Total Posts:50|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Question #01

tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2012 8:44:02 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/9/2012 8:29:22 PM, GodSands wrote:
God created us, He has the right to set the rules. Otherwise, why not make our own rules?

Sounds good to me. Why not make our own rules, like when we abolished slavery, or gave equal rights to women?
KeytarHero
Posts: 612
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2012 9:13:53 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/9/2012 8:44:02 PM, tkubok wrote:
At 4/9/2012 8:29:22 PM, GodSands wrote:
God created us, He has the right to set the rules. Otherwise, why not make our own rules?

Sounds good to me. Why not make our own rules, like when we abolished slavery, or gave equal rights to women?

Sorry, that's not man making his own rules, that's man treating fellow man how God intended us to treat each other. Nice try, though.
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2012 9:17:20 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/9/2012 9:13:53 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 4/9/2012 8:44:02 PM, tkubok wrote:
At 4/9/2012 8:29:22 PM, GodSands wrote:
God created us, He has the right to set the rules. Otherwise, why not make our own rules?

Sounds good to me. Why not make our own rules, like when we abolished slavery, or gave equal rights to women?

Sorry, that's not man making his own rules, that's man treating fellow man how God intended us to treat each other. Nice try, though.

Oh, that's a relief. What God is that? I can't recall many holy texts that denounce slavery and teach us to treat women equally.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
KeytarHero
Posts: 612
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2012 9:30:15 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/9/2012 9:17:20 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 4/9/2012 9:13:53 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 4/9/2012 8:44:02 PM, tkubok wrote:
At 4/9/2012 8:29:22 PM, GodSands wrote:
God created us, He has the right to set the rules. Otherwise, why not make our own rules?

Sounds good to me. Why not make our own rules, like when we abolished slavery, or gave equal rights to women?

Sorry, that's not man making his own rules, that's man treating fellow man how God intended us to treat each other. Nice try, though.

Oh, that's a relief. What God is that? I can't recall many holy texts that denounce slavery and teach us to treat women equally.

The God of the Bible, of course. But the Bible doesn't always lend itself to an "on the surface" reading, and most atheists refuse to dig deeper into the Bible to see why it says something. They just look at the surface because it's easier to refute the Bible if you don't know what it actually teaches.

For example, the Bible never claims that slavery is moral. However, it does offer guidelines on how to treat slaves. God allowed certain things to happen (such as divorce) because of the hard-heartedness of the Jews. Additionally, slavery was much different back then. People became "bond servants," which is a willing form of slavery. If you couldn't afford to care for yourself, you could become a slave and be given a place to live and food to eat, and when you decided to leave their service you were given enough to live on for a while after you left.

Also, there is nothing in the Bible that says women should not be treated equally with men, but there are religious people who take the Bible out of context and use it to try and control women. This doesn't mean the Bible is wrong or God is misogynistic, just that people either misconstrue what the Bible teaches or some do use it to control others.
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2012 9:41:10 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/9/2012 9:30:15 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 4/9/2012 9:17:20 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 4/9/2012 9:13:53 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 4/9/2012 8:44:02 PM, tkubok wrote:
At 4/9/2012 8:29:22 PM, GodSands wrote:
God created us, He has the right to set the rules. Otherwise, why not make our own rules?

Sounds good to me. Why not make our own rules, like when we abolished slavery, or gave equal rights to women?

Sorry, that's not man making his own rules, that's man treating fellow man how God intended us to treat each other. Nice try, though.

Oh, that's a relief. What God is that? I can't recall many holy texts that denounce slavery and teach us to treat women equally.

The God of the Bible, of course. But the Bible doesn't always lend itself to an "on the surface" reading, and most atheists refuse to dig deeper into the Bible to see why it says something. They just look at the surface because it's easier to refute the Bible if you don't know what it actually teaches.

Even though, when taking quiz surveys, Atheists know much more about the Bible than Christians?
Even though I go to church services 2-3 times a week?

For example, the Bible never claims that slavery is moral. However, it does offer guidelines on how to treat slaves. God allowed certain things to happen (such as divorce) because of the hard-heartedness of the Jews.

So God never said slavery is bad but he still thinks so? I guess that's one of those things it's ok to figure out for ourselves. Not like killing homosexuals and cutting off the tips of our penises. That's important.

Additionally, slavery was much different back then. People became "bond servants," which is a willing form of slavery. If you couldn't afford to care for yourself, you could become a slave and be given a place to live and food to eat, and when you decided to leave their service you were given enough to live on for a while after you left.

Oh yeah. You must be quite the historian. *condescending wonka*

Also, there is nothing in the Bible that says women should not be treated equally with men, but there are religious people who take the Bible out of context and use it to try and control women. This doesn't mean the Bible is wrong or God is misogynistic, just that people either misconstrue what the Bible teaches or some do use it to control others.

I'm very glad you know your scripture. Nothing misogynistic about the bible. No-sir-ee. Thank you for informing such a scripture-ignorant Atheist, as myself.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2012 9:41:31 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/9/2012 9:13:53 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 4/9/2012 8:44:02 PM, tkubok wrote:
At 4/9/2012 8:29:22 PM, GodSands wrote:
God created us, He has the right to set the rules. Otherwise, why not make our own rules?

Sounds good to me. Why not make our own rules, like when we abolished slavery, or gave equal rights to women?

Sorry, that's not man making his own rules, that's man treating fellow man how God intended us to treat each other. Nice try, though.

The bible talks of slavery and that a woman should be subservient to her man because Man is the head of the household much like jesus and God are head of the church.

Thats man treating fellow man against the bibles wishes. Sorry, nice try though.
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2012 9:46:07 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/9/2012 9:30:15 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
However, it does offer guidelines on how to treat slaves. God allowed certain things to happen (such as divorce) because of the hard-heartedness of the Jews. Additionally, slavery was much different back then. People became "bond servants," which is a willing form of slavery. If you couldn't afford to care for yourself, you could become a slave and be given a place to live and food to eat, and when you decided to leave their service you were given enough to live on for a while after you left.

Read the bible.

It tells you that you can beat your slave if he disobeys you. It tells you that you can beat your slave as much as you want, as long as the slave doesnt die in 1 or 2 days.

It tells you that you can sell your children into slaves. It tells you that you can sell your daughter into slavery. If you cant afford to care for yourself or your children, why not just sell them as slaves!

It tells you that if you conquer cities, the spoils of war are yours, including the women and children. And these slaves didnt sell themselves, nor were they allowed to be free if they were not jewish or adhere to your God.

