It matters because athiests believe they are "enlightened" and that they need to share this "enlightenment" with the rest of the world. Since most things can be proven with science (and most educated religious people these days believe god used science as a means to an end), they use science as a means to brush off all "religious evidence." Athiests, as you can tell by what Proleteria, Necrodrac and LinkX have been doing this whole thread... can be just as preachy as religious whack jobs. They just do it in a different form.
There is no such thing as "religious evidence". There is only Evidence. And the Bible is not classified as Evidence.
I didn't think I would have to, but here's the definition of Evidence.
ev·i·dence noun \ˈe-və-dən(t)s, -və-ˌden(t)s\
1 a : an outward sign : indication
b : something that furnishes proof : testimony; specifically : something legally submitted to a tribunal to ascertain the truth of a matter
@ proletaria: Do you believe that the findings of science are true? I just want a yes or no answer and then you may follow it up with any other information that you feel is useful. Thank you for your time.
We don't have to believe anything. Science gives proof for it's claims.
So science itself just stands alone outside of your understanding of things and it does nto interact or affect you in any way? What do you think of science? Is it correct? Is it wrong? Is it something that was created to answer questions that noone had an answer to?
Considering Science gives proof for it's claims, yea.
Science also tosses away bad theories and laws when proof comes about saying they are wrong.
Sadly you can not speak for all atheists as I can not speak for all Christians, so there are idiots on both sides and aggressive speech will come from both sides. Perhaps you are the true atheist as you may or may not believe think of yourself. You are a truly objective person that only trusts cold hard statistical fact and emotions are not required for this issue.
Also I do not condemn anyone to hell as I have no power over anyone. I am just stating my beliefs and am jsut as curious as to what you put your trust in.
The problem I see with this is that we are not cold lifeless people. I can smell a flower just like you can and be amazed at how amazing it smells. I can look upon a beautiful man or woman and be amazed at the beauty that he or she holds just as you can. I can look at the night sky and be mesmerized by the faint dots of light, just as you can. I dare say that Atheists are able to appreciate the world more, because we are able to see the world through the same eyes as you, but we are also able to appreciate it for what it is, not what we wish it to be.
Then please enlighten me as to what the purpose of sex is if it is not two reproductive organs atempting to take an egg and a seed and fertalize that seed to bring forth a new life. What purpose is there to sex then that does nto just simply lie in "I wanna do it cause it feels good"?
So you believe that infertile people have no reason to make love? Does an infertile person have no right to get married? Last I checked, that was not illegal.
Actually I was referring to the plethora of bacteria and venereal diseases that were present without the sophisticated medical practices we have today. It wasn't a dig at HIV, it was a dig at how promiscuity could and frequently did result in the death of those involved, due to the myriad micro-organisms not found elsewhere on the body. I hope you're not offended, I thought it was known fact.
Because it's more dangerous to screw my boyfriend in the butt then it is for me to screw my girlfriend in the butt, right?
I am an atheist and an agnostic. I will refer to myself as an atheist for the rest of the reply for practical reasons. I used to be Catholic, but I renounced my faith.
I chose to be atheist because religion is ultimately a question of faith. Specifically, it is ultimately a question of faith from an epistemological view that uses scientific tools to obtain knowledge. Other points of view regard personal experience, such as feeling a gods presence, as evidence of a god´s existence.
My opinion is that you need an agreed-upon method of obtaining knowledge, that can be tested in regard to how good it is at obtaining knowledge. The testable methods we are currently using (experiments, correlational studies et cetera) can not be used to test the existence of any god what so ever. No evidence, no reason to believe. In addition, science requires a paradigm in which the world is looked upon as a deterministic sequence of cause and effect, both on a large scale, and on a small scale.
I was unable to fit the concept of God into this world-view. Notice that I am speaking about the concept of God, and not God himself. These are completely different matters. Initially, I tried to resolve this issue by choosing dualism. The problem about dualism, is that it creates more problems than it solves. Interaction is just one among many. So I ended up choosing simplicity. No God, no incompatibility problems.
TLDR; I chose an atheist point of view because it is ultimately a question of belief according to my ways of obtaining knowledge, and because I got less problems with how I view the world:)
I just wanted to quote this because it's awesome and needs to be read a second time.
My wife and I chose eachother and you have the right to choose another man. It is the right given to all people. It does nto mean that everyone will agree with you but what does it matter what they think? You should do what you want and what you think it good or right or true or scientifically proven to you. As for me I will serve God to the best of my very limited ability.
First, if it's scientifically proven, it's scientifically proven to everyone.
Second, if a man is not married to his homosexual lover (Or woman to her's) then they are treated as friends in the eyes of the law, and are not equal to you and your wife.
Noone is treated fairly. Your lifestyle is outside of the norm of society and therfore you are shunned. Do i think you are treated in the correct manner? No, but legal issues are legal issues. I could hold dearly the life of a close friend that is not related to me and I would not be able to visit them in the hospital either if they were in a family only area. Am I now discriminated against due to my lower level of relation with them? I don't think so. That is jsut the way the rules are there.
Because a close friend is the same in your eyes as your wife?
Your wife should be more important then a close friend, and the same would be the same for everyone, if the law was not bigoted towards heterosexuals. But this is a thread about religion, not politics, so I won't get into that here.
If you were married and listed legally as husband then yes you could visit them. If I attempted to visit my wife in ICU prior to us getting married then I would not be allowed to visit her. This is the legal issue. Emotionally we would be on a similar level and feel we have the right to see our partner, but the legal matter keeps us from it.
But that's the great thing, isn't it? He's not married so he's not allowed to see his significant other, unlike you, who is legally permitted to get married and able to see your significant other.
Real fair, right? Religious dogma turned to law. If I wanted that, I'd go to Iraq or Israel...
you kno what i think? the basis of a christian is to not resist evil, and by that i mean the evil directed at you not go do evil things. so no a real christian would accept the injustice and try to help you accept it as well. This goes for every other comment out there about fighting for rights and that christians should fight for rights as well. Did Christ fight injustice, no he accepted it. He did not resist evil and that is what all christians are called to do. and yes it aint pretty for Christians. I hope there isnt any more confusion in that matter.
This is something that, back when I was christian, I never was able to embrace.
If something is wrong, it's not a right or privilege, it's our right as human beings to see that the wrong is fixed.
This is not a privilege, but a responsibility, regardless of what faith or lack of you have.
This is something that, back when I was christian, I never was able to embrace.
If something is wrong, it's not a right or privilege, it's our right as human beings to see that the wrong is fixed.
This is not a privilege, but a responsibility, regardless of what faith or lack of you have.
big problem with ur reasoning, who decides wrong from right or what if people have different views on a certain truth or right. one thing i learned from experience is that no one will ever truly, wholly, agree with someone else. We may have a similar idea but the little thousand details will vary from person to person. and so something is wrong according to whom exactly? you? me? Fixing a wrong also states that what ur trying to do is make JUSTICE. but whose justice r u making? ur own. everyone has their own sense of justice. If u hit me ill hit u back, and harder. this way we will never gain peace, world peace or inner peace. besides with ur response i c u dont fully understand the Christian stance of not resisting evil. I am beginning to kno myself, i think. n with wat i kno i can already have an idea of what i deserve. and there is no evil that someone can ever do to me that will fully cover wat i deserve. so i will try not to resist not only because i deserve it but because i deserve much worse and i am fully aware of it. that is a little further exlpanation of a Christian. so for all those who i think its about being nice, good people, think again. its more about discoverin who u are n about christs love for you AS you are. not about being nice. that being said i am not a Christian, i try but im not. keep it up guys this thread has some awesome stuff, its good to kno its not getting out of hand, there may yet be hope for humanity, lol, this stuff on a diablo forum is funny
Then please enlighten me as to what the purpose of sex is if it is not two reproductive organs atempting to take an egg and a seed and fertalize that seed to bring forth a new life. What purpose is there to sex then that does nto just simply lie in "I wanna do it cause it feels good"?
