1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.

God orders murder: Insanity in the USA, Barbarianism in the middle east?

Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by phil, Apr 4, 2004.

  1. MÆST

    MