Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
Open Forums for ExChristian.Net > Debating with Christians > What to do about Judaism, Christianity, and Islam


Posted by: Rameus Feb 13 2005, 08:33 PM
I can give you four good reasons to choose the "actively work against the spread of these apocalyptic cults" option.

Reason #1: Armageddon is something they actively work towards.

Reason #2: This fucking guy.

(from http://forum.anointedyouth.org)
QUOTE
Ed 
Age: 18
Posts: 1,803 | Talents: 344.80 (Donate)
Arcade Info  :

Well i still have many questions which im meeting with my pastor to explain, however to tell you a bit more of what happened, wicca ppl had been saying incantations against me, there was a christmas card i'd been given carrying a curse (now dealt with and destroyed) and there was some vodoo, had to pray for God to break ties of doll to me and from all the gold pins put in its head, there was a spiritual attack of fear too. God revealed this to me and the multiple people at church praying with me (pastor, elder, and some of the older more mature christians) at same time.... Anyway thats an overview... satan was taking foothold, but he's not allowed to anymore. im nolonger being decieved that way anyway, and praying daily the scriptures and God's protection in this battle. And God is blessing us with the youthwork. We are seeing people coming to him slowly - but know that the major blessing is round the corner, God wants to reign his spirit on our area, we desire and need that revival.


Reason #3: This fucking girl.

(from http://forum.anointedyouth.org)
QUOTE
QUOTE
~*Amy*~ 
Age: 17
Posts: 849 | Talents: 1292.10 (Donate)
Arcade Info :

lol oh and by the way gulliver...your not a nerd for watching the history channel. If I had cable or satellite I'd love to watch the history channel too! Now, thanks for clarifying that, I thought you were actually talking about Christ's second coming. Im a christian and will never deny my faith. No one will ever be satisfied with where they are in their walk with God. We will always want more and need more until the day we get to heaven. We will always grow more and more in Christ, we will never stop growing in Him. Some people get comfortable with where they are in their walk with Christ and then dont go any farther, but God has so much more for them and we need to tell them that. Theres so many people around us that dont know Jesus and we dont even know it. Thats why we need to tell people about Him so that if He did come for them tonight then they would know about salvation and forgiveness. The Bible tells us that in the last days there will be signs and wonders. Well, we see signs and wonders (at least I do) and thats why I think its the last day. But I also believe that there are going to be more severe ones ex:the earthquake that just happened in Indonesia. I believe that that is a sign and wonder that God sent. Did you know that every nation that was hit was either an Islamic, Buddhist, or Hindu nation? I think the mark of the beast has to come about first, I think things like that have to happen first. And actually if you goto http://www.4verichip.com/index.htm you can see that the mark of the beast could very well already be comeing about! It is a chip that is inserted under the skin and..wow....just goto the site and you will see. Goto the quickfind drop box and click on products. Its very interesting

QUOTE
~*Amy*~ 
Age: 17
Posts: 849 | Talents: 1292.00 (Donate)
Arcade Info  :
 
I believe very much so in curses. I believe especially in generational curses. Ive been attacked before by demons and Satan and never any curses that I know of but I have definately been attacked by demons. I had a dream not too long ago and in this dream I knew that there was a demon attacking me in this dream. I coudlnt breathe! It was a dream but it was very real. In the dream I couldnt say anything and then finally just barely on my breath I said Jesus, and as soon as I said that in the dream I woke up and I was literally trying to catch my breath because I couldnt breathe. It couldve been (the not breatheing thing) all in my head just to put fear in me, but as soon as I woke up I could feel the demonic presence in my room. I layed in my bed and just started praying in my head...for some reason the words just wouldnt come out of my mouth, and then after a minute I felt that presence leave my room and my house. I found out the next morning that there had been some wiccan people who didnt really like me that much (of course not lol) and had a meeting that night. So I know that it had something to do with that. So, even just speaking the name of Jesus will protect you. When we call on Jesus, all things are possible. Another good verse is Psalm 91. Ive memorized the whole chapter and its probally a good thing to momorize.


Reason #4: Self destructive beliefs.

(excerpt from raptureready.com)
QUOTE
The Most Significant End-Time Prophecy

The end-time events described in the Olivet Discourse and the Book of Revelation could not have taken place without Israel back in their land. Israel’s return to the land of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the 20th century after dispersion by the Roman armies in 70 A.D. is the most important event that signals the soon return of Jesus Christ. Israel’s rebirth as a nation has also served as a catalyst for other end-time prophecies that are beginning to converge on the world scene. The pieces necessary for development of the end-time prophetic puzzle began to fall in place between the middle of the 19th and first half of the 20th century when the Jewish people began coming back to their homeland in record numbers.

A movement called Zionism encouraged the Jewish people to return to the “Promised Land” and brought about the Balfour Declaration in 1917, a statement by Great Britain that supported a home for the Jewish people. After much negotiation and endorsement of a partition resolution by the United Nations in 1947, the rebirth of Israel (Isaiah 66:7-9) took place on May 15, 1948. Following a period of wars between the Jewish and Arab nations in 1948, 1956, 1967, and 1973, peace negotiations have been ongoing and will continue until a covenant (Daniel 9:27) is confirmed between “the prince that shall come” (Antichrist) and the nation of Israel.


GOD’S BLUEPRINT FOR THE FUTURE
Christians who take the Bible seriously should be actively watching the prophetic shadows that are appearing in today’s headlines. The primary purpose of God’s prophetic Word is to point people to Jesus Christ, “the author and finisher of our faith.”

A Chosen Generation

As we entertain the possibility that we may be the generation Jesus was talking about in the fig tree parable nearly 2000 years ago, we are admonished by the Scriptures to watch and be prepared. As stated clearly by Jesus in Matthew and Mark, no man knows the day or the hour of his coming but the Father only. The same Jesus, however, was very angry with the Pharisees and Scribes for not discerning “the signs of the times” and not knowing the “time of their visitation.” In these thought-provoking and challenging times in which we are living, we need to be informed and discerning like “the children of Issachar, which were men that had understanding of the times, to know what Israel ought to do…” (1 Chronicles 12:32).

One day there will be a generation of Christians that will escape the grip of death and be ushered into heaven, the “final frontier” for believers. The generation that is “left behind” will face the ruthless tyranny of a global dictatorship. The world stage is now being set for the closing act of this dispensation, and the climax of world history, Christ’s return, is drawing near. As God’s children, we may very well be the generation that is chosen to “escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man” (Luke 21: 34-36). That possibility is certainly worth pondering!


They look forward to the end of the world as depicted in the book of stale rye bread, I mean Revelations. If you haven't read that degenerate acid trip written by some desert maniac, I suggest you go give it a read. That billions of people look forward to this event should frighten every sane, rational human being on this planet.

Rameus

Posted by: Clergicide Feb 13 2005, 09:04 PM
I recommend a proactive approach to dealing with these dangerous lunatics. Only when Freethinkers have challenged the religious institutions have they retreated to points of moderation. Silent contempt will not aid in slaying this beast.

Posted by: Reality Amplifier Feb 13 2005, 09:08 PM
I voted to promote education (especially science and the scientific method). I see that as the best long-term way to begin weaning humanity off of religion.

The more educated people become, the lower the tendency is that they will believe in God/Religion.


Posted by: Fyrefly Feb 13 2005, 09:17 PM
I voted 'Actively work against the spread of these apocalyptic cults'.

Posted by: Cerise Feb 13 2005, 09:28 PM
There will always be people who believe in some form of God or Gods. I have no problem with this, as long as it is assured that there can be no one right way for everyone.

Posted by: luck mermaid Feb 13 2005, 09:37 PM
Rameus I should have known you'd start this thread.

I chose education and tolerance, because I think many atheists, and also many non-Muslims and non-Jews in particular could use it.

I think that many strict religious people are strict because they don't have access to information and they're afraid to get it. It's hard to 'run the line' sometimes because a ) people should all just get along and b ) I for example totally think it's wrong to circumcise someone at birth, even if it's for religious reasons, things like that. Many atheists who aren't atheist by emotion but logic have tons of fact to back them up whereas religious and 'spiritual ' people have perception and experience so there's a clash. I can sometimes try to be tolerant of those who are religious but I sometimes feel like being tolerant translates into something equivalent to 'let me put my hand up your dress, you can't say anything because this is my religion and you're not being tolerant'. But that's my opinion.

Also, FYI most Jews do not evangelize to non-Jews, from my understanding most people are turned away at least once or twice if they are interested in conversion. Unless we're talking Jews for Jesus, I don't know about the customs for those Jews.

Posted by: Tocis Feb 13 2005, 11:37 PM
Voted for education and tolerance too. After all, though the wholly babble (and the koran too) can easily be used to justify the most monstrous deeds imaginable, I have to acknowledge that the majority of believers in both faiths are not bloodthirsty maniacs... and that these tend to be the educated ones.
While I don't agree at all with all that monotheistic doctrine, believers have a right to believe. They just don't have a right to make everyone else believe, or to harm others just because they think they have Divine justification.

Posted by: euphgeek Feb 14 2005, 02:21 AM
Amazingly enough, I voted for "Nothing, these religions are not harmful". Why, you may ask? Because as rabid and insane as some of these people act, I have to wonder how much worse it would be if they thought there were no eternal consequences. These people have not progressed beyond the mindset of, "If I do bad things, I'll go to hell." That's the only way some people can stay out of trouble. Be glad they're only evangelizing. If their god were taken away from them who knows what chaos would ensue? Scary.

Posted by: Pseudonym Feb 14 2005, 02:44 AM
100 %, "Work Against the Spread of These Apocalyptic Cults". There was a documentary on British television recently concerning the influence of fundamentalist Christianity in U.S governmental institutions in which an individual whose name I can't remember but who was a very influential member of the Bush administration was actively stating that he believes the current climate to be indicative of the approach of "The End Times" and that the U.S.A's actions with regards to other nations is justified on that basis. This sent a shiver up my spine, and those of every person watching, Christian or no.

Posted by: Rameus Feb 14 2005, 04:59 AM
Look at these children on that forum. Everything to them is curses, and demons, and magic god armor. They are being persecuted by wiccans and Satan. And at the ripe old ages of 17 and 18, they are convinced that the world is ending and they can't wait for all of us to die. You can't tell me this is a healthy belief system.

Sometimes I feel like I'm another species on an alien planet. How did this apocalyptic insanity become the cultural norm for much of the world for the last 1,700 years? What went wrong in human history to get us where we are today? Can we set it right, and if so HOW do we set it right?

Rameus

Posted by: Mad_Gerbil Feb 14 2005, 05:06 AM
This is funny.

After the discussion in our other thread that was locked I was thinking through some of the arguments and one that bothered me was the assertion that nobody today would claim that religous beliefs are genetic (hence, no need to fear the proverbial 'cleansing'.)

So I went to Barnes & Noble on Saturday and there on the book shelf under "Trends in Science" was a book entitled "The God Gene". In it the author (Dr. Dean Hamer) argues that there is a gene that codes for the hunger of the transcendent. Towards the end of the book he does a case study on the Jewish people.

The book isn't intended to prove or disprove G_d, but the author does state that he feels the 'God Gene' was selected for through evolution because it gives the species a better chance of survival.

Whatever the case may be, the book is incredibly relevant to this thread on many levels -- not the least of which, it is a refutation of the notion that anything should be 'done' about monotheistic religion at all.

Posted by: Mad_Gerbil Feb 14 2005, 05:09 AM
I think we should push for the active removal of all of atheism since in every system it takes hold human rights take a major nose dive. The point being, if one is going to work for the elimination of systems that have guided human development for at least 10,000 years then one might be wise to have a better system with which to replace the old.

The lesson of the 20th Century was that pure rationalism, atheism, and science were definitely NOT the answer.

Posted by: Zach Feb 14 2005, 05:09 AM
MG-

But did you buy the book and read it? I have. Hamer makes it very clear that the "god gene" has nothing to do with the specific cultural context of a belief in the metaphysical, just that some individuals are more likely to experience what they call 'sprituality' than others.

Cultural idiocy is inherited, but not genetically.

Posted by: Mad_Gerbil Feb 14 2005, 05:15 AM
QUOTE (Zach @ Feb 14 2005, 01:09 PM)
MG-

But did you buy the book and read it? I have. Hamer makes it very clear that the "god gene" has nothing to do with the specific cultural context of a belief in the metaphysical, just that some individuals are more likely to experience what they call 'sprituality' than others.

Cultural idiocy is inherited, but not genetically.

Yes I bought it.
And yes, the author makes that very clear.

He claims the title "God Gene" is somewhat sensationalized.

Posted by: Rameus Feb 14 2005, 06:31 AM
(by Water_Bag)
QUOTE
After the discussion in our other thread that was locked I was thinking through some of the arguments and one that bothered me was the assertion that nobody today would claim that religous beliefs are genetic (hence, no need to fear the proverbial 'cleansing'.)


What I find absolutely hysterical is that degenerate fundamentalists (like our beloved Frothing_Gerbil) tend to believe that homosexuality is a choice, a sinful one and practitioners of that evil vice must be reformed. Essentially they don't believe homosexuality is genetic, therefore justifying their efforts to curb the sinful practice that allegedly destroys society. Intolerant monotheism on the other hand, which most certainly tears at the fabric of global society, is obviously genetic and therefore it is immoral for us to try and talk some sense into these lunatics. Physicians put away your needles; the patients don’t want any more of your stinking medicine!

Let's recap, according to my understanding of this brilliant concept:

A. Homosexuality

1. It is a choice, not genetic.

2. It destroys the fabric of society. Obviously two men making out in the privacy of their own home affects us all!

3. Therefore it is perfectly moral for the Christians to work to marginalize or eliminate homosexuality. Obviously sodomy is a great danger to us all, and if it is not curbed then life as we know it on this planet could end at any moment. God might send a Tsunami our way!!! *Kneels in fear of the Lord*

B. Fundamentalist Christianity and Islam

1. Religious beliefs are genetic.

2. Belief that their way is the right way, the only way, and the correct way, and the willingness to push this message on others is not harmful to global society in any way.
a. Asia thirsts for the "living water of Christ". True they have their own culture, but they will happily dismantle it once we convince them of the error of their ways.

3. Belief that the world is ending at any given moment, and that they can't wait for that moment, is not harmful to global society in any way.
a. Why worry about the environment? Jesus is coming soon.
b. Why fund NASA, the bible doesn't say anything about going to space.
c. Peace and pluralism on a global level? That's New World Order talk!!!
d. Children focusing on the Book of Rye Bread (Revelations) rather than on their education.

Is it just me, or is the logic presented in the above scenario so fucking twisted that it's difficult to fathom people other than Emmanuel Apestein and our beloved Frothing_Gerbil buying into it? Sadly, I have members of my own family who would agree entirely with the above scenario.

(by Water_Bag)
QUOTE
The book isn't intended to prove or disprove G_d, but the author does state that he feels the 'God Gene' was selected for through evolution because it gives the species a better chance of survival.


Until the Nuclear Age when some maniac equates MIRV fission warheads with the seven headed dragons of the Book of Rye Bread and presses the button so that Jesus can come back. If you Christians and Muslims would care to relocate yourselves to Israel and eradicate each other over there so that very few of the rest of us will be caught up in your insanity, then perhaps I will withdraw my opposition to your demented faiths.

(by Water_Bag)
QUOTE
Whatever the case may be, the book is incredibly relevant to this thread on many levels -- not the least of which, it is a refutation of the notion that anything should be 'done' about monotheistic religion at all.


Good point, let's leave these apocalyptic cults with billions of members alone. But the homosexuals, something really needs to be done about them. Mass belief in Armageddon is totally benign, but if a few people are practicing sodomy in the privacy of their own home then our entire world might end.

Frothing_Gerbil, I'm sorry that God gifted you with such poor reasoning skills. Truly the only contribution to humanity you have left to make before you die is to breed as little as possible.

Rameus

Posted by: Reach Feb 14 2005, 07:27 AM
QUOTE (Reality Amplifier @ Feb 13 2005, 09:08 PM)
I voted to promote education (especially science and the scientific method). I see that as the best long-term way to begin weaning humanity off of religion.

The more educated people become, the lower the tendency is that they will believe in God/Religion.

I voted "Actively work against the spread of these apocalyptic cults," however I believe we do that best by sharing the responsibility of educating ourselves first and others, secondly and promoting tolerance to marginalize the impact of the aforementioned cults and their aggressively malignant cancerous worldviews.

Also, regarding religion and its impact on the world, I think it best when we learn to educate ourselves, as much as is possible, rather than be educated by others. This comes to mind; "Give a man a fish; you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish; and you have fed him for a lifetime. Teach a man to teach others to fish and..." —Author unknown

The more educated, the less superstitious.

Posted by: luck mermaid Feb 14 2005, 07:53 AM
QUOTE
Frothing_Gerbil, I'm sorry that God gifted you with such poor reasoning skills. Truly the only contribution to humanity you have left to make before you die is to breed as little as possible.


Any reason I'm unaware of for such animosity? I don't know the history between you two, but that statement sounded like it's own rabid frothing.

Posted by: Cerise Feb 14 2005, 07:56 AM
QUOTE (Rameus @ Feb 14 2005, 04:59 AM)
Look at these children on that forum. Everything to them is curses, and demons, and magic god armor. They are being persecuted by wiccans and Satan. And at the ripe old ages of 17 and 18, they are convinced that the world is ending and they can't wait for all of us to die. You can't tell me this is a healthy belief system.

Sometimes I feel like I'm another species on an alien planet. How did this apocalyptic insanity become the cultural norm for much of the world for the last 1,700 years? What went wrong in human history to get us where we are today? Can we set it right, and if so HOW do we set it right?

Rameus

Everyone at 18 years old is waiting for the End Times. Our forefathers gave us a shitty world with shitty air and shitty water and shitty wars cropping up all over the place. We have this thing called education that serves as a tweleve year babysitter so the economy can continue to roll along. For a lot of us, this is the end times, not because of Christianity, but because of Taker mythology.

It's not healthy at all, but we keep reenacting the myth because we think it is the only right way to live.

Posted by: Reach Feb 14 2005, 07:57 AM
QUOTE (luck mermaid @ Feb 14 2005, 07:53 AM)
Any reason I'm unaware of for such animosity? I don't know the history between you two, but that statement sounded like it's own rabid frothing.

Sometimes, it's better to be kept in the dark. Why stir up things?

Posted by: Cerise Feb 14 2005, 07:58 AM
QUOTE (Mad_Gerbil @ Feb 14 2005, 05:09 AM)
I think we should push for the active removal of all of atheism since in every system it takes hold human rights take a major nose dive. The point being, if one is going to work for the elimination of systems that have guided human development for at least 10,000 years then one might be wise to have a better system with which to replace the old.

The lesson of the 20th Century was that pure rationalism, atheism, and science were definitely NOT the answer.

That may be the only thing you've said here that I am in total agreement with, Gerbil. How 'bout that. FrogsToadBigGrin.gif

Any ideas about what a "better system" would look like? That's what we need right now.

Posted by: luck mermaid Feb 14 2005, 08:01 AM
Oh Reach you know me...can't resist GONZ9729CustomImage1539775.gif plus I saw no reason to call that 'harsh'. I thought that crossed a line into written abusiveness and I wanted to say so (and yes I do cross that line myself, sometimes with cheerful ease).

Posted by: Reach Feb 14 2005, 08:05 AM
QUOTE (luck mermaid @ Feb 14 2005, 08:01 AM)
Oh Reach you know me...can't resist GONZ9729CustomImage1539775.gif plus I saw no reason to call that 'harsh'. I thought that crossed a line into written abusiveness and I wanted to say so (and yes I do cross that line myself, sometimes with cheerful ease).

Of course, LM! GONZ9729CustomImage1539775.gif

Rameus likes to push the lines, bend the lines, move the lines over a bit... and cross the lines, when he gets out of his cage.

Watch him! FrogsToadBigGrin.gif

Posted by: Clergicide Feb 14 2005, 08:08 AM
QUOTE (euphgeek @ Feb 14 2005, 05:21 AM)
Amazingly enough, I voted for "Nothing, these religions are not harmful". Why, you may ask? Because as rabid and insane as some of these people act, I have to wonder how much worse it would be if they thought there were no eternal consequences. These people have not progressed beyond the mindset of, "If I do bad things, I'll go to hell." That's the only way some people can stay out of trouble. Be glad they're only evangelizing. If their god were taken away from them who knows what chaos would ensue? Scary.

Please examine cultures, like China, before intimating that these people would all go crazy without these beliefs. It's kinda sad, and naive.

Posted by: Rameus Feb 14 2005, 08:10 AM
(by Everything_Lady)
QUOTE
Oh Reach you know me...can't resist GONZ9729CustomImage1539775.gif plus I saw no reason to call that 'harsh'. I thought that crossed a line into written abusiveness and I wanted to say so (and yes I do cross that line myself, sometimes with cheerful ease).


As you are undoubtedly a woman of all things, it seems difficult not to offend you in some way. Just the other day I was about to share a joke about midgets from Tanzia, but then I thought to myself: "What if Luck Mermaid is one?" So I erred on the side of caution and kept the joke to myself.

A thousand apologies for offending you yet again madam.

Rameus

Posted by: Clergicide Feb 14 2005, 08:25 AM
QUOTE (Cerise @ Feb 14 2005, 10:58 AM)
QUOTE (Mad_Gerbil @ Feb 14 2005, 05:09 AM)
I think we should push for the active removal of all of atheism since in every system it takes hold human rights take a major nose dive.  The point being, if one is going to work for the elimination of systems that have guided human development for at least 10,000 years then one might be wise to have a better system with which to replace the old.

The lesson of the 20th Century was that pure rationalism, atheism, and science were definitely NOT the answer.

That may be the only thing you've said here that I am in total agreement with, Gerbil. How 'bout that. FrogsToadBigGrin.gif

Any ideas about what a "better system" would look like? That's what we need right now.

I think where the Chinese are on the verge of taking the drivers seat in the world, and they are going to do so without religion..that perhaps that's the model we should be striving towards.

Posted by: Mad_Gerbil Feb 14 2005, 09:24 AM
Rameus:

Homosexuality may be genetic -- but then again, so are some forms of diabetes. The fact that something is genetic doesn't make it right or wrong -- the fact that something is genetic doesn't make it something that shouldn't be fought against.

In God Gene the author makes it quite clear that the genetics of what he is discussing doesn't prove or disprove the existence of G_d since genetic bent doesn't equal truth.

It is the homosexual movement that has been trying to equate genetics with truth, not the fundamentalist camp.


Posted by: Mad_Gerbil Feb 14 2005, 09:32 AM
Regarding the Apocalypse I've Four Thoughts:

1: The only message I've been able to get out of the Book of Revelation is that 'G_d Wins'. Other than that, I cannot tell you anymore about the end times other than it doesn't appear to be much fun.

2: It is interesting that in the Book of Revelation that the claim is made that if G_d didn't end the warfare that no person would be left alive. I find that interesting because only recently (past 50 years) has humankind developed the ability to kill the entire planet. The claim must have appeared silly back in the age of swords and sandles.

3: Destruction of the earth by fire is interesting in the age of nuclear weapons, doncha think?

4: I'm not necessarily looking for the apocalypse in my lifetime. I think people who are constantly on the lookout for the end times are sick. Compare these two outlooks:

a: Watching and waiting for the return of your hope and joy. (2nd Coming of Jesus)
b: Watching and waiting for the appearance of teh deval (anti-Christ).

While those here may think of both views as being indicative of mental illness I would have to think that the greater mental illness would be wrapped up in option b. I'm sorry, but I cannot live that way -- that pessimissm and the hatred of the here and now is no way to live. I'm looking for a better future -- not hell on earth.




Posted by: Mad_Gerbil Feb 14 2005, 09:33 AM
QUOTE (Clergicide @ Feb 14 2005, 04:25 PM)
QUOTE (Cerise @ Feb 14 2005, 10:58 AM)
QUOTE (Mad_Gerbil @ Feb 14 2005, 05:09 AM)
I think we should push for the active removal of all of atheism since in every system it takes hold human rights take a major nose dive.   The point being, if one is going to work for the elimination of systems that have guided human development for at least 10,000 years then one might be wise to have a better system with which to replace the old.

The lesson of the 20th Century was that pure rationalism, atheism, and science were definitely NOT the answer.

That may be the only thing you've said here that I am in total agreement with, Gerbil. How 'bout that. FrogsToadBigGrin.gif

Any ideas about what a "better system" would look like? That's what we need right now.

I think where the Chinese are on the verge of taking the drivers seat in the world, and they are going to do so without religion..that perhaps that's the model we should be striving towards.

You've no knowledge of their human rights record, I see.

Posted by: Clergicide Feb 14 2005, 09:34 AM
QUOTE (Mad_Gerbil @ Feb 14 2005, 12:33 PM)
QUOTE (Clergicide @ Feb 14 2005, 04:25 PM)
QUOTE (Cerise @ Feb 14 2005, 10:58 AM)
QUOTE (Mad_Gerbil @ Feb 14 2005, 05:09 AM)
I think we should push for the active removal of all of atheism since in every system it takes hold human rights take a major nose dive.   The point being, if one is going to work for the elimination of systems that have guided human development for at least 10,000 years then one might be wise to have a better system with which to replace the old.

The lesson of the 20th Century was that pure rationalism, atheism, and science were definitely NOT the answer.

That may be the only thing you've said here that I am in total agreement with, Gerbil. How 'bout that. FrogsToadBigGrin.gif

Any ideas about what a "better system" would look like? That's what we need right now.

I think where the Chinese are on the verge of taking the drivers seat in the world, and they are going to do so without religion..that perhaps that's the model we should be striving towards.

You've no knowledge of their human rights record, I see.

And you have no record of ours I see.

Posted by: Mad_Gerbil Feb 14 2005, 09:37 AM
QUOTE (luck mermaid @ Feb 14 2005, 03:53 PM)
QUOTE
Frothing_Gerbil, I'm sorry that God gifted you with such poor reasoning skills. Truly the only contribution to humanity you have left to make before you die is to breed as little as possible.


Any reason I'm unaware of for such animosity? I don't know the history between you two, but that statement sounded like it's own rabid frothing.

While I don't know if it is two sided or not, I think Rameus and I have a little bit of respect for one another and poke each other with insults out of good natured fun and less out of a desire to be evil. I feel the same way about NBBTB, Neil, and Chefranden.

I think we are all having fun here. FrogsToadBigGrin.gif

Posted by: Mad_Gerbil Feb 14 2005, 09:39 AM
QUOTE (Clergicide @ Feb 14 2005, 05:34 PM)
QUOTE (Mad_Gerbil @ Feb 14 2005, 12:33 PM)
QUOTE (Clergicide @ Feb 14 2005, 04:25 PM)
QUOTE (Cerise @ Feb 14 2005, 10:58 AM)
QUOTE (Mad_Gerbil @ Feb 14 2005, 05:09 AM)
I think we should push for the active removal of all of atheism since in every system it takes hold human rights take a major nose dive.   The point being, if one is going to work for the elimination of systems that have guided human development for at least 10,000 years then one might be wise to have a better system with which to replace the old.

The lesson of the 20th Century was that pure rationalism, atheism, and science were definitely NOT the answer.

That may be the only thing you've said here that I am in total agreement with, Gerbil. How 'bout that. FrogsToadBigGrin.gif

Any ideas about what a "better system" would look like? That's what we need right now.

I think where the Chinese are on the verge of taking the drivers seat in the world, and they are going to do so without religion..that perhaps that's the model we should be striving towards.

You've no knowledge of their human rights record, I see.

And you have no record of ours I see.

And which country would you rather protest human rights in today?

KatieHmm.gif

Posted by: Clergicide Feb 14 2005, 09:46 AM
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200403/01/eng20040301_136190.shtml


Posted by: atheist_ewtcoma Feb 14 2005, 09:55 AM
Promoting education and tolerance is the best bet. Actively working against these fanatics will only encourage them. Got to be slick about it. Or we can say fuckem and move to mars.

Posted by: Tocis Feb 14 2005, 10:05 AM
QUOTE (Reach @ Feb 14 2005, 04:27 PM)
This comes to mind; "Give a man a fish; you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish; and you have fed him for a lifetime. Teach a man to teach others to fish and..." —Author unknown

Confucius, if memory serves. woohoo.gif

Posted by: Tocis Feb 14 2005, 10:07 AM
QUOTE (Mad_Gerbil @ Feb 14 2005, 06:24 PM)
the fact that something is genetic doesn't make it something that shouldn't be fought against.

Indeed. Thus diabetes has to be fought as it puts lives in peril. Thus homosexuality doesn't have to be fought because (unless rape et cetera is involved) it harms no one.

*SIGH* Every time just after I developed some respect for the rodent he posts those idiotic things again...

Posted by: Mad_Gerbil Feb 14 2005, 10:30 AM
QUOTE (Clergicide @ Feb 14 2005, 05:46 PM)
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200403/01/eng20040301_136190.shtml

ROFLOL!

You LINKED to a CHINESE GOVERNMENT WEBSITE?

lmao_99.gif

Posted by: Clergicide Feb 14 2005, 10:36 AM
QUOTE (Mad_Gerbil @ Feb 14 2005, 01:30 PM)
QUOTE (Clergicide @ Feb 14 2005, 05:46 PM)
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200403/01/eng20040301_136190.shtml

ROFLOL!

You LINKED to a CHINESE GOVERNMENT WEBSITE?

lmao_99.gif

There is ample citation if you care to refute any of the claims. You can verify most of it right http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm

Can you do anything bad Ad-Hom? I mean seriously, you're attacking the source and not the information provided. Everything is cited, most of it US news sources, and FBI resources.

Posted by: skankboy Feb 14 2005, 10:56 AM
Before the whole "China as an example of atheism" argument gets started I'd like to make a point.

For about a thousand years before communism, China was, and to certain extent still is, under the influence of an atheistic belief system. That system was Confucianism. Communism was then superimposed upon this base. The communism we see today in china is the result of another ideology: "Maoism". Specifically, a cult of personality around their leader that still has it's echos today.

Indeed, the famed "atheistist communism" of the soviet union (esp the time of Lenin/Stalin) was the same thing.

Bringing it back: Their has never been a truly atheistic communist society in the history of this planet (except for possibly the early xtian community as it's described in the bible). All other forms have been cults of personality, quite possibly the most unstable form of cultural philosphy in existence. So please, if you're going to blame a philosophy, ascribe the blame to the correct one.

My 2 cents,
woohoo.gif


Posted by: notblindedbytheblight Feb 14 2005, 11:02 AM
I voted for education, but then I remembered M_G and thought that I may have been mistaken. After all, intellegence is often deemed cantalized, so if intellegence is genetic, and M_G appears intellegent, then maybe education won't work on some. Maybe there is a god gene that allows the intellegent person's brain to accept irrational ideals as a way to deal with stress and no amount of education will force them to see it any other way.

So, my choice? SHOCK TREATMENTS! FrogsToadBigGrin.gif

Posted by: SmallStone Feb 14 2005, 11:04 AM
Actively work against the spread via education.

Posted by: SmallStone Feb 14 2005, 11:07 AM
QUOTE (Mad_Gerbil @ Feb 14 2005, 12:32 PM)
3: Destruction of the earth by fire is interesting in the age of nuclear weapons, doncha think?

MG, You're smarter than that.

Posted by: Clergicide Feb 14 2005, 11:20 AM
QUOTE (skankboy @ Feb 14 2005, 01:56 PM)
Before the whole "China as an example of atheism" argument gets started I'd like to make a point.

For about a thousand years before communism, China was, and to certain extent still is, under the influence of an atheistic belief system.  That system was Confucianism.  Communism was then superimposed upon this base.  The communism we see today in china is the result of another ideology: "Maoism".  Specifically, a cult of personality around their leader that still has it's echos today.

Indeed, the famed "atheistist communism" of the soviet union (esp the time of Lenin/Stalin) was the same thing.

Bringing it back: Their has never been a truly atheistic communist society in the history of this planet (except for possibly the early xtian community as it's described in the bible).  All other forms have been cults of personality, quite possibly the most unstable form of cultural philosphy in existence.  So please, if you're going to blame a philosophy, ascribe the blame to the correct one.

My 2 cents,
woohoo.gif

So you've illustrated examples of corrupt leadership..most of which have been outgrown in modern times. China currently appoints it's leadership based on merit, via testing that requires more intensive study than most of the US PHD programs, where we appoint leadership based on money. You're dead wrong in saying there has never been truly atheistic society. There has never been a truly communistic society,yes..but tying the two together hardly shows that either has never existed. Central leadership is always subject to corruption..but we're not looking at the ramifications of individual political leaders, we are examining the moral and philosphical mindset held by a society since well before the Shang dynasty..and the subsequent success it has yielded. Confucianism is a 'philosophy',(and one thousand years? Maoism was mid 20th century. So it's more like 3,000 years sparky) and respecting ancestral spirits is hardly an observance of a supreme creator. As far as atrocities, corruption, and human rights violations go, the scales are still heavily weighed against societies that adopted religious world views. So you can have your two cents.

Posted by: Raineshower Feb 14 2005, 11:58 AM
QUOTE
So, my choice? SHOCK TREATMENTS!


Can we stick him with needles first? lmao_99.gif lmao_99.gif

Posted by: notblindedbytheblight Feb 14 2005, 12:12 PM
QUOTE (Raineshower @ Feb 14 2005, 11:58 AM)
QUOTE
So, my choice? SHOCK TREATMENTS!


Can we stick him with needles first? lmao_99.gif lmao_99.gif

Sure! But, we have to be sure they are little bitty needles...we don't want the little rodent to pass out before we administer the shock! wicked.gif

Posted by: notblindedbytheblight Feb 14 2005, 12:14 PM
QUOTE (SmallStone @ Feb 14 2005, 11:07 AM)
QUOTE (Mad_Gerbil @ Feb 14 2005, 12:32 PM)
3: Destruction of the earth by fire is interesting in the age of nuclear weapons, doncha think?

MG, You're smarter than that.

Self-fullfilling prophecy huh?

And god sent the rainbow.... FrogsToadBigGrin.gif

Posted by: Mad_Gerbil Feb 14 2005, 12:33 PM
*coughs on everyone so they catch teh monotheism*

Muahaha... rodents spread disease!


. : . : . . .
. . .: . . . <---- mono-theism germs coming for you!
: . ' . '.. .: .

Posted by: Clergicide Feb 14 2005, 12:42 PM
QUOTE (Mad_Gerbil @ Feb 14 2005, 03:33 PM)
*coughs on everyone so they catch teh monotheism*

Muahaha... rodents spread disease!


. : . : . . .
. . .: . . . <---- mono-theism germs coming for you!
: . ' . '.. .: .

Can I take this to mean you can no longer refute China as a better model? I wasn't really expecting a cogent rebuttal, but you usually at least supply something inane at the frustration of the rest of us. Maybe you meant to say something like "the devil has already won in China, so of course his evil works are more apparent in America"..nothing as devoid of intelligence as this for us, Gerby?

Posted by: notblindedbytheblight Feb 14 2005, 12:46 PM
QUOTE (Clergicide @ Feb 14 2005, 12:42 PM)
QUOTE (Mad_Gerbil @ Feb 14 2005, 03:33 PM)
*coughs on everyone so they catch teh monotheism*

Muahaha... rodents spread disease!


. : .    : . .  .
. . .: .  . .          <---- mono-theism germs coming for you!
: . ' . '..  .: .

Can I take this to mean you can no longer refute China as a better model? I wasn't really expecting a cogent rebuttal, but you usually at least supply something inane at the frustration of the rest of us. Maybe you meant to say something like "the devil has already won in China, so of course his evil works are more apparent in America"..nothing as devoid of intelligence as this for us, Gerby?

I think he was just messin' with me and raineshower for wanting to poke him with needles and administer shock treatments. FrogsToadBigGrin.gif

Posted by: lalli Feb 14 2005, 12:48 PM
Education.
Education isn't a magical elixir that will solve all the world's problems, but it is the key to many of them. Ignorance and superstition are best fought by spreading knowledge and logical thinking.
Truly stupidity is the cardinal sin.

Posted by: Madame M Feb 14 2005, 01:19 PM
QUOTE
Their has never been a truly atheistic communist society in the history of this planet (except for possibly the early xtian community as it's described in the bible).


I'm not sure what you mean here? The early christian community, while a form of communism, was not a form of atheism, as they were worshipping God. In fact, it could also fall under the "personality cult" definition, as they were "following" Jesus. Not much is known though as to how this model of communism worked out in practicality, since it did not seem to spawn a society but a religion which does not follow this model today.

Posted by: Mad_Gerbil Feb 14 2005, 01:26 PM
QUOTE (Clergicide @ Feb 14 2005, 08:42 PM)
QUOTE (Mad_Gerbil @ Feb 14 2005, 03:33 PM)
*coughs on everyone so they catch teh monotheism*

Muahaha... rodents spread disease!


. : .    : . .  .
. . .: .  . .          <---- mono-theism germs coming for you!
: . ' . '..  .: .

Can I take this to mean you can no longer refute China as a better model? I wasn't really expecting a cogent rebuttal, but you usually at least supply something inane at the frustration of the rest of us. Maybe you meant to say something like "the devil has already won in China, so of course his evil works are more apparent in America"..nothing as devoid of intelligence as this for us, Gerby?

No, it is much simplier than that.

If the effects of Communism on the societies that tried it in the 20th century isn't enough to move you then there isn't anything I'm going to be able to produce that is going to move you.

That, and I don't hang out here to talk about China.


Posted by: Clergicide Feb 14 2005, 01:37 PM
QUOTE (Mad_Gerbil @ Feb 14 2005, 04:26 PM)
QUOTE (Clergicide @ Feb 14 2005, 08:42 PM)
QUOTE (Mad_Gerbil @ Feb 14 2005, 03:33 PM)
*coughs on everyone so they catch teh monotheism*

Muahaha... rodents spread disease!


. : .    : . .  .
. . .: .  . .          <---- mono-theism germs coming for you!
: . ' . '..  .: .

Can I take this to mean you can no longer refute China as a better model? I wasn't really expecting a cogent rebuttal, but you usually at least supply something inane at the frustration of the rest of us. Maybe you meant to say something like "the devil has already won in China, so of course his evil works are more apparent in America"..nothing as devoid of intelligence as this for us, Gerby?

No, it is much simplier than that.

If the effects of Communism on the societies that tried it in the 20th century isn't enough to move you then there isn't anything I'm going to be able to produce that is going to move you.

That, and I don't hang out here to talk about China.

Again, you're examining a political structure, and it's corruption isolated under the leadership of a few individuals, which harldy does justice to bulk of Chinese history. I'm sorry your view is so limited. We could speak volumes of the McCarthy administration..but that hardly sums up the history of America. You are again diverting from the orginal premise, and that is China has been absent of a religious and spiritual mindset since the times of 'oracle bone inscription', and that currently they are on the fast-track to being the number 1 superpower in the world. And you haven't answered for why an atheistic nation's crime rate is so microscopic compared to our own, or why (currently) in the human rights department they are making our Christian nation look like savage morons. These are the reasons I present China as a model if we are to adopt a superior philosophy in place of this mindless drivel you call 'the word of god'.

Posted by: Mad_Gerbil Feb 14 2005, 01:47 PM
Okay, I'll bite.

What about the Chinese model do you find attractive?
What about the Chinese model do you find repulsive?

Are you advocating Communism?

Posted by: atheist_ewtcoma Feb 14 2005, 02:37 PM
I'll get on Mad Gerblis side...

Hey, The United states may not be the best country in the world but ummmm ohhhh brain fart, oh, it is.

You can not compare china to america on human rights. China has some work still.

The reason that China may appear to have a small crime rate is that they beat the shit out of their people into submition, they have a 0 tolerance policy. Also do you think that they are going to report everything like we do? Rob a store or get cought dealing drugs and see whats happens. You just guilty period.

We have a policy thats called due process. You are innocent until proven guilty. Stop the bitchen about Americas human rights policies. We got it good.

Oh yea sombody should bitch smack Ward Churchill, he is full of shit.

Posted by: Clergicide Feb 14 2005, 03:22 PM
QUOTE (Mad_Gerbil @ Feb 14 2005, 04:47 PM)
Okay, I'll bite.

What about the Chinese model do you find attractive?
What about the Chinese model do you find repulsive?

Are you advocating Communism?

I'm advocating their philosophical mindset..not communism. What's attractive is that philosophy is 'ideas' about the world around that are subject to change when better ones come along. I find it attractive that they are intolerant of the intolerant(Christianity). Their beliefs advocate education, and morality for the sake of being a moral human being. They teach personal responsibility for one's actions, something you Christians seem fucking incapable of.

There is nothing repulsive about confucian philosophy.

And again, no, you stupid ape, I'm not advocating communism, stop fucking associating two things that aren't related.

Posted by: ChefRanden Feb 14 2005, 03:54 PM
QUOTE (lalli @ Feb 14 2005, 02:48 PM)
Education.
Education isn't a magical elixir that will solve all the world's problems, but it is the key to many of them. Ignorance and superstition are best fought by spreading knowledge and logical thinking.
Truly stupidity is the cardinal sin.

I am now of the opinion that education, as we know it, ensures the problems will continue.

Link to http://www.spinninglobe.net/gattopage.htm

Posted by: Clergicide Feb 14 2005, 04:00 PM
QUOTE (ChefRanden @ Feb 14 2005, 06:54 PM)
QUOTE (lalli @ Feb 14 2005, 02:48 PM)
Education.
Education isn't a magical elixir that will solve all the world's problems, but it is the key to many of them. Ignorance and superstition are best fought by spreading knowledge and logical thinking.
Truly stupidity is the cardinal sin.

I am now of the opinion that education, as we know it, ensures the problems will continue.

Link to http://www.spinninglobe.net/gattopage.htm

With Intelligent Design being slated to replace Darwinism, you may have a point, Chef.

Posted by: Shadfox Feb 14 2005, 05:08 PM
If there's anything I can call worthwhile in life, it would be "Actively working against the spread of these apocalyptic cults." That's to be my lifelong, good deed to humanity. How I do it exactly, I don't know. But, I think speaking against religion despite the PC police is a good way to start.

And, Gerbil, my band of commie Roborovskies want to have a word with you.

user posted image

Posted by: luck mermaid Feb 14 2005, 08:43 PM
QUOTE
As you are undoubtedly a woman of all things, it seems difficult not to offend you in some way. Just the other day I was about to share a joke about midgets from Tanzia, but then I thought to myself: "What if Luck Mermaid is one?" So I erred on the side of caution and kept the joke to myself.

A thousand apologies for offending you yet again madam.

Rameus





I knew crocodiles cried, but I didn't know they could talk also...

I said earlier, I don't know the history but from my limited perspective it sounded way too harsh and no one is exempt from me saying what I feel.

On Tanzania and midgets : it can be hard to adjust from a life where people are defined in easily accessible unshifting roles as a sense of stability in a whirling unstable world.

Posted by: Cerise Feb 14 2005, 08:57 PM
QUOTE (Mad_Gerbil @ Feb 14 2005, 09:32 AM)
While those here may think of both views as being indicative of mental illness I would have to think that the greater mental illness would be wrapped up in option b. I'm sorry, but I cannot live that way -- that pessimissm and the hatred of the here and now is no way to live. I'm looking for a better future -- not hell on earth.

What you should be doing is looking into how to stop the ticking of the time bomb, not counting your purgatory points and hoping Jesus comes back before the 50th season of Survivor tortures us all.

Waiting for the antichrist is silly. We already know who the antichrist is. B.

Posted by: Cerise Feb 14 2005, 09:00 PM
QUOTE (atheist_ewtcoma @ Feb 14 2005, 02:37 PM)
I'll get on Mad Gerblis side...

Hey, The United states may not be the best country in the world but ummmm ohhhh brain fart, oh, it is.

Glad to see you yanks are still humble and not stuck on yourselves at all. GONZ9729CustomImage1539775.gif

One day you guys are going to "best" yourself right into a nuclear explosion. And nobody will be boasting and waving flags anymore.

Posted by: MalaInSe Feb 14 2005, 09:41 PM
QUOTE (Cerise @ Feb 14 2005, 09:00 PM)
Glad to see you yanks are still humble and not stuck on yourselves at all. GONZ9729CustomImage1539775.gif

Oh no, Cerise. I know you didn't just lump me in with that guy.

Actually, I know you didn't, because I know you know he isn't typical of much of anything.

Renee

Posted by: Cerise Feb 14 2005, 10:45 PM
Renee I'd be surprised if anything in this world is typical.

Also, I live in an igloo and hunt beavers for sustenance. woohoo.gif

Posted by: MalaInSe Feb 14 2005, 10:48 PM
QUOTE (Cerise @ Feb 14 2005, 10:45 PM)
Renee I'd be surprised if anything in this world is typical.

Also, I live in an igloo and hunt beavers for sustenance. woohoo.gif

Really?!?!?

Can you tell me why igloos are warm enough to live in? I mean, they're made of ice, right?

wicked.gif

Posted by: Rameus Feb 14 2005, 11:12 PM
QUOTE
(by Clergicide)
QUOTE
Let's just set the Human Rights record straight

(by ooh ooh ooh aaah aaah aaah)
QUOTE
ROFLOL!

You LINKED to a CHINESE GOVERNMENT WEBSITE?


What, do you think the U.S. Government is going to publish reports about how horrible and inhumane we are? I knew you weren't gifted in the brain department but sweet Jesus I didn't realize you were this bad off Chimpy. Oh and where do you get your information about how horrible and inhumane China is? You just laughed at Clergicide for using a Chinese source that condemns U.S. human rights violations, and yet you almost certainly rely on U.S. (or Western) sources that condemn Chinese human rights violations. Christians really put the "hip" in hypocrites don't they?

(by water bag)
QUOTE
If the effects of Communism on the societies that tried it in the 20th century isn't enough to move you then there isn't anything I'm going to be able to produce that is going to move you.

That, and I don't hang out here to talk about China.


So essentially you are entirely ignorant of Chinese history that goes back further than 50 years? You can bash the Far East all you want, but the reality is that they are the only region on this Earth who has successfully resisted the culturally destructive forces of Christianity and Islam, and yes they will be surpassing the U.S. economically within a few years. Incidentally, they surpassed us philosophically 2,500 years ago...

Rameus

Posted by: Slayer-2004 Feb 14 2005, 11:17 PM
Has anyone else actually been to china ? Communism may be controlling but it really isnt that bad in china . Its actually a decent place to visit and people can be quite nice there .

Posted by: Euthyphro Feb 15 2005, 02:17 AM
I voted 'Actively work against the spread of these apocalyptic cults.
The fundies of Christianity and Islam make me paranoid.

The bible is a self contradicting mixed bag of good examples of civilty and very scary, bad examples.
And the fundies are inadvertently supported by the other religionists because they all unanimously agree that the bible is the word of God. Bible worship is a threat to the world.

I say actively work to dispel the notion that the holy books of the terrible three are a revalation from a God. Actively work to deconvert people from those three religions.

Islam and Christianity both put pressure on the adherents to spread the religion across the globe. And people die from this very thing today. Christians, Islamics, Hindu's, and some Buddhists die because of how hungry Christianity and Islam are for dominance. This by itself is bad enough.

Christianity, most of the time, seems harmless enough here, but over seas they are getting themselves and the natives killed. And if not killings or massacres, then domestic violence from differences of religions among families and relatives that christianity has touched. Praise jesus.

Posted by: Euthyphro Feb 15 2005, 03:03 AM
QUOTE (Mad_Gerbil @ Feb 14 2005, 08:09 AM)
I think we should push for the active removal of all of atheism since in every system it takes hold human rights take a major nose dive.   The point being, if one is going to work for the elimination of systems that have guided human development for at least 10,000 years then one might be wise to have a better system with which to replace the old.

The lesson of the 20th Century was that pure rationalism, atheism, and science were definitely NOT the answer.

YOU KEEP MAKING STRAW MEN OF WHAT ATHEISM IS.

Atheism does not have a holy book. The three religions being discussed do.

Atheists have one thing in common and one thing only. NO BELIEF IN GOD(S)
Religion, and certain poltical philosophies are what have caused so much harm.
You are so dishonest M_G.


Freethinkers have one thing in common. Sharing ideas and the willingness to learn from EVERYONES mistakes past and present. Freethinking is also about thinking outside of the box. People on this board are exchanging ideas as freethinkers and not as atheists, agnostics, pagans, pantheists, deists...etc

Some Freethinkers are the ones who are paranoid of those religions especially, and for good reason.

Freethinking is dynamic as it promotes learning and discourages holding on to bad ideas. Secular Ethics is a better system than religion.

Religion is not dynamic. And two of the three religions being discussed have a long and bloody history.
The only reason xianity became dominant in the western world is because of bloody conquest. Islam also spread through bloody conquest.

Those religions are a big part of the cause of fundies getting themselves and others killed. That is a fact today.

Posted by: Euthyphro Feb 15 2005, 03:19 AM
QUOTE (Mad_Gerbil @ Feb 14 2005, 08:06 AM)
This is funny.

After the discussion in our other thread that was locked I was thinking through some of the arguments and one that bothered me was the assertion that nobody today would claim that religous beliefs are genetic (hence, no need to fear the proverbial 'cleansing'.)

So I went to Barnes & Noble on Saturday and there on the book shelf under "Trends in Science" was a book entitled "The God Gene".  In it the author (Dr. Dean Hamer) argues that there is a gene that codes for the hunger of the transcendent.  Towards the end of the book he does a case study on the Jewish people.

The book isn't intended to prove or disprove G_d, but the author does state that he feels the 'God Gene' was selected for through evolution because it gives the species a better chance of survival. 

Whatever the case may be, the book is incredibly relevant to this thread on many levels -- not the least of which, it is a refutation of the notion that anything should be 'done' about monotheistic religion at all.

If there is a God gene, then that gene is at least partly responsible for there being spiritual beliefs at all.

But it IS NOT responsible for what kind of spiritual beliefs we will have. The environment and human interaction is what molds philosophies and religions.
If there is a God gene it is one variable of many that shaped the idea of monotheism. God belief by itself is not necessarily a danger.

The abrahamic monotheism is different as it has a very long bloody history and causes problems even today. Why does America care about Isreal? Why is Isreal and the Palestinians killing eachother? Why does much of the Islamic countries that do not even border Palestine care about the conflict between the Isrealis and the Palestinians? Why is much of Islam pissed at the U.S's historical coddling of Isreal? Religion.

Posted by: ChefRanden Feb 15 2005, 10:08 AM
QUOTE (atheist_ewtcoma @ Feb 14 2005, 04:37 PM)
I'll get on Mad Gerblis side...

Hey, The United states may not be the best country in the world but ummmm ohhhh brain fart, oh, it is.

QUOTE


UNITED NATIONS Norway, Sweden, Australia, Canada and the Netherlands ranked as the best five countries to live in but Africa’s quality of life plummeted because of AIDS, said a U.N. report released on Thursday.
.
The United States was ranked in eighth place, a drop of one position from 2003 in the report that rates not only per-capita income but also educational levels, health care and life expectancy in measuring a nation’s well-being.
.
The Human Development Index, prepared by the U.N. Development Program, is issued annually and includes every country for which statistics are available.
.
Iraq, Afghanistan, North Korea, and Liberia were among nations not included because of lack of data.
.
Norway has led the list for the past four years.
.
Aside from the overall index, the report produces indicators on women’s equality, income inequality and consumption, poverty and other categories that countries use to measure development. In Canada, for example, the index has been used in advertisements to attract business.
.
The industrialized nations as usual were in the top 20, their ratings close to one another. Belgium was in sixth place, followed by Iceland, the United States, Japan, Ireland, Switzerland, Britain, Finland, Austria, Luxembourg, France, Denmark, New Zealand, Germany and Spain.
.
At the bottom of the list for the seventh year was Sierra Leone, emerging from a decade of civil war. Right above it were Niger, Burkina Faso, Mali and Burundi.
.
The world’s newest nation, East Timor, was included for the first time and ranked 158th out of 177 countries.
.
In Africa, the AIDS crisis reduced the average life expectancy in many countries to 40 years or less, making it the biggest factor in the decline of overall human development indicators, the report said. In comparison, the average life expectancy in Norway was 79 years.
.
At least 20 nations suffered development reversals since 1990, 13 of them in Africa: Angola, Central African Republic, Lesotho, Mozambique, Sierra Leone, Swaziland, Zambia and Zimbabwe, the report said.
.
‘‘The AIDS crisis cripples states at all levels because the disease attacks people in their most productive years,’’ said Mark Malloch Brown, head of U.N. Development Program.
.
In Latin American and Caribbean nations, Barbados again headed the list, in 29th place. Argentina ranked 34th, Chile, 43; Costa Rica, 45; Uruguay, 46; Bahamas, 51; Cuba, 52; Mexico, 53; Venezuela, 68. Surprisingly, Brazil dropped to 72nd place, one above Colombia, compared to last year when it ranked 65th.
.
In Asia, Hong Kong was in 23rd place and Singapore in 25th, South Korea in 28th, Thailand, 76; Philippines, 83; China, 94; India 127; Bangladesh 138 and Pakistan 142.
.
In the Middle East, Israel led the list in 22nd place, followed by Cyprus in 30th place, Bahrain, 40; Kuwait, 44; Qatar, 47; United Arab Emirates, 49; Libya, 58; Oman 74; Saudi Arabia, 77; Lebanon, 80; Jordan, 90; Tunisia, 92; Palestinian territories 102; Syria, 106; Algeria, 108; Egypt, 120; Morocco, 125 and Yemen, 149.
http://www.iht.com/articles/529503.html


I expect lack of research from fundies, but not from you.

Posted by: euphgeek Feb 15 2005, 10:38 AM
QUOTE (Clergicide @ Feb 14 2005, 08:08 AM)
QUOTE (euphgeek @ Feb 14 2005, 05:21 AM)
Amazingly enough, I voted for "Nothing, these religions are not harmful".  Why, you may ask?  Because as rabid and insane as some of these people act, I have to wonder how much worse it would be if they thought there were no eternal consequences.  These people have not progressed beyond the mindset of, "If I do bad things, I'll go to hell."  That's the only way some people can stay out of trouble.  Be glad they're only evangelizing.  If their god were taken away from them who knows what chaos would ensue?  Scary.

Please examine cultures, like China, before intimating that these people would all go crazy without these beliefs. It's kinda sad, and naive.

Based on the fundie xtians I've debated, I get the impression that the only reason they do anything good is because the either want to go to heaven or fear going to hell. That is their sole motivation. I'm not saying that all people are that way, just some.

Posted by: Madame M Feb 15 2005, 10:49 AM
It seems hypocritical that China would criticize the United State's treatment of women. If women are equally valued in China, then why are the orphanages filled with female babies abandoned by parents who want their one allowed child to be male? The pressure to produce a son, which would only occur under conditions in which males are valued more highly than females, must be intense for a new mother to willingly abandon her newborn baby girl. Therefore, there must be some extreme patriarchal beliefs driving this kind of behavior.

Posted by: notblindedbytheblight Feb 15 2005, 12:21 PM
QUOTE (ChefRanden @ Feb 14 2005, 03:54 PM)
QUOTE (lalli @ Feb 14 2005, 02:48 PM)
Education.
Education isn't a magical elixir that will solve all the world's problems, but it is the key to many of them. Ignorance and superstition are best fought by spreading knowledge and logical thinking.
Truly stupidity is the cardinal sin.

I am now of the opinion that education, as we know it, ensures the problems will continue.

Link to http://www.spinninglobe.net/gattopage.htm

I'm tellin' ya...shock treatment is the answer! GONZ9729CustomImage1539775.gif

Posted by: Mad_Gerbil Feb 15 2005, 12:24 PM
QUOTE (notblindedbytheblight @ Feb 15 2005, 08:21 PM)
QUOTE (ChefRanden @ Feb 14 2005, 03:54 PM)
QUOTE (lalli @ Feb 14 2005, 02:48 PM)
Education.
Education isn't a magical elixir that will solve all the world's problems, but it is the key to many of them. Ignorance and superstition are best fought by spreading knowledge and logical thinking.
Truly stupidity is the cardinal sin.

I am now of the opinion that education, as we know it, ensures the problems will continue.

Link to http://www.spinninglobe.net/gattopage.htm

I'm tellin' ya...shock treatment is the answer! GONZ9729CustomImage1539775.gif

*tries to tie the entire thread together*

That would be legal in China.... maybe that is the system Clericide is referring to?

Posted by: notblindedbytheblight Feb 15 2005, 12:28 PM
QUOTE (Euthyphro @ Feb 15 2005, 03:19 AM)
QUOTE (Mad_Gerbil @ Feb 14 2005, 08:06 AM)
This is funny.

After the discussion in our other thread that was locked I was thinking through some of the arguments and one that bothered me was the assertion that nobody today would claim that religous beliefs are genetic (hence, no need to fear the proverbial 'cleansing'.)

So I went to Barnes & Noble on Saturday and there on the book shelf under "Trends in Science" was a book entitled "The God Gene".  In it the author (Dr. Dean Hamer) argues that there is a gene that codes for the hunger of the transcendent.  Towards the end of the book he does a case study on the Jewish people.

The book isn't intended to prove or disprove G_d, but the author does state that he feels the 'God Gene' was selected for through evolution because it gives the species a better chance of survival. 

Whatever the case may be, the book is incredibly relevant to this thread on many levels -- not the least of which, it is a refutation of the notion that anything should be 'done' about monotheistic religion at all.

If there is a God gene, then that gene is at least partly responsible for there being spiritual beliefs at all.

But it IS NOT responsible for what kind of spiritual beliefs we will have. The environment and human interaction is what molds philosophies and religions.
If there is a God gene it is one variable of many that shaped the idea of monotheism. God belief by itself is not necessarily a danger.


Indeed, and if it is genetic it probably evolved as a way to cope with the stress of the knowledge of death-a defense mechanism. And what did the Big 3 go and do...put the fear of death back into that defense mechanism by implying eternal death. What dumb shits!

Posted by: notblindedbytheblight Feb 15 2005, 12:29 PM
QUOTE (Mad_Gerbil @ Feb 15 2005, 12:24 PM)
QUOTE (notblindedbytheblight @ Feb 15 2005, 08:21 PM)
QUOTE (ChefRanden @ Feb 14 2005, 03:54 PM)
QUOTE (lalli @ Feb 14 2005, 02:48 PM)
Education.
Education isn't a magical elixir that will solve all the world's problems, but it is the key to many of them. Ignorance and superstition are best fought by spreading knowledge and logical thinking.
Truly stupidity is the cardinal sin.

I am now of the opinion that education, as we know it, ensures the problems will continue.

Link to http://www.spinninglobe.net/gattopage.htm

I'm tellin' ya...shock treatment is the answer! GONZ9729CustomImage1539775.gif

*tries to tie the entire thread together*

That would be legal in China.... maybe that is the system Clericide is referring to?

No...I mean for smart gerbils. GONZ9729CustomImage1539775.gif

Posted by: Valgeir Feb 15 2005, 02:02 PM
Actively work to stop the spread of these cults, but by that I mean actively work to stamp them out. Liberal Christianity is fine if it's controlled and stopped from spreading, but "conservative" Christianity has to be ended one way or another- and yes, I'm including... less humanitarian solutions that I otherwise wouldn't approve of (not the physical harming of a person, but possibly tactics to scatter and inflict terror... I'm not glad to say it, but it needs to be said). Simply put this institution is too harmful to allow to exist.

I only say we need to fight back against liberal Christianity because ALL Christianity needs to be stopped. I have no problem with liberal Christianity in and of itself, but it can give birth to a new wave of fundamentalist, evil Christians if left unchecked. Not to mention, to be a Christian at all, even a liberal one, requires a rather unnerving level of delusion. Christianity is, in all truth, government sanctioned and protected insanity.

Posted by: Mad_Gerbil Feb 15 2005, 02:27 PM
QUOTE (Valgeir @ Feb 15 2005, 10:02 PM)
Actively work to stop the spread of these cults, but by that I mean actively work to stamp them out. Liberal Christianity is fine if it's controlled and stopped from spreading, but "conservative" Christianity has to be ended one way or another- and yes, I'm including... less humanitarian solutions that I otherwise wouldn't approve of (not the physical harming of a person, but possibly tactics to scatter and inflict terror... I'm not glad to say it, but it needs to be said). Simply put this institution is too harmful to allow to exist.

I only say we need to fight back against liberal Christianity because ALL Christianity needs to be stopped. I have no problem with liberal Christianity in and of itself, but it can give birth to a new wave of fundamentalist, evil Christians if left unchecked. Not to mention, to be a Christian at all, even a liberal one, requires a rather unnerving level of delusion. Christianity is, in all truth, government sanctioned and protected insanity.

Thank you for your honesty.

To destroy Christianity we now have, in addition to removing my children from my home, a call for terrorism. Is Valgeir a lunatic or just following the logic I've pointed out several times in other threads?

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

Now instead of getting defensive, I want you to think with me about something.

I believe the greatest sin is pride. When a fundamentalist looks down on atheists he is being prideful. When whole groups of people are painted with a broad brush or when other people become 'the enemy' that is an expression of pride. Claims of intelligence (typically by freethinkers) or righteousness (by theists) are again, nothing but expressions of pride.

I think that many people who become Christians (convert from atheism) and many people that become Atheists (convert from Christianity) have not converted at all -- only the excuses for looking down on other people have changed.

How is an atheist bellowing about the fundamentalist fifth column and the need to crush the enemy by any means possible any different than a fundamentalist bellowing about unwashed infidels and the need to beat back the devil spawn. At the end of the day, both groups go to bed at night thinking the other is the absolute personification of evil -- both are snug and warm in their own arrogance.

Again, as people move back and forth between these two groups they haven't really changed religions at all -- the religion is exactly the same -- looking down on other people because [insert reason here].

Posted by: Cerise Feb 15 2005, 04:17 PM
there's logic in your other threads? GONZ9729CustomImage1539775.gif

Like I've said before, I have no problem with other people believing in God. Or even with people who have decided that the one right way for them includes a God of some sort. What I have a problem with is people decided what the one right way for everyone is.

Posted by: Madame M Feb 15 2005, 04:51 PM
QUOTE
Christianity has to be ended one way or another- and yes, I'm including... less humanitarian solutions that I otherwise wouldn't approve of (not the physical harming of a person, but possibly tactics to scatter and inflict terror... I'm not glad to say it, but it needs to be said). Simply put this institution is too harmful to allow to exist.


MG said it pretty well. This is no better than what you "think" the Christians may or may not do within the fundamentalist mindset.

The ironic thing is, when Christians read this kind of stuff, it confirms what they are told about the coming persecution from the "evil" unbelievers. So what happens when people get scared. They perpare to defend themselves and go on the defensive. In the USA, it is the current push you see for legislation, christian based education in public schools, voting for certain officials. When this happens, the "other side" gets scared and goes on their own defensive, pushing back.

The fact is, when force, terror and violence is used against a specific group, that group becomes martyred or persecuted. The first thing that persecution does, is provide the persecuted group with proof, from their own perspective, that they are indeed right and suffering for being "right". The second thing it does, is it eventually gives said group special protection or status, in the long run. Think of how the Jewish people now have special protection in a way and people are even afraid to do any criticism of them due to the holocaust. Third, you could create a generation of angry children who grow up to be angry adults due to either being separated from their parents or having to live through hardships. This may cause them to seek out the beliefs of their parents or to grow up clinging even harder to these beliefs, and being quite intolerant, due to the intolerance they recieved. Right now, there is no violence or terror coming from Christians. Pushing political views is not quite the same thing, since everyone feels their worldview is the correct one.

Sometimes I feel like I am sitting in the middle, watching both sides and noting a mounting insanity I can do nothing about. I will not stand in the ranks of any group that would advocate violence or terror against another group of human beings that is not doing the same.

Posted by: Clergicide Feb 15 2005, 05:03 PM
QUOTE (Rameus @ Feb 15 2005, 02:12 AM)
QUOTE
(by Clergicide)
QUOTE
Let's just set the Human Rights record straight

(by ooh ooh ooh aaah aaah aaah)
QUOTE
ROFLOL!

You LINKED to a CHINESE GOVERNMENT WEBSITE?


What, do you think the U.S. Government is going to publish reports about how horrible and inhumane we are? I knew you weren't gifted in the brain department but sweet Jesus I didn't realize you were this bad off Chimpy. Oh and where do you get your information about how horrible and inhumane China is? You just laughed at Clergicide for using a Chinese source that condemns U.S. human rights violations, and yet you almost certainly rely on U.S. (or Western) sources that condemn Chinese human rights violations. Christians really put the "hip" in hypocrites don't they?

Our government told us, in an official series of media warnings, that we could protect ourselves from chemical and biological weapons attacks with duct tape and bottled water...

MG I can understand how you might find that perfectly reasonable..but I think those of us who have the critical thinking skills above that of a five year-old's, may take what our government tells us with bigger grains of salt from now on

Posted by: Casey Feb 15 2005, 05:05 PM
QUOTE (Madame M)
Sometimes I feel like I am sitting in the middle, watching both sides and noting a mounting insanity I can do nothing about. I will not stand in the ranks of any group that would advocate violence or terror against another group of human beings that is not doing the same.


I voted for "Education". I'll put it this way. I don't like snakes all that much, but I don't go into a killing frenzy every time I see a snake. Snakes live in their own circle, humans in theirs, and as long as the two circles don't intersect, that's fine by me.

When the two circles do intersect, that's snake killing time for me. If a snake comes into my (human) circle, I must get rid of it lest it harm me or mine. I would much prefer to do that without killing the snake but if I have to kill it I will.

Another example. During the Civil War, some in the North advocated making peace with the Confederacy. I think it was Horace Greely who disposed of this argument rather neatly when he rhetorically asked, "What do you do with people who don't want peace and won't let you have any?"
Casey

Posted by: ChefRanden Feb 15 2005, 05:38 PM
QUOTE (Valgeir @ Feb 15 2005, 04:02 PM)
Actively work to stop the spread of these cults, but by that I mean actively work to stamp them out. Liberal Christianity is fine if it's controlled and stopped from spreading, but "conservative" Christianity has to be ended one way or another- and yes, I'm including... less humanitarian solutions that I otherwise wouldn't approve of (not the physical harming of a person, but possibly tactics to scatter and inflict terror... I'm not glad to say it, but it needs to be said). Simply put this institution is too harmful to allow to exist.
```````````````````````````````````````````````````
I only say we need to fight back against liberal Christianity because ALL Christianity needs to be stopped. I have no problem with liberal Christianity in and of itself, but it can give birth to a new wave of fundamentalist, evil Christians if left unchecked. Not to mention, to be a Christian at all, even a liberal one, requires a rather unnerving level of delusion. Christianity is, in all truth, government sanctioned and protected insanity.

given the perversity of human nature, this kind of action amounts to throwing water on oil fire. In the end you will just spread it further.

Intolerant religion is not going to be done away with via more intolerance. Christianity has worked for 1700 years trying to do the very thing that you are advocating. This has not worked for the betterment of mankind. Simply changing yokes will not make the burden lighter. The problem is saying to the other, "you have to live like I tell you to live." This is the destructive idea derived from taker culture and sanctified by monotheistic religion.

1700 years seems to be a lot to us as individuals. However, it is nothing compared to the 3 million years that our species has existed. This is a little aberration that will eventually fall of its own weight.
````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
First there is nothing wrong with being delusional. It is probably a common human condition that unbelievers are not free of themselves.

Next while it is true that Christians are barking up the wrong tree, we free thinkers are as well. We're just barking up a different tree, but there's still no coon in it. In point of fact though we have thrown out God, we have not gotten rid of the main destructive idea: others must live as we live. We have not seen that there is no one right way to live.

Posted by: Cerise Feb 15 2005, 07:28 PM
What we need now is innovation. Not "the good old days" because there weren't any. Not "the glorious present" because it isn't. We need a new vision.

Obviously the answer isn't going to come from eradicating Christianity. If cults exists it is because they fulfill a need that the world right now isn't providing. A need for a support group cycle that we have eliminated and replaced with an economic cycle. In order to stop people from joining or starting dangerous cults, we're going to have to change our way of defining "healthy". We're going to have to redefine the word "wealth" and start taking care of the things that kids are shooting each other in gang warfare for (and no, it isn't running shoes).

Posted by: luck mermaid Feb 15 2005, 08:03 PM
I like Cerise's point ( I often agree with her).

I also think that 'spreading terror' is another form of Christianity or the negative aspect of it. It's like a man who slams his fist into the wall BESIDE a woman's head and then we're supposed to sympathize with him for not punching her face. The real damage, though body and mind are connected, is often done in the mind. Psychological violence and terror are an effective part of abuse of any kind.

Posted by: spamandham Feb 15 2005, 09:06 PM
If you had asked this pre-Bush, I would have answered #3. But now I think actively confronting the religious nuts in public is the best chance we have at survival as a species.

QUOTE (euthgeek)
Amazingly enough, I voted for "Nothing, these religions are not harmful". Why, you may ask? Because as rabid and insane as some of these people act, I have to wonder how much worse it would be if they thought there were no eternal consequences.


That's right, Japan is such a festering hell hole that no-one can survive there.

Posted by: Reality Amplifier Feb 15 2005, 09:20 PM
QUOTE (ChefRanden @ Feb 15 2005, 05:38 PM)
First there is nothing wrong with being delusional.  It is probably a common human condition that unbelievers are not free of themselves.

Next while it is true that Christians are barking up the wrong tree, we free thinkers are as well.  We're just barking up a different tree, but there's still no coon in it.  In point of fact though we have thrown out God, we have not gotten rid of the main destructive idea: others must live as we live.  We have not seen that there is no one right way to live.

Hmm. Interesting...

Posted by: Rameus Feb 15 2005, 09:32 PM
Honestly, what the Hell is wrong with these people? They believe that the world is now one step closer to Armageddon, and they consider that to be "very exciting news." How do human beings become this ill? Knowing that there are over a billion of these maniacs in the world is not a comforting thought.

Rameus

QUOTE
QUOTE
lookupforjesus
Posted: Feb 15 2005, 02:49 AM   

SOUNDING THE ALERT THAT JESUS CHRIST IS COMING VERY SOON!


Faith: Baptist
Posts: 2047
Member No.: 244
Joined: 17-June 03

Israel is Peparing for the Messiah
On a recent Hal Lindsey broadcast, Mr. Lindsey talked about how Israel is preparing for the Messiah. The following is based on his broadcast.

The ancient Sanhedrin was the Jewish Supreme Court was composed of 71 of Israel’s most revered Torah scholars. A majority vote had to be at least two votes over half of the 71, to settle any case before it. (Christ was taken before the Sanhedrin during His trial). After the Temple was destroyed, the Sanhedrin moved from place to place. It finally dissolved in Tiberias during the reign of the Roman Emperor Constantine.

Jewish tradition is that from Tiberias, the Sandhedrin will be restored. The Jews believe the restoration of the Sanhedrin will precede the coming of the Messiah, as only the Sanhedrin has the authority to crown the Messiah as the Jewish King.

In October 2004, 71 Jews were ordained to restore the Sanhedrin in Tiberias. Rabbi Chaim Richmond stated, "We don’t have a choice, it is a religious mandate for us to establish a Sanhedrin." Rabbi Richmond is head of the Temple Mount Institute and also one of the Sanhedrin. There, the Jewish Priests are recreating the tools necessary to restore Temple worship, where animal sacrifices will once again be offered.

The first and most important sacrifice, is a pure unblemished Red Heifer, as specified in the Bible’s book of Numbers, chapter 19. It is only the ashes of the Red Heifer that can purify the Temple so the Jews can worship there. Jewish scholars note that a total of nine unblemished Red Heifers have been born during the entire period of the first and second Temples. Since the destruction of the second Temple, no perfect Red Heifer has been born until this generation.

In the late 1990's, two perfect Red Heifers were born in Israel, and a third on a ranch in Texas. It has been 2000 years since the last Red Heifer was found to meet the stringent requirement set forth in Numbers 19.

Three of the items needed for the construction of a new Temple are now in place. The instruments used for animal sacrifices - the first legal Sanhedrin in 1600 years - and the first perfect Red Heifers in 2000 years. There are other items needed, but the biggest one is the Temple itself. The major obstacle to its construction, is the Moslem occupation of the Temple Mount. Also there is the famous "Dome of the Rock" sitting on top of the mount, and for some time most people thought the Jewish Temples were sitting on the same spot on which the mosque now occupies. Therefore there was no way the new Temple could be built without removing the mosque. But there are scholars today who believe the Dome of the Rock is not sitting on the exact spot of the old Temples, and that the new Temple could be constructed near by.

The Bible may be predicting this type of a situation in Revelation 11:1,2. How will this come about? As the Bible says, "anything is possible with God." One of the possibilities is that some kind of a treaty between the Jews and Moslems will allow the Jews to build the Temple. But however God arranges it, the Temple will be built.

What does all this mean today? It means the time for the return of Christ (the Messiah) is getting closer. When three items needed to build the Temple, that have been missing for centuries, are now a reality, then the construction of the Temple is that much closer. And many believe that the Temple needs to be rebuilt before Christ returns.

Keep your eyes on Israel – it is God's prophetic timepiece.

By George Konig
February 6, 2005
www.konig.org


QUOTE
lookupforjesus
Posted: Feb 15 2005, 03:07 AM   

SOUNDING THE ALERT THAT JESUS CHRIST IS COMING VERY SOON!

Faith: Baptist
Posts: 2047
Member No.: 244
Joined: 17-June 03

Studies reveal that the Jewish temple could sit alongside the Dome of the Rock for the latter is in the courtyard area of the original temple, not on its actual original site.

Attached Image (Click thumbnail to expand)


QUOTE
Justin
Posted: Feb 15 2005, 09:27 AM   

TF Sergeant

Faith: Pentecostal
Posts: 715
Member No.: 709
Joined: 19-February 04

This is very exciting news. It looks as if nothing will stop this new Sanhedrin from rebuilding the temple and offering sacrafices. I wonder if they will be fooled by the messiah that is coming, that is the false messiah, the Antichrist. 


QUOTE
lookupforjesus
Posted: Feb 15 2005, 03:46 PM   

SOUNDING THE ALERT THAT JESUS CHRIST IS COMING VERY SOON!

Faith: Baptist
Posts: 2047
Member No.: 244
Joined: 17-June 03

QUOTE 
I wonder if they will be fooled by the messiah that is coming, that is the false messiah, the Antichrist

Im Sure he will till he claims to be God in the Temple then they will turn on him!!


QUOTE
jereome
Posted: Feb 15 2005, 07:41 PM   

TF Corporal

Faith: Baptist
Posts: 260
Member No.: 1194
Joined: 12-July 04

Now Im just looking for a false Elijah to appear to point out the Anti-christ for the Jews. 

Posted by: spamandham Feb 15 2005, 10:20 PM
It's amazing that this guy knows that there have been no perfectperfect Red Heifers in 2000 years until know. Is there a world wide red heifer registry of some kind that dates back 2000 years? Gee, I hope all the red heifer ranchers are more informed than I in this regard.

Posted by: Lanakila Feb 15 2005, 10:30 PM
QUOTE (Mad_Gerbil @ Feb 14 2005, 12:33 PM)
*coughs on everyone so they catch teh monotheism*

Muahaha... rodents spread disease!


. : . : . . .
. . .: . . . <---- mono-theism germs coming for you!
: . ' . '.. .: .

I have been inoculated against that disease by 18 years of fundism. Some of us need a bigger and stronger vaccine, and needle for the innocuation to take. But, once it has taken--we can't catch the disease again. woohoo.gif

Posted by: Fweethawt Feb 15 2005, 10:45 PM
Rameus,

I'm not at all educated on the depths of the 'jewiness' in your recent post, but I do have one quick question...

Is the Jewish society over there so primitive that it will/might eventually go back to doing ritual animal sacrifices in a temple? Wendyshrug.gif


I dont' know much of the reality of the situation.
I just thought that mabye you could answer that. WendyDoh.gif

Posted by: Mad_Gerbil Feb 16 2005, 05:07 AM
Rameus:

My only question after reading your post is:

"Did they really convene the first Sanhedrin in 1600 years or is it just a typical fundy story?".

Ya have to admit, even if the end time hysteria isn't true it would be an amazing thing to witness the rebirth of a 4,000 year old ritual in the location it has been performed for hundreds of years. While I can understand your atheist agnst -- or ridicule -- the fact remains that if this is true it is very, very interesting.

Posted by: Madame M Feb 16 2005, 10:20 AM
QUOTE (spamandham @ Feb 16 2005, 01:20 AM)
It's amazing that this guy knows that there have been no perfectperfect Red Heifers in 2000 years until know.  Is there a world wide red heifer registry of some kind that dates back 2000 years?  Gee, I hope all the red heifer ranchers are more informed than I in this regard.

I wondered the same thing. Until fairly recently in history, we didn't have the global communications necessary to get that kind of information out.

QUOTE
Honestly, what the Hell is wrong with these people? They believe that the world is now one step closer to Armageddon, and they consider that to be "very exciting news." How do human beings become this ill? Knowing that there are over a billion of these maniacs in the world is not a comforting thought.

Poor Rameus! ROFLOL!! I've heard this kind of stuff my entire life. This kind of talking and thinking is pretty common place to me. I'm sure it looks pretty abnormal to someone who has never been a christian.

Posted by: Euthyphro Feb 16 2005, 12:12 PM
QUOTE (Mad_Gerbil @ Feb 15 2005, 05:27 PM)
QUOTE (Valgeir @ Feb 15 2005, 10:02 PM)
Actively work to stop the spread of these cults, but by that I mean actively work to stamp them out. Liberal Christianity is fine if it's controlled and stopped from spreading, but "conservative" Christianity has to be ended one way or another- and yes, I'm including... less humanitarian solutions that I otherwise wouldn't approve of (not the physical harming of a person, but possibly tactics to scatter and inflict terror... I'm not glad to say it, but it needs to be said). Simply put this institution is too harmful to allow to exist.

I only say we need to fight back against liberal Christianity because ALL Christianity needs to be stopped. I have no problem with liberal Christianity in and of itself, but it can give birth to a new wave of fundamentalist, evil Christians if left unchecked. Not to mention, to be a Christian at all, even a liberal one, requires a rather unnerving level of delusion. Christianity is, in all truth, government sanctioned and protected insanity.

Thank you for your honesty.

To destroy Christianity we now have, in addition to removing my children from my home, a call for terrorism. Is Valgeir a lunatic or just following the logic I've pointed out several times in other threads?

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

Now instead of getting defensive, I want you to think with me about something.

I believe the greatest sin is pride. When a fundamentalist looks down on atheists he is being prideful. When whole groups of people are painted with a broad brush or when other people become 'the enemy' that is an expression of pride. Claims of intelligence (typically by freethinkers) or righteousness (by theists) are again, nothing but expressions of pride.

I think that many people who become Christians (convert from atheism) and many people that become Atheists (convert from Christianity) have not converted at all -- only the excuses for looking down on other people have changed.

How is an atheist bellowing about the fundamentalist fifth column and the need to crush the enemy by any means possible any different than a fundamentalist bellowing about unwashed infidels and the need to beat back the devil spawn. At the end of the day, both groups go to bed at night thinking the other is the absolute personification of evil -- both are snug and warm in their own arrogance.

Again, as people move back and forth between these two groups they haven't really changed religions at all -- the religion is exactly the same -- looking down on other people because [insert reason here].


Parody of Fundamentalism :
QUOTE
"Valgeir is not a real  freethinking passifist disciple of Lord Rameus.  He twisted and took out of context the words of the God Rameus. Lord Rameus's message is one of peace."

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

You see M_G , you have said nothing logical so far , as no one considers Rameus's words as the "inspired words of a God"
You fundies have a very POWERFUL authority called the Holy Bible.
And sometimes certain fundies miquote, or twist the scriptures to support their superstitous bigotry. This is one reason of many, of why The Creator would not use a book in need of being "harmonized" again, and again, from the time the scriptures were first written, up to the present , as a revalation to humankind. A God would not give us something that could be twisted.

Also your "goD breathed book" does give fundies "Authority" to hold bigoted and intolerant attitudes towards nonbelievers, homosexuals, lesbians, trans gender, as well as robbing humanity of its birth right which is progress through the sciences.
Fundamentalist are trying to rob humanity of our right to know what really happened in Earth's history, as well as the history of our Universe.

Rameus is just a man, regardless of degrees and expertise , and everyone can question him as you are doing here, BECAUSE HE CLAIMS NO AUTHORITY FROM A GOD. HE WAS ASKING FOR PEOPLES -->OPINIONS<--

Freethinking is not dangerous, because it is dynamic. We can all question eachother.

IT IS THE FUNDAMENTALIST THAT MUST NEEDS DOGMATICALY FOLLOW THE WORD OF AN ALLEGED GOD. FUNDAMENTALIST CHRISTIANITY IS A REAL DANGER. AND THE LIBERAL CHRISTIANS ARE RESPONSIBLE AS WELL AS THEY SUPPORT THE BELIEF THAT THE CHRISTIAN BIBLE IS THE WORD OF A GOD.

Posted by: Mad_Gerbil Feb 16 2005, 12:38 PM
Euth:

I fail to see why a Christian quoting a Bible is anymore dangerous to society than Rameus quoting himself. An individual must decide if they find the source credible or not on his or her own.

People blindly follow other people all of the time. In fact, every despot has to have a certain number of people blindly following him or he wouldn't be in power. A personality cult can spring up around Rameus just as easily as Jesus Christ.

QUOTE
Also your "goD breathed book" does give fundies "Authority" to hold bigoted and intolerant attitudes towards nonbelievers, homosexuals, lesbians, trans gender, as well as robbing humanity of its birth right which is progress through the sciences.
Fundamentalist are trying to rob humanity of our right to know what really happened in Earth's history.


No.
Some men twist the Bible into an alleged authority that allows them to express the hatred they would have expressed in some other fashion if the Bible didn't exist. Anyone who claims the Bible is an authority that excuses one man hating another is not telling the truth.

Just because someone points at an authority figure (book, person, or gerbil) and proclaims something as absolute truth doesn't mean you need to shut yer head off and follow them.


Posted by: Euthyphro Feb 16 2005, 01:04 PM
QUOTE (Mad_Gerbil @ Feb 16 2005, 03:38 PM)
Euth:

I fail to see why a Christian quoting a Bible is anymore dangerous to society than Rameus quoting himself. An individual must decide if they find the source credible or not on his or her own.

People blindly follow other people all of the time. In fact, every despot has to have a certain number of people blindly following him or he wouldn't be in power. A personality cult can spring up around Rameus just as easily as Jesus Christ.

QUOTE
Also your "goD breathed book" does give fundies "Authority" to hold bigoted and intolerant attitudes towards nonbelievers, homosexuals, lesbians, trans gender, as well as robbing humanity of its birth right which is progress through the sciences.
Fundamentalist are trying to rob humanity of our right to know what really happened in Earth's history.


No.
Some men twist the Bible into an alleged authority that allows them to express the hatred they would have expressed in some other fashion if the Bible didn't exist. Anyone who claims the Bible is an authority that excuses one man hating another is not telling the truth.

Just because someone points at an authority figure (book, person, or gerbil) and proclaims something as absolute truth doesn't mean you need to shut yer head off and follow them.

QUOTE
Euth:

I fail to see why a Christian quoting a Bible is anymore dangerous to society than Rameus quoting himself.
The Bible is the "infallable word of God. Remember? A mere mortal can be questioned and tested.

QUOTE
An individual must decide if they find the source credible or not on his or her own.
I agree. Good thinking. Remember though that the Bible is the infallable word of a God, and can not be questioned. The works of men can be tested and questioned. Look as the scientific method. Look at our form of Government. Free speach.

QUOTE
People blindly follow other people all of the time.  In fact, every despot has to have a certain number of people blindly following him or he wouldn't be in power.  A personality cult can spring up around Rameus just as easily as Jesus Christ.
True. Thats why Frethinking should be encouraged. Intellectual Eletism is not a very helpful attitude in helping to diffuse the dogmantic thinking of the average Joes in the world.

However, I am for minimizing the damage as much as possible. There will always be dangerous nutjobs, but we should try and minimize damage as much as we can.
Valgeir does not have a God inspired Book as an authority of his ->opinions<-

Christianity is large. And there are vastly more fundie nutjobs than there are Valgeirs in the world. So your point is moot, as I value damage control. I can do something about Bible worship, and it will be easier to change theminds of the Valgeirs in this world as they do not dogmaticaly follow an inerrent god breathed book. Fundamentalism is a more common problem than the people you are talking about.

QUOTE
No.
Some men twist the Bible into an alleged authority that allows them to express the hatred they would have expressed in some other fashion if the Bible didn't exist.  Anyone who claims the Bible is an authority that excuses one man hating another is not telling the truth

There is a difference between your dogmatic perception/version of what the bible is saying verses what the bible really is. I will hand you your ass in any debate on scripture. Also read my sig. I wil not let you avoid the contradictions in your holybook. They exist and you must quote scripture to explain the contradictions without twisting scipture yourself.

QUOTE
Just because someone points at an authority figure (book, person, or gerbil) and proclaims something as absolute truth doesn't mean you need to shut yer head off and follow them.
If you believe that the bible is the word of a god, and you are a person of low character you will find scripture to back your bigoted attitudes and intentions. If you believe the bible is the word of god you must follow it if you fear god.



Posted by: Euthyphro Feb 16 2005, 01:23 PM
Mad_Gerbil

If you like we can have debate on the problems of the bible.

Also, if you wish, we can work together through PM's. My door is always open to you.



--Reaon and Respect---

Posted by: Mad_Gerbil Feb 16 2005, 01:27 PM
Euth:

Well I can certianly understand why you'd be upset -- I find Bible worship to be as disturbing as you find it to be. People who throw around 1 or 2 verses to justify horrible behavior are no more acceptable to me than they are to you.

Furthermore, I don't stop at merely questioning the Bible -- I question G_d Himself. The idea that a person should blindly follow any book is outrageous and it isn't a philosophy to which I subscribe. The asking of questions and the resulting struggles have been more characteristic of my life than blindly following.

We are adults in the arena of ideas -- there is no question that should not be asked if the seeker can do so honestly and with pure motivation. (They can ask with impure motivation but that is merely a waste of time) G_d is a big boy -- He can handle anything you care to throw at Him. If He doesn't exist, then no harm done anyways.

In short, the promise to 'hand me my ass' means very little to me because I'm on a journey of discovering new things about the Bible, my relationship with G_d, and the world around me. Anyone who hasn't stumbled along the way isn't honest. Anyone who claims they have all the truth is an idiot.

For me the Bible is an authority -- because I believe it to be a record of different people's interactions with the G_d that I love. It has some contradictions, some outrageous behavior, and some things I don't understand -- but then again, I don't expect myself to be able to connect all the dots, iron out all the difficulties, and answer every objection because I enjoy something new in my relationship on
almost a daily basis -- and in every relationship I've ever had there are oddities -- it is part of what makes it interesting.

Posted by: Euthyphro Feb 16 2005, 01:45 PM
QUOTE (Mad_Gerbil @ Feb 16 2005, 04:27 PM)
Euth:

Well I can certianly understand why you'd be upset -- I find Bible worship to be as disturbing as you find it to be.  People who throw around 1 or 2 verses to justify horrible behavior are no more acceptable to me than they are to you.

Furthermore, I don't stop at merely questioning the Bible -- I question G_d Himself.  The idea that a person should blindly follow any book is outrageous and it isn't a philosophy to which I subscribe.  The asking of questions and the resulting struggles have been more characteristic of my life than blindly following.

We are adults in the arena of ideas -- there is no question that should not be asked if the seeker can do so honestly and with pure motivation. (They can ask with impure motivation but that is merely a waste of time)  G_d is a big boy -- He can handle anything you care to throw at Him.  If He doesn't exist, then no harm done anyways.

In short, the promise to 'hand me my ass' means very little to me because I'm on a journey of discovering new things about the Bible, my relationship with G_d, and the world around me.   Anyone who hasn't stumbled along the way isn't honest.  Anyone who claims they have all the truth is an idiot.

For me the Bible is an authority -- because I believe it to be a record of different people's interactions with the G_d that I love.   It has some contradictions, some outrageous behavior, and some things I don't understand -- but then again, I don't expect myself to be able to connect all the dots, iron out all the difficulties, and answer every objection because I enjoy something new in my relationship on
almost a daily basis -- and in every relationship I've ever had there are oddities -- it is part of what makes it interesting.

The bible is dangerous. Good people like you use empathy and reason to cherry pick the bible. You are probably more of a disciple of christ >specificaly< than a bible worshiper. Still, the bible has bad examples as well as good examples of civil/ethical behavior. You are a very odd Fundie indeed, because you are a freethinker as well. And you can teach me, I admit that.

I do not claim to have all the answers, but I know for a fact that the bible has bad examples in it that perpetuate hate and bigotry.

The philosophy of the bible is contradicting/ambigous enough that it can be used for evil, as it has in the past. If we all admit that the bible is not the word of God, then we will be free to cherry pick the scripture that is beautiful, loving, and reasonable.

God would not dress an important message to humankind in such a contradtictory book such as the bible. The bible has bad examples , and contradicting/ambigous philosophy. It is dangerous.


My points still stand.

My previous invitation is still open to you. Just keep my sig in mind.

Posted by: Mad_Gerbil Feb 16 2005, 01:56 PM
Euth:

You keep saying the Bible is dangerous.

Should it be banned?


Posted by: notblindedbytheblight Feb 16 2005, 01:59 PM
QUOTE (Mad_Gerbil @ Feb 16 2005, 01:56 PM)
Euth:

You keep saying the Bible is dangerous.

Should it be banned?

Oh hell no! No more than any other mythologies.

Posted by: Euthyphro Feb 16 2005, 02:02 PM
QUOTE (Mad_Gerbil @ Feb 16 2005, 04:56 PM)
Euth:

You keep saying the Bible is dangerous.

Should it be banned?

NO!




I believe in changing minds, and not making unfair laws, or using force. That is not ethical.

Posted by: Cerise Feb 16 2005, 02:39 PM
QUOTE (Mad_Gerbil @ Feb 16 2005, 01:56 PM)
Euth:

You keep saying the Bible is dangerous.

Should it be banned?

the bible is dangerous the way that chocolate is dangerous. If it's the only thing you're digesting, then you're gonna get sick and eventually die. Some people are like diabetics to the bible. They get sick quicker then others on the stuff and decide drowning their kids to emulate Abraham is a good idea.

Posted by: Euthyphro Feb 16 2005, 02:41 PM
Freedom is a gift from the Creator................
, and to try and undermine what God(s)/Universe put in place is Blasphemy!


Secular Ethics is the only fair mediator between diverse Peoples.


Posted by: notblindedbytheblight Feb 16 2005, 02:41 PM
QUOTE (Cerise @ Feb 16 2005, 02:39 PM)
QUOTE (Mad_Gerbil @ Feb 16 2005, 01:56 PM)
Euth:

You keep saying the Bible is dangerous.

Should it be banned?

the bible is dangerous the way that chocolate is dangerous. If it's the only thing you're digesting, then you're gonna get sick and eventually die. Some people are like diabetics to the bible. They get sick quicker then others on the stuff and decide drowning their kids to emulate Abraham is a good idea.

Such few words, such great insight!

Posted by: Euthyphro Feb 16 2005, 02:43 PM
QUOTE (Cerise @ Feb 16 2005, 05:39 PM)
QUOTE (Mad_Gerbil @ Feb 16 2005, 01:56 PM)
Euth:

You keep saying the Bible is dangerous.

Should it be banned?

the bible is dangerous the way that chocolate is dangerous. If it's the only thing you're digesting, then you're gonna get sick and eventually die. Some people are like diabetics to the bible. They get sick quicker then others on the stuff and decide drowning their kids to emulate Abraham is a good idea.

Thats why showing that the bible is no revelation of a God is so important.

Posted by: Rameus Feb 16 2005, 02:49 PM
I believe that Valgeir may have made an accurate prediction for the wrong time period. Our war on the Abrahamic traditions should always be an intellectual one. However, there may come a day (decades or centuries from now) when the mainstream religious maniacs of the world start detonating nuclear weapons (or releasing biological ones) in accordance with their religious beliefs. At that point, the rational population very well might go for the most effective and pragmatic solution, which is to wipe these dangerous lunatics off the planet. I would shed tears over the loss of life, but inside I would realize that it is probably for the greater good in the long run.

I truly want humanity to evolve and outgrow this religious insanity, however I am a realist and I realize that it may be the tip of a sword that decides the outcome of this war of faith someday. I just hope I don’t live to see this time, humanity’s most shameful hour.

Rameus

Posted by: Euthyphro Feb 16 2005, 02:59 PM
Thats why I hope , that you Rameus, and others can dispel the crazy notion that anyone has a god inspired holybook.



I agree that things might esculate in the future. If so.... the planet comes first.

Posted by: Euthyphro Feb 16 2005, 03:43 PM
QUOTE (notblindedbytheblight @ Feb 16 2005, 05:41 PM)
QUOTE (Cerise @ Feb 16 2005, 02:39 PM)
QUOTE (Mad_Gerbil @ Feb 16 2005, 01:56 PM)
Euth:

You keep saying the Bible is dangerous.

Should it be banned?

the bible is dangerous the way that chocolate is dangerous. If it's the only thing you're digesting, then you're gonna get sick and eventually die. Some people are like diabetics to the bible. They get sick quicker then others on the stuff and decide drowning their kids to emulate Abraham is a good idea.

Such few words, such great insight!

The belief that some one has authority from a god is dangerous.

The bible is dangerous as the word of a god.

Posted by: Euthyphro Feb 17 2005, 12:53 AM
QUOTE (Rameus @ Feb 16 2005, 05:49 PM)
I believe that Valgeir may have made an accurate prediction for the wrong time period.  Our war on the Abrahamic traditions should always be an intellectual one.  However, there may come a day (decades or centuries from now) when the mainstream religious maniacs of the world start detonating nuclear weapons (or releasing biological ones) in accordance with their religious beliefs.  At that point, the rational population very well might go for the most effective and pragmatic solution, which is to wipe these dangerous lunatics off the planet.  I would shed tears over the loss of life, but inside I would realize that it is probably for the greater good in the long run.

I truly want humanity to evolve and outgrow this religious insanity, however I am a realist and I realize that it may be the tip of a sword that decides the outcome of this war of faith someday.  I just hope I don’t live to see this time, humanity’s most shameful hour.

Rameus



QUOTE
"Valgeir is not a real  freethinking passifist disciple of Lord Rameus.  He twisted and took out of context the words of the God Rameus. Lord Rameus's message is one of peace."

I sincerely appologize for this. It just dawned on me that this is not very flattering. Sorry.I meant no offence and was not implying anything negative about your character.I am not very bright sometimes. hehe.
I appologize to Valgeir as well. Feel free to call me an idiot.

Me
QUOTE
Rameus is just a man, regardless of degrees and expertise , and everyone can question him as you are doing here, BECAUSE HE CLAIMS NO AUTHORITY FROM A GOD. HE WAS ASKING FOR PEOPLES -->OPINIONS<--

Freethinking is not dangerous, because it is dynamic. We can all question eachother.

I was ineptly trying to show that even the word of an educated man is not treated the same by ignorant people as someone who quotes scripture from an infallible god breathed book. I felt that Mad_Gerbil was trying to make a "Prophet" out of you who people dogmatically follow. I did not mean any offense to you or to Valgeir. I was saying what I was saying for the sake of argument in order to make a point. I was trying to show that there is a difference between someone who wields the infallable word of God verses a mortal who makes no claims of "God says..."

And I do agree that things can esculate in the way you have described. Like you I hope that doesn't happen. But if and when things come down to that the world has a right to defend itself as you pointed out. It would seem to me that if the world did not need so much oil then fundies of middle east would not have the monies for nukes or other weapons of mass destruction. Yes? No?

We have more of a chance of changing minds here than in the middle east.
Luke Warm Christians are the majority in this country. They are not as brainwashed or addicted to their religion as the fundies are. The luke warms' can be deconverted much, much easier than fundies by showing how flawed the bible is. Thats my experience anyways.

Since the luke warm christians say that they are christian, that in turn makes it look like the political fundies have support from the majority. Yes? No? The luke warms in their ignorance may vote fundies in office without realizing that they are voting in a brand of christianity that really does not represent them.
Shouldn't we concentrate on deconverting the majority who are luke warm so that The U.S. in the future has no fundie politicians who try to fullfil bible "prophesy" ?

Just a thought.

Posted by: notblindedbytheblight Feb 17 2005, 09:14 AM
QUOTE (Euthyphro @ Feb 17 2005, 12:53 AM)
Since the luke warm christians say that they are christian, that in turn makes it look like the political fundies have support from the majority. Yes? No? The luke warms in their ignorance may vote fundies in office without realizing that they are voting in a brand of christianity that really does not represent them.
Shouldn't we concentrate on deconverting the majority who are luke warm so that The U.S. in the future has no fundie politicians who try to fullfil bible "prophesy" ?

Just a thought.

That's a good point. If we could show them how many things are wrong, christianity may split into even more sections. This would make all the sects the minority when it comes to someone of a different sect wanting to lead.

Take away votes by putting them against themselves and sit back and enjoy the outcome!

Oh hell...I don't know. FrogsToadBigGrin.gif

Posted by: Euthyphro Feb 17 2005, 12:26 PM
QUOTE (notblindedbytheblight @ Feb 17 2005, 12:14 PM)
QUOTE (Euthyphro @ Feb 17 2005, 12:53 AM)
Since the luke warm christians say that they are christian, that in turn makes it look like the political fundies have support from the majority. Yes? No? The luke warms in their ignorance may vote fundies in office without realizing that they are voting in a brand of christianity that really does not represent them.
Shouldn't we concentrate on deconverting the majority who are luke warm so that The U.S. in the future has no fundie politicians who try to fullfil bible "prophesy" ?

Just a thought.

That's a good point. If we could show them how many things are wrong, christianity may split into even more sections. This would make all the sects the minority when it comes to someone of a different sect wanting to lead.

Take away votes by putting them against themselves and sit back and enjoy the outcome!

Oh hell...I don't know. FrogsToadBigGrin.gif

I guess I have too much faith in people. I would hope that the luke warm xians would realize that 2nd or 3rd hand revelation from God IS NOT a revelation from God at all, but is only hearsay to everyone else, and that being made aware of the errors in the bible would hammer in the final nail for most of them as far as bible worship goes. No Paine no gain.

I dunno. I'm gonna keep on doin' what I'm doin'. If the X'ers have the right to fish for men, then I have just as much right to deconvert people. And from my experience non-fundie xians are open minded to what I show them.

Posted by: notblindedbytheblight Feb 17 2005, 01:17 PM
QUOTE (Euthyphro @ Feb 17 2005, 12:26 PM)
No Paine no gain.

I love that! woohoo.gif

Posted by: MalaInSe Feb 17 2005, 01:19 PM
QUOTE (Euthyphro @ Feb 17 2005, 12:26 PM)
I would hope that the luke warm xians would realize that 2nd or 3rd hand revelation from God IS NOT a revelation from God at all, but is only hearsay to everyone else, and that being made aware of the errors in the bible would hammer in the final nail for most of them as far as bible worship goes.

Actually, it's hearsay to everyone. Hearsay has a pretty precise definition that cannot be overcome in reference to the bible. I have noticed that many Christians seem to be avoiding the argument that it is not hearsay lately.

Renee

Posted by: notblindedbytheblight Feb 17 2005, 01:21 PM
QUOTE (MalaInSe @ Feb 17 2005, 01:19 PM)
QUOTE (Euthyphro @ Feb 17 2005, 12:26 PM)
I would hope that the luke warm xians would realize that 2nd or 3rd hand revelation from God IS NOT a revelation from God at all, but is only hearsay to everyone else, and that being made aware of the errors in the bible would hammer in the final nail for most of them as far as bible worship goes.

Actually, it's hearsay to everyone. Hearsay has a pretty precise definition that cannot be overcome in reference to the bible. I have noticed that many Christians seem to be avoiding the argument that it is not hearsay lately.

Renee

Indeed...they are calling it General Revelation! Amen... GONZ9729CustomImage1539775.gif

Posted by: Euthyphro Feb 17 2005, 03:34 PM
QUOTE (MalaInSe @ Feb 17 2005, 04:19 PM)
QUOTE (Euthyphro @ Feb 17 2005, 12:26 PM)
I would hope that the luke warm xians would realize that 2nd or 3rd hand revelation from God IS NOT a revelation from God at all, but is only hearsay to everyone else, and that being made aware of the errors in the bible would hammer in the final nail for most of them as far as bible worship goes.

Actually, it's hearsay to everyone. Hearsay has a pretty precise definition that cannot be overcome in reference to the bible. I have noticed that many Christians seem to be avoiding the argument that it is not hearsay lately.

Renee

Thanks! I hope to improve my writing skills. woohoo.gif

Posted by: MalaInSe Feb 17 2005, 03:36 PM
QUOTE (notblindedbytheblight @ Feb 17 2005, 01:21 PM)
Indeed...they are calling it General Revelation! Amen... GONZ9729CustomImage1539775.gif

lmao_99.gif

Posted by: Valgeir Feb 17 2005, 04:17 PM
I'm quite glad to see my post generated the kind of response I was looking for.

All of you saw the fundamental flaws and truths in what I said.

M_G, your statements made directly after my last post here are very insightful and are exactly what EVERYONE needs to realize. This "enemy" bullshit has to stop.

That being said, I still feel these religions should be confronted- they ARE dangerous, and to believe them IS to have a clinically insane level of delusion. I don't get it- people think they're Michael Jackson and you toss them in a mental hospital. People think an invisible sky man is talking to them and going to pull them up to a magical place in the clouds as long as "we help Israel kill the towel-heads" and they get to gather and spread these ideas to children in a tax-free building which many in our government want to provide money for.

Rameus' post about our battle being mainly an intellectual one, for now, is absolutely correct. But friends and colleagues, don't count on a call to war taking too long. As the events in the Middle East escalate and morons like Bush and many of our Congresspeople become more rabid, and common, we're going to be in more danger.

Posted by: spamandham Feb 17 2005, 09:07 PM
QUOTE (Valgeir @ Feb 17 2005, 07:17 PM)
I'm quite glad to see my post generated the kind of response I was looking for.

All of you saw the fundamental flaws and truths in what I said.

M_G, your statements made directly after my last post here are very insightful and are exactly what EVERYONE needs to realize. This "enemy" bullshit has to stop.

That being said, I still feel these religions should be confronted- they ARE dangerous, and to believe them IS to have a clinically insane level of delusion. I don't get it- people think they're Michael Jackson and you toss them in a mental hospital. People think an invisible sky man is talking to them and going to pull them up to a magical place in the clouds as long as "we help Israel kill the towel-heads" and they get to gather and spread these ideas to children in a tax-free building which many in our government want to provide money for.

Rameus' post about our battle being mainly an intellectual one, for now, is absolutely correct. But friends and colleagues, don't count on a call to war taking too long. As the events in the Middle East escalate and morons like Bush and many of our Congresspeople become more rabid, and common, we're going to be in more danger.

Mixing religion and politics is extremely dangerous. Within my life, the paradigm has shifted from religion being mostly taboo within political contexts to attempts to shower religious organizations with faith based funding of all kinds. Conversely, we now also have ministers basically telling the fleeced how to vote with winks and nods. The pulpit has become the ultimate PAC.

The candidates now seem to want to highlight their faith during elections shouting ever louder "no I'm more devout than you!".

The Iraqi war has so many religious overtones that it's hard to tell what the Administration's actual motivation was. If it looks like a crusade, and it walks like a crusade, and the simeon in chief calls it a crusade, it's a crusade.

Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)