Science vs Religion - Page 11

MadPenguin · 2011-10-11, 11:55 AM

He had holy men of old write as they were inspired by the Spirit of God.

I didnt ask you to restate your hypothesis, i asked you to give me reasons to believe it.

Proof that you would accept? Dunno. Not trying to convince anyone. Just stating.

Not proof, a single good reason to believe, lets start there. Cant be too hard right?
Why take part in an adult debate if your not willing to argue or support your claims?

Effective · 2011-10-11, 11:59 AM

Originally Posted by Traak

Proof? He had holy men of old write as they were inspired by the Spirit of God. Proof that you would accept? Dunno.

Not trying to convince anyone. Just stating.

In other words, a group of semi-crazy people wrote a book filled with out-dated bronze age "ethics". I use the term ethics lightly since the acts that are approved of in the bible are downright wrong (in the bad, evil sense) sometimes.

Quovatis · 2011-10-11, 12:17 PM

Originally Posted by Effective

In other words, a group of semi-crazy people wrote a book filled with out-dated bronze age "ethics". I use the term ethics lightly since the acts that are approved of in the bible are downright wrong (in the bad, evil sense) sometimes.

Yep, and christians and **** now conveniently ignore the bits that don't fit in with today's morality. I guess they know better than god. God said slavery is ok, but we know better! Where is the outrage from **** and christians on banning slavery? It is the word of god after all and it's not up to us to second guess god's morality, right? And if god is wrong on slavery, why assume god is right on everything else?

Baneblade · 2011-10-12, 03:03 AM

Don't forget, the Bible also rationalizes genocide.

Sirisian · 2011-10-12, 01:32 PM

Originally Posted by IDukeNukeml

Believe in something or die for nothing fellas....

That quote generally doesn't apply here. You can believe in something and then die for nothing. Look at religious wars from the perspective of an Atheist. The people fighting are dying for nothing.

"If you don't stand for something you'll fall for anything" is the more unbiased way to write it.

Effective · 2011-10-12, 01:43 PM

Originally Posted by IDukeNukeml

Believe in something or die for nothing fellas....

Traak · 2011-10-13, 01:09 AM

Originally Posted by Quovatis

Yep, and christians and **** now conveniently ignore the bits that don't fit in with today's morality. I guess they know better than god. God said slavery is ok, but we know better! Where is the outrage from **** and christians on banning slavery? It is the word of god after all and it's not up to us to second guess god's morality, right? And if god is wrong on slavery, why assume god is right on everything else?

If the average person has a choice between slavery and death, what would they choose? Evidently, slavery, because slavery still exists, and not every single slave commits suicide the very microsecond they become one. Slavery still exists today. If you are so against it, explain to us what you, personally, have done to stop it. With proof. Show us how you have spent every single cent you own to stop it. Why haven't you done so? Can't afford it? Multiply this by a few billion, and you will see why slavery exists.

When people face death by starvation or whatever other means, and there aren't enough people, like yourself, who are magnanimous enough to do anything that costs them any money to help them out, they are faced with choices. Among those choices is certain death. Another of those choices is slavery. Not all slaves are willing slaves. But, slavery as an alternative, hopefully temporary, to certain death is often an economic reality.

In Thailand, slavery is practiced, possibly, almost as much as it is in Dubai, which I regard as the human trafficking center of the world. A charter plane full of girls arrives from former Soviet countries daily, so I am told by people in Dubai. Who knows how much is going on that they don't know about.

But, back to S.E. Asia. Slavery, sex slavery, is practiced here a lot. But, if you ask the average person who is in that (I don't know, I've never met one, that I knew of) "how about if, instead of being a sex slave, you just slowly starve to death?" I think the answer would be being a sex slave.
Is all slavery people saving the poor and starving from death? No. Is all slavery a choice? No. But, slavery as an alternative to dying? Most would choose slavery.

Have you ever read the Bible? Any of it? How about all of it?