So you believe that infertile people have no reason to make love? Does an infertile person have no right to get married? Last I checked, that was not illegal.
umm guys maybe i should mention that some of my closest friends, married, were known to be infertile. kinda sad
however they seem to have like a couple of kids running around their house, funny, i thought they were infertile.
yea the doctors ARE baffled, all things are possible for God. maybe they made a mistake? yea maybe, its just they happen to make mistakes soo often in my experience. Also the one where the doctor said to my friend over in another state, "it is impossible for you to get pregnant." n walla next month she's pregnant. 3ish years later she's pregnant with 3 child.
silly doctor. in other words when ur married u r totally free to make love with ur wife whether she's infertile or not. In christianity, the belief is that as long as ur open to the will of God making love is always good. because u kno God is not just some muscle head on a throne he does act in our lives. if u didnt believe in God but u thought that sex is just to make kids then yea u could argue that the infertile couple should not have sex. but if ur just enjoying the infertility because u dont have to worry bout kids, then yea not Christian at all. I knew someone who was actually "infertile" suddenly after a while she got pregnant and decided to abort. talk about throwing the supposed "impossible" gift out the window.
I nearly included a disclaimer saying that I wasn't trying to say that the bible actually is a textbook, but I thought it wasn't necessary. Clearly it was. I also now see that textbook was probably the incorrect word to use.
I'm glad we're on the same page then. =)
I see what you did there! Lol...Well played.
I know I said I was done here but I can never resist congratulating a good pun.
thats why i cant get away from this forum, theres talent in here i tell you.
[quote=Hiero;/comments/811923]Actually I was referring to the plethora of bacteria and venereal diseases that were present without the sophisticated medical practices we have today. It wasn't a dig at HIV, it was a dig at how promiscuity could and frequently did result in the death of those involved, due to the myriad micro-organisms not found elsewhere on the body. I hope you're not offended, I thought it was known fact.
Because it's more dangerous to screw my boyfriend in the butt then it is for me to screw my girlfriend in the butt, right?
you kno what i think? the basis of a christian is to not resist evil, and by that i mean the evil directed at you not go do evil things. so no a real christian would accept the injustice and try to help you accept it as well. This goes for every other comment out there about fighting for rights and that christians should fight for rights as well. Did Christ fight injustice, no he accepted it. He did not resist evil and that is what all christians are called to do. and yes it aint pretty for Christians. I hope there isnt any more confusion in that matter.
This is something that, back when I was christian, I never was able to embrace.
If something is wrong, it's not a right or privilege, it's our right as human beings to see that the wrong is fixed.
This is not a privilege, but a responsibility, regardless of what faith or lack of you have.
I don't know what denomination you are, BlackShepherd, but I've NEVER seen that Christians are supposed to behave like doormats. When good men stand back and let shit go down, then that's when they stop being good men. I suppose you mean we should all be pacifists, but you're wrong. There's a time and place for everything - I'm sure you've heard that before.
I'm not saying that I condone the persecution of people, I'm saying that Christianity is by no means a passive religion. It should be an active religion that actively does good things for the betterment of others. A log can sit back and say, "what will come will come," but a man is supposed to be a bit more resourceful. Sure unavoidable shit happens, but I've never seen it where we're directed to twiddle our thumbs while we're oppressed. The beginnings of the church was underground because of persecution. They didn't sit back say, "I accept this injustice." No, they said, "fuck that, we'll do it anyway."
I know I'm probably exaggerating your point a little bit, but Christ was no human carpet. Neither was Peter, or Paul, or any of the other disciples... Mercy and justice are duties.
I was raised a Catholic and I'm also a scientist so I've got my foot in both camps. As far as the bible and God are concerned, I see them as a 'tool' for the means of conveying how to live a certain life style.
What is the biblical "tool," and how do you justify it being able to do anything? One tool, science, evidently works to explain a lot in our universe. The other tool, belief, is without evidence, and makes even more far-reaching claims about the nature of the universe and how we should live in it. What makes that life style so good you're willing to render your scientific mind null and void to use the other tool?
A book can be quite a useful tool for manipulating other people thoughts.
As for life style. Life style is something subjective to each person, if i like it more to sleep on the floor is completely up to me. You can say the same for the life style of a believer.
I don't believe in any religion but the way you approached and replayed to his comment is wrong.
Actually because Graphics_I treat the bible and god as tools, I find hem quite sceptic in his Catholic origins.
It's equally dangerous..... There's feminazis that would sue you for that. They love equality.
But seriously, you're nitpicking. I'm just trying to give you the reason that Leviticus passage says what it says. I'm not trying to say you're going to hell or anything, but the fact of the matter is, there's E. Coli and other shit in your ass and it can make you sick. And butt sex increases the chances of transmission and infection.
as for condoms existing, that's debated. There's no proof that they had prevalent use. But you already knew that since you read the article didn't you?
And yes, I suppose some girls would like it up the butt. But that's not what we were talking about....
The problem here is that you are using current knowledge to explain that Leviticus passage. Assuming that it did guess E.coli and the properties the rectal wall put you at more risk of infection and transmission, how do they come to the gay killing and persecution part?
And if we are using current knowledge, you will also need to factor in the use of condoms in addition to the diversity of the sexual act (meaning homosexual activity does not equal anal sex- like you mentioned eariler) to understand that the( or this part of if you prefer) scriptures are way outdated and irrelevant for our current time.
And it is important to nitpick on the matter since at one point in our history Christians were using the bible to justify slavery just like it is doing nowadays to justify this double standard in living conditions for and acknowledgment of gay people.
And I am not trying to side track the discussion here but I consider this to be a valid parallel showing how at the bible(or any other holy book) is not a good tool to derive our morals from.
It was already explained in an earlier post the direct benefits (societal and evolutionary) of not doing the 'major sins' whether or not god condemns them.
Disclaimer: I am not disputing the fact that some Christians had a major role in the abolition of slavery but I would argue that it's human nature and compassion that triumphed over religion. And as expected, we cherry-picked the parts that helped the cause. However this does not preclude the fact that within holy books, the persecution of man that is (arbitrarily) deemed less equal than his brethren is encouraged or supported in some way or form.
The problem here is that you are using current knowledge to explain that Leviticus passage. Assuming that it did guess E.coli and the properties the rectal wall put you at more risk of infection and transmission, how do they come to the gay killing and persecution part?
And if we are using current knowledge, you will also need to factor in the use of condoms in addition to the diversity of the sexual act (meaning homosexual activity does not equal anal sex- like you mentioned eariler) to understand that the( or this part of if you prefer) scriptures are way outdated and irrelevant for our current time.
And it is important to nitpick on the matter since at one point in our history Christians were using the bible to justify slavery just like it is doing nowadays to justify this double standard in living conditions for and acknowledgment of gay people.
And I am not trying to side track the discussion here but I consider this to be a valid parallel showing how at the bible(or any other holy book) is not a good tool to derive our morals from.
It was already explained in an earlier post the direct benefits (societal and evolutionary) of not doing the 'major sins' whether or not god condemns them.
