "fuck Texas", a deeply religious state.
So either they're Christians who kill people or they're not Christians.

There aren't any references to any such thing at all because they didn't happen at the time The Bible was written.

The bible was the prime reference for all religious activities throughout europe for like 1500 years.

I don't have a 12th century Bible and neither do you so it'd be irresponsible for either of us to say what stories would and wouldn't be in it. We don't know.

Well there are bible historians who do know what texts appeared in the bible at what time so they could tell us. But we both know that the actual modern bible is relatively recent.
And the bible is notorious for being a collection of religious texts that was VOTED into one volume.

HOWEVER. I believe the basic tenets of Christianity (golden rule, 10 commandments, Jesus' divinity), are a staple of Christianity, and I do not believe has been altered (but then again, I dunno (neither do you))

Well most of these rules have existed at various parts of the world. They're easy rules to figure out on our own, I don't see why you'd need the bible to teach kids.
You could teach the golden rule from greek scriptures, or buddhism or whatever.

He just says 'The Law'. That could mean anything.

He says the law and the prophetS, with an "S", thus referring to at least one other than Moses, and presumably all the of old testament prophets, whoever they were. ( Was Abraham a prophet? And Noah? I dunno ).

1.) It's a metaphor to say get rid of whatever causes you to sin, get rid of. It doesn't specifically mean if you jerk off you must cut your hand off

Maybe, who knows? Someone crazy might take it literally and you'd have the bible to blame for not being clear enough.
Good laws are crystal clear. Good laws are not stories and metaphors. That's why I think the bible is not a good way to teach morals to people.

2.) Jerking off isn't even a fucking sin... but I suppose that's another topic for discussion.

It was back then.

That makes sense. How is that bad?

He said to not marry a divorced woman, ever and that doing so is just as bad as cheating on a spouse you're already married with ( even if you're not even married)... like.. no.

Right, don't make promises.

Who doesn't make promises?
Do you teach people "Jesus said to not make promises".
But then you could say "oh no, he said SWEAR, as in he really mean you shouldn't use that turn of phrase when you promise things".
See? This is just an endless web of interpretations that amount to nothing in the end.

We could both debate for hours about what Jesus meant here, or we could just both say "look we know it's alright to make promises, so who gives a shit what Jesus said?"

There's nothing in the bible that we can't figure for ourselves. There's nothing that Jesus has ever said that hadn't been figured out eslewhere long before.

So why bother with him?

At 5/16/08 07:34 PM, Imperator wrote:

And you argue for science while yourself going against it's very principles. Doesn't the scientific method teach that you investigate and research things before making claims?

What claims are you challenging here?
All I gather is that you want to attack me for some reason based on something I never even said about history in the first place.
o.O

Like, it's not like Poxpower is making shit up, this is a particularly common criticism of Christianity, and religion in general, and the least you could do is dignify it with a response rather than tell him to read the Bible and some apologetics literature.

Christians, in the main, act like they have the exact same moral code as humanists. They appear to take no morals whatsoever from the Bible, and they certainly don't act like the Bible is The Moral Code. They might think forgiveness is a virtue, and they've gathered that that is one of the main themes of the Bible, and a couple of parables are striking, but that's only because they agreed with them beforehand.

So yeah, answer the fucking question and don't skirt around it with non-answers calling the questioner dumb. C.S Lewis' reinterpretation of Christianity does not address this point, and neither does yours - just cos you've loosened it up doesn't mean you have solid reasons to do so.

Seriously, I reckon you should just accept that your morality doesn't come from religion or your longing for eternal bliss or whatever, and in reality you're religious because of a whole host of other reasons, like group solidarity and culture and parents and because it's an easy answer.

At 5/16/08 08:34 PM, Earfetish wrote:
what is your actual response, other than attacking his personality?

If his "personality" is based around making crap up, then there's no need to make an actual response.

"I haven't read the bible" negates HIS claims.

If he hasn't read it, he doesn't know. Simple as that, and if you have a problem with it, you can both point that judgemental finger right back at yourselves for not practicing what you preach.

Nothing makes it clearer you talk out your ass on these boards when you generalize me and categorize me and then say "I've never read the book or studied your religion".

Just like all hypocritical Atheist morons, making claims straight from their asses.

(see, I can generalize too. Payback's a bitch).

At 5/16/08 08:55 PM, Imperator wrote:

If he hasn't read it, he doesn't know. Simple as that

I can still quote from it you tard.

At 5/16/08 08:59 PM, poxpower wrote:

At 5/16/08 08:55 PM, Imperator wrote:

If he hasn't read it, he doesn't know. Simple as that

I can still quote from it you tard.

Doesn't mean shit, nor make you right.

We've had this problem of you quoting bullshit from things you don't understand before, were you not paying attention or are you just a slow learner?

At 5/16/08 09:19 PM, Imperator wrote:

Doesn't mean shit, nor make you right.

Sorry, but if I quote things form the bible, it means it comes from the bible and I am right about those things being in the bible.

So once again: what are you challenging? Be specific, otherwise you're just being a dipshit.

At 5/16/08 09:40 PM, poxpower wrote:
Sorry, but if I quote things form the bible, it means it comes from the bible and I am right about those things being in the bible.

Doesn't mean you're interpreting them correctly, they were translated correctly, or you argument concerning those quotes are correct. It's called "context", which I'm sure is a foreign concept to you.

Hard to gather context on things when you admit to not caring enough to actually read the material.....but making arguments about the material you haven't read? Priceless. It's like writing a book report when you've only read the cover.

And for someone who's always talking about how theists never investigate things or are critical, you sure do take a ton of shit at face value without doing any in depth investigations yourself.

I'm criticizing your terrible methods of making judgements, and it's sad that I have to spell that out to you.

-sigh grammy- i just have to point this out "

The Law and the Prophets were until John; since then the good news of the kingdom of God is preached, and everyone forces his way into it. But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one dot of the Law to become void.
-luke 16:16-17

In context this makes perfect sense- god would be so perfect his word would be absolute- earlier the passage was talking of the pharisees and their misdeeds.

At 5/16/08 09:51 PM, Imperator wrote:

Doesn't mean you're interpreting them correctly

What am I not interpreting correctly specifically?