|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
posted December 11, 2011 11:17 PM |
|
|
Quote:
So what the hell are you trying to tell me?
I'm trying to tell you that if you don't like the way someone posts, you have the right to ignore them. Just so, nobody is under any obligation to answer your questions. Beyond that, it's rather amusing that you take the time to criticize someone for posting a lot of words that don't add anything (in your opinion), and then fail to see the irony that in doing so you're doing the exact same thing.
Finally, if you don't tone down the obnoxious level of agression, I'm telling you that I'll feel quite free to close the thread and give you time to sit in the corner and think of more civilized ways to express yourself. That goes for everyone here. I'm not going to have the usual religion thread crap going on in the OSM. If you guys can't figure out a way to discuss religion in a respectful manner, then I'll terminate the topic. And I'll terminate every topic on religion UNTIL you figure it out, and I'll sit as many people in the corner as I have to in order to get this point across.
Capiche?
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
Brukernavn
Hero of Order
|
|
posted December 12, 2011 12:50 AM |
|
|
Go Corribus 
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted December 12, 2011 01:26 AM |
|
|
@Salamandre
Quote:
Quote:
The Bible says in Israel prostitutes were to be stoned (real stone sounds this time).
Well, for once you have to acknowledge that atheist nations do better than Christianity. We don't kill prostitutes.
Actually you have missed some key concepts. The church is not Israel. The Old Covenant ceremonial and civil Law governed Israel. The church is under the New Covenant. The church is not a physical nation. Christ established no physical nation. The church has no civil law. The church is not authorized to punish evil doers in any way beyond disfellowshipping people who claim to be Christians but who persist in living in sin after being confronted several times over their behavior.
So, Christianity has never said to stone anyone. Anyone who has ever claimed to punish anyone for sin "in the name of Christ" has been a "rogue", not acting on the commands of Christ.
@JJ
Actually, I have addressed your questions and accusations against "monotheist nations" while you have made no attempt to address mine when I called on you to explain the behavior of officially atheist nations. You kept making the same charge against the Bible/Christianity over and over even after I proved your statements to be incorrect and I answered your charges several times.
To recap the answers I gave to your main questions...
The Bible teaches all mankind..male, female, and all races, regardless of "station" in life...were created in the image of God and that God loves everyone. Thus the Bible teaches the actual equality of all mankind. The Bible also says all mankind should be treated equally (ie, equal rights), as I'll recap below.
Jesus did not establish a physical nation like the Old Covenant did (Israel was created when the Law of Moses was given.) Jesus established the church, a group of individuals who wish to follow him, which knows no national boundaries. You will not find the exact phrase "equal rights" in the New Covenant scriptures. Indeed, Jesus did not deal with "political rights" at all because he was not establishing a physical nation nor was he telling Rome or any other nation how to conduct their affairs. Jesus did not come to redeem nations but to redeem people. He taught people how to live in a way that is pleasing to God.
Jesus called people to LOVE EVERYONE, EVEN THEIR ENEMIES, and the New Testament scriptures say not to discriminate against anyone, which I quoted from the book of James (the half brother of Jesus.) The command to treat everyone with love and not to discriminate against anyone IS equal rights and IS EVEN A HIGHER STANDARD THAN "EQUAL RIGHTS", which merely require that everyone be treated the same under the legal system of a nation.
Oh, and I also pointed out gender diversity does not mean gender inequality. Males and females are different but equal.
|
|
GunFred
Supreme Hero
Sexy Manticore
|
|
posted December 12, 2011 02:23 AM |
|
|
Sorry to butt in from thin air but...
"Yes, my exhortation is that pagans, agnostics, and atheists need to shape up and treat women better. The Bible teaches a husband is to be a husband to his wife, not a father to his wife. I can't imagine why a husband would want to parent his wife. Fantasys of incest? Some pagans may think incest is ok but Christians don't."
The european and north american nations are probably the ones that treat their women best compared to other nations and yet these nations have the most atheists and agnostics.