You dont think the black slaves were given no food? A shelter? Of course they were. But they were still slaves.

Your argument fails.
KeytarHero
Posts: 612
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/10/2012 1:09:37 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/9/2012 9:41:10 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 4/9/2012 9:30:15 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 4/9/2012 9:17:20 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 4/9/2012 9:13:53 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 4/9/2012 8:44:02 PM, tkubok wrote:
At 4/9/2012 8:29:22 PM, GodSands wrote:
God created us, He has the right to set the rules. Otherwise, why not make our own rules?

Sounds good to me. Why not make our own rules, like when we abolished slavery, or gave equal rights to women?

Sorry, that's not man making his own rules, that's man treating fellow man how God intended us to treat each other. Nice try, though.

Oh, that's a relief. What God is that? I can't recall many holy texts that denounce slavery and teach us to treat women equally.

The God of the Bible, of course. But the Bible doesn't always lend itself to an "on the surface" reading, and most atheists refuse to dig deeper into the Bible to see why it says something. They just look at the surface because it's easier to refute the Bible if you don't know what it actually teaches.

Even though, when taking quiz surveys, Atheists know much more about the Bible than Christians?
Even though I go to church services 2-3 times a week?

For example, the Bible never claims that slavery is moral. However, it does offer guidelines on how to treat slaves. God allowed certain things to happen (such as divorce) because of the hard-heartedness of the Jews.

So God never said slavery is bad but he still thinks so? I guess that's one of those things it's ok to figure out for ourselves. Not like killing homosexuals and cutting off the tips of our penises. That's important.

Additionally, slavery was much different back then. People became "bond servants," which is a willing form of slavery. If you couldn't afford to care for yourself, you could become a slave and be given a place to live and food to eat, and when you decided to leave their service you were given enough to live on for a while after you left.

Oh yeah. You must be quite the historian. *condescending wonka*

Also, there is nothing in the Bible that says women should not be treated equally with men, but there are religious people who take the Bible out of context and use it to try and control women. This doesn't mean the Bible is wrong or God is misogynistic, just that people either misconstrue what the Bible teaches or some do use it to control others.

I'm very glad you know your scripture. Nothing misogynistic about the bible. No-sir-ee. Thank you for informing such a scripture-ignorant Atheist, as myself.

Which quiz surveys are you talking about? Would you mind sourcing your assertions?

Again, you misconstrue the Bible. This is exactly what I'm talking about. You look on the surface but you don't dig deeper to know what the Bible teaches. Homosexuality is a sin to God, and all sin is heinous before God. In the Old Testament, there were many sins that came with a penalty of death. In the New Testament (which is a new covenant between God and man), our handling of sin is different. All sin is still deserving of death. That's the reason why we must die in the first place, because of our sin (homosexuality being one possible sin but by no means the worst).

I'm not a historian, but I am somewhat familiar with the history of Christianity and Judaism. Your tactic seems to be to condescend, not to reply with actual facts. You must learn from the Richard Dawkins school of atheism.
KeytarHero
Posts: 612
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/10/2012 1:11:12 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/9/2012 9:46:07 PM, tkubok wrote:
At 4/9/2012 9:30:15 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
However, it does offer guidelines on how to treat slaves. God allowed certain things to happen (such as divorce) because of the hard-heartedness of the Jews. Additionally, slavery was much different back then. People became "bond servants," which is a willing form of slavery. If you couldn't afford to care for yourself, you could become a slave and be given a place to live and food to eat, and when you decided to leave their service you were given enough to live on for a while after you left.

Read the bible.

It tells you that you can beat your slave if he disobeys you. It tells you that you can beat your slave as much as you want, as long as the slave doesnt die in 1 or 2 days.

It tells you that you can sell your children into slaves. It tells you that you can sell your daughter into slavery. If you cant afford to care for yourself or your children, why not just sell them as slaves!

It tells you that if you conquer cities, the spoils of war are yours, including the women and children. And these slaves didnt sell themselves, nor were they allowed to be free if they were not jewish or adhere to your God.

You dont think the black slaves were given no food? A shelter? Of course they were. But they were still slaves.

Your argument fails.

I do read the Bible. But I also study the Bible. I don't just leave it at face value.

Would you provide quotes, please?
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/10/2012 4:49:47 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/9/2012 9:30:15 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 4/9/2012 9:17:20 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 4/9/2012 9:13:53 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 4/9/2012 8:44:02 PM, tkubok wrote:
At 4/9/2012 8:29:22 PM, GodSands wrote:
God created us, He has the right to set the rules. Otherwise, why not make our own rules?

Sounds good to me. Why not make our own rules, like when we abolished slavery, or gave equal rights to women?

Sorry, that's not man making his own rules, that's man treating fellow man how God intended us to treat each other. Nice try, though.

Oh, that's a relief. What God is that? I can't recall many holy texts that denounce slavery and teach us to treat women equally.

The God of the Bible, of course. But the Bible doesn't always lend itself to an "on the surface" reading, and most atheists refuse to gymnastically change definitions into the Bible to make it say something. They just look at the surface because it's easier to refute the Bible if you don't know what it actually teaches.

For example, the Bible never claims that slavery is moral, but it does condone slavery. However, it does offer guidelines on how to treat slaves. God allowed certain things to happen (such as divorce) because of the hard-heartedness of the Jews, apart from the passages where it says no divorces allowed. Additionally, slavery was much different back then. People became "bond servants," which is a willing form of slavery, or the much more popular Prisoner of War system, where you were less than the other slaves. If you couldn't afford to care for yourself, you could become a slave and be given a place to live and food to eat, and when you decided to leave their service you were given enough to live on for a while after you left. Of course, this depends if you were fed.

Also, there is nothing in the Bible that says women should not be treated equally with men, but there are religious people who take the Bible out of context and use it to try and control women. This doesn't mean the Bible is wrong or God is misogynistic, just that people either misconstrue what the Bible teaches or some do use it to control others.

Strange: Job 14:4 calling all women unpure and men pure, and the common quotes littered in Colossians.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
Composer
Posts: 5,858
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/10/2012 5:04:44 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
To sum up:
In general, higher rates of belief in and worship of a creator correlate with higher rates of homicide, juvenile and early adult mortality, STD infection rates, teen pregnancy, and abortion in the prosperous democracies...
The United States is almost always the most dysfunctional of the developed democracies, sometimes spectacularly so, and almost always scores poorly. The view of the U.S. as a "shining city on the hill" to the rest of the world is falsified when it comes to basic measures of societal health.
[…]
Although they are by no means utopias, the populations of secular democracies are clearly able to govern themselves and maintain societal cohesion. Indeed, the data examined in this study demonstrates that only the more secular, pro-evolution democracies have, for the first time in history, come closest to achieving practical "cultures of life" that feature low rates of lethal crime, juvenile-adult mortality, sex related dysfunction, and even abortion. The least theistic secular developed democracies such as Japan, France, and Scandinavia have been most successful in these regards. Source: http://stupac2.blogspot.com.au...)