Disclaimer: I am not disputing the fact that some Christians had a major role in the abolition of slavery but I would argue that it's human nature and compassion that triumphed over religion. And as expected, we cherry-picked the parts that helped the cause. However this does not preclude the fact that within holy books, the persecution of man that is (arbitrarily) deemed less equal than his brethren is encouraged or supported in some way or form.
I've stayed overlong in this thread trying to just spread some background on that passage. I've done what I can do and I'm tired of my points being picked over down to the wording when I'm just trying to give people information. I'm tired of people quoting me and responding to what I'm saying like I'm condemning them and everyone that has the same lifestyle to the darkness. Double standards piss me off, too. I guess you can't have a discussion on the internet where both sides assume the other's humanity and allow a little room for error and try to work through it. Most of what I've received in this thread seems like it has been filled with thinly veiled malice, but that may just be me. If it's not just me, I hope deep inside you have a kernel of shame that eats away at you until you PM me an apology.
And quite frankly, I'm just tired of some people acting like I'm a complete idiot.
Honestly nekro, if I can't use current knowledge to explain that leviticus passage, what knowledge should I use? Mid 20'th century? That's not a good one. 19'th century? Still not a good one. I'm not going to go through and respond to your points simply because they're frivolous and silly. Do some research and learn how to carry on a polite conversation with quibbling over shit like this. And no they didn't have fucking condoms back then. Birth control was the woman's responsibility.
There's a reason these threads don't work out. It's because someone comes along and responds with malice and pisses everyone off.
If you see sex as just a way to acquire pleasure then what keeps people from having sex with animals or children. If they find pleasure in it and the other party does not object then what is the problem? You can not procreate with an animal or children prior to their puberty.
Nothing have kept ppl from having sex with animals. As fare as I know there is no low that prevent it. If you like it you are free to do it.
As for children. Human under a certain age are not mature, they can't think rationally and make a rational choice.
That's why sex, driving, drinking and many other things are prohibited for human underage.
Like driving and drinking, sex is not prohibited because a child can't have children at that age, it's prohibited because he/she is not ready mentally.
big problem with ur reasoning, who decides wrong from right or what if people have different views on a certain truth or right.
If it harms somebody directly, then it's wrong. Slavery was wrong. We shouldn't sit back and allow it, we ended it like it should of been done. Feminist rights (Or lack thereof) was wrong. Females fought and got the rights they deserved.
I don't think you are going to disagree that there are some things that are glaringly right or wrong, would you?
As for deserving suffering, when I was Christian, I accepted it, but never embraced it. It always felt wrong somehow. Now that I've left the religion and been out for some time, I can look at the world without the lens of Christianity, and personally, I feel like a new person. I don't have to be punished for my ancestors sins, and I can be me. I deserve punishment for my own wrong doings, but things like eating shell fish is not wrong, contrary to the Bible.
umm guys maybe i should mention that some of my closest friends, married, were known to be infertile. kinda sad
however they seem to have like a couple of kids running around their house, funny, i thought they were infertile.
yea the doctors ARE baffled, all things are possible for God. maybe they made a mistake? yea maybe, its just they happen to make mistakes soo often in my experience. Also the one where the doctor said to my friend over in another state, "it is impossible for you to get pregnant." n walla next month she's pregnant. 3ish years later she's pregnant with 3 child.
silly doctor.
So it's okay for infertile couples to get married, because the doctors might of made a mistake or god might of come down and done a magic trick, but it's evil and wrong for a homosexual couple to get married because everyone knows a man cannot get pregnant?
I feel this to be...wrong...and sick... And personally, it makes me detest the religion more. :/
But seriously, you're nitpicking. I'm just trying to give you the reason that Leviticus passage says what it says. I'm not trying to say you're going to hell or anything, but the fact of the matter is, there's E. Coli and other shit in your ass and it can make you sick. And butt sex increases the chances of transmission and infection.
I understand this, but some women prefer it up the butt, and that's just a fact. This was also true when Leviticus was written, so why does it not also say you don't do women up the butt?
(Answer: Because it's anti-gay hate speech.)
I'm not calling you anti-gay, just the bible. Just making that clear. o.O
I don't know what denomination you are, BlackShepherd, but I've NEVER seen that Christians are supposed to behave like doormats. When good men stand back and let shit go down, then that's when they stop being good men. I suppose you mean we should all be pacifists, but you're wrong. There's a time and place for everything - I'm sure you've heard that before.
I'm glad there are people like you still in the religion. I just hope you follow your heart and not the literal translation of the Bible.
I've stayed overlong in this thread trying to just spread some background on that passage. I've done what I can do and I'm tired of my points being picked over down to the wording when I'm just trying to give people information. I'm tired of people quoting me and responding to what I'm saying like I'm condemning them and everyone that has the same lifestyle to the darkness.
I just wanna say real quick that I never condemned you, just the Bible, Tanakh, and Qu'ran. I just wanna put that out there.
Honestly nekro, if I can't use current knowledge to explain that leviticus passage, what knowledge should I use? Mid 20'th century? That's not a good one. 19'th century? Still not a good one. I'm not going to go through and respond to your points simply because they're frivolous and silly. Do some research and learn how to carry on a polite conversation with quibbling over shit like this. And no they didn't have fucking condoms back then. Birth control was the woman's responsibility.
Actually, considering the Council of Nicea was held in 325 CE so it would be most logical to use that time period. (Yes, the books were written before this, but this is when the Bible was put together.)
Nothing have kept ppl from having sex with animals. As fare as I know there is no low that prevent it. If you like it you are free to do it.
As for children. Human under a certain age are not mature, they can't think rationally and make a rational choice.
That's why sex, driving, drinking and many other things are prohibited for human underage.
Like driving and drinking, sex is not prohibited because a child can't have children at that age, it's prohibited because he/she is not ready mentally.
Thankyou for pointing this post out. I seem to have missed it.
If you see sex as just a way to acquire pleasure then what keeps people from having sex with animals or children. If they find pleasure in it and the other party does not object then what is the problem? You can not procreate with an animal or children prior to their puberty.
What keeps people from having sex with animals and children. Well, animals are not consenting adult humans, and children are not consenting adult humans.
In addition, you should be absolutely ashamed of trying this stunt.
big problem with ur reasoning, who decides wrong from right or what if people have different views on a certain truth or right.
If it harms somebody directly, then it's wrong.
Just a quick thought.
What if a person is convicted of murder and sentenced to death? Is it wrong, because harm will be done to him?
What if someone breaks into your home, threatening to stab your loved ones and you beat the crap out of him?
What if a rally gets out of hand and the police becomes obligated to use force to bring the mobs to order?
What if a soldier shoots a child because he's running around firing an assault rifle?
I can probably give more examples, even some better examples, but these will do. I just wanted to show that there are moral grey zones. Especially if you take different cultures and religions into account, then you can't decide where the line is drawn, and it's not always as simple as you may think.
Not even a deity can enforce its own laws.
big problem with ur reasoning, who decides wrong from right or what if people have different views on a certain truth or right.
If it harms somebody directly, then it's wrong.
Just a quick thought.
What if a person is convicted of murder and sentenced to death? Is it wrong, because harm will be done to him?
What if someone breaks into your home, threatening to stab your loved ones and you beat the crap out of him?
What if a rally gets out of hand and the police becomes obligated to use force to bring the mobs to order?
What if a soldier shoots a child because he's running around firing an assault rifle?
I can probably give more examples, even some better examples, but these will do. I just wanted to show that there are moral grey zones. Especially if you take different cultures and religions into account, then you can't decide where the line is drawn, and it's not always as simple as you may think.