"I won't answer for Islam because Islam does not follow the Bible. But I'll call you to answer for all lands of unbelievers. In particular lands of atheism. What is up with atheist leaders like Pol Pot, Mao, Stalin, Lenin, ect who were responsible for the deaths of more than 250 million people in the past 100 years? Why is it when atheists gain politcal power over a nation there are so many mass murders and denial of basic human rights? Atheists always claim it is theism that produces all the problems, so why have atheists always done worse than theists in ruling nations?"
You can not really blame atheism for those evil leaders. Instead of religion, evil men like these had evil or misused ideaologies like nazism, communsism or simple evil/greed/ambition. Raw atheism is simply not believing in religion. And you do not get much more atheistic than Sweden yet I am pretty sure that Sweden is better than any religious nation when it comes to crime and human rights.
"I already proved what the Bible teaches by quoting the Bible and refuting your false statements about it so there is no "if the Bible teaches..." The Bible teaches to treat all people with love and not to discriminate against anyone."
Why do not homosexuals and some other minority groups get any love?
"The US was founded by Christians on Christian principles, sure, the founders were not perfect, but from the US freedom has spread around the world. Heck, the US has has to kick atheist butts to spread freedom in many places. If the US had not won the cold war most of the world would likely be under the iron fisted rule of an atheistic USSR regime."
You mean communist butts? The difference between your friends and enemies were that your friends were free atheists and your enemies were atheists led by communist dictators.
"Maybe you can tell me why every officially atheist nation is always a cesspool of mass murder and denial of basic human rights? In the US Declaration of Independence the founders declared all men are created equal, just like the Bible teaches. Governments founded on the concept that there is no god have always treated people like crap, to be honest. Why is that? Sure, it took the US a little while to throw off the shackles of slavery that Europe had introduced but in the US people now have more rights than anywhere else in the world. The US is the nation most sought out by immigrants."
Like said before, there are atheist nations that have less crime and more rights than US and again why no love for gays?
"The Christian west advanced so much further than the rest of the world precisely because of Christianity. Sometimes people in charge have made bad decisions or pretended to be Christian but were not. Certainly America has not always in every situation acted according to Christian principles. But that is due to humans sinning or due to wolves in sheeps clothing, not to a failure in what the Bible teaches."
Correct me if I do not got my history right...
Christianity was at its peak of influense and power during the middle ages where europe had taken a step back after the classical era. The europeans later came into contact with cultures like the arabic one that still possesed technology and culture stuff from the classical era and somtime after that, europe enters the renaissance. In this time european nation practically owns the globe and art, science, technology, rights and other stuff flourishes even when the church fights back. I come to the conclusion that the west world has taken the renaissance further and we got a steady growth of the stuff mentioned before while christianity has lost more and more influense and power at the same time. Islamic nations remain as religious as in the middle ages and thats pretty much were they still are except that they get to play with some western toys once in a while. Hardly think you can credit christianity for todays western nations.
Also...
Not blaming christianity for the faults of wolves in sheeps clothing works both ways. Just because Stalin was bad it does not necessarely mean that communsim or atheism is too.
"If everyone followed the teachings of Jesus to love God and their neighbor the world would be a paradise. Don't blame Christianity when someone who claims to be a Christian does not live up to Christian teachings. Some are pretenders and of course no Christian is perfect."
Pretty much answered this one a few rows above and I agree with it. Do not judge Christianity by some bad christian dude, do not judge atheism by some bad atheist, do not judge communism by Stalin, do not judge nazism by Hitler... Ok, the last one you can judge as much as you want.
"Again, Jesus did not start a political kingdom. You won't find the phrase "equal rights" in the Bible. But the command to treat everyone with love and not to discriminate against anyone IS equal rights and IS EVEN A HIGHER STANDARD THAN "EQUAL RIGHTS." "Equal rights" in the US for instance is not a call for you to love everyone, just for everyone to be treated equally by the law. Jesus said mere equal treatment is not enough. Treating everyone with love is required."
So the Bible's standard of treatment for everyone is a higher standard than any nation requires. No nation requires that you actually love everyone."