Pus_sy cats are more benficial for societies health than jesus -

(Source: http://medheadlines.com...)
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/10/2012 6:28:48 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/9/2012 8:29:22 PM, GodSands wrote:
God created us, He has the right to set the rules. Otherwise, why not make our own rules?

I see no indication that there are any rules in existence which we haven't made ourselves.
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/10/2012 7:36:07 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/9/2012 9:30:15 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 4/9/2012 9:17:20 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 4/9/2012 9:13:53 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 4/9/2012 8:44:02 PM, tkubok wrote:
At 4/9/2012 8:29:22 PM, GodSands wrote:
God created us, He has the right to set the rules. Otherwise, why not make our own rules?

Sounds good to me. Why not make our own rules, like when we abolished slavery, or gave equal rights to women?

Sorry, that's not man making his own rules, that's man treating fellow man how God intended us to treat each other. Nice try, though.

Oh, that's a relief. What God is that? I can't recall many holy texts that denounce slavery and teach us to treat women equally.

The God of the Bible, of course. But the Bible doesn't always lend itself to an "on the surface" reading, and most atheists refuse to dig deeper into the Bible to see why it says something. They just look at the surface because it's easier to refute the Bible if you don't know what it actually teaches.

Why not? Why isn't the Bible written in such a way that lends itself to an "on the surface" reading? Also, your point about atheists is false. Atheists test higher on Biblical knowledge than any other group.
http://www.nytimes.com...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com...


For example, the Bible never claims that slavery is moral. However, it does offer guidelines on how to treat slaves.

Which is fvcking psychotic, when you think about it. If you're going to bother including rules about how to treat slaves, why not have a rule that DENOUNCES SLAVERY instead?

God allowed certain things to happen (such as divorce) because of the hard-heartedness of the Jews. Additionally, slavery was much different back then. People became "bond servants," which is a willing form of slavery. If you couldn't afford to care for yourself, you could become a slave and be given a place to live and food to eat, and when you decided to leave their service you were given enough to live on for a while after you left.

Also, there is nothing in the Bible that says women should not be treated equally with men, but there are religious people who take the Bible out of context and use it to try and control women.

Why is there interpretation wrong but yours right? How do you decide that they have used the Bible "out of context"?

This doesn't mean the Bible is wrong or God is misogynistic, just that people either misconstrue what the Bible teaches or some do use it to control others.

Seems to me that the Bible should have been written more clearly so it didn't take 2,000 years to figure this sh1t out.
Meatros
Posts: 1,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/10/2012 7:54:07 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/9/2012 8:29:22 PM, GodSands wrote:
God created us, He has the right to set the rules. Otherwise, why not make our own rules?

I created my children, so I have the right to set the rules for them.

Right?
KeytarHero
Posts: 612
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/10/2012 8:19:37 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/10/2012 7:36:07 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 4/9/2012 9:30:15 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 4/9/2012 9:17:20 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 4/9/2012 9:13:53 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 4/9/2012 8:44:02 PM, tkubok wrote:
At 4/9/2012 8:29:22 PM, GodSands wrote:
God created us, He has the right to set the rules. Otherwise, why not make our own rules?

Sounds good to me. Why not make our own rules, like when we abolished slavery, or gave equal rights to women?

Sorry, that's not man making his own rules, that's man treating fellow man how God intended us to treat each other. Nice try, though.

Oh, that's a relief. What God is that? I can't recall many holy texts that denounce slavery and teach us to treat women equally.

The God of the Bible, of course. But the Bible doesn't always lend itself to an "on the surface" reading, and most atheists refuse to dig deeper into the Bible to see why it says something. They just look at the surface because it's easier to refute the Bible if you don't know what it actually teaches.

Why not? Why isn't the Bible written in such a way that lends itself to an "on the surface" reading? Also, your point about atheists is false. Atheists test higher on Biblical knowledge than any other group.
http://www.nytimes.com...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com...


For example, the Bible never claims that slavery is moral. However, it does offer guidelines on how to treat slaves.

Which is fvcking psychotic, when you think about it. If you're going to bother including rules about how to treat slaves, why not have a rule that DENOUNCES SLAVERY instead?

God allowed certain things to happen (such as divorce) because of the hard-heartedness of the Jews. Additionally, slavery was much different back then. People became "bond servants," which is a willing form of slavery. If you couldn't afford to care for yourself, you could become a slave and be given a place to live and food to eat, and when you decided to leave their service you were given enough to live on for a while after you left.

Also, there is nothing in the Bible that says women should not be treated equally with men, but there are religious people who take the Bible out of context and use it to try and control women.

Why is there interpretation wrong but yours right? How do you decide that they have used the Bible "out of context"?

This doesn't mean the Bible is wrong or God is misogynistic, just that people either misconstrue what the Bible teaches or some do use it to control others.

Seems to me that the Bible should have been written more clearly so it didn't take 2,000 years to figure this sh1t out.

Okay. First of all, just because some atheists may have scored higher on a religion test than some Christians doesn't actually prove anything. First, just because there are other Christians who don't know the Bible doesn't mean that I don't know the Bible. So that's not proof that my claims are incorrect. Secondly, just because someone consideres themselves religious doesn't mean they know anything about their religion. They may just believe it because their parents believe it. Also, some people call themselves Christian but don't even take their faith very seriously. So atheists scoring higher on a religion test doesn't actually prove anything, just that Christians need to do a better job of educating their children and new converts about the ins and outs of the Christian faith.

Again, you have no idea what the Bible teaches. It's not psychotic to say that "we're all created in God's image so you should treat each other fairly. However, if you're going to insist on keeping slaves, here's how to keep them." Simply saying "you shall not own slaves" wouldn't necessarily keep them from owning slaves. We see all over the Old Testament that the Jews were constantly falling into sin and earning the wrath of God. And again, slavery back then was much different than it is now.

I know they use the Bible out of context because they use the Bible out of context. It's easy to prove that. For example, you can make the Bible say "there is no God." But if you go back and read the Bible in context, you'll see it actually says "the fool has said in his heart 'there is no God.'" It's actually not that difficult to prove.