Not even a deity can enforce its own laws.
rawr thank you. it also depends on what you mean by harm, physical or emotional. in both instances pple decide to take justice into their own hands because they think they know better.
The problem here is that you are using current knowledge to explain that Leviticus passage. Assuming that it did guess E.coli and the properties the rectal wall put you at more risk of infection and transmission, how do they come to the gay killing and persecution part?
And if we are using current knowledge, you will also need to factor in the use of condoms in addition to the diversity of the sexual act (meaning homosexual activity does not equal anal sex- like you mentioned eariler) to understand that the( or this part of if you prefer) scriptures are way outdated and irrelevant for our current time.
And it is important to nitpick on the matter since at one point in our history Christians were using the bible to justify slavery just like it is doing nowadays to justify this double standard in living conditions for and acknowledgment of gay people.
And I am not trying to side track the discussion here but I consider this to be a valid parallel showing how at the bible(or any other holy book) is not a good tool to derive our morals from.
It was already explained in an earlier post the direct benefits (societal and evolutionary) of not doing the 'major sins' whether or not god condemns them.
Disclaimer: I am not disputing the fact that some Christians had a major role in the abolition of slavery but I would argue that it's human nature and compassion that triumphed over religion. And as expected, we cherry-picked the parts that helped the cause. However this does not preclude the fact that within holy books, the persecution of man that is (arbitrarily) deemed less equal than his brethren is encouraged or supported in some way or form.
I've stayed overlong in this thread trying to just spread some background on that passage. I've done what I can do and I'm tired of my points being picked over down to the wording when I'm just trying to give people information. I'm tired of people quoting me and responding to what I'm saying like I'm condemning them and everyone that has the same lifestyle to the darkness. Double standards piss me off, too. I guess you can't have a discussion on the internet where both sides assume the other's humanity and allow a little room for error and try to work through it. Most of what I've received in this thread seems like it has been filled with thinly veiled malice, but that may just be me. If it's not just me, I hope deep inside you have a kernel of shame that eats away at you until you PM me an apology.
And quite frankly, I'm just tired of some people acting like I'm a complete idiot.
Honestly nekro, if I can't use current knowledge to explain that leviticus passage, what knowledge should I use? Mid 20'th century? That's not a good one. 19'th century? Still not a good one. I'm not going to go through and respond to your points simply because they're frivolous and silly. Do some research and learn how to carry on a polite conversation with quibbling over shit like this. And no they didn't have fucking condoms back then. Birth control was the woman's responsibility.
There's a reason these threads don't work out. It's because someone comes along and responds with malice and pisses everyone off.
Thank you for the lesson in polite discourse. So I should follow your example? Quoting you and saying you are speaking shit without responding to your points and merely discarding them as silly and frivolous?
Oh yes I would love to do that...NOT.
Since you seem to be under some weird impression of malice on my behalf, allow me to clarify. You seem willing and understanding in shedding light on passages of the bible. I took the opportunity to tell how these passages are not relevant and downright counter-productive in our time and age. If your ideas are above criticism, then you are in the wrong place. And if you think I am being disrespectful, please read again my last post. It was as formal and honest as possible.
Also instead of wasting energy in inferring the most melodramatic possible purpose behind me questioning you, I would have preferred you give instead some consideration to what I wrote and if you have nothing worthy to add or at least to explain, then I would be appreciative if you held back your frustration.
Exactly how would it be, if when you quoted the bible, I instead refuted that it's shit, pointless and frivolous?
I believe I have been respectful enough while getting my points across. If after you read this you think I still owe you an apology, then please PM me and explain yourself. I have apologized many a times to members (regular users) I have somehow wronged or offended here so I have don't an ego problem if that is what you are wondering.
Back on topic and to my 'frivolous' points, the problem with using current knowledge to examine the Leviticus passage requires the implication that those who wrote the book had such knowledge and we know this is false.
The actual rationale at that point in time to condemn homosexuality results from precisely lack of understanding of the human condition.
And if you had bothered to read what I wrote, you would have noticed that I didn't (and never)say they used condoms at that time.
Instead I said that the irrelevance of the texts and passages of the bible is made even more prominent in the face of our current knowledge.
Condoms apply obviously for our time and this comes from our desire to preserve and promote the health of our species. If the bible had been so understanding of the human being, instead of condemning it would tried to champion safe sex(which like i said does not necessarily involve penetration).
But we all know how sex is made taboo throughout most religions, so current knowledge cannot possibly be used to understand the rationale behind these texts when they decided some humans were bound for hell for being just who they are.
And to be safe that you don't randomly fly off the handle again, I would like you to know that I sincerely would appreciate your opinion on this if you would care to respond.
Cheers.
BlackSheperd, on 11 October 2011 - 06:04 AM, said:
umm guys maybe i should mention that some of my closest friends, married, were known to be infertile. kinda sad
however they seem to have like a couple of kids running around their house, funny, i thought they were infertile.
yea the doctors ARE baffled, all things are possible for God. maybe they made a mistake? yea maybe, its just they happen to make mistakes soo often in my experience. Also the one where the doctor said to my friend over in another state, "it is impossible for you to get pregnant." n walla next month she's pregnant. 3ish years later she's pregnant with 3 child.
silly doctor.
So it's okay for infertile couples to get married, because the doctors might of made a mistake or god might of come down and done a magic trick, but it's evil and wrong for a homosexual couple to get married because everyone knows a man cannot get pregnant?
I feel this to be...wrong...and sick... And personally, it makes me detest the religion more. :/
first i never said the doctors were wrong, they were right. thats just one instance were someone might shove it aside as a technical mistake instead of facing the facts. this woman was and still is infertile according to all scientific knowledge there is, yet shes making babies. Second i never actually mentioned homosexuality or thats its evil, so umm not sure where u got that. but im sorry if i have offended. but honestly why would you want to get married under the church if ur homosexual or if u dont believe in God, or are not open to life.If u get married under a certain pertense its really actually insulting to the Church. besides cant homosexuals get married in some states, i wouldnt worry about it cause eventually itll be allowed, by the gov't, in every state and country. I never said anything about a magic trick either i just meant that God can act in ur life if u let him. but if u dont want him to he's not going to rip ur freedom apart and do it anyways. oh n btw, i understand where ur coming from with regards to God, but the first phrase u said could be very offensive to some pple, just letting u kno. i probly left something out.
Why are some people unable to believe that there is something that can not be explained? Everything can not be proven and it is a waste to attempt to do so.
Prove to me that gravity exists.
The idea that gravity is in every way as unknowable as the assertion of an almighty god is rediculous and a slap in the face to all physicists since newton who helped us form our understanding of gravity and further explain our universe.
Newton was wrong as well as all the other physicists that came after him. He mearly was incapably of understanding the great power that God holds.
I tend to be open-minded and leave others on their business but I can’t stand your way of talking.
You don’t deserve to talk about science because probably you haven’t passed your fist class of math or physics. And so you don’t deserve to mention great people like Newton.
Your foolish religions have burned this people alive because they were right in their claims that the earth circled around the sun. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giordano_Bruno
The religion should have fallen apart the first moment that humanity finally accepted that is the earth that circle around the sun and that we are not the center of be all and end all.
But you have always found way to circumvent what your religion had sad in the past. It’s the same as the discussion we are having here about literal and not literal scripts. In short everything written in this holly books is literal and the word of god until, science prove otherwise, or it fall against our human moral/ethic.
I’m not saying those books are useless actually they are quite useful to understand how stupid a civilization can be.