Treating people the way they deserve when the time come is enough I think. Forcing yourself to show that you love everyone the same must be quite tiresome both mentally and physically. To truly love someone often involves letting them fly free and not force them to be like you and like the same stuff you like which christians do not seem to realise sometimes. And if christianity is so filled with love... why you no love gays? Many muslims consider Islam the religion of love but you do not get that impression based on the followers words and actions. Guess what... same with Christianity.
____________
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted December 12, 2011 07:39 AM |
|
|
Quote:
To recap the answers I gave to your main questions...
The Bible teaches all mankind..male, female, and all races, regardless of "station" in life...were created in the image of God and that God loves everyone. Thus the Bible teaches the actual equality of all mankind. The Bible also says all mankind should be treated equally (ie, equal rights), as I'll recap below.
The command to treat everyone with love and not to discriminate against anyone IS equal rights and IS EVEN A HIGHER STANDARD THAN "EQUAL RIGHTS", which merely require that everyone be treated the same under the legal system of a nation.
Oh, and I also pointed out gender diversity does not mean gender inequality. Males and females are different but equal.
Yes, you said that, but I already told you that you are wrong. Whether you love someone or not has nothing to do with the rights you may think appropriate. That's fairly obvious for children - but the same workings that allows to love a child AND deny them certain rights, may work for other people - like women - as well. It may come in the guise of protection or in the guise of denying their abilities and so on.
Kings supposely loved their subjects - like God is supposed to love the people and the people love God. Equal rights, however, that's something different.
And that's how it has been.
In fact, the nature of the monotheistic religions is male-chauvinist. God is MALE, and he created MAN, put MAN into the garden he created for HIM and decided to give HIM HELP. So he created WOMAN out of a rib of MAN to be HIS HELP.
This is Genesis 2, and it's a foundation of inequality. The story of Eve plucking the apple later hasn't been helpful either.
And you admit it yourself - you claim "male spiritual leadership", do you? That makes sense only with a self-proclamated superiority of men in spiritual things, that's completely unfounded and arbitrary. Equal rights doesn't mean uniformity - it means NO PRIVILEDGES.
|
|
baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted December 12, 2011 11:39 AM |
|
Edited by baklava at 11:46, 12 Dec 2011.
|
Perhaps whoever wrote the Bible, in the patriarchal society of the time, never thought that people would one day become retarded enough to be offended over whether he presented God, a being which perfectly doesn't fit into any gender, as male or female?
EDIT
I re-read the Genesis right now to see if I feel anything wrong. I still strongly believe that it's equally retarded to both use it as evidence that women are inferior to men, as well as to be offended by it, the difference being that people stopped doing the former a few hundred years ago.
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted December 12, 2011 12:21 PM |
|
|
Quote:
... retarded enough ...
?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_roles_in_Christianity
Let me add the question whether you think it a coincidence that the strengthening of women's rights and so on is a development somehow parallel to the decline of religion and the churches as a normative social element in the Western world?
|
|
baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted December 12, 2011 12:56 PM |
|
Edited by baklava at 12:57, 12 Dec 2011.
|
Now re-read my post and continue to do so until you read and understand all of it.
EDIT
Not this one, the previous one.
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted December 12, 2011 01:16 PM |
|
|
You miss Elodin's charmingly naive style when you switch to offensive mode, so your posts tend to be just rude.
That's why I don't care too much reading them - especially when content matches the used vocabulary.
|
|
baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted December 12, 2011 01:59 PM |
|
|
I've just left my teen years and miss the time when I could be rude all I wanted, to be frank. It'll probably take a while to get used to it. On the other hand, you're over 50-something (if I remember correct), nearing the life period when you can again act like an arsehole all you like, and I can barely hide my envy - especially since, in your years, you also get to criticize others for being rude while doing it.
What I was trying to say, and what you would have understood had you read my post again as I advised, is that, while even most of the hardcore organized-religion elements of society stopped viewing Genesis and interpreting religion as a justification for claiming superiority of men over women a long time ago - certain folks still won't let it go and use it repeatedly in an attempt to bash religion as a whole (and variably certain elements of it, spitefully and entirely out of random, such as God, Christ etc), carefully avoiding things that imply otherwise and generally, due to all that, not leaving a better impression than the Church did, in its prime.