It hasn't taken 2,000 years to figure this all out. As long as there is religion, there will be people around to exploit it. It's just a fact of life.
KeytarHero
Posts: 612
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/10/2012 8:24:22 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/10/2012 4:49:47 AM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 4/9/2012 9:30:15 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 4/9/2012 9:17:20 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 4/9/2012 9:13:53 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 4/9/2012 8:44:02 PM, tkubok wrote:
At 4/9/2012 8:29:22 PM, GodSands wrote:
God created us, He has the right to set the rules. Otherwise, why not make our own rules?

Sounds good to me. Why not make our own rules, like when we abolished slavery, or gave equal rights to women?

Sorry, that's not man making his own rules, that's man treating fellow man how God intended us to treat each other. Nice try, though.

Oh, that's a relief. What God is that? I can't recall many holy texts that denounce slavery and teach us to treat women equally.

The God of the Bible, of course. But the Bible doesn't always lend itself to an "on the surface" reading, and most atheists refuse to gymnastically change definitions into the Bible to make it say something. They just look at the surface because it's easier to refute the Bible if you don't know what it actually teaches.

For example, the Bible never claims that slavery is moral, but it does condone slavery. However, it does offer guidelines on how to treat slaves. God allowed certain things to happen (such as divorce) because of the hard-heartedness of the Jews, apart from the passages where it says no divorces allowed. Additionally, slavery was much different back then. People became "bond servants," which is a willing form of slavery, or the much more popular Prisoner of War system, where you were less than the other slaves. If you couldn't afford to care for yourself, you could become a slave and be given a place to live and food to eat, and when you decided to leave their service you were given enough to live on for a while after you left. Of course, this depends if you were fed.

Also, there is nothing in the Bible that says women should not be treated equally with men, but there are religious people who take the Bible out of context and use it to try and control women. This doesn't mean the Bible is wrong or God is misogynistic, just that people either misconstrue what the Bible teaches or some do use it to control others.

Strange: Job 14:4 calling all women unpure and men pure, and the common quotes littered in Colossians.

This is exactly what I'm talking about, when I say people pull passages out of context. Job 14:4 is not calling all women unpure and men pure. Read the entire passage in context. Job 14:1 says that man, who is born of trouble, lasts only a few days (figuratively) and is full of trouble. Verse four is calling men clean, just the opposite. It poses a question: "Who can bring a clean thing from an unclean thing? No one!" If your interpretation was correct, no men would be born from women because clean things cannot come from unclean things. Men and women are both sinners. Man, who comes from (i.e. are born of) women, are sinners.
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/10/2012 8:34:40 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/10/2012 8:19:37 AM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 4/10/2012 7:36:07 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 4/9/2012 9:30:15 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 4/9/2012 9:17:20 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 4/9/2012 9:13:53 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 4/9/2012 8:44:02 PM, tkubok wrote:
At 4/9/2012 8:29:22 PM, GodSands wrote:
God created us, He has the right to set the rules. Otherwise, why not make our own rules?

Sounds good to me. Why not make our own rules, like when we abolished slavery, or gave equal rights to women?

Sorry, that's not man making his own rules, that's man treating fellow man how God intended us to treat each other. Nice try, though.

Oh, that's a relief. What God is that? I can't recall many holy texts that denounce slavery and teach us to treat women equally.

The God of the Bible, of course. But the Bible doesn't always lend itself to an "on the surface" reading, and most atheists refuse to dig deeper into the Bible to see why it says something. They just look at the surface because it's easier to refute the Bible if you don't know what it actually teaches.

Why not? Why isn't the Bible written in such a way that lends itself to an "on the surface" reading? Also, your point about atheists is false. Atheists test higher on Biblical knowledge than any other group.
http://www.nytimes.com...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com...


For example, the Bible never claims that slavery is moral. However, it does offer guidelines on how to treat slaves.

Which is fvcking psychotic, when you think about it. If you're going to bother including rules about how to treat slaves, why not have a rule that DENOUNCES SLAVERY instead?

God allowed certain things to happen (such as divorce) because of the hard-heartedness of the Jews. Additionally, slavery was much different back then. People became "bond servants," which is a willing form of slavery. If you couldn't afford to care for yourself, you could become a slave and be given a place to live and food to eat, and when you decided to leave their service you were given enough to live on for a while after you left.

Also, there is nothing in the Bible that says women should not be treated equally with men, but there are religious people who take the Bible out of context and use it to try and control women.

Why is there interpretation wrong but yours right? How do you decide that they have used the Bible "out of context"?

This doesn't mean the Bible is wrong or God is misogynistic, just that people either misconstrue what the Bible teaches or some do use it to control others.

Seems to me that the Bible should have been written more clearly so it didn't take 2,000 years to figure this sh1t out.

Okay. First of all, just because some atheists may have scored higher on a religion test than some Christians doesn't actually prove anything.

It proves that atheists were able to answer knowledge questions about the Bible more than theists were.

First,

I thought the above comment was "first"...

just because there are other Christians who don't know the Bible doesn't mean that I don't know the Bible.

I didn't say it did. I was directly refuting your comment about atheists and their understanding of the Bible.

So that's not proof that my claims are incorrect.

You made a claim about atheists and their understanding of the Bible. I provided evidence that contradicts that claim.

Secondly, just because someone consideres themselves religious doesn't mean they know anything about their religion. They may just believe it because their parents believe it. Also, some people call themselves Christian but don't even take their faith very seriously. So atheists scoring higher on a religion test doesn't actually prove anything, just that Christians need to do a better job of educating their children and new converts about the ins and outs of the Christian faith.

Wait, you just said it doesn't prove anything, then you provided an example of something it proves. Which is it?


Again, you have no idea what the Bible teaches.

You are not in a position to draw such conclusions about what I know.

It's not psychotic to say that "we're all created in God's image so you should treat each other fairly. However, if you're going to insist on keeping slaves, here's how to keep them." Simply saying "you shall not own slaves" wouldn't necessarily keep them from owning slaves. We see all over the Old Testament that the Jews were constantly falling into sin and earning the wrath of God. And again, slavery back then was much different than it is now.

Yes, it is psychotic. The idea that there wasn't a rule (or - say - commandement) against slavery is just fvcking stupid. The whole point of entire sections of the Bible was to provide rules. You might as well say "Simply saying' you shall not kill' wouldn't necessarily keep them from killing, ergo that rule shouldn't be in the Bible."

