At least Jp brought up some interesting points. No offense, Tiberath, but the points you bring up are very elementary. It is not very respectable to not research your argument before presenting it. So, here I go anyways.

The first point you bring up:

- 'I bet that hardly any of the religious fanatics what day the sabbath it. >.>
For those wondering, it's Saturday. Sunday is the beginning of the week and Monday is the beginning of the working week.'

Who ever said the sabbath is on Sunday? It hasn't changed. It has always been Saturday. This is basic knowledge.

- '"You must not work on the Sabbath" - People who do work are condemmed to death.'

Thankfully following the sabbath is no longer needed!

Second point:

- '"Thou shalt not kill" and as JP mentioned, a person was stoned for picking up sticks because he didn't obey "Gods law." CONTRADICTION!'

Think of it like this: Police are not allowed to invade one's home according to law. However, an officer may get a warrant from a judge to enter the home. Is this officer breaking the law? Of course not.

Not really a point, but for better organization:

- 'You tend to stop giving a fuck when a "man of god" comes into your class room and says: "Who here has ever gone into a shop, asked for a milky way and never recieved it? Well, did you know, that if you pray to god, before walking into the shop, you will get one?"'

To be honest, that is pretty stupid.
The name 'Ten Commandments' is mentioned a couple times in the Bible. Here is one of them:

Yes - in reference to the 'ritual decalogue', as you describe them. The other set is never described as The Ten Commandments - at least, not in the KJV. Of course, that's what you get for translating a book through three different languages. A book written by several different people, nonetheless.

That is how it used to be with the old covenant.

I still think you're not following me - basically, God did something horribly and utterly unethical and immoral. God has blood on his hands.

Regardless of whether he later decides to 'change the rules', he has done numerous bad things - and the New Testament has worse, because that's where the doctrine of Hell comes into it, and that's a massively nasty barrel of fish.

Those nations burned their children in honor of false gods, practiced sodomy and bestiality, among many other disgusting things.

What's wrong with sodomy? None of my business if two consenting adults decide to have sex. Bestiality is a different issue, because an animal can't give consent. If it could, and did, I'd see no problem with that.

I find it amusing that you added 'in honour of false gods'. Surely burning children is enough?

Except I suppose the Israelites burnt all their children. At least, killed them. But that was for the real, honest-to-god, true god! So that's alright then.

And you dodged my question - do you support the practice of genocide when the genocidees are immoral, in your eyes? Because that's what your defence of the OT is implying.

Think of it like this: Police are not allowed to invade one's home according to law. However, an officer may get a warrant from a judge to enter the home. Is this officer breaking the law? Of course not.

So God doesn't have to follow his own rules? That explains a lot.

If someone tells you that x, y, and z are ethical, you expect them to do x, y, and z. If they say they can't because they're trying to police you, clearly there's a problem with the rules, isn't there?

Either that, or they're a immoral hypocrite. I'm leaning towards that explanation for God, considering the quantity of supporting evidence.
- 'You tend to stop giving a fuck when a "man of god" comes into your class room and says: "Who here has ever gone into a shop, asked for a milky way and never recieved it? Well, did you know, that if you pray to god, before walking into the shop, you will get one?"'

To be honest, that is pretty stupid.

Just like the rest of religion. How fitting. <.<
Jp, the verse I gave you referred to the 'Ethical Decalogue', not the 'Ritual Decalogue' And yes, the same verse in the KJV names them the ten commandments.

- "I still think you're not following me - basically, God did something horribly and utterly unethical and immoral. God has blood on his hands."

Break a law and you are condemned to death. I can't put it more simple.

- "And you dodged my question - do you support the practice of genocide when the genocidees are immoral, in your eyes? Because that's what your defence of the OT is implying."

I already gave you reason to believe they are not immoral with my surgeon's example. And no, if the genocides are immoral then I do not support it. However, this is not the case.

- "So God doesn't have to follow his own rules? That explains a lot."

You missed the point. God is not the officer. God is the judge. He makes the rules.
Oh, so God goes around calling two different things 'the Ten Commandments'? Lovely. I'm sure that makes so much sense. (Note that 'ritual decalogue' and 'ethical decalogue' certainly don't turn up anywhere in there)

Break a law and you are condemned to death. I can't put it more simple.

That's a horribly stupid and wrong idea. The guy picked up sticks. It was a stupid law. I'm against the death penalty in all cases (On general principles), but even fundies should be able to see that killing someone because they picked up sticks on a day God told them not to is horribly murderous. Laws can, and are, wrong. Say it was illegal to walk three steps without singing, punishable by death. Would you consider it justified to kill someone because they broke that law? Not just kill, mind you, kill horribly.

My point is, laws can be unethical. Regardless of whether God is giving you the law or not, you are still capable of judging the ethicality of that law

God gets someone killed horribly for a stupid reason. I can't put it more simple.

I already gave you reason to believe they are not immoral with my surgeon's example.

Do not kill - except when I tell you to. Oh, and except when it's some sort of amputational thing. Then you're allowed - in fact, I command - that you kill everybody, including innocent children that you could quite easily leave alone, if you wish.

There was no requirement for the Israelites to kill the children of these various tribes - even if you accept your assertion that they were horribly immoral. The kids weren't going out and fighting anything.

And no, if the genocides are immoral then I do not support it. However, this is not the case.

Please look at what I wrote more carefully. It read "Do you support the practice of genocide when the genocideee's (That is, the people being genocided) are immoral, in your eyes".

Those last three words are important, too.

You missed the point. God is not the officer. God is the judge. He makes the rules.

Bzzt! Wrong, thanks for playing. Judges don't make rules, they give out sentences. Lawmakers are usually government officials. But beyond that pointless technicality, both groups still have to follow the law. If a random judge murdered somebody and justified it by saying he was a judge, would that be okay? No, it wouldn't. It would be stupid. And immoral. Like God.

Numbers 31:
"And they warred against the Midianites, as the Lord commanded Moses; and they slew all the males.... And Moses was wroth with the officers of the host, with the captains over thousands, and captains over hundreds, which came from the battle. And Moses said unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive? .... Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves."

God likes rape, too. He certainly doesn't tell Moses off for that one.
Hah, you two have been going at it for a while. No one is going to win here. Im gonna say this, There is no evidence God is real. There is no reason for me to think he is. But, i would rather die a believer, and have him not exist, then die not believing, and him existing. Catch my drift?
So if there was an ethereal all-knowing being, you'd rather die in his favor than actually believe with all of your heart and mind that he exists.

Nice, don't you think that if there was such a being, he'd know that you weren't a true believer anyway?
Oh lovely, Pascal's Wager. I wonder what's wrong with that.
I'm a very strong minded atheist, but I still think that pretty much everything you said was just retarded.

- There were many diffrent versions of the Bible, the one you will see in church and in hotel rooms is the king james version. How could there be different versions if the bible is supposed to be the words of GOD.

Christians believe the Bible is the word of God, but that doesn't mean it isn't open to human interpretation and modification.

- Has there ever been any proof what so ever that GOD, or Jesus exist?

The Bible? Proof is a relative term. Also, scholars in general agree that Jesus lived.

- If you believe in GOD, then you should believe in Beowulf, the fairy tales, ghosts. The idea of GOD is crazier then all of those.

This is completely inane.

- Dont you think it is possible that early humans made GOD up for a reason of existence, or to control the human race from being completly evil and commiting crimes every day, because if they did, they would go to Hell(If there wasnt a Hell, or a Heaven what point is there of being a good person).

Yes, and that's what I believe, but that's by no means proof that god doesn't exist.

Why did Jesus command us to hate our parents and children (Luke 14:26)?

If you read even a little bit in to this verse, it's very clear that God is saying that compared to Him, you should hate everyone you love (in other words, you should love Him more than anyone or anything else, by a large amount).

Why did God try to kill Moses immediately after Moses agreed to free the Israelites (Ex 4:24-26)?

Because Moses had displeased the LORD previously, and he was told he would not see the promised land.

If abortion is wrong, was it right for the Israelites to murder whole cities of women and children, saving only the virgin girls for use of their warriors (Num 31:17-18)?

First off, not all Christians think abortion is wrong. Second, Christians do not follow the Old Testament - they believe that Jesus recreated the rules, essentially.

If false prophecy proves a false prophet, why did Jesus predict that all the Disciples, including Judas, would sit on thrones in Heaven (Matt 19:28)?

There are twelve disciples not counting Judas (Silas).

Didn't Jesus seem tacitly to approve of slavery, even slave-beating (Luke 12:47)?

No, that is a stupid thing to think.
I support Ben G fully.
me too
yeah he's great

I will now be fielding arguments. :-D
Broken link Jp :(
That's weird. Probably something with Knifo's CSS - I can't click it, either.

Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Pascal%27s_Wager#Criticisms_of_Pascal.27s_wager

The Bible? Proof is a relative term. Also, scholars in general agree that Jesus lived.

Scholars also generally agree that the bible was written in roughly AD 100, by people who were not eyewitnesses to any of the events it pertains to chronicle (NT, clearly, not OT)

Funny, that, because there are no unambiguous, first-hand accounts of Jesus' existence, even. Several mention Christianity - there are a few mentions of Jesus from after living memory of his existence - such as Tacitus - there is one work that was written in a time period that could make it a primary source.... but it's likely an interpolation by a later writer because the style of writing makes no sense, and the passage isn't referred to until much, much later in the historical record (Josephus)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Historicity_of_Jesus#Non-Christian_writings
Scholars also generally agree that the bible was written in roughly AD 100, by people who were not eyewitnesses to any of the events it pertains to chronicle (NT, clearly, not OT)

That's mostly speculation though - the only book that scholars pretty much unanimously agree was written after Jesus' death was Luke - the other gospels are very much the subject of debate.

In any case, it doesn't matter because God isn't real.
Hmm I didn't know it was called pascal's wager.

Yeah believing in god because you have more to gain by doing so doesn't work, hell, maybe god rewards atheists...
Just so you all know, there is a long standing stigma that atheists are assholes, resulting from the fact that many atheists ridicule and insult an ideology that many(in fact most) people base their lives around. Not having read anything but the blog post, I'd just like to add that it doesn't make you cool in any way to try to shatter the beliefs that are the pillars of many people's lives.
No, it doesn't make you cool. It makes you intelligent.

Just because people base their lives around it doesn't make it any less a ridiculous, stupid, and above all, dangerous thing to believe in. Religion causes inquisitions, discrimination, fundamentalism.

People based their lives around fascism, too.
No, it doesn't make you cool. It makes you intelligent.

Bullshit it does, just not believing in a god doesn't mean you're intelligent. Even if you have reason to back it.

Just because people base their lives around it doesn't make it any less a ridiculous, stupid, and above all, dangerous thing to believe in. Religion causes inquisitions, discrimination, fundamentalism.

People based their lives around fascism, too.


Except for the fact that all modern society and values are based around these books, and can teach many important lessons even to a non-believer.

They at least deserve the reverence an extremely well written treatise on society and law, at least the same that you'd give some of Confucius' writings, since they were arguably equally enlightened.


Your comparing of the bible to fascism is completely idiotic and obviously part of your hate parade on the bible. Live and let live.

EDIT-
Oh and your part about people being able to twist the bible. People can twist anything they want.

For Example: Ok since we were all the property of evolution, society should be based on survival of the fittest too, so that means all you deaf, blind and disabled people should die.
Fuck off, Worldweaver. Have you even read the bible? All our laws and values based around it? Roughly half of the Ten Commandments (The ones we get told are the Ten Commandments, rather then the "Don't boil a baby goat in it's mothers milk" ones) are religious in nature - and go directly AGAINST modern values, like freedom of religion - and the other half generally miss several important crimes - like "Don't rape people", for starters. Where is the mention of copyright in the Bible? For every verse that says "Don't kill", you can find ten of people killing other people because God told them to.

The Bible is hardly an extremely well written treatise on anything.

Comparing the Bible to fascism is possibly going too far - Hitler only tried to genocide Jews, homosexuals, the disabled, and Gypsies. God goes further. Sorry, Hitler.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6