I can't even fathom what's so horrible about the whole thing. Both Adam and Eve were victims of the snake, which was a male demon; both Adam and Eve screwed up by their own will; God is presented as male, as well as Lucifer; Mary is praised about as much as Jesus, especially in Western Christianity; and all in all, you can go around blaming everything throughout history for being chauvinistic or homophobic, which leaves us yet again with my favourite Harvey Keitel quote about being such a loser that you can't tell when you've won.
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted December 12, 2011 03:48 PM |
|
|
I understood your post the first time - the problem is, it's as far from reality away as is Mars from Venus.
That's why I linked you to the page. Just ask Elodin about the spiritual leadership of man. Sure, he will say that leadership doesn't constituate a male superiority - but of course he is wrong, because in effect it's a male privilege that is completely unfounded, which he - and others are advocating.
Sure, things are getting better NOW, but obviously the Christian religion has been not very helpful in establishing equal rights - on the contrary.
Also, your post is wrong in a very general way. You cannot pick from the Bible what you like. You either believe that this is a holy book and its writing was inspired by God. For Example Elodin believes that. Then you have the duty to accept things as they are written.
Or you say, some of these things simply CANNOT be true or have been exactly that way. In that case you have no reason whatsoever to believe just one word of the stuff written there. Why would you.
Anyway. You can believe what you want. You can even believe that things are retarded - but things can never be too retarded to actually happen, so that doesn't say much.
|
|
markkur
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Once upon a time
|
|
posted December 12, 2011 04:35 PM |
|
|
I think I finally understand the confusion of religious OSM arguments.
When Christianity is mentioned 2 paradigms are hastily built.
A. The non-believers think "Church" and therefore all of its long history.
B. The believers think "Christ".
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted December 12, 2011 09:25 PM |
|
|
Strangely enough, if it's about religion, "Church" and "Jesus" are two completely different things that have nothing to do with each other.
However, when it's about Communism, it suddenly is about Stalin and not about Marx, Engels and Lenin.
You see, you cannot see one OR the other because the theory is nothing without the practise. You always have to see BOTH. Something may sound good in theory, but it's important that it works. I mean, if all marriages would be divorced and not one would live to survive ten years, the theory of marriage might sound compelling, but practise would show that theory was way off the mark.
The scientific way is different. Theories are derived from the observed reality and tested via prediction. Not the other way round that theories are crafted and then observation and practise is thought to be faulty when it's contradicting theory.
There is a connection between a religion and its churches, as there is a connection between an ideology and the states or nations living by them.
If Marx and Engels are responsible for the deaths in communist regimes, than Jesus is responsible for the deaths in his name as well. If God did write the Bible, he has some responsibility for what happened because of that, as Marx and Engels have responsbility for what happened because of the Communist Manifest.
The reason is simple. WE are by no means perfect. And we won't ever be. Even if we develop, perfection is like reaching 0 when you got 1/x, x->infinite. So we shouldn't strive to be perfect. Just to get better.
|
|
markkur
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Once upon a time
|
|
posted December 13, 2011 12:58 AM |
|
|
Quote:
However, when it's about Communism, it suddenly is about Stalin and not about Marx, Engels and Lenin.
Not with me. My experience with this "undersight" concerning Church has not not limited my view in understanding; that many ideas of Man are betrayed for money, power etc.
|
|
baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted December 13, 2011 01:45 AM |
|
Edited by baklava at 02:31, 13 Dec 2011.
|
I loved the "I am right. Just ask Elodin. He'll say I'm wrong but actually he's wrong" bit. I might use it sometimes.
Also, your Wikipedia entry states, I quote:
Many progressive Christians disagree with the traditional male-authority and female-submission paradigm. They take a Christian egalitarian or Christian feminist view, holding that the overarching message of Christianity provides positional equality for women in marriage and in ministry. Accordingly, some Protestant churches now ordain women to positions of ecclesiastical leadership.