You are missing the point by so much you might as well be posting in another thread, in another forum, on another website altogether. The point is: There are rules against a great number of things, regardless of the fact that people wouldn't obey, yet no rule against slavery. And, in lieu of a rule against slavery, you have rules about how to correctly keep slaves. If the intention is to have people keep slaves, then fine, that's what it is, but don't deny it. If the intention is not to have people keep slaves, then it's psychotic.


I know they use the Bible out of context because they use the Bible out of context.

Profound. Utterly profound. "I know they're wrong because they're wrong." Is that from the "Nananana booboo" or the "I'm rubber and you're glue" fields of retorts?

It's easy to prove that. For example, you can make the Bible say "there is no God."

Show me.

But if you go back and read the Bible in context, you'll see it actually says "the fool has said in his heart 'there is no God.'" It's actually not that difficult to prove.

Ok. Show me how treating women unequally is taking the Bible out of context.


It hasn't taken 2,000 years to figure this all out. As long as there is religion, there will be people around to exploit it. It's just a fact of life.

Yes, it has taken 2,000 years to figure out that slavery is wrong and women should be treated equally. Are you fvcking daft or just completely ignorant of history? I wasn't saying it has taken 2,000 years to figure out that people will exploit religion. Maybe if you read my responses IN LINE WITH WHERE I PLACED THEM, you would understand what points I'm referring to. Talk about taking things out of context...
KeytarHero
Posts: 612
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/10/2012 8:36:42 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/10/2012 8:24:22 AM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 4/10/2012 4:49:47 AM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 4/9/2012 9:30:15 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 4/9/2012 9:17:20 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 4/9/2012 9:13:53 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 4/9/2012 8:44:02 PM, tkubok wrote:
At 4/9/2012 8:29:22 PM, GodSands wrote:
God created us, He has the right to set the rules. Otherwise, why not make our own rules?

Sounds good to me. Why not make our own rules, like when we abolished slavery, or gave equal rights to women?

Sorry, that's not man making his own rules, that's man treating fellow man how God intended us to treat each other. Nice try, though.

Oh, that's a relief. What God is that? I can't recall many holy texts that denounce slavery and teach us to treat women equally.

The God of the Bible, of course. But the Bible doesn't always lend itself to an "on the surface" reading, and most atheists refuse to gymnastically change definitions into the Bible to make it say something. They just look at the surface because it's easier to refute the Bible if you don't know what it actually teaches.

For example, the Bible never claims that slavery is moral, but it does condone slavery. However, it does offer guidelines on how to treat slaves. God allowed certain things to happen (such as divorce) because of the hard-heartedness of the Jews, apart from the passages where it says no divorces allowed. Additionally, slavery was much different back then. People became "bond servants," which is a willing form of slavery, or the much more popular Prisoner of War system, where you were less than the other slaves. If you couldn't afford to care for yourself, you could become a slave and be given a place to live and food to eat, and when you decided to leave their service you were given enough to live on for a while after you left. Of course, this depends if you were fed.

Also, there is nothing in the Bible that says women should not be treated equally with men, but there are religious people who take the Bible out of context and use it to try and control women. This doesn't mean the Bible is wrong or God is misogynistic, just that people either misconstrue what the Bible teaches or some do use it to control others.

Strange: Job 14:4 calling all women unpure and men pure, and the common quotes littered in Colossians.

This is exactly what I'm talking about, when I say people pull passages out of context. Job 14:4 is not calling all women unpure and men pure. Read the entire passage in context. Job 14:1 says that man, who is born of trouble, lasts only a few days (figuratively) and is full of trouble. Verse four is calling men clean, just the opposite. It poses a question: "Who can bring a clean thing from an unclean thing? No one!" If your interpretation was correct, no men would be born from women because clean things cannot come from unclean things. Men and women are both sinners. Man, who comes from (i.e. are born of) women, are sinners.

Noticed a couple of typos. "Job 14:1 says that man, who is born of *women*, lasts only a few days..." Also, "Verse four is *not* calling men clean, just the opposite."
KeytarHero
Posts: 612
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/10/2012 8:50:48 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/10/2012 8:34:40 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 4/10/2012 8:19:37 AM, KeytarHero wrote:

Okay. First of all, just because some atheists may have scored higher on a religion test than some Christians doesn't actually prove anything.

It proves that atheists were able to answer knowledge questions about the Bible more than theists were.

First,

I thought the above comment was "first"...

just because there are other Christians who don't know the Bible doesn't mean that I don't know the Bible.

I didn't say it did. I was directly refuting your comment about atheists and their understanding of the Bible.

So that's not proof that my claims are incorrect.

You made a claim about atheists and their understanding of the Bible. I provided evidence that contradicts that claim.

Secondly, just because someone consideres themselves religious doesn't mean they know anything about their religion. They may just believe it because their parents believe it. Also, some people call themselves Christian but don't even take their faith very seriously. So atheists scoring higher on a religion test doesn't actually prove anything, just that Christians need to do a better job of educating their children and new converts about the ins and outs of the Christian faith.

Wait, you just said it doesn't prove anything, then you provided an example of something it proves. Which is it?


Again, you have no idea what the Bible teaches.

You are not in a position to draw such conclusions about what I know.

It's not psychotic to say that "we're all created in God's image so you should treat each other fairly. However, if you're going to insist on keeping slaves, here's how to keep them." Simply saying "you shall not own slaves" wouldn't necessarily keep them from owning slaves. We see all over the Old Testament that the Jews were constantly falling into sin and earning the wrath of God. And again, slavery back then was much different than it is now.

Yes, it is psychotic. The idea that there wasn't a rule (or - say - commandement) against slavery is just fvcking stupid. The whole point of entire sections of the Bible was to provide rules. You might as well say "Simply saying' you shall not kill' wouldn't necessarily keep them from killing, ergo that rule shouldn't be in the Bible."

You are missing the point by so much you might as well be posting in another thread, in another forum, on another website altogether. The point is: There are rules against a great number of things, regardless of the fact that people wouldn't obey, yet no rule against slavery. And, in lieu of a rule against slavery, you have rules about how to correctly keep slaves. If the intention is to have people keep slaves, then fine, that's what it is, but don't deny it. If the intention is not to have people keep slaves, then it's psychotic.


I know they use the Bible out of context because they use the Bible out of context.

Profound. Utterly profound. "I know they're wrong because they're wrong." Is that from the "Nananana booboo" or the "I'm rubber and you're glue" fields of retorts?

It's easy to prove that. For example, you can make the Bible say "there is no God."

Show me.