Have you read the rules regarding servants in the Old Testament? If so, please enlighten us, what does it say, exactly? I mean, the entire concept, in context, with the rules and regulations that pertain to it. Remember, this was in a world with no Christ, no Christians, Holy Spirit not resident in people in the Earth. It was a much harder, darker time. For many, it was "slavery or death." There wasn't welfare, liberals to murder the unborn so they weren't born to become poor people, or whatever else. Unlike welfare today, slavery was the welfare system where you survived by working. Was it desirable to be a slave? Is it EVER desirable? It beats dying, however.

Actually, from a Christian perspective, we live by the New Testament. Just like Adam's sons married, ostensibly, Adam's daughters, but incest was only outlawed with the beginning of the Mosaic law, we don't live in that era anymore.

In the New Covenant era, unlike the Old Covenant era, people can be born again, in their heart, their spirit, their inner man, and become a new creation on the inside. This changes the whole tone of the planet. The 2000 years since Christ have seen more technological advancement than (what you believe to be) the hundreds of millions of years before him.

That is because men could now have God living inside them, directly, because their spirits are reborn in his image, and not dead, aka out of contact with God, which was how adults were, universally, in the Old Testament. It is likely, that given any nation or population, there are some Christians in it, and they act as a preserving force, whereas the entire population would be sinners, otherwise. Jesus said "ye are the salt of the Earth." Salt preserves.

And God has all scientific knowledge, so he can now reveal it directly to the common man, if said man has accepted Jesus as his savior, which leads to domino-effect ideas by other people all over.

When God's presence was in a temple of stone or cloth, he could not deal directly with the common man like he can today. Different era. He could speak to the judge, the prophet, the priest, and the king, because they were anointed by God. But, unlike the average Christian today, they did not have God resident in their spirit. Jesus had to make that available, and to do that he had to go to hell, and to do that, he had to die in sin, not his sin, but ours.

Exterminating an entire populace was used under the Old Testament times. This is the time of the New Covenant, and there are enough of God's people in the Earth that an entire population is not often so steeped in evil that they are irredeemable.

God would have spared Sodom and Gomorrah if even ten righteous people were found in it. No righteous people to act as a preserving force, or insufficient numbers, (Lot and his family moved out by angels just before judgment fell) and the cities were destroyed.

God exterminated the entire population of Sodom and Gomorrah, towns where people could expect to be set upon by gangs of homosexual rapists. So, yes, God has condoned and executed genocide personally. Man has done similar at Nagasaki and Hiroshima, for the purpose of what? Ending the violence.

The flood was a response to the violence that filled the Earth

Genesis 6:13
And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth.

When a people become irredeemably violent, they face genocide. The choices that lead to it are theirs, however. Genocide is the killing of all and any in an area. Any grenade thrown, any bomb dropped, without a census taken just prior to the time of impact to determine that there are no children present, is a scaled-down version of that.

Genocide is a level of destruction that sometimes becomes necessary to stop something worse. It has been practiced by God and people acting on his orders, for millenia, and practiced by man going against God's orders, also.

I know that, for the most part, "liberals" think genocide is wonderful, as long as it is only committed against the unborn, and at all other times it is evil. However, it isn't really how God views it.

Sirisian · 2011-10-13, 01:35 AM

It doesn't bother you in the slightest that he designed humans in such a way that they could falter. Free will or not, the god most Christians relate to is omniscient making him capable of seeing his own doing. The common rewording Effective used sums up this point. Your analogy of bombing a place and not checking if there are innocents is erroneous. In the view of a god it would be like knowing their whole life history before doing it and knowing you did nothing to stop their fate. Why kill at that point? The ability to do anything and show mercy is apparently beyond Him? I don't know how anyone can defend genocide toward anyone especially if you stood by and let it come to that.

Originally Posted by Traak

I know that, for the most part, "liberals" think genocide is wonderful, as long as it is only committed against the unborn, and at all other times it is evil. However, it isn't really how God views it.

You don't know how God views it. That's the whole point.

Effective · 2011-10-13, 05:39 AM

Truthfully traak? I'm not a liberal, I'm a moderate conservative (I.E. I'm in the middle on some policies but lean towards more conservative). That being said, I think abortion is fine as long as it isn't used as a form of birth control. And before you ask what I mean here's an explanation.

If a woman is raped, and she becomes pregnant, I see no issues with abortion unless for some reason she wants the child.

If the child being born is going to have health issues that will affect his/her ability to support herself, I see no issue.

If having the child will cause significant health problems (i.e. death) for the mother, I see no issues.

There's probably more, but those are the first ones that come to mind. I don't consider an embryo a person, not even close.

As far as reading the bible, yes, I assume quovatis has read most of the bible, most atheist are more knowledgeable about religion then the actual practitioners of said religion.

Would you like us to bring up the bits in the bible that approve of genocide, rape, murder, stealing (pillage/plunder), outright lies, slavery, or any random miscellaneous bits that are not people friendly?

CutterJohn · 2011-10-13, 09:19 AM

Originally Posted by Traak

Jesus said "ye are the salt of the Earth." Salt preserves.

Salting the earth, or sowing with salt, is the ritual of spreading salt on conquered cities to symbolize a curse on its re-inhabitation. It originated as a practice in the ancient Near East and became a well-established folkloric motif in the Middle Ages.

So pretty much JC said we're a curse on the earth.

He also said he wasn't here to end the old laws. They all apply.

Matthew
5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Ofc then theres Luke..

16:16 The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.
16:17 And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.

Lordy lordy, whats one to think? JC says they aren't binding, and in the very same breath says they are. I think it was probably the wine.

It was a nice attempt at retconning though. I can just imagine some guy sitting there, lamenting how people are kinda pissed at the religions restrictions.. I got it! We'll say they no longer apply!

Firefly · 2011-10-13, 09:30 AM

Originally Posted by Traak

I know that, for the most part, "liberals" think genocide is wonderful, as long as it is only committed against the unborn, and at all other times it is evil. However, it isn't really how God views it.

You know what ticks me off? That you use the word "liberal" like it's a fucking slur. Seriously - who the fuck are you to judge someone? Your ignorance and your hypocrisy are astounding.

You know what else ticks me off? That you presume that no liberal can be a true Christian. When, in fact, your Jesus was A FUCKING DIRTY HIPPIE SOCIALIST LIBERAL WHO INCITED REBELLION AGAINST THE LAWFUL GOVERNMENT. If you don't know any liberal Christians, that really doesn't surprise me.

You know what ELSE ticks me off? That you paint all liberals with the same brush. Lemme tell you something, kid. Of the women I know who have had abortions, my calculator says 80% of them are CHRISTIAN. 80% of them are CONSERVATIVE. My sister being one of them. I love how you judge my sister by calling her a slut or a career woman, a few pages back.

Now. Let me see. How many dirty liberal chicks do I know who got knocked up? Maybe three - probably because the other dozen or so practiced "good Christian values" and "good Jewish values" by abstaining or at least being smart enough to use protection. But that's beside the point - of the three liberal chicks I know, all of whom are Jewish, who got knocked up, how many had an abortion?

Zero.

How many of those three believe that abortion is good?

Zero.

How many of them contemplated having an abortion?

Zero.

Quovatis · 2011-10-13, 10:45 AM

Originally Posted by Traak

Have you ever read the Bible? Any of it? How about all of it?

Have you read the rules regarding servants in the Old Testament? If so, please enlighten us, what does it say, exactly? I mean, the entire concept, in context, with the rules and regulations that pertain to it.

I have. I'll be glad to enlighten you:

Exodus 21:20-21 "And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money [property]."

Exodus 21:26-27 "And if a man smite the eye of his servant, or the eye of his maid, that it perish; he shall let him go free for his eye's sake. And if he smite out his manservant's tooth, or his maidservant's tooth; he shall let him go free for his tooth's sake."

Leviticus 25:44-46: "Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. You can will them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly."

Exodus 21:7-11: "When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. "

So basically, you can beat the shit out of your slaves as long as they don't die in 24 hours, or as long as you don't hurt their eyes or teeth. And if you're a slave and not a ***, you can never go free and you're SOL. Oh yeah, and it's perfectly legit to sell your own daughter as a sex slave. If she doesn't give good head, she can never be freed. What a nice god to allow such things. I guess I missed the part where you're supposed to be supper nice to them and take them as slaves because they were going to die from starvation.

I have to say, I'm quite appalled you basically think slavery today is ok under certain circumstances. I don't think it's ok under any circumstance. And it's silly you think I have to prove that I've tried to do something about it. There is a lot of fucked up things wrong with this world. I don't have the power to do much about it (but ironically god does, but chooses not to do anything about it). If slavery were still legal in the USA, you bet I would be out there protesting and voting to get it abolished. But thankfully, secularism pulled this country out of the dark ages in the last 200 years. The most fucked up countries on the planet are usually those who are theocracies.

MadPenguin · 2011-10-13, 07:26 PM

The 2000 years since Christ have seen more technological advancement than (what you believe to be) the hundreds of millions of years before him.

I apologize if im wrong, but it appears that you are a young Earth Creationist, so perhaps you could explain to me why when we measure the distance to some stars and galaxies, it turns out it would take tens of thousands of years for the light emitted from these stars to reach us. In other words, if the world were 6000 years old, how come we can see objects tens of thousands of light years away and further, surely the light from these objects couldnt have reached us yet?

Quovatis made the point of slavery and Christians choose not to follow this demand by God, and you decided to attack the example but not the underlying logic.
When, for example, Jesus suggests his disciples should go forth and kill those who wont accept him as saviour in Luke 19. You are presented with 2 options:

Either you believe killing non-christians is a good thing (in which case we have a much more serious issue on our hands than what we are talking about)

Or (and i hope this is the case) you dont agree with the killing of non-christians for the crime of not following Christ. But once you admit this, it becomes clear that you arent actually following the bible, you are just using it to justify the God you believe in.

What you are effectively saying is: "not only does God exist, but out of the infinite possibile Gods, the one that actually exists is the one that i think is just right, he will judge people how i think people should be judged and act how i think he should act, what a stroke of luck."

It just becomes patently obvious to us at this point that your belief in the specific God you believe in is no more than wishful thinking. I could probably think of few Gods i would want to exist, but there is a difference between wanting something to be true and actually believing its true: to believe something is true (especially something of this much importance) you need reasons.

Traak · 2011-10-17, 03:26 AM

Originally Posted by Quovatis

I have. I'll be glad...I have to say, I'm quite appalled you basically think slavery today is ok under certain circumstances.

I didn't say it was okay. I figured you would warp what I said to try to make it say that. What I said was given the choice of slavery or death, most choose slavery. If someone gave you the choice of your kids being shot dead immediately, or working as underpaid slaves in some Nike factory, would you kill them? Or would you regard it as approving of slavery if you didn't?

Since the rest of your response was attempting to prove that I approve of slavery, I didn't quote it. The Old Testament rules were during a different age, as I have said.

Slavery is what most people choose if given a choice between slavery and death. In China, where slavery isn't really an option, they just kill baby girls instead of selling them.

Firefly · 2011-10-17, 03:48 AM

Originally Posted by Traak

I didn't say it was okay. I figured you would warp what I said to try to make it say that. What I said was given the choice of slavery or death, most choose slavery. If someone gave you the choice of your kids being shot dead immediately, or working as underpaid slaves in some Nike factory, would you kill them? Or would you regard it as approving of slavery if you didn't?

That's funny because I know I've read plenty of literature about slaves who chose escape and eventual punishment (accepting that beatings, whippings, lynching, and even murder can be expected as punishment), rather than live another day as a slave. I don't know what the statistics are because nobody really compiled stuff like that. But given the choice between slavery and death, I'd choose death. It's better to die on your feet than live on your knees. I can't speak for anyone else here. But then again, I'm the guy that enlisted in the Army and served so that you and others like you didn't have to make that choice - so choosing certain death is not something at which I will blink if it means freedom.

Originally Posted by Traak

In China, where slavery isn't really an option, they just kill baby girls instead of selling them.

This is antiquated and ignorant prejudice, if not outright misinformation. This practice does still exist in China, but only in rural areas - *AND* that's being combated by education, redefining of values, and China's brand of extremist justice. China's government recognised that this wasn't a good idea but failed to control it until the last 10-20 years. Now it's bitten them in the ass: they have way too many males, a lot of them are either single or turning to homosexuality/foreign women. China expressed dismay at this as recently as eight months ago and went so far as to document how they are combating it. A little bit of Google-fu will keep you from looking completely clueless.