Despite these emerging theological differences, the majority of Christians regard women with dignity and respect as having been created alongside men in the Image of God. The Bible is seen by many as elevating and honoring women, especially as compared with certain other religions or societies. Women have filled prominent roles in the Church historically, and continue to do so today in spite of significant limitations imposed by ordination restrictions.
You cannot pick from a Wikipedia article what you like. You either believe it's a valuable and relevant source of information or not. For example you do. Then you have the duty to accept things as they are written. Ho ho.
Christianity went a long way in establishing civil rights, even through the Church. Let me bring in something fresh to illustrate. The Eastern Orthodox Church, for example, is often overlooked in these discussions, because people don't really know much about it. Most of these discussions are led by Western people who had little to no contact with it, which is a pity - although, considering it didn't get itself involved in the crusades, witch-burning, torture and murder of scientists etc, it's kind of... uneventful. See, through the Orthodox Church and Orthodox rulers, in lands around Byzantium, including Serbia, something incredibly similar to the renaissance happened, before it was born in Italy. Actually, before even that, pretty much ever since there were first written records of Slavs in the Balkans, Orthodox scholars like Cyril and Methodius went around Slavic peoples, enlightening them, helping lay down the first codes of law, teaching them it's wrong to throw unwanted children into wells and whatnot. We Serbs today celebrate a Christian saint called saint Sava, the patron of schools - a medieval Serbian prince who took monastic vows and went on to spread enlightenment and civilization throughout the land, ending up as more or less the founder of Serbian literature and education.
The list goes on but I don't want to overdo it with Orthodoxy right now.
Even in the West, Catholic scholars often acted similarly. What Cyril, Methodius, Sava and the others did for us, saint Patrick did for the Irish people, for instance. So it's, well the word "ignorant" sounds too much like something 12-year-olds use in internet discussions like monkeys throwing feces at each other, but - well - it's rather uninformed and we could perhaps even say angsty to claim Christianity didn't have anything to do with the development of civil rights or enlightenment, especially looking at the wider picture.
About you (coincidentally an atheist) explaining to me (coincidentally a Christian) how I should interpret the Bible, I can only shrug and ask you where exactly what I am saying contradicts what Jesus was saying. Not the Old Testament. The New one. The one with Jesus in it. Because that guy was probably a sharper critic of the Old Testament than anyone here is. And in a time when that was actually something which took balls to do, not a past-time.
About your last post, the only guy here who appears to completely identify communism with Stalin is Elodin. Acting like El toward everyone because El is acting like El to you goes a lot to show why people are comparing you guys all the time. Anyway, others on the board, as far as I've seen, have differing opinions about Marx, Engels, Lenin etc. Lenin was a more-or-less rational statesman, yes, as well as an opportunist who, like most communist revolutionaries, exploited a time of huge strife and foreign invasion to ruthlessly get to power. Mao, Pol Pot, Stalin and others were sociopaths who used a failing system to get to power and do as they please, with the notable exception that Stalin's Soviet Union defeated Germany and more or less saved the universe, no matter how unpleasant we may or may not feel about that. Marx and Engels were more-or-less irresponsible and short-sighted political-economical theorists, with a few solid ideas which got interpreted and implemented relatively well over time here and there, for example in social democratic theory. They played an important role in inspiring people to challenge 19th century capitalism in all its brutality and absolute power, and I won't deny that, even if it did backfire quite a bit.
Communism, though, for the 86th time, is a political and economical system, unlike Christianity which is a personal philosophy and religion which doesn't depend on the current sociopolitical climate to be practiced, nor was it ever meant to be the governing body of a nation. That's a major, major difference.
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted December 13, 2011 02:10 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
To recap the answers I gave to your main questions...
The Bible teaches all mankind..male, female, and all races, regardless of "station" in life...were created in the image of God and that God loves everyone. Thus the Bible teaches the actual equality of all mankind. The Bible also says all mankind should be treated equally (ie, equal rights), as I'll recap below.
The command to treat everyone with love and not to discriminate against anyone IS equal rights and IS EVEN A HIGHER STANDARD THAN "EQUAL RIGHTS", which merely require that everyone be treated the same under the legal system of a nation.