But if you go back and read the Bible in context, you'll see it actually says "the fool has said in his heart 'there is no God.'" It's actually not that difficult to prove.

Ok. Show me how treating women unequally is taking the Bible out of context.


It hasn't taken 2,000 years to figure this all out. As long as there is religion, there will be people around to exploit it. It's just a fact of life.

Yes, it has taken 2,000 years to figure out that slavery is wrong and women should be treated equally. Are you fvcking daft or just completely ignorant of history? I wasn't saying it has taken 2,000 years to figure out that people will exploit religion. Maybe if you read my responses IN LINE WITH WHERE I PLACED THEM, you would understand what points I'm referring to. Talk about taking things out of context...

"I thought the above comment was 'first.'"

If you're going to go grammar Nazi on me, I'm going to stop taking you seriously. Congratulations! You exploited my ADD.

This doesn't prove that all atheists are able to answer knowledgeable questions about the Bible better than all theists.

I do know there are atheists that are knowledgeable about the Bible. Some are merely dishonest when they try to discredit the Bible. But I've found that oftentimes when I ask atheists to back up their claims about the Bible, they are unable to do so. If they are, then we can talk about it. But I've found that many atheists just regurgitate what they hear other atheists say.

Again, taking my words out of context. Obviously I didn't mean the test results prove absolutely nothing, just that it doesn't prove what you are claiming it does. My words should be read as: So this test doesn't prove anything, although what it does prove (if anything) is that Christians need to do a better job of educating other Christians. Again, you're going grammar Nazi on me, which is a last-ditch effort used by someone who has no grounds to stand on with their own argument.

Perhaps I'm not in a position to actually say what you know, but you haven't yet offered one shred of evidence that the claims in the OP are correct.

Again, it is not psychotic. The Bible is not an exhaustive list of rights and wrongs. Some things we are able to infer from the Bible because we are all created in God's image. The Bible never says that I shouldn't push anyone into a shark tank or cut the brakes on their car, but it can be logically inferred that I shouldn't because other people are created in God's image and harming them is wrong.

"Profound. Utterly profound. 'I know they're wrong because they're wrong.' Is that from the 'Nananana booboo' or the 'I'm rubber and you're glue' fields of retorts?"

What are you, five? I offered an example of what I'm talking about.

Show me some verses in the Bible that say women should be treated unequally and I'll show how they're taken out of context. If you're looking for a specific examples, I already gave one with Stephen_Hawking.

I'm not ignorant of history, but it seems you are. Just because some people do wrong doesn't mean everyone does wrong. Just because some Jews owned slaves in the Old Testament era doesn't mean everyone did. Yes, some Christians have owned slaves relatively recently, but Christians have been instrumental in abolishing it (e.g. William Wilberforce was instrumental in abolishing the British slave trade). Christianity usually leads people to do good, not evil, although it can be used to control people in the wrong hands.
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/10/2012 9:03:19 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/10/2012 8:50:48 AM, KeytarHero wrote:

[snip]


"I thought the above comment was 'first.'"

If you're going to go grammar Nazi on me, I'm going to stop taking you seriously. Congratulations! You exploited my ADD.

This doesn't prove that all atheists are able to answer knowledgeable questions about the Bible better than all theists.

I didn't say it did.


I do know there are atheists that are knowledgeable about the Bible. Some are merely dishonest when they try to discredit the Bible. But I've found that oftentimes when I ask atheists to back up their claims about the Bible, they are unable to do so. If they are, then we can talk about it. But I've found that many atheists just regurgitate what they hear other atheists say.

None of this accurately reflects the initial point to which I was responding.


Again, taking my words out of context. Obviously I didn't mean the test results prove absolutely nothing, just that it doesn't prove what you are claiming it does.

Liar. You said, quite clearly and without qualification that it "doesn't prove anything." At no point did you say "It doesn't prove what [I am] claiming it does."

My words should be read as: So this test doesn't prove anything, although what it does prove (if anything) is that Christians need to do a better job of educating other Christians. Again, you're going grammar Nazi on me, which is a last-ditch effort used by someone who has no grounds to stand on with their own argument.

This has nothing to do with grammar. You said it doesn't prove anything. It does.


Perhaps I'm not in a position to actually say what you know, but you haven't yet offered one shred of evidence that the claims in the OP are correct.

Again, it is not psychotic. The Bible is not an exhaustive list of rights and wrongs. Some things we are able to infer from the Bible because we are all created in God's image. The Bible never says that I shouldn't push anyone into a shark tank or cut the brakes on their car, but it can be logically inferred that I shouldn't because other people are created in God's image and harming them is wrong.

Again, it is psychotic. Being against slavery without explicitly being against slavery while, at the same providing rules on how to keep slaves would be like the government passing a bill that describes how bank robberies should safely and efficiently rob banks.

You keep saying that, with regards to slavery, the sentimet is "Don't keep slaves, but if you are going to, here's how" yet the "Don't keep slaves" part isn't anywhere to be seen. All we have is "Here's how." With ONLY "Here's how" it's less a mitigation against slavery and more a "How-to" guide.

Answer this simple question: Why not simply say "DON'T ENSLAVE PEOPLE" rather than "HERE'S HOW TO CORRECTLY ENSLAVE PEOPLE." Remember, "Because people wouldn't follow it" is a bullsh1t answer, I don't want to hear it.


"Profound. Utterly profound. 'I know they're wrong because they're wrong.' Is that from the 'Nananana booboo' or the 'I'm rubber and you're glue' fields of retorts?"

What are you, five? I offered an example of what I'm talking about.

Show me some verses in the Bible that say women should be treated unequally and I'll show how they're taken out of context. If you're looking for a specific examples, I already gave one with Stephen_Hawking.

Genesis 3:16 - God says that husbands will rule over their wives.


I'm not ignorant of history, but it seems you are.

Uhm... no. You don't realize it has taken almost 2,000 for humanity to, on a large scale, get rid of slavery and begin to treat women equally. You figure if the Bible was, in any way, clear on the issue, it would have happened a lot sooner.

Just because some people do wrong doesn't mean everyone does wrong.

I didn't say it did.

Just because some Jews owned slaves in the Old Testament era doesn't mean everyone did.

I didn't say it did.

Yes, some Christians have owned slaves relatively recently, but Christians have been instrumental in abolishing it (e.g. William Wilberforce was instrumental in abolishing the British slave trade). Christianity usually leads people to do good, not evil, although it can be used to control people in the wrong hands.

