Issues of morality shut Christians up

by Greatest I am Wed Jun 27, 2012 7:47 pm

First topic message reminder :

Issues of morality shuts Christians up.

I know I have done well in an O. P. when Christians run from a discussion.

I wrote these two posts and got almost no response. Not a usual thing for my posts. This tells me that I hit the nail right on the head and Christians have no apologetics to refute my claim.

==========================

If you accept this as universal morality, you will reject God.

http://blog.ted.com/2008/09/17/the_real_differ/

God does not follow the first rule at all.

The bible says that Jesus "was crucified from the foundations of the Earth," that is to say, God planned to crucify Jesus as atonement for sin before he even created human beings or sin.

This shows that what many thinks is our number one moral value was completely ignored by God.

Is God immoral or has man gotten morality wrong?

If God was right, then are we to believe that fathers are to bury their children instead of the way people think in that children should bury their parents?

John 6:44
"No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him.”

On earth as it is in heaven.

If you had God’s power to set the conditions for atonement, would you step up yourself or would you send your child to die?

=============================

God to Jesus. I just condemned the human race. Now go die to save them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YoHP-f-_F9U

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ott1...eature=related

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqP_f...eature=related

I think that the notion that punishing the innocent instead of the guilty perpetrator is immoral. Be it a willing sacrifice as some believe with Jesus or unwilling victim.

I also think that God, who has a plethora of other options, would have come up with a moral way instead of an immoral and barbaric human sacrifice.

I agree with scriptures say that we are all responsible for our own righteousness as well as our own iniquity and that God cannot be bribed by sacrifice.

Ezekiel 18:20
The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

Psalm 49:7
None of them can by any means redeem his brother, nor give to God a ransom for him:

I believe as I do because I believe that the first rule of morality is harm/care of children.

http://blog.ted.com/2008/09/17/the_real_differ/

Do you agree that the notion of substitutionary atonement is immoral and that God’s first principle of morality is hare/harm and that this would prevent him from demanding the death of his son?

==============================

This lack of opposition to the premise given tells me that Christians may actually be more moral than what I give them credit for. They do not walk their talk in these cases and that is a plus.

Seems Christians actually recognize good morals even if they do not preach them.
I thank Christians for confirming my view that they are just following tradition, dogma and culture while not really following their God. Thank God for that. Any sane man would reject the bible God.

Regards
DL

by Jsmythe Fri Dec 14, 2012 6:55 pm

Well I can certainly see you're not such a bad fella Mr. Poo . Surprised

by Greatest I am Fri Mar 08, 2013 1:23 pm

Should God the Father adore man for teaching him better morals and ethics than what he has taught man?

Does God the Father have any moral responsibility to his children?

I think so. God the Father’s first responsibility to his children is to insure that they live. God the Father does not do so. Is God the Father moral or immoral for this sin of omission?

Human Fathers have as their first moral responsibility the protection of their children and a strong duty to insure that they live. Our laws make parents morally and legally responsible for the wellbeing of their children. If God the Father were just one of many Gods in a God society that society would demand that he take responsibility in the same way human society has decided that a human child’s parent must take responsibilities.

I believe God the Father’s society, if they were real, would demand this of God as care/harm and reciprocity are the corner stones of all moral systems and because man, a moral creature, demands that of himself and others and that should be the universal standard.

The fact that God the Father punishes or rewards us seems to indicate that he at least thinks that he has some moral responsibility to his children. If not, he could not morally retain the right to punish or reward. That being the case, it would be immoral for God to passively and negligently allow any of his children to die or take any active part in killing them.

God is doing these immoral, unethical and satanic things constantly.

Man seems to have developed a better moral code than God the Father.

What a game for your God the Father to play!
Create a place for eternal bliss on earth and heaven as well as a place for eternal suffering or death. Then he creates beings that he loves dearly and watches over. And in the end, decide which to consider "trash" and "throw away" into the place for eternal suffering or death and which to cling to and love in the place of eternal bliss. Even man, with all his faults, is greater and more responsible, moral and ethical to his children than God the Father is to his.

Is man more moral, ethical, responsible and loving than God the Father?

Should God the Father adore man for teaching him better morals and ethics than what he has taught man?

Should man adore God for teaching us what not to do by his immoral, unethical, irresponsible and unloving example?

Regards
DL

by oftenwrong Fri Mar 08, 2013 5:37 pm

Should God the Father adore man for teaching him better morals and ethics than what he has taught man?

Why don't you ask Him what He should ought to have taught, GIM?

Tell us what you get as a response, Greatest man.

by polyglide Sat Mar 09, 2013 10:37 am

If man's morals and way of life is better than that which God indicates to us as the best for mankind, why are we in such a mess?.

Every day you read of murders, the abuse of children, starvation, brutality of every kind, children with no respect for their parents or anyone or anything else, parents abusing their own children etc; etc; there is not one kind of the unthinkable that does not occur on a regular basis through the actions of mankind.

This is not God's fault but mankind's.

You forget one very important point, if we did as God instructed there would be no need for any of the events you describe, they are brought about by not adhereing to God's instructions.

by Shirina Sat Mar 09, 2013 12:16 pm

If man's morals and way of life is better than that which God indicates to us as the best for mankind, why are we in such a mess?.

Oh right, I get it ...

We're supposed to stone to death disobedient children, kill witches, not wear clothing of two different kinds of material, execute non-virgins on her wedding night, refrain from eating shellfish, only own slaves from neighboring nations - and we shouldn't beat them to death, stop planting two types of crops in the same field, and a whole host of other non-relevant, idiotic, and barbaric things.

And, if we really want to emulate God, we should commit genocide, kill children, wipe out cities, sacrifice our own children, make bets with Satan and torture some guy to see if he'll lose his faith, etc. etc. and etc.

How silly of me not to see all that we're doing wrong!

by Greatest I am Mon Mar 11, 2013 12:49 pm

polyglide wrote:If man's morals and way of life is better than that which God indicates to us as the best for mankind, why are we in such a mess?.

Every day you read of murders, the abuse of children, starvation, brutality of every kind, children with no respect for their parents or anyone or anything else, parents abusing their own children etc; etc; there is not one kind of the unthinkable that does not occur on a regular basis through the actions of mankind.

This is not God's fault but mankind's.

You forget one very important point, if we did as God instructed there would be no need for any of the events you describe, they are brought about by not adhereing to God's instructions.

Would you like to live by God's laws?

Are you ready to start stoning unruly children and those who your God thinks are having inappropriate sex?

Regards
DL

by Greatest I am Mon Mar 11, 2013 12:55 pm

RockOnBrother wrote:
Shirina wrote:
Oh right, I get it ...

We're supposed to stone to death disobedient children, kill witches… execute non-virgins on her wedding night…

How silly of me not to see all that we're doing wrong!

Y’shua bar Yosef, Y’shua Moshiach, comes to fulfill the Law and the Prophets.

Greek Bible:

“Think not that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have come not to abolish but to fulfill.”

Matthew 5:17-19, partial

Note how Y’shua bar Yosef, Y’shua Moshiach, fulfills the Law and the Prophets.

Greek Bible

Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. Early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people were coming to him, and he sat down and began to teach them.

And the scribes and Pharisees brought to him a woman caught in adultery, and having set her in the center of the court, they said to him, “Teacher, this woman has been caught in adultery, in the very act. Now Moses in the law commanded us to stone such women; what then do you say?” This they said, testing Him, so that they might have grounds for accusing him.

But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.

So when they persisted in asking him, he lifted himself up, and said to them, “He who is without sin among you, let him be the first to cast a stone at her.”

And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.

And when they heard it, being convicted by their own consciences, they went out one by one, beginning with the eldest, and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing, in the center of the court.

When Jesus had lifted himself up, and saw none but the woman, he said to her, “Woman, where are your accusers? Has no one condemned you?” She said, “No one, Lord.” And Jesus said to her, “Neither do I condemn you. Go, and sin no more.”

John 8:1-11

Disciples of Y’shua bar Yosef, Y’shua Moshiach, fulfill the Law and the Prophets by teaching as Y’shua bar Yosef, Y’shua Moshiach, teaches; accordingly, “disobedient children”, “witches”, and “non-virgins” are taught.

I see that you will speak of all kinds of issues except the morality of your God.
I am not surprised that you will not defend the indefensible.
You cannot as you clearly show above that you have to use your external conscience, scriptures, instead of speaking of the laws you are supposed to internalize and write on your heart.

Quite pathetic that.

Regards
DL

by ROB Mon Mar 11, 2013 5:11 pm

Greatest I am wrote:
I see that you will speak of all kinds of issues except the morality of your God.

No you do not see.

Greatest I am wrote:
I am not surprised that you will not defend the indefensible.

I know of no one whose name is “the indefensible” to defend.

Greatest I am wrote:
… you have to use your external conscience

I have no external “conscience.” I have an internal conscience.

by Greatest I am Mon Mar 11, 2013 6:41 pm

Thanks for wasting both of our time. That is why I ignore you.

Regards
DL

by oftenwrong Mon Mar 11, 2013 7:25 pm

Seeking enlightenment, how can a response to a previous posting be categorised as "ignoring" it?

Don't you just love existentialist logic?

by ROB Mon Mar 11, 2013 11:40 pm

Greatest I am wrote:
Thanks for wasting both of our time. That is why I ignore you.

No need to thank me. You’ve got time wasting down pat all by yourself. And as to your statement, “That is why I ignore you”, if only it were so.

Greatest I am, Monday, 11 March 2013, 12:55
RockOnBrother wrote:
[RockOnBrother, Saturday, 9 March 2013, 14:32, full text]
I see that you will speak of all kinds of issues except the morality of your God.
I am not surprised that you will not defend the indefensible.
You cannot as you clearly show above that you have to use your external conscience, scriptures, instead of speaking of the laws you are supposed to internalize and write on your heart.

Quite pathetic that.

Regards
DL

Sadly, it is not so.

by snowyflake Tue Mar 12, 2013 9:04 am

Thanks for the clips, DL.

The West Wing clip clearly shows the lunacy and ludicrousness of cherry picking belief which is so prominent in American Christians. They don't really look at what the bible actually says. If it doesn't suit their moral compass, the passage is a metaphor, a parable or allegory. How convenient.

by Greatest I am Tue Mar 12, 2013 12:43 pm

snowyflake wrote:Thanks for the clips, DL.

The West Wing clip clearly shows the lunacy and ludicrousness of cherry picking belief which is so prominent in American Christians. They don't really look at what the bible actually says. If it doesn't suit their moral compass, the passage is a metaphor, a parable or allegory. How convenient.

Yes. Hence all the division within Christianity. Some cults embrace gays others not. Some give women full equality others not, etc.

Regards.
DL

by snowyflake Thu Mar 14, 2013 3:15 pm

That’s what I’ve been trying to tell you. So now will you oppose the mis-naming that is rampant in my country? A person who doesn’t look at what the Bible actually says is neither a Jew nor a Christian.

Rock, you ignore keys parts of the bible as well. It doesn't matter a single jot if it's read in Greek, Hebrew or Martian. The point is what the majority of christians get out of the bible to support their own personal beliefs (and prejudices). You believe. Not from evidence or even common sense but what is written in an ancient language in an ancient book by ancient people with ancient morals. Don't you think that humans have developed quite a lot since then? And for the better contrary to what apocolyptic believers think.

by polyglide Sat Mar 16, 2013 10:38 am

Shirina, I just wish you could learn to understand that which is intended and self evident.

There would be no need for any punishment of any kind if God's wishes were adhered to, no stoning of anyone or killing of anyone etc;

God points out the results of not doing his wishes, rather than wishes, a better expalanation may be God's suggested way of life that would result in harmony in every respect of life along with an explanation of the possible consequences of going our own way.

For the better, half the world's children undernourished including one in three in our country, [recently published] and the world at a critical state regarding several possible conflicts involving nuclear weapons.

Civil war in several countries with hundreds of children and innocent people being killed on a daily basis.

Just what planet do you think you are on Shirina?

by oftenwrong Sat Mar 16, 2013 2:47 pm

Things sound really tough all over.

by Shirina Sat Mar 16, 2013 2:59 pm

There would be no need for any punishment of any kind if God's wishes were adhered to, no stoning of anyone or killing of anyone etc;

This is why some atheists regard God and Christianity as a celestial dictatorship. Divine tyranny, as it were. As long as one does what the dictator tells you to do, everything will be peachy keen.

Except ... what does the celestial dictator want, exactly? No one really knows for sure. Is it to love thy neighbor as you would yourself? Or is it thou shalt not suffer a witch to live?

And so we have 20,000 different Christian denominations that believe all kinds of crazy things - from the Amish who believe foregoing technology is what God wants to Jehovah's Witnesses who would gladly die instead of receiving a blood transfusion. There are people who handle snakes as part of their Christianity, those who believe a cracker and some wine transform into the body and flesh of Christ when consumed and those who believe God, Jesus and Joseph Smith are hanging out together on an extraterrestrial world.

Civil war in several countries with hundreds of children and innocent people being killed on a daily basis.

Nearly ALL of the violence taking place in the world today is the result of people fighting over religion, trying to prove through the use of force that their primitive god concept is better than everyone else's. Go ahead and research it for yourself.

Just what planet do you think you are on Shirina?

The planet I live on is one where the inhabitants are enjoying one of the most peaceful times in human history, a time when an ever increasing number of people are growing more prosperous with each passing year. Certainly there are still problems and we have a long way to go ... but we're getting there. And if you look around, you'll notice one immutable fact: That nations with a high percentage of the population declaring themselves atheistic are the most prosperous of all, those with the highest life expectancies, highest literacy rates, best health care, excellent secondary and primary educations, lowest infant mortality rates, lowest crime rates, lowest rates of teen pregnancies and slowest spread of STDs. Even the divorce rate is lower in those nations. However countries with high degrees of religiosity - including the United States - suffer from high crime rates, high teen pregnancy rates, extreme wealth and income inequality, poor access to health care, a dwindling middle class, and in some cases, high levels of domestic terrorism, civil rights violations, racism, bigotry, intolerance, xenophobia, paranoia, and Social Darwinism.

Those truths are truths - they are irrefutable.

by snowyflake Sun Mar 17, 2013 9:33 am

I ignore no parts of the Bible.

Yes you do.

And he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him. Leviticus 24:16

If any man take a wife, and go in unto her, and hate her ... and say, I took this woman, and when I came to her, I found her not a maid: Then shall the father of the damsel, and her mother, take and bring forth the tokens of the damsel's virginity unto the elders of the city in the gate: And the damsel's father shall say ... these are the tokens of my daughter's virginity. And they shall spread the cloth before the elders of the city. ... But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel: Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die. Deuteronomy 22:13-21

If there be found among you ... that ... hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them ... Then shalt thou ... tone them with stones, till they die. Deuteronomy 17:2-5

If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers ... thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die. Deuteronomy 13:5-10

If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother ... Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city ... And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die. Deuteronomy 21:18-21

A man also or woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be put to death: they shall stone them with stones: their blood shall be upon them. Leviticus 20:27

Whosoever ... giveth any of his seed unto Molech; he shall surely be put to death: the people of the land shall stone him with stones. Leviticus 20:2

They found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day. ... And the LORD said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death: all the congregation shall stone him with stones.... And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the LORD commanded Moses. Numbers 15:32-56

Thou didst blaspheme God and the king. And then carry him out, and stone him, that he may die. 1 Kings 21:10

Jesus came to uphold the Law and the Prophets. This is the law, Rock, that Jesus is upholding.

I'm pretty sure that you are not in the habit of stoning anyone in Texas in your efforts to obey God and Jesus. The worrying thing is that there are people who truly believe that these acts should be carried out in the name of God. Thanks to secular law we do not see the rampant stoning of people for these very minor crimes that God, the supreme being you worship, says one should be killed for.

by Greatest I am Sun Mar 17, 2013 12:16 pm

polyglide wrote:Shirina, I just wish you could learn to understand that which is intended and self evident.

There would be no need for any punishment of any kind if God's wishes were adhered to, no stoning of anyone or killing of anyone etc;

God points out the results of not doing his wishes, rather than wishes, a better expalanation may be God's suggested way of life that would result in harmony in every respect of life along with an explanation of the possible consequences of going our own way.

For the better, half the world's children undernourished including one in three in our country, [recently published] and the world at a critical state regarding several possible conflicts involving nuclear weapons.

Civil war in several countries with hundreds of children and innocent people being killed on a daily basis.

Just what planet do you think you are on Shirina?

A & E found out what God wanted. People with eyes closed to almost all knowledge. The moment they opened their eyes God did the fatherly thing and murdered them by neglect and stowing away what would have kept them alive.

And you adore him for it. You might wonder why and wonder why you are so worried about your soul and not your morals that you will sell your soul to Satan to get to where you think God will accept one with such poor morals. Fat chance of that.

Regards
DL

by snowyflake Sun Mar 17, 2013 2:26 pm

Read Y’shua’s teachings quoted herein and decide for yourself whether these persons who believe that these acts should be carried out are correct in asserting that they are speaking in the name of YHVH Elohim, who said in reference to Y’shua, “This is my beloved Son, my Chosen One, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.”

God made these Laws. Jesus came to uphold the Law. The following passages are the Law according to God for some pretty minor infractions. What part of the following is not God's Word? If Jesus doesn't teach any of the following does that make God's Word a lie? These are the parts that you ignore, Rock. Either the bible is the Word of God and it's all 'true' or you are cherry picking those parts that you say Jesus teaches and ignoring the rest.

And he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him.1 Leviticus 24:16

If any man take a wife, and go in unto her, and hate her ... and say, I took this woman, and when I came to her, I found her not a maid: Then shall the father of the damsel, and her mother, take and bring forth the tokens of the damsel's virginity unto the elders of the city in the gate2…

… And the damsel's father shall say ... these are the tokens of my daughter's virginity.3

And they shall spread the cloth before the elders of the city4…

… But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel: Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house5…

… and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die.6 Deuteronomy 22:13-21

If there be found among you ... that ... hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them ... Then shalt thou ... stone them with stones, till they die.7 Deuteronomy 17:2-5

If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers ... thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die.8 Deuteronomy 13:5-10

If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother ... Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city9…

… And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.10

And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die.11 Deuteronomy 21:18-21

A man also or woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be put to death12…

… they shall stone them with stones: their blood shall be upon them.13 Leviticus 20:27

Whosoever ... giveth any of his seed unto Molech; he shall surely be put to death14…

… the people of the land shall stone him with stones.15 Leviticus 20:2

They found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day. ... And the LORD said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death16…

… all the congregation shall stone him with stones17…

… And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the LORD commanded Moses.18 Numbers 15:32-56

Thou didst blaspheme God and the king. And then carry him out, and stone him, that he may die.19 1 Kings 21:10

This is the God you worship. These are his laws. If you love Jesus, then you must love God. Loving this God is morally wrong.

by Shirina Sun Mar 17, 2013 7:07 pm

That’s not thanks to secular law.

Oooh yes it is. During the colonial period each colony had a "Government under God" and the laws they implemented were both cruel and unjust. No one was stoned to death - except those who worshiped God differently than the Puritan ideal. Quakers were literally hauled out of their own homes and lynched in the town square. Catholic priests were banned from entering any of the 13 colonies. It was a criminal offense to laugh on Sunday in some places, and the law even allowed men to put a dog muzzle on their wife if he thought she was nagging too much. There are still some throwback laws on the books of some southern states which explains how to be within the law when beating your wife. Men could be thrown into the stockades for kissing his wife on a Sunday, most recreational activities from attending theater to playing cards were banned, and accusations of witchcraft and Satan worship were everywhere.

At mosst, the Founders of America were deists, not Christian. What's more, a goodly number were heavy into Free Masonry including George Washington and Benjamin Franklin. The connection to Free Masonry is important because one of the tenets of Free Masonry is a strict separation of church and state. One must remember that modern Free Masonry came about because "radical" men wanted to sit down and talk about controversial subjects like religion, politics, etc. that could have landed one in prison or executed if caught. Of course, one of those "radical" and controversial ideas was the separation of church and state.

Whatever people say now, what, with the Christian right making more noise than ever, the Founders did not believe in a "Government under God" but a "government for the people, of the people, and by the people." God is not anywhere in that famous quotation nor is God to be found anywhere in the US Constitution. The Bible is remarkably silent on such issues as voting rights, cruel and unusual punishment, freedom of speech, how to elect a democratic government, gun ownership, and whether one is entitled to a fair trial. The Bible SURE as hell doesn't advocate freedom of religion as Deuteronomy 17:2-5 certainly shows.

One great example of religion getting too heavily involved in government is Prohibition. All this did was gobble up resources in order to enforce it, and it created all by itself what is today known as "organized crime." It was such a bad law that the Prohibition amendment had to be repealed.

Yes, Rock, we have a secular government and secular law is what keeps the religious loons from trying any more batshit crazy stunts like Prohibition - or, at least, it's supposed to. Those unconstitutional gay marriage amendments proves that the religious right STILL thinks it has the right to ramrod its values down the rest of our throats. The Founders knew full well that religion needed to be separate from government lest we no longer have a democracy but a theocracy. Washington knew this better than any considering he was actually stopped and detained in one small town for working on the Sabbath - as President of the United States.

Sure, we can pretend that our government is one "under God," but it isn't nor was it ever supposed to be. Religion loves nothing more than to hijack pre-existing beliefs and claim them as its own. People got married before there was ever a Christian or Jewish religion; there were laws against murder, rape, theft, bearing false witness, and hundreds of other things before there was a Christian or Jewish religion. Just because the Bible just happens to be the closest book to reach for when it comes to morality, people think that the Christian God is the author of our moral compass. Christianity did not invent morality. Therefore, to even say that our laws are based on Judao-Christian beliefs is a historical lie. We have plenty of laws and rights that aren't found anywhere within the Bible, and there are plenty of laws and rules in the Bible that are not found anywhere within our secular laws.

It's also an easy cop-out to point to the likes of Stalin, Pol Pot, and others to show what happens when secularism rules government policy. But why not point to modern Finland, Norway, Sweden, Japan, France, Holland, Belgium and dozens of other prosperous nations that currently have secular governments? The Establishment Clause does its best to keep America secular, yet the wall between church and state which Thomas Jefferson spoke of is constantly being assailed by the ultra-religious who want their laws, their rules, and their God yoking us all to their wagon whether willingly or not. The Founders knew the danger of this and understood, as I do, that there can be no freedom OF religion without freedom FROM religion.

by Greatest I am Sun Mar 17, 2013 10:02 pm

Shirina

A good point on the drug issue.

In Canada and the U S prohibition has always been racially motivated. Opium is a good example. The British went to war against China, the Opium wars, yet 50 odd years later if memory serves, opium was outlawed here while the police advocated against it as they saw it as a less harmful drug than alcohol.

What a strange world.

I hear there are new books coming out showing that prohibitions are definitely tools of discrimination. Pot was first criminalized in the U S to discriminate against the blacks while the whites were basically allowed all the uppers they could buy.

We have been making war against our own children ever since. People are so dumb.

Regards
DL

by ROB Mon Mar 18, 2013 4:04 am

Shirina wrote:
That’s not thanks to secular law.
Oooh yes it is.

That’s not thanks to secular law. That’s thanks to laws enacted by nations with governments under God.

Shirina wrote:
During the colonial period [the Puritan colony] had a "Government under God" and the laws they implemented were both cruel and unjust.

During the colonial period, the Puritan colony had a theocracy with cruel and unjust laws implemented in a cruel and unjust manner. During this same period of time, England was both conquering and consolidating into one united kingdom its Celtic neighbors and extricating itself from theocratic monarchial rule, wherein the king or queen regent ruled by “divine right”, and slowly developing the principles of government under God, wherein all men, whether royalty or peasantry, whether landed gentry or poor as church mice, are endowed by their common creator with certain unalienable human rights, including life liberty, and property.

John Locke dealt with both struggles. Locke’s First Treatise of Civil Government torpedoed irrevocably the millennia-old nonsense that kings and queen regents, (a) rule, and (b) rule by divine right. Locke’s Second Treatise of Civil Government, 1690, a document so fundamental to decent government that I tend to cry tears of gratitude whenever I type the title, laid down the principles and concepts within which present-day Locke-ian governments are firmly rooted and upon which present-day Locke-ian governments solidly stand. Each of these governments, among which are the governments of Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States, is a government under God.

Thankfully, the founders of my nation drew their ideas, concepts, and principles from John Locke rather than Puritan theocrats. I prefer living under neither theocracy nor secular government; I prefer living under government under God.

Shirina wrote:
… the Founders did not believe in a "Government under God" but a "government for the people, of the people, and by the people."

You missed something.

… It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us -- that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain -- that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

Had you chosen to communicate Abraham Lincoln’s logos rather than your own logos, no doubt you would not have ignored that word that was right there in the same paragraph and sentence (separated one from another by nine words) as that from which you lifted the phrase that you have misquoted (it is “of”, “by” and “for”, and there is no “and” therein).

Note: These comments were delivered four score and seven years after publication of the Declaration of Independence of the thirteen united States, lowercase “united” intentional.

Shirina wrote:
God is not anywhere in that famous quotation…

Oh?

The document from which you have misquoted, in its entirety.

The Gettysburg Address
Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States of America, Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, 19 November 1863

Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate -- we can not consecrate -- we can not hallow -- this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us -- that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain -- that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

Please tell me what the underlined word might be.

Shirina wrote:
… nor is God to be found anywhere in the US Constitution.

The Creator is a key part of the Declaration of Independence, the foundation within which the United States Constitution is firmly rooted and upon which the United States Constitution solidly stands.

Shirina wrote:
It's also an easy cop-out to point to the likes of Stalin, Pol Pot, and others to show what happens when secularism rules government policy.

Whether or not it’s an “easy cop-out”, it is irrefutable fact that Mao Zedong / Mao Tse-tung, Idi Amin Dada, Pol Pot, and Josef Stalin despotically ruled and exterminated humans through secular governments.

Shirina wrote:
The Establishment Clause does its best to keep America secular…

As you’ve not mentioned Amendment 1, I will presume that you refer to the first two phrases of Amendment 1, wherein the word “religion” is either found or referenced.

United States Constitution, Amendment 1

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The underlined phrases of Amendment 1 do not include the word “secular”; thus, your statement, “The Establishment Clause does its best to keep America secular”, is necessarily incorrect.

by snowyflake Mon Mar 18, 2013 6:07 am

Rock, I don't know why you think that flooding the board with lots of words adds any validity to your point.

Not “this” God,

You have a choice of nearly 3000 Gods in the history of mankind. The only reason you are choosing this god is because of your geographical location, the religiosity of your particular state, your upbringing and the christian god is in fashion in America at the moment. You had about as much choice as a Saudi Arabian has to choose anything other than Islam. And you call it free will. Smile

Christians cherry pick. Unless you are stoning people in secret then you are ignoring God's law in the hebrew bible.

by polyglide Mon Mar 18, 2013 1:59 pm

I wish people would understand what Jesus actually preached.

As I have stated previously. Iam only realy interested in events just prior to the birth of Jesus and that which follows.

The reason being that the birth of Jesus was a means of all those who truly believed in him to have their sins forgiven and all those born after were subject to that offer.

But to consider all the nonsense about burning and stoning people you have to also considerwhat Jesus said. Let the first one without sin etc;

This indicates that no one should judge another because we are all sinners in one way or another.

So no one should stone anyone else etc;

by tlttf Mon Mar 18, 2013 3:50 pm

Thank god I live in a secular society.

by oftenwrong Mon Mar 18, 2013 7:18 pm

That secular society of yours seems to support a remarkable number of well-fed and well-dressed priests, tlttf.

You do watch television, don't you?

by snowyflake Mon Mar 18, 2013 7:58 pm

I wish people would understand what Jesus actually preached.

So the OT is irrelevant to Christians? You can just wipe that slate clean and start afresh with the new and improved Jesus/God? Everything that God commanded in the OT is now null and void in the NT?

My friend, Rock, is a great one for the meaning of words. The bible is full of words that mean something. In the OT, God commands us to stone to death:

unbelievers
homosexuals
non-virgins
lippy children
blasphemers
anyone who works or kisses his wife on the sabbath

If you're going to stone someone, don't you think it ought to be for a quite heinous crime like rape, child molestation, murder? God comes across as quite petty and vengeful in the OT. Yet, these verses are ignored by today's Christians (thankfully) and not thanks to Jesus but thanks to our secular laws.

So no one should stone anyone else etc;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffwFXGPRDu4

It still makes me laugh Smile

by snowyflake Mon Mar 18, 2013 8:27 pm

I don’t understand why you think such chastisement will quench my commitment to share truth, as YHVH Elohim would have all men know the truth and the man Moshiach Y’shua.

I don't want to quench your committment at all. But your 'truth' is not truth. It is only 'truth' to you. You have admitted this on several occasions. I don't understand why you think that a lot of words, whatever their origin (hebrew, greek or english) adds weight to your 'truth'. As I said in another post, you are looking at one pine tree and seeing the pine forest, ignoring all the other trees that are there.

by oftenwrong Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:34 pm

The conceit lies in the assumption that all trees are the same as each other.

by Shirina Tue Mar 19, 2013 1:19 am

As I said in another post, you are looking at one pine tree and seeing the pine forest, ignoring all the other trees that are there.

How true.

I've brought this up several times with people who still use Pascal's Wager as a defense of religion. Picking the Christian god to worship does not guarantee that the Christian god is real. There are around 2,999 other gods they DIDN'T pick, and every last one of those gods were thought to be just as real as "YHVH Elohim." Seen in that light, the odds of any specific individual being correct in his or her beliefs is pretty remote. To put it into perspective, you have a 30 to 1 chance of winning a single number bet on a roulette wheel, but only a 1 in 3000 chance of your god being the right god ... assuming there are any gods at all.

Of course believers will insist that, "No, no, no, there is evidence for my god and plus we have this holy book ..." but I'm sure you and I both know that holy books prove absolutely nothing. In fact, a holy book isn't even evidential that a god of any kind exists. I mean, let's face it, even Sarah Palin wrote a book, and it was actually a best seller. So there you go ... a book is a book is a book. When a book is making extraordinary claims about supernatural events while simultaneously making morally reprehensible demands, simply knowing that some places and kings were historical does nothing to make me a believers.

I think you called it "mental gymnastics," and that is so correct. The wide variety of ways Christians try to weasel out of the Old Testament atrocities borders on the amusing - like watching a guilty dog who just chewed up his master's favorite pair of slippers. Every sane individual knows that stoning to death children for being rebellious (what teen isn't?) is inexcusable. And that is precisely what God said to do. Yeah, God said it. It doesn't MATTER if God suddenly turned over a new leaf in the New Testament. In fact, God changing so radically between the two testaments really only means one thing: That God KNEW that his behavior in the Old Testament was wrong. And that makes God imperfect. Uh oh ... you can see where THIS is going, I'm sure.

Bottom line is very simple in regards to God/Jesus and the Old/New Testaments: To embrace God and/or Jesus (aren't they essentially the same?) would be like inviting Hitler over for dinner because Der Feuhrer swears up and down that he's put all of that genocide behind him ... and hey, look, here's a book Hitler wrote to prove it!

Anyway back to Pascal's Wager and pine forests. Believers tend to make liberal use of the false dilemma fallacy in which there are only two viable choices for an atheist: worship their god and believe in their religion or continue being an atheist and suffer the consequences. All of the other religions aren't even considered since they have already been branded as false - and in many cases, those believers know next to nothing about other religions, and they know even LESS about atheism.

And so we're back to there being only one Truth, and, as always, each believer thinks his or her personal religion is that Truth. It doesn't matter where you go, who you talk to, what culture, what religion, or what god - they will ALL say that their beliefs are True and everyone else's is false. I'm sure you know as well as I that this is what tends to land many believers in the doghouse with both atheists and believers in other religions. It's that arrogance of being absolutely, beyond any doubt, correct based only on the belief that they are correct - and not based on actual evidence.

But there is one truism in all of this: All religions can't be right, but they CAN all be wrong. A little bit of doubt about their own beliefs would do the world wonders.

by polyglide Tue Mar 19, 2013 3:46 pm

Shirina, we cannot possibly understand the times prior to the birth of Jesus,
they were relevant to the times prior to Jesus.

We cannot understand the 45 ton dinosaurs, nor much of that which we have unearthed, it may be that we were not meant to meddle with the past, there has been civilisations as intelligent as our present day humans that have been wiped out completely and we have no explanation of why, how etc;

There is nothing wrong in seeking the truth through the Bible as a whole and I admire those who spend time doing so just so long as in doing so strenghtens their faith.

However, I am unable to take all the past into consideration because I do not know all the prevailing circumstances, what I do know is that Jesus exists and made a promise he will keep.

by Greatest I am Tue Mar 19, 2013 3:58 pm

Spoken like one who has no clue.

Attention idol worshipers of Godinabook. Satan is God’s Champion.

In esoteric terms, God and I see Satan as the champion of the soul. So should anyone who seeks his or her true God. Satan, as the gateway to God, is the champion of esoteric thought that Jesus and God promote and love. Without Satan, none of us humans could communicate with God. Satan is the mythical representation of the one who opens the door to the inner consciousness and third eye. Satan is God’s doorman and firewall. He opens the same third eye that Jesus calls the single eye.

Matthew 7:7 Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:

Moses had to confront the burning bush to hear God’s voice. So must you if you seek enlightenment.

Matthew 6:22 The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light.

I can hear all the fundamental and literalist right wing idol worshipping Christians tongues wagging negatively with the term Satan worshiper. I thank you for the compliment you do not realize you give. Right wingers do not realize that to one who is enlightened, that term is a compliment denoting one who is closer to God than they are and have bested Satan. Right wingers tend to be the only ones silly enough to think Satan is real and that God would be such an immoral and evil entity that he would first create an evil Satan and then be even more evil and create a place of purposeless torture like hell. Right wingers call evil good and think that their good God would torture or kill souls forever without any purpose. IOW. Torture just for the fun of it. They call that evil God good and that is how we can recognize these believers as evil and unenlightened. Jesus hates right wingers and so should all moral people.

Hebrews 1;13 But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool? 9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

In esoteric terms, this scripture means that Jesus himself must suffer the heat of Satan’s purifying heat to refine his thinking and gain rebirth. The same applies to your internal Jesus for the ascension to the right hand of God. A place that we must all reach to gain full enlightenment as confirmed in this scripture.

Romans 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

We must all conform to the archetypal Jesus and bow to Satan. He is God’s angel of light and the one who can make your body full of light as you kill and sacrifice your Jesus to the will of God.

Jesus always spoke in parables. In esoteric terms, you are to take these parables and subject them to Satan, the heat and flame that refines, tests and purifies, ---- and you must seek the secret meaning that Jesus only revealed to his disciples. IOW, you idol worshipers of Godinabook are reading parables literally and missing Jesus’ true messages as they apply to reality.

Luke 17:21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.

Literalist, fundamentals and others right wingers idol worship a Godinabook and totally ignore the scripture above.
You look to pages that you have pasted over a golden calf and worship those WORDs instead of seeking as Jesus taught, the words written in your heart.

As an esoteric ecumenist and Gnostic Christian, I promote seeking archetypal Jesus and God and hate to see otherwise good right wing minds lost to the wonder of knowing their real God. So did Jesus as he said the following.

Luke 11:52 Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered.

Mark 7:13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

The Bible and written word are the traditions Jesus speaks of here and he is telling you that you are making the word of God to no effect as you follow that WORD and ignore the fact that Jesus is telling you to ignore it.

Seek God Jesus’ way my friend or continue to let Satan control you instead of you controlling Satan. Satan loses his power in you and cannot effect a purified element.

Remember that Jesus, God Satan are all archetypes that you must recognize live in your own mind and that only by opening your third eye can you master them all and become as Gods in knowing good and evil. Awaken the Adam within you and know that you will live forever. That is how you are reborn in Jesus.

Genesis 3:22 And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil:

Esoterically speaking, Adam, led by the newly born wisdom of Eve, chose correctly and followed her lead. You should do so as well. There is pain in apotheosis but trust me when I tell you that it is worth every tear as the tears of pleasure continue to fall long after the pain is gone.

Regards
DL

P.S.
Please see page 2.

===================

Right wingers, literalists and fundamental idol worshippers of the Bible and the Godinabook; listen to people who know about your true God and would lead you to him or her.

Remember that religions live and work to maintain their existence and to keep you supporting them. They do not care about you as a spiritual entity and will not work for your enlightenment because you would realize that you do not need them. I do not promote killing the churches but only to recognize that they are not necessary and are not working for your spiritual benefits but only for their own longevity and wealth. Martin Luther recognized this and this is pure Gnostic Christian doctrine.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_qnsTr7I04

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FdSVl_HOo8Y

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SF6I5VSZVqc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AfFcAmx-Ro&feature=relmfu

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGx4IlppSgU

In death, all of us must and will have to get past Satan. We are all purified before gaining access to the Godhead and his consciousness. Some can access the Godhead before death if they seek hard enough. Idol worshippers do not seek and will never touch the God consciousness while idol worshipping their Godinabook. You can only serve one master and you have chosen the evil one. Stop doing so and find your good God.

If any of you are still foolish enough to think that you should read your Bibles literally, please view this clip and repent as you have definitely missed the mark.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPSjzM14vLA

Regards
DL

by polyglide Tue Mar 19, 2013 4:08 pm

As I have said, the only thing that should concern present day man is the promise Jesus made. The past wether accurately related or not does not concern present day man, in terms of the times previous.

by Greatest I am Tue Mar 19, 2013 4:21 pm

polyglide wrote:As I have said, the only thing that should concern present day man is the promise Jesus made. The past wether accurately related or not does not concern present day man, in terms of the times previous.

Yes. Yet you ignored what that promise was as shown in the post above.

You worship an idol and do not care as you willfully ignored what Jesus taught just above.

And you want to lead people to Jesus. What a crock of garbage you spew from behind your idol.

Regards
DL

by Shirina Tue Mar 19, 2013 4:39 pm

Shirina, we cannot possibly understand the times prior to the birth of Jesus,
they were relevant to the times prior to Jesus.

Of course we can - and we do. What you're suggesting is that we toss most of the history of Rome into the trash bin - along wth the complete histories of classical Greece and ancient Egypt. Not to mention the very old civilizations such as China, India, and, say, the Australian aboriginees who have been around for 30,000 years. The Chinese and Indians wrote histories, too, you know.

It is preposterous to believe that history is worthless until Jesus came along - as if Jesus suddenly invalidated anything that occurred before the year 0 B.C. If you're going to claim that we can't get an accurate account of what happened before Jesus, then you had best be prepared to explain why everything that happened AFTER Jesus suddenly becomes accurate. You make it sound as if the birth of Jesus opened up a brand new method of conducting historiography, but if that's the case, I've never heard about it, and I certainly don't recall Jesus talking about it, either.

Yeah, you might want to make your religion the focus of your world so that even a well documented civilization like Rome ceases to be of any relevance, but that's just plain foolishness.

it may be that we were not meant to meddle with the past

This sounds like one of those cryptic warnings that hermits and psychics give to people in 'B' horror movies.

there has been civilisations as intelligent as our present day humans that have been wiped out completely and we have no explanation of why, how etc;

Okay, that's possible. Perhaps even plausible considering our current civilization could have risen and fallen 17 times during the course of humanity - providing you don't believe in that Young Earth rubbish. That doesn't mean, however, that we know absolutely nothing about classical Greece or the Chinese don't even know their own history before Jesus came.

There is nothing wrong in seeking the truth through the Bible

I beg to differ. Learning "Truth" through the Bible is like learning history by watching Hollywood movies. Yeah, you'll get SOME "Truth" but you're also getting rubbish along with it. Good luck distinguishing between the two. You're getting "Truth" through a particular lens, especially if you're thinking the Bible is historical. Not only do you get stories of King David, you also get a heaping helping of talking snakes, burning bushes, virgin births, resurrections, water turning into wine, and all-powerful God being unable to defeat an army possessing iron chariots (Judges 1:19). Perhaps my favorite is when Jacob tried to reproduce spotted sheep by painting spots on the parent sheep (Genesis 30:31-43).

If you want to get your "Truth" from a book that contains a lot of nonsense, be my guest, but perhaps you should ask yourself how spotted sheep are REALLY produced, first.

However, I am unable to take all the past into consideration because I do not know all the prevailing circumstances, what I do know is that Jesus exists and made a promise he will keep.

No one can know everything about the past, but it exists nonetheless, and it shouldn't be ignored.

by Tosh Wed Mar 20, 2013 11:40 am

YHVH Elohim says, “This is my beloved Son, my Chosen One, in whom I’m well pleased; hear ye him.”

You cannot prove Elohim said anything of the sort, unfortunately for you and your ilk your scriptures are not evidence of truth.

by Tosh Wed Mar 20, 2013 1:26 pm

You cannot prove YHVH Elohim did not say anything of the sort, unfortunately for you.

The onus is on the positive claimant as you well know, its not my assertion and its not my misfortune that you are unable to support it.

Fortunately for me, I neither care what you can prove nor care what I can prove insofar as YHVH Elohim, author, creator, and sovereign of everything, is concerned.

Then contrary to another one of your claims you do not care about truth, because the truth must be proven, please confirm by return your opinion is but a bare assertion and restore some intellectual honesty to this sham of a debate.

Although you use them as such, your two chosen words are not synonyms in either verb forms (prove, evidence) or their noun forms (proof, evidence). .

Sure, please don't be offended if I do not join in with your semantic evasion, it reeks of weakness and failure, you are the one proposing Genesis 1:1 as evidence that proves the immeasurable power is an entity called Elohim not me, I will leave the exact relationship between the two verbs or nouns to a day when the paint has all but dried.

by Tosh Wed Mar 20, 2013 1:34 pm

As I have said, the only thing that should concern present day man is the promise Jesus made. The past whether accurately related or not does not concern present day man, in terms of the times previous.

This person should be under restraint, its frightening, look you nitwit the promise Jesus made was in the past and its accuracy is rather important to the present.

There is definitely something wrong with the wiring, creationists are devoid of basic reasoning, its like a mind from the past and it was not very accurate.
Maybe if you read primitive shit often enough one becomes embroiled in their primitive mindset.

by Tosh Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:55 pm

Jesus is supposed to be God but he cries on the cross " My God My God why have you forsaken me " ?

by Shirina Wed Mar 20, 2013 5:45 pm

You cannot prove YHVH Elohim did not say anything of the sort, unfortunately for you.

You also can't prove that YHVH didn't say, "Dibbity bibbity babbity boo!"

Maybe he did say that? Maybe he didn't.

You can't disprove that a real Batman somewhere didn't actually say, "I'm Batman!"

You can't disprove that a Gandalf somewhere in the universe didn't really say, "You shall not pass!"

Or that Papa Smurf on a purple planet somewhere didn't say, "We're going to have a smurfy time today!"

Maybe they said these things. Maybe not.

It's all about probability - and what are the odds that an all-powerful, supernatural entity that no one has actually seen said anything about listening to his son? *shrug*

I've never been one to gamble with long odds against me.

by Sponsored content