Oh, and I also pointed out gender diversity does not mean gender inequality. Males and females are different but equal.
Yes, you said that, but I already told you that you are wrong. Whether you love someone or not has nothing to do with the rights you may think appropriate.
Sorry, dude, but treating everyone the same and not discriminating against anyone means everyone is treated equally. Equal rights if words are to have any meaning whatsoever. And the Bible goes beyond that to say to love everyone. The Bible has a higher standard than mere equal rights.
Quote:
In fact, the nature of the monotheistic religions is male-chauvinist. God is MALE, and he created MAN, put MAN into the garden he created for HIM and decided to give HIM HELP. So he created WOMAN out of a rib of MAN to be HIS HELP.
So if God were male that is chauvinist but if God were female that would be not be discriminatory, eh. Political correctness is rather bizarre.
But, unfortunately once again you show your ignorance of what the Bible teaches.
The Bible teaches God is a genderless Spirit who also exists as the man Jesus Christ. The Spirit of God has no genitalia and is neither male nor female.
Quote:
Joh 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.
God is described as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (ways in which God relates to mankind.) Since Jesus Christ (the human form in which God revealed himself) is male is it obvious God could not be described as mother. God becoming a male to die for our sins is not chauvinistic. Again, the idea that if God would have become a woman to die for the sins of the world somehow that would be ok but him becoming a man is somehow chauvinistic is just strange.
Oh, and as I quoted MALE AND FEMALE WERE CREATED IN THE IMAGE OF GOD. Since the Bible says both are in the image of God it is rather hard to see how you can twist that into male superiority.
Yes, Adam was created first. If Eve had been created first would that have not been discriminatory but Adam being created first is discriminatory? Lol!!!!!
Quote:
The story of Eve plucking the apple later hasn't been helpful either.
So if Adam had eaten the apple first that would not have been chauvinist but Even having taken the fruit first is? Lol!!!!!!!!!! Sorry, I'm really trying to contain my laughter. 
Quote:
And you admit it yourself - you claim "male spiritual leadership", do you? That makes sense only with a self-proclamated superiority of men in spiritual things, that's completely unfounded and arbitrary. Equal rights doesn't mean uniformity - it means NO PRIVILEDGES.
Errrrrr.....leadership does not mean superiority. You have just made the claim that Obama is superior to everyone in the free world (he is the leader of the free world.) I reject that claim.
Biblical leadership is serving those you lead. So man serves woman through spiritual leadership. God holds the husband accountable for ministering to his family physically, financially, and spiritually. You see, godly leadership is totally different than the "I is the big dog, give me urrr bone" idea of leadership.
Quote:
Joh 13:12 So after he had washed their feet, and had taken his garments, and was set down again, he said unto them, Know ye what I have done to you?
Joh 13:13 Ye call me Master and Lord: and ye say well; for so I am.
Joh 13:14 If I then, your Lord and Master, have washed your feet; ye also ought to wash one another's feet.
Joh 13:15 For I have given you an example, that ye should do as I have done to you.
Mat 20:25 But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them.
Mat 20:26 But it shall not be so among you: but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister;
Mat 20:27 And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant:
Mat 20:28 Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.
The fact that women can bear children and men can't does not mean women are superior to men. Man being tasked with spiritual leadership does not make man superior of women.
Men and women have different biological, social, and spiritual abilities. I'm glad my wife is not just a man with different sex organs.  Both equally bear the divine image and are thus equals.
I just can't understand to concept you seem to have that gender differences mean gender inequality. *shrugs*
|
|
Seraphim
Supreme Hero
Knowledge Reaper
|
|
posted December 13, 2011 02:15 AM |
|
Edited by Seraphim at 03:38, 13 Dec 2011.
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted December 13, 2011 03:40 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Christianity went a long way in establishing civil rights, even through the Church.
I don't know about that, but fundamentalist Christians did go a long way in establishing breakfast cereal as an acceptible part of the Western diet.
Seriously.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted December 13, 2011 05:34 AM |
|
|
Bak:
You're doing what a lot of moderate (i.e. inconsistent) Christians like to do and are saying "Look at all of Jesus's good teachings! Don't look at the bad Old Testament!" There are at least three problems with this:
1. The Old Testament God and the New Testament God are one and the same. And Jesus is God. So you can't overlook the Old Testament God when looking at Christianity.
2. You're telling us to look specifically at Jesus's teachings. What about the rest of the New Testament? How about Paul and Timothy? There are some objectionable things in there. If you tell us to reject them, then on what basis do you pick and chose what to accept and what to reject?
3. Jesus's teachings aren't that good anyway. For example, he equates divorce and adultery. He taught to "turn the other cheek" instead of retaliating against an enemy. He taught to love your enemy. He taught not to be concerned with one's well-being. He taught not to judge others. I could go on, but you get the idea.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
Mytical
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
Chaos seeking Harmony
|
|
posted December 13, 2011 05:38 AM |
|
|
A lot of people do not understand religion, including some of those who follow it. Lets try to clear a few things up.
First, just because it is your view of a religion..does not make it the only correct view. There are hundreds of different religions, and hundreds of different interpretations of each, all claiming to be the correct/only/true/etc version. None can prove this claim. None can even seem to answer why their view is supposedly superior, without quoting like a parrot from the religious text they believe. Which helps not a bit, because the other religious texts still exist and even the text they use can be interpreted different ways. Does that mean there is not a correct/only/true religion? Guess we will find out when we die.
Second the people who do not believe in a religion, can not seem to separate the religion from the people IN the religion. When somebody does something horrible, and claims it is in the name of religion..often it is not. It is their own twisted interpretation, or they follow somebody who has such twisted interpretations. Through fear, ignorance, or something else (or combination).
Third most religion state that mankind has free will, and that this is sacrosanct. If the deity interferes to stop people from doing horrible things, then they would just make us robots without our own choices. It is we who chose wrong, even if it was they who give us the ability to choose. TO sum this up..the deity (with whatever name) starts the world, and watches. They set up rules for themselves to follow..and are moralistic enough to follow those rules..even if sometimes they do not like it. So a deity does not cause bad things to happen. Natural disasters are because of nature, and man made disasters are because of man.
Fourth, religious people sometimes forget that people do not share their beliefs..and think that endless quotes from their religious texts, people who believe how they believe, etc should be enough to prove their case. It would be like me believing in Harry Potter, and using any of the seven books to try to prove my point, or quotes from its creator/fans/etc. They would look at me as if I was mad, and they would be right to do so. I would be proving nothing, because no matter what quotes I make..it is not PROOF of anything. That is what makes it faith. Believing despite the lack of proof. It would be called 'fact' if it could be proved..but people forget this. People should believe what they will, as long as it doesn't hurt anybody else. When a PERSON (who uses religion for an excuse, as they would anything else they could use) harms somebody..the whole should not be blamed. That would be like blaming Elodin for something JJ did. Or blaming Corribus for this long rambling post. 
Elodin has a right to believe whatever he wants, even if I disagree with his interpretation. Even I have to admit he is rather intelligent, though I wish sometimes he would use his own words..as his quoting and links prove nothing. Our interpretation is different, and thus to him WRONG. We will not accept his interpretation, and he will not accept ours. It is not a matter of ignorance, but what we believe. He can not prove his version is the only/true version because there is no evidence that his god is the one true god. HE believes it is, and that is all that really matters imo. I do not, as I interpret the bible differently (and of course he thinks I interpret it wrongly which is his right).
I have nothing but respect for those who follow religion, yes I respect Elodin. We need to live and let live, as long as it harms none. Those that do harm, need to be stopped, and separated from the religion. 'Christian', 'Muslim', etc is a sort of misnomer. They interpret the religious texts different, but that is not the fault of the religion but of the people. Because man (woman) is flawed, but men (women) are also individuals. Just like somebody who happens to be a homosexual who commits a crime does not represent all homosexuals, not all who wear the title 'Christian', 'Muslim', etc represent all others who wear that title.
____________
Message received.
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