Sorry, but you are talking about things I haven't said. Please provide one thing that I have said that is historically inaccurate. Otherwise, retract the accusation.
wiploc
Posts: 1,485
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/10/2012 10:19:11 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/9/2012 8:29:22 PM, GodSands wrote:
God created us, He has the right to set the rules.

Who made that rule?

Otherwise, why not make our own rules?

Why not anyway?
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/10/2012 12:17:39 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/10/2012 10:19:11 AM, wiploc wrote:
At 4/9/2012 8:29:22 PM, GodSands wrote:
God created us, He has the right to set the rules.

Who made that rule?

Otherwise, why not make our own rules?

Why not anyway?

<(8D) exactly what I was thinking. oh oh.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/10/2012 12:19:07 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/10/2012 8:50:48 AM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 4/10/2012 8:34:40 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 4/10/2012 8:19:37 AM, KeytarHero wrote:

Okay. First of all, just because some atheists may have scored higher on a religion test than some Christians doesn't actually prove anything.

It proves that atheists were able to answer knowledge questions about the Bible more than theists were.

First,

I thought the above comment was "first"...

just because there are other Christians who don't know the Bible doesn't mean that I don't know the Bible.

I didn't say it did. I was directly refuting your comment about atheists and their understanding of the Bible.

So that's not proof that my claims are incorrect.

You made a claim about atheists and their understanding of the Bible. I provided evidence that contradicts that claim.

Secondly, just because someone consideres themselves religious doesn't mean they know anything about their religion. They may just believe it because their parents believe it. Also, some people call themselves Christian but don't even take their faith very seriously. So atheists scoring higher on a religion test doesn't actually prove anything, just that Christians need to do a better job of educating their children and new converts about the ins and outs of the Christian faith.

Wait, you just said it doesn't prove anything, then you provided an example of something it proves. Which is it?


Again, you have no idea what the Bible teaches.

You are not in a position to draw such conclusions about what I know.

It's not psychotic to say that "we're all created in God's image so you should treat each other fairly. However, if you're going to insist on keeping slaves, here's how to keep them." Simply saying "you shall not own slaves" wouldn't necessarily keep them from owning slaves. We see all over the Old Testament that the Jews were constantly falling into sin and earning the wrath of God. And again, slavery back then was much different than it is now.

Yes, it is psychotic. The idea that there wasn't a rule (or - say - commandement) against slavery is just fvcking stupid. The whole point of entire sections of the Bible was to provide rules. You might as well say "Simply saying' you shall not kill' wouldn't necessarily keep them from killing, ergo that rule shouldn't be in the Bible."

You are missing the point by so much you might as well be posting in another thread, in another forum, on another website altogether. The point is: There are rules against a great number of things, regardless of the fact that people wouldn't obey, yet no rule against slavery. And, in lieu of a rule against slavery, you have rules about how to correctly keep slaves. If the intention is to have people keep slaves, then fine, that's what it is, but don't deny it. If the intention is not to have people keep slaves, then it's psychotic.


I know they use the Bible out of context because they use the Bible out of context.

Profound. Utterly profound. "I know they're wrong because they're wrong." Is that from the "Nananana booboo" or the "I'm rubber and you're glue" fields of retorts?

It's easy to prove that. For example, you can make the Bible say "there is no God."

Show me.

But if you go back and read the Bible in context, you'll see it actually says "the fool has said in his heart 'there is no God.'" It's actually not that difficult to prove.

Ok. Show me how treating women unequally is taking the Bible out of context.

The Fool: You mean you will re-interpret the lines. <(XD)

It hasn't taken 2,000 years to figure this all out. As long as there is religion, there will be people around to exploit it. It's just a fact of life.

Yes, it has taken 2,000 years to figure out that slavery is wrong and women should be treated equally. Are you fvcking daft or just completely ignorant of history? I wasn't saying it has taken 2,000 years to figure out that people will exploit religion. Maybe if you read my responses IN LINE WITH WHERE I PLACED THEM, you would understand what points I'm referring to. Talk about taking things out of context...

"I thought the above comment was 'first.'"

If you're going to go grammar Nazi on me, I'm going to stop taking you seriously. Congratulations! You exploited my ADD.

This doesn't prove that all atheists are able to answer knowledgeable questions about the Bible better than all theists.

I do know there are atheists that are knowledgeable about the Bible. Some are merely dishonest when they try to discredit the Bible. But I've found that oftentimes when I ask atheists to back up their claims about the Bible, they are unable to do so. If they are, then we can talk about it. But I've found that many atheists just regurgitate what they hear other atheists say.

Again, taking my words out of context. Obviously I didn't mean the test results prove absolutely nothing, just that it doesn't prove what you are claiming it does. My words should be read as: So this test doesn't prove anything, although what it does prove (if anything) is that Christians need to do a better job of educating other Christians. Again, you're going grammar Nazi on me, which is a last-ditch effort used by someone who has no grounds to stand on with their own argument.

Perhaps I'm not in a position to actually say what you know, but you haven't yet offered one shred of evidence that the claims in the OP are correct.

Again, it is not psychotic. The Bible is not an exhaustive list of rights and wrongs. Some things we are able to infer from the Bible because we are all created in God's image. The Bible never says that I shouldn't push anyone into a shark tank or cut the brakes on their car, but it can be logically inferred that I shouldn't because other people are created in God's image and harming them is wrong.

"Profound. Utterly profound. 'I know they're wrong because they're wrong.' Is that from the 'Nananana booboo' or the 'I'm rubber and you're glue' fields of retorts?"

What are you, five? I offered an example of what I'm talking about.

Show me some verses in the Bible that say women should be treated unequally and I'll show how they're taken out of context. If you're looking for a specific examples, I already gave one with Stephen_Hawking.

I'm not ignorant of history, but it seems you are. Just because some people do wrong doesn't mean everyone does wrong. Just because some Jews owned slaves in the Old Testament era doesn't mean everyone did. Yes, some Christians have owned slaves relatively recently, but Christians have been instrumental in abolishing it (e.g. William Wilberforce was instrumental in abolishing the British slave trade). Christianity usually leads people to do good, not evil, although it can be used to control people in the wrong hands.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/10/2012 12:22:14 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/9/2012 9:13:53 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 4/9/2012 8:44:02 PM, tkubok wrote:
At 4/9/2012 8:29:22 PM, GodSands wrote:
God created us, He has the right to set the rules. Otherwise, why not make our own rules?

Sounds good to me. Why not make our own rules, like when we abolished slavery, or gave equal rights to women?

Sorry, that's not man making his own rules, that's man treating fellow man how God intended us to treat each other. Nice try, though.