The only true value this books hand out are matters of ethic and moral, like: don’t still, don’t lie, don’t harm the other, help the one in need, etc. You don’t need a religion to teach to a child these things.
Everything else is bullsh*t. Who ever come from the dead to say if there is a heaven or hell?
Live your life while you can because is the only one you have. After you’re dead you will just be dead and you won’t have a second chance.
Life is the future, not the past (books of any kind are part of the past).
The past can teach us, through experience, how to accomplish things in the future, comfort us with cherished memories, and provide the foundation of what has already been accomplished. But only the future holds life. To live in the past is to embrace what is dead. To live life to its fullest, each day must be created anew. As rational, thinking beings, we must use our intellect to make rational choices, not a blind devotion to what has come before.
Faith is a device of self-delusion, a sleight of hand done with words and emotions founded on any irrational notion that can be dreamed up.
Faith is the attempt to coerce truth to surrender to whim. In simple terms, it is trying to breathe life into a lie by trying to outshine reality with the beauty of wishes.
Faith is the refuge of fools, the ignorant, and the deluded, not of thinking, rational men.
Willfully turning aside from the truth is treason to one's self.
I will apologies to everyone who is trying to have a civil conversation and take my leave from this thread.
Back on topic and to my 'frivolous' points, the problem with using current knowledge to examine the Leviticus passage requires the implication that those who wrote the book had such knowledge and we know this is false.
The actual rationale at that point in time to condemn homosexuality results from precisely lack of understanding of the human condition.
And if you had bothered to read what I wrote, you would have noticed that I didn't (and never)say they used condoms at that time.
Instead I said that the irrelevance of the texts and passages of the bible is made even more prominent in the face of our current knowledge.
Condoms apply obviously for our time and this comes from our desire to preserve and promote the health of our species. If the bible had been so understanding of the human being, instead of condemning it would tried to champion safe sex(which like i said does not necessarily involve penetration).
But we all know how sex is made taboo throughout most religions, so current knowledge cannot possibly be used to understand the rationale behind these texts when they decided some humans were bound for hell for being just who they are.
just by saying that the Bible is irrelevant in any context, could be insulting to some. The whole thing about condemning homosexuality is not entirely true. it is simply condemning any act of sex that is not faithful to what is natural. the problem with the human condition is that we've been given the freedom to explore beyond ourselves, and our curiosity gets the better of us. because whether or not something is wrong, our curiousity will want to justify it. for example doing drugs, teenage sex, all these things are results of our curiosity and just because everyone is doing it, doesnt mean its right because ur saying that the wisdom of 13-15 year old is right and true. Furthermore, nobody is bound to hell for being who they are, if that is ur interpretation of Christianity, then ur horribly mistaken, im sry. with regards to other religions idk as much about those, so i cant say. The core of christianity is love and forgiveness this is aimed at friends, family, and enemies. by enemies i mean pple that physically harm you or just piss u off. so its kinda funny when i find pple against this. and btw the Bible is used as a tool to help us interpret our history and understand our present. and what pple dont know is that it has been changed, slightly, to be more relevant with the times. also much of what is written, if not all, is based on Jewish traditions and customs sooo if u dont know them ur not going to fully understand many many verses, and even whole chapters. and btw i dont think theres any other book out there that understands the human condition as WELL as the Bible does. we're only human its understandable.
also the whole thing about condoms, im going to say something and i want you to tell me if u feel its true, think hard b4 u answer. why do we really want to use condoms. for safe sex? is that it? or is it more so that we can CONTROL our little lives? If i shove aside wat i kno to be true then ill use condoms but only so that i can control what happens to the best of my ability. i mean u c it everywhere when two teenagers have sex or when in college. their biggest worry is not acquiring a disease. their biggest worry is pregnancy. they dont want to take that responsibility because of whatever, but they dont use condoms to protect their health, that if anything, comes second.
I’m not saying those books are useless actually they are quite useful to understand how stupid a civilization can be.
The only true value this books hand out are matters of ethic and moral, like: don’t still, don’t lie, don’t harm the other, help the one in need, etc. You don’t need a religion to teach to a child these things.
Everything else is bullsh*t. Who ever come from the dead to say if there is a heaven or hell?
Live your life while you can because is the only one you have. After you’re dead you will just be dead and you won’t have a second chance.
WOW this is by far the biggest insults i've seen in this thread. Congrats. btw the bible is not about teaching not to steal, or dont lie, or helping the one in need. that all comes from our individual choices based on what we believe to be true. The bible goes a lot deeper than that, dont hurt ur silly head over it tho
but u definately said something quite interesting but ill reiterate. guys in reading this right now, there is NO HOPE, after ur dead ull be just that DEAD! like food for worms, so get cremated pple cause its ugly. oh and there is no SECOND CHANCE. if u make a mistake ur done for. HAR HAR HAR! So anwser me this why should i help anybody besides myself? to be nice and a good person? thats very debateable cause maybe im just a proud bastard in the inside, which i am. If i help someone in need, sure its good to help them, but the essence of the act is to help myself. this is a wisdom u may not understand. but its ok, thank you for sharing ur ignorance with regards to the bible. Feel free to live in ur past or u future just dont forget about the present or u might break ur nose on a wall.
as far as the link u provided. its from wiki so i wonder its acurracy but yea ill take it for wat it is, in my experience however there is much history that is left out that many times shows a much different reality.
just by saying that the Bible is irrelevant in any context, could be insulting to some.
Denial and arrogance are the only possible explanations for feeling insulted in this case.
Certainly you can appreciate that from the point of view of Hindus and Buddhists (non-Abrahamic religions) the bible is almost completely irrelevant. Never mind atheists, most if not all maintain that they are the only and true religion. There is no doubt that there are interlacing philosophies among religions of the world but that this is due to our natural sense of morality and self-preservation.
The whole thing about condemning homosexuality is not entirely true. it is simply condemning any act of sex that is not faithful to what is natural.
So is homosexuality natural then? I recall proletariat quoting specific passages condemning homosexuals. Maybe you would like to respond to that in particular?
I just copy pasted the part of that post to save you the trouble:
"If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives." (Leviticus 20:13)
the problem with the human condition is that we've been given the freedom to explore beyond ourselves, and our curiosity gets the better of us. because whether or not something is wrong, our curiousity will want to justify it. for example doing drugs, teenage sex, all these things are results of our curiosity and just because everyone is doing it, doesnt mean its right because ur saying that the wisdom of 13-15 year old is right and true.
You are taking what I said completely out of context. The term 'human condition' I have used in my post focused on our predisposition to either homosexuality or heterosexuality, none of which can be related to curiosity. In either case you're are attracted to a man or to a woman. I am not curious how it is to sleep with a guy because I am simply not attracted to them. Are you curious in your sexuality so that you can relate to the curiosity associated with underage sex and drug use/misuse? I am only asking by the way(this is not an attack).
Furthermore, nobody is bound to hell for being who they are, if that is ur interpretation of Christianity, then ur horribly mistaken, im sry. with regards to other religions idk as much about those, so i cant say. The core of christianity is love and forgiveness this is aimed at friends, family, and enemies. by enemies i mean pple that physically harm you or just piss u off. so its kinda funny when i find pple against this and btw the Bible is used as a tool to help us interpret our history and understand our present. and what pple dont know is that it has been changed, slightly, to be more relevant with the times. also much of what is written, if not all, is based on Jewish traditions and customs sooo if u dont know them ur not going to fully understand many many verses, and even whole chapters. and btw i dont think theres any other book out there that understands the human condition as WELL as the Bible does. we're only human its understandable.
All of this has been addressed in detail already(tool for history, love and forgiveness). Please if you quote me, do respond to the specific points I mentioned otherwise it is not a discussion but a mere statement of belief. I say this with no ill-intent.
Just please quote one point at a time and respond to them individually if possible and I will happily get back to you to continue the discussion. Hope that's alright.
Denial and arrogance are the only possible explanations for feeling insulted in this case.
Certainly you can appreciate that from the point of view of Hindus and Buddhists (non-Abrahamic religions) the bible is almost completely irrelevant. Never mind atheists, most if not all maintain that they are the only and true religion. There is no doubt that there are interlacing philosophies among religions of the world but that this is due to our natural sense of morality and self-preservation.
ur right, i was just stating the possible offense someone might take not that i take any.
HAR HAR HAR! So anwser me this why should i help anybody besides myself? to be nice and a good person? thats very debateable cause maybe im just a proud bastard in the inside, which i am. If i help someone in need, sure its good to help them, but the essence of the act is to help myself. this is a wisdom u may not understand. but its ok, thank you for sharing ur ignorance with regards to the bible. Feel free to live in ur past or u future just dont forget about the present or u might break ur nose on a wall.
You help people to help yourself. You got that one right.
What I don't understand is how you think that this wisdom is partial to religion(or the bible)? Or that it is even 'wisdom' at all?
Allow me to explain.
One concrete and basic (instinctual) reason why you help other people(and it in turn helps you):
Our ability to empathize with fellow humans make it so that we recognize when another individual is in a bad condition. We actually feel bad and anxious when we contemplate that situation. It's our natural tendency.
Degrees of empathy obviously vary from person to person but I can confidently say that if I show the major part of humanity a video of a Somalian child starving, crying and dying in pain, you will cringe and feel bad. And if I present a donation box right after the video, odds are most will try and help.
How does it effectively help you: You feel good you've contributed to whatever aid is going to that child. Feeling good releases hormones that decreases your stress level- the latter being widely recognized as a harmful element if in high levels. In other words and as unromantic as it sounds, most of us, irrespective of religion, color or gender are programmed to help.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I just spent an hour reading over everything posted and re-reading it to make sure I understood the posts. Here's the ones that grab my attention.
There is no such thing as "religious evidence". There is only Evidence. And the Bible is not classified as Evidence.
I didn't think I would have to, but here's the definition of Evidence.
ev·i·dence noun \ˈe-və-dən(t)s, -və-ˌden(t)s\
1 a : an outward sign : indication
b : something that furnishes proof : testimony; specifically : something legally submitted to a tribunal to ascertain the truth of a matter
We don't have to believe anything. Science gives proof for it's claims.
Some people just prefer to ignore the proof.
Considering Science gives proof for it's claims, yea.
Science also tosses away bad theories and laws when proof comes about saying they are wrong.
It's, what we call, self-correcting.
The problem I see with this is that we are not cold lifeless people. I can smell a flower just like you can and be amazed at how amazing it smells. I can look upon a beautiful man or woman and be amazed at the beauty that he or she holds just as you can. I can look at the night sky and be mesmerized by the faint dots of light, just as you can. I dare say that Atheists are able to appreciate the world more, because we are able to see the world through the same eyes as you, but we are also able to appreciate it for what it is, not what we wish it to be.
(No offense intended.)
So you believe that infertile people have no reason to make love? Does an infertile person have no right to get married? Last I checked, that was not illegal.
Again, do you believe that infertile people have no place getting married, because they cannot pump out the babies?
I don't understand this position, I really, really don't...
Because it's more dangerous to screw my boyfriend in the butt then it is for me to screw my girlfriend in the butt, right?
Then again, condom's were not around either.
Wait...yes they were...for four hundred years...
I just wanted to quote this because it's awesome and needs to be read a second time.
Because there is no girl in the world that likes it up the butt?
First, if it's scientifically proven, it's scientifically proven to everyone.
Second, if a man is not married to his homosexual lover (Or woman to her's) then they are treated as friends in the eyes of the law, and are not equal to you and your wife.
I had to make those two points.
Because a close friend is the same in your eyes as your wife?
Your wife should be more important then a close friend, and the same would be the same for everyone, if the law was not bigoted towards heterosexuals. But this is a thread about religion, not politics, so I won't get into that here.
The law cares, because the law is not letting him get married so he cannot see his other half like you can.
But that's the great thing, isn't it? He's not married so he's not allowed to see his significant other, unlike you, who is legally permitted to get married and able to see your significant other.
Real fair, right? Religious dogma turned to law. If I wanted that, I'd go to Iraq or Israel...
And if a hypothesis is tested and found to be wrong, it's thrown out as garbage. What's your point?
This is something that, back when I was christian, I never was able to embrace.
If something is wrong, it's not a right or privilege, it's our right as human beings to see that the wrong is fixed.
This is not a privilege, but a responsibility, regardless of what faith or lack of you have.
As there has never been any evidence for the beliefs, this is an untrue statement.
This is to everyone. Please stop double posting. It's just annoying at this point. Thanks.
big problem with ur reasoning, who decides wrong from right or what if people have different views on a certain truth or right. one thing i learned from experience is that no one will ever truly, wholly, agree with someone else. We may have a similar idea but the little thousand details will vary from person to person. and so something is wrong according to whom exactly? you? me? Fixing a wrong also states that what ur trying to do is make JUSTICE. but whose justice r u making? ur own. everyone has their own sense of justice. If u hit me ill hit u back, and harder. this way we will never gain peace, world peace or inner peace. besides with ur response i c u dont fully understand the Christian stance of not resisting evil. I am beginning to kno myself, i think. n with wat i kno i can already have an idea of what i deserve. and there is no evil that someone can ever do to me that will fully cover wat i deserve. so i will try not to resist not only because i deserve it but because i deserve much worse and i am fully aware of it. that is a little further exlpanation of a Christian. so for all those who i think its about being nice, good people, think again. its more about discoverin who u are n about christs love for you AS you are. not about being nice. that being said i am not a Christian, i try but im not. keep it up guys this thread has some awesome stuff, its good to kno its not getting out of hand, there may yet be hope for humanity, lol, this stuff on a diablo forum is funny
umm guys maybe i should mention that some of my closest friends, married, were known to be infertile. kinda sad
however they seem to have like a couple of kids running around their house, funny, i thought they were infertile.
yea the doctors ARE baffled, all things are possible for God. maybe they made a mistake? yea maybe, its just they happen to make mistakes soo often in my experience. Also the one where the doctor said to my friend over in another state, "it is impossible for you to get pregnant." n walla next month she's pregnant. 3ish years later she's pregnant with 3 child.
silly doctor. in other words when ur married u r totally free to make love with ur wife whether she's infertile or not. In christianity, the belief is that as long as ur open to the will of God making love is always good. because u kno God is not just some muscle head on a throne he does act in our lives. if u didnt believe in God but u thought that sex is just to make kids then yea u could argue that the infertile couple should not have sex. but if ur just enjoying the infertility because u dont have to worry bout kids, then yea not Christian at all. I knew someone who was actually "infertile" suddenly after a while she got pregnant and decided to abort. talk about throwing the supposed "impossible" gift out the window.
Because it's more dangerous to screw my boyfriend in the butt then it is for me to screw my girlfriend in the butt, right?
Then again, condom's were not around either.
Wait...yes they were...for four hundred years...
I don't know what denomination you are, BlackShepherd, but I've NEVER seen that Christians are supposed to behave like doormats. When good men stand back and let shit go down, then that's when they stop being good men. I suppose you mean we should all be pacifists, but you're wrong. There's a time and place for everything - I'm sure you've heard that before.
I'm not saying that I condone the persecution of people, I'm saying that Christianity is by no means a passive religion. It should be an active religion that actively does good things for the betterment of others. A log can sit back and say, "what will come will come," but a man is supposed to be a bit more resourceful. Sure unavoidable shit happens, but I've never seen it where we're directed to twiddle our thumbs while we're oppressed. The beginnings of the church was underground because of persecution. They didn't sit back say, "I accept this injustice." No, they said, "fuck that, we'll do it anyway."
I know I'm probably exaggerating your point a little bit, but Christ was no human carpet. Neither was Peter, or Paul, or any of the other disciples... Mercy and justice are duties.
A book can be quite a useful tool for manipulating other people thoughts.
As for life style. Life style is something subjective to each person, if i like it more to sleep on the floor is completely up to me. You can say the same for the life style of a believer.
I don't believe in any religion but the way you approached and replayed to his comment is wrong.
Actually because Graphics_I treat the bible and god as tools, I find hem quite sceptic in his Catholic origins.
The problem here is that you are using current knowledge to explain that Leviticus passage. Assuming that it did guess E.coli and the properties the rectal wall put you at more risk of infection and transmission, how do they come to the gay killing and persecution part?
And if we are using current knowledge, you will also need to factor in the use of condoms in addition to the diversity of the sexual act (meaning homosexual activity does not equal anal sex- like you mentioned eariler) to understand that the( or this part of if you prefer) scriptures are way outdated and irrelevant for our current time.
And it is important to nitpick on the matter since at one point in our history Christians were using the bible to justify slavery just like it is doing nowadays to justify this double standard in living conditions for and acknowledgment of gay people.
And I am not trying to side track the discussion here but I consider this to be a valid parallel showing how at the bible(or any other holy book) is not a good tool to derive our morals from.
It was already explained in an earlier post the direct benefits (societal and evolutionary) of not doing the 'major sins' whether or not god condemns them.
Disclaimer: I am not disputing the fact that some Christians had a major role in the abolition of slavery but I would argue that it's human nature and compassion that triumphed over religion. And as expected, we cherry-picked the parts that helped the cause. However this does not preclude the fact that within holy books, the persecution of man that is (arbitrarily) deemed less equal than his brethren is encouraged or supported in some way or form.
I've stayed overlong in this thread trying to just spread some background on that passage. I've done what I can do and I'm tired of my points being picked over down to the wording when I'm just trying to give people information. I'm tired of people quoting me and responding to what I'm saying like I'm condemning them and everyone that has the same lifestyle to the darkness. Double standards piss me off, too. I guess you can't have a discussion on the internet where both sides assume the other's humanity and allow a little room for error and try to work through it. Most of what I've received in this thread seems like it has been filled with thinly veiled malice, but that may just be me. If it's not just me, I hope deep inside you have a kernel of shame that eats away at you until you PM me an apology.
And quite frankly, I'm just tired of some people acting like I'm a complete idiot.
Honestly nekro, if I can't use current knowledge to explain that leviticus passage, what knowledge should I use? Mid 20'th century? That's not a good one. 19'th century? Still not a good one. I'm not going to go through and respond to your points simply because they're frivolous and silly. Do some research and learn how to carry on a polite conversation with quibbling over shit like this. And no they didn't have fucking condoms back then. Birth control was the woman's responsibility.
There's a reason these threads don't work out. It's because someone comes along and responds with malice and pisses everyone off.
Nothing have kept ppl from having sex with animals. As fare as I know there is no low that prevent it. If you like it you are free to do it.
As for children. Human under a certain age are not mature, they can't think rationally and make a rational choice.
That's why sex, driving, drinking and many other things are prohibited for human underage.
Like driving and drinking, sex is not prohibited because a child can't have children at that age, it's prohibited because he/she is not ready mentally.
If it harms somebody directly, then it's wrong. Slavery was wrong. We shouldn't sit back and allow it, we ended it like it should of been done. Feminist rights (Or lack thereof) was wrong. Females fought and got the rights they deserved.
I don't think you are going to disagree that there are some things that are glaringly right or wrong, would you?
As for deserving suffering, when I was Christian, I accepted it, but never embraced it. It always felt wrong somehow. Now that I've left the religion and been out for some time, I can look at the world without the lens of Christianity, and personally, I feel like a new person. I don't have to be punished for my ancestors sins, and I can be me. I deserve punishment for my own wrong doings, but things like eating shell fish is not wrong, contrary to the Bible.
So it's okay for infertile couples to get married, because the doctors might of made a mistake or god might of come down and done a magic trick, but it's evil and wrong for a homosexual couple to get married because everyone knows a man cannot get pregnant?
I feel this to be...wrong...and sick... And personally, it makes me detest the religion more. :/
I understand this, but some women prefer it up the butt, and that's just a fact. This was also true when Leviticus was written, so why does it not also say you don't do women up the butt?
(Answer: Because it's anti-gay hate speech.)
I'm not calling you anti-gay, just the bible. Just making that clear. o.O
I'm glad there are people like you still in the religion. I just hope you follow your heart and not the literal translation of the Bible.
I just wanna say real quick that I never condemned you, just the Bible, Tanakh, and Qu'ran. I just wanna put that out there.
Actually, considering the Council of Nicea was held in 325 CE so it would be most logical to use that time period. (Yes, the books were written before this, but this is when the Bible was put together.)
Thankyou for pointing this post out. I seem to have missed it.
What keeps people from having sex with animals and children. Well, animals are not consenting adult humans, and children are not consenting adult humans.
In addition, you should be absolutely ashamed of trying this stunt.
What if a person is convicted of murder and sentenced to death? Is it wrong, because harm will be done to him?
What if someone breaks into your home, threatening to stab your loved ones and you beat the crap out of him?
What if a rally gets out of hand and the police becomes obligated to use force to bring the mobs to order?
What if a soldier shoots a child because he's running around firing an assault rifle?
I can probably give more examples, even some better examples, but these will do. I just wanted to show that there are moral grey zones. Especially if you take different cultures and religions into account, then you can't decide where the line is drawn, and it's not always as simple as you may think.
Not even a deity can enforce its own laws.
Thank you for the lesson in polite discourse. So I should follow your example? Quoting you and saying you are speaking shit without responding to your points and merely discarding them as silly and frivolous?
Oh yes I would love to do that...NOT.
Since you seem to be under some weird impression of malice on my behalf, allow me to clarify. You seem willing and understanding in shedding light on passages of the bible. I took the opportunity to tell how these passages are not relevant and downright counter-productive in our time and age. If your ideas are above criticism, then you are in the wrong place. And if you think I am being disrespectful, please read again my last post. It was as formal and honest as possible.
Also instead of wasting energy in inferring the most melodramatic possible purpose behind me questioning you, I would have preferred you give instead some consideration to what I wrote and if you have nothing worthy to add or at least to explain, then I would be appreciative if you held back your frustration.
Exactly how would it be, if when you quoted the bible, I instead refuted that it's shit, pointless and frivolous?
I believe I have been respectful enough while getting my points across. If after you read this you think I still owe you an apology, then please PM me and explain yourself. I have apologized many a times to members (regular users) I have somehow wronged or offended here so I have don't an ego problem if that is what you are wondering.
Back on topic and to my 'frivolous' points, the problem with using current knowledge to examine the Leviticus passage requires the implication that those who wrote the book had such knowledge and we know this is false.
The actual rationale at that point in time to condemn homosexuality results from precisely lack of understanding of the human condition.
And if you had bothered to read what I wrote, you would have noticed that I didn't (and never)say they used condoms at that time.
Instead I said that the irrelevance of the texts and passages of the bible is made even more prominent in the face of our current knowledge.
Condoms apply obviously for our time and this comes from our desire to preserve and promote the health of our species. If the bible had been so understanding of the human being, instead of condemning it would tried to champion safe sex(which like i said does not necessarily involve penetration).
But we all know how sex is made taboo throughout most religions, so current knowledge cannot possibly be used to understand the rationale behind these texts when they decided some humans were bound for hell for being just who they are.
And to be safe that you don't randomly fly off the handle again, I would like you to know that I sincerely would appreciate your opinion on this if you would care to respond.
Cheers.
first i never said the doctors were wrong, they were right. thats just one instance were someone might shove it aside as a technical mistake instead of facing the facts. this woman was and still is infertile according to all scientific knowledge there is, yet shes making babies. Second i never actually mentioned homosexuality or thats its evil, so umm not sure where u got that. but im sorry if i have offended. but honestly why would you want to get married under the church if ur homosexual or if u dont believe in God, or are not open to life.If u get married under a certain pertense its really actually insulting to the Church. besides cant homosexuals get married in some states, i wouldnt worry about it cause eventually itll be allowed, by the gov't, in every state and country. I never said anything about a magic trick either i just meant that God can act in ur life if u let him. but if u dont want him to he's not going to rip ur freedom apart and do it anyways. oh n btw, i understand where ur coming from with regards to God, but the first phrase u said could be very offensive to some pple, just letting u kno. i probly left something out.
I tend to be open-minded and leave others on their business but I can’t stand your way of talking.
You don’t deserve to talk about science because probably you haven’t passed your fist class of math or physics. And so you don’t deserve to mention great people like Newton.
Your foolish religions have burned this people alive because they were right in their claims that the earth circled around the sun. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giordano_Bruno
The religion should have fallen apart the first moment that humanity finally accepted that is the earth that circle around the sun and that we are not the center of be all and end all.
But you have always found way to circumvent what your religion had sad in the past. It’s the same as the discussion we are having here about literal and not literal scripts. In short everything written in this holly books is literal and the word of god until, science prove otherwise, or it fall against our human moral/ethic.
I’m not saying those books are useless actually they are quite useful to understand how stupid a civilization can be.
The only true value this books hand out are matters of ethic and moral, like: don’t still, don’t lie, don’t harm the other, help the one in need, etc. You don’t need a religion to teach to a child these things.
Everything else is bullsh*t. Who ever come from the dead to say if there is a heaven or hell?
Live your life while you can because is the only one you have. After you’re dead you will just be dead and you won’t have a second chance.
Life is the future, not the past (books of any kind are part of the past).
The past can teach us, through experience, how to accomplish things in the future, comfort us with cherished memories, and provide the foundation of what has already been accomplished. But only the future holds life. To live in the past is to embrace what is dead. To live life to its fullest, each day must be created anew. As rational, thinking beings, we must use our intellect to make rational choices, not a blind devotion to what has come before.
Faith is a device of self-delusion, a sleight of hand done with words and emotions founded on any irrational notion that can be dreamed up.
Faith is the attempt to coerce truth to surrender to whim. In simple terms, it is trying to breathe life into a lie by trying to outshine reality with the beauty of wishes.
Faith is the refuge of fools, the ignorant, and the deluded, not of thinking, rational men.
Willfully turning aside from the truth is treason to one's self.
I will apologies to everyone who is trying to have a civil conversation and take my leave from this thread.
also the whole thing about condoms, im going to say something and i want you to tell me if u feel its true, think hard b4 u answer. why do we really want to use condoms. for safe sex? is that it? or is it more so that we can CONTROL our little lives? If i shove aside wat i kno to be true then ill use condoms but only so that i can control what happens to the best of my ability. i mean u c it everywhere when two teenagers have sex or when in college. their biggest worry is not acquiring a disease. their biggest worry is pregnancy. they dont want to take that responsibility because of whatever, but they dont use condoms to protect their health, that if anything, comes second.
WOW this is by far the biggest insults i've seen in this thread. Congrats. btw the bible is not about teaching not to steal, or dont lie, or helping the one in need. that all comes from our individual choices based on what we believe to be true. The bible goes a lot deeper than that, dont hurt ur silly head over it tho
but u definately said something quite interesting but ill reiterate. guys in reading this right now, there is NO HOPE, after ur dead ull be just that DEAD! like food for worms, so get cremated pple cause its ugly. oh and there is no SECOND CHANCE. if u make a mistake ur done for. HAR HAR HAR! So anwser me this why should i help anybody besides myself? to be nice and a good person? thats very debateable cause maybe im just a proud bastard in the inside, which i am. If i help someone in need, sure its good to help them, but the essence of the act is to help myself. this is a wisdom u may not understand. but its ok, thank you for sharing ur ignorance with regards to the bible. Feel free to live in ur past or u future just dont forget about the present or u might break ur nose on a wall.
as far as the link u provided. its from wiki so i wonder its acurracy but yea ill take it for wat it is, in my experience however there is much history that is left out that many times shows a much different reality.
Certainly you can appreciate that from the point of view of Hindus and Buddhists (non-Abrahamic religions) the bible is almost completely irrelevant. Never mind atheists, most if not all maintain that they are the only and true religion. There is no doubt that there are interlacing philosophies among religions of the world but that this is due to our natural sense of morality and self-preservation.
So is homosexuality natural then? I recall proletariat quoting specific passages condemning homosexuals. Maybe you would like to respond to that in particular?
I just copy pasted the part of that post to save you the trouble:
"If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives." (Leviticus 20:13)
You are taking what I said completely out of context. The term 'human condition' I have used in my post focused on our predisposition to either homosexuality or heterosexuality, none of which can be related to curiosity. In either case you're are attracted to a man or to a woman. I am not curious how it is to sleep with a guy because I am simply not attracted to them. Are you curious in your sexuality so that you can relate to the curiosity associated with underage sex and drug use/misuse? I am only asking by the way(this is not an attack).
All of this has been addressed in detail already(tool for history, love and forgiveness). Please if you quote me, do respond to the specific points I mentioned otherwise it is not a discussion but a mere statement of belief. I say this with no ill-intent.
Just please quote one point at a time and respond to them individually if possible and I will happily get back to you to continue the discussion. Hope that's alright.
You help people to help yourself. You got that one right.
What I don't understand is how you think that this wisdom is partial to religion(or the bible)? Or that it is even 'wisdom' at all?
Allow me to explain.
One concrete and basic (instinctual) reason why you help other people(and it in turn helps you):
Our ability to empathize with fellow humans make it so that we recognize when another individual is in a bad condition. We actually feel bad and anxious when we contemplate that situation. It's our natural tendency.
Degrees of empathy obviously vary from person to person but I can confidently say that if I show the major part of humanity a video of a Somalian child starving, crying and dying in pain, you will cringe and feel bad. And if I present a donation box right after the video, odds are most will try and help.
How does it effectively help you: You feel good you've contributed to whatever aid is going to that child. Feeling good releases hormones that decreases your stress level- the latter being widely recognized as a harmful element if in high levels. In other words and as unromantic as it sounds, most of us, irrespective of religion, color or gender are programmed to help.