LOL, what a dishonest statement. God sanctions sexual slavery, slavery of foreigners, and murder, and rape in the Bible.
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/10/2012 12:26:01 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/9/2012 9:30:15 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 4/9/2012 9:17:20 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 4/9/2012 9:13:53 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 4/9/2012 8:44:02 PM, tkubok wrote:
At 4/9/2012 8:29:22 PM, GodSands wrote:
God created us, He has the right to set the rules. Otherwise, why not make our own rules?

Sounds good to me. Why not make our own rules, like when we abolished slavery, or gave equal rights to women?

Sorry, that's not man making his own rules, that's man treating fellow man how God intended us to treat each other. Nice try, though.

Oh, that's a relief. What God is that? I can't recall many holy texts that denounce slavery and teach us to treat women equally.

The Fool: If read .. in a particular way.

The God of the Bible, of course. But the Bible doesn't always lend itself to an "on the surface" reading, and most atheists refuse to dig deeper into the Bible to see why it says something.

The Fool: You mean reinterpret God word.

They just look at the surface because it's easier to refute the Bible if you don't know what it actually teaches.

The Fool: You mean reinterpret what it says.

For example, the Bible never claims that slavery is moral. However, it does offer guidelines on how to treat slaves. God allowed certain things to happen (such as divorce) because of the hard-heartedness of the Jews.

The Fool: You mean if we reinteprete it the right way. We can make it appear as such.

Additionally, slavery was much different back then. People became "bond servants," which is a willing form of slavery

The Fool: you mean if interpreted in the right way.

. If you couldn't afford to care for yourself, you could become a slave and be given a place to live and food to eat, and when you decided to leave their service you were given enough to live on for a while after you left.

The Fool: Yeah Okay .....whos fooling who now? Those are what we call employees..

Also, there is nothing in the Bible that says women should not be treated equally with men, but there are religious people who take the Bible out of context and use it to try and control women.

The Fool: If we manipulate the meaning in the right way.

This doesn't mean the Bible is wrong or God is misogynistic, just that people either misconstrue what the Bible teaches or some do use it to control others.

The Fool: If we manipulate the meaning in the right way.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/10/2012 12:33:56 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/9/2012 9:13:53 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 4/9/2012 8:44:02 PM, tkubok wrote:
At 4/9/2012 8:29:22 PM, GodSands wrote:
God created us, He has the right to set the rules. Otherwise, why not make our own rules?

Sounds good to me. Why not make our own rules, like when we abolished slavery, or gave equal rights to women?

Sorry, that's not man making his own rules, that's man treating fellow man how God intended us to treat each other. Nice try, though.:

Why don't you try cracking open a bible sometime. It very clearly states that women are not to preach and very clearly condones slavery and even gives tips on how slaves should live.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/10/2012 12:40:28 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
For example, the Bible never claims that slavery is moral.:

You know, 1/3 of the bible is condemning behavior. Not once does it disavow slavery. Not once. Yet, there's thousands of other prohibitions. Seems evident in that sea of prohibitions that if slavery was considered immoral, it would be in there. As it stands, it tells slaves how to live righteously and basically to accept their fate.

However, it does offer guidelines on how to treat slaves. God allowed certain things to happen (such as divorce) because of the hard-heartedness of the Jews. Additionally, slavery was much different back then. People became "bond servants," which is a willing form of slavery. If you couldn't afford to care for yourself, you could become a slave and be given a place to live and food to eat, and when you decided to leave their service you were given enough to live on for a while after you left.:

You can't in one sense defend slavery and then in the next disavow it. Nice shifting the goalposts though.

Also, there is nothing in the Bible that says women should not be treated equally with men, but there are religious people who take the Bible out of context and use it to try and control women. This doesn't mean the Bible is wrong or God is misogynistic, just that people either misconstrue what the Bible teaches or some do use it to control others.:

How can they be equal if even the bible doesn't treat them as equals? Does it or does it not state that men will be head of the household? Does it or does it not state that women are not to preach? I'm not saying that the bible doesn't have very affectionate verses concerning women, because it does. But it does not treat them as equals, that's extremely apparent.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/10/2012 12:48:24 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
KeytarHero: Okay. First of all, just because some atheists may have scored higher on a religion test than some Christians doesn't actually prove anything.

The Fool: yes it does, it means that atheist tend to know more about what they are talking about on average.

KeytarHero: First, just because there are other Christians who don't know the Bible doesn't mean that I don't know the Bible.

The Fool: Saying that is not too you the advantage of your claims.

KeytarHero: So that's not proof that my claims are incorrect. Secondly, just because someone consideres themselves religious doesn't mean they know anything about their religion.

The Fool: Firstly, all there is to know is what is said in the book, any other meaning is a manipulation of the original interpretation. It mean that the Religion itself breeds problems none the less.

KeytarHero: They may just believe it because their parents believe it. Also, some people call themselves Christian but don't even take their faith very seriously.

The Fool: thank God for that. <(8D)

KeytarHero: So atheists scoring higher on a religion test doesn't actually prove anything, just that Christians need to do a better job of educating their children and new converts about the ins and outs of the Christian faith.

The Fool: the bible is not education. It particular is the breeder of ignorance. Academics scores fall in relation to increase religious belief. Faith is ignorance. Or else we would just call it knowledge.
KeytarHero: Again, you have no idea what the Bible teaches. It's not psychotic to say that "we're all created in God's image so you should treat each other fairly.

The Fool: Or perhaps it much more likely that we created God in our image. Just a little more likely no? lol

KeytarHero: I know they use the Bible out of context because they use the Bible out of context.
The Fool: The bible is in the context of the 1st century. Lol

KeytarHero: It's easy to prove that. For example, you can make the Bible say "there is no God."

The Fool: right and it shouldn't be..

KeytarHero: But if you go back and read the Bible in context, you'll see it actually says "the fool has said in his heart 'there is no God.'" It's actually not that difficult to prove.

The Fool: Ahhh!!!! How did he know!? It must be true now!! <(;D)
Or maybe its because the Mind was thought to be in the Heart in the First century. A appose to the brain. You might want to pick a less problematic line or infact a whole new interpretation. Althoug

KeytarHero: It hasn't taken 2,000 years to figure this all out.

The Fool: I am sure an all mighty being wasn't expecting us to take 2000 years figure it out. Isn't that just a little suspicious.

KeytarHero: As long as there is religion, there will be people around to exploit it. It's just a fact of life.

The Fool: or as long as there is religion there will be exploitation of people. One is just a little more likely no??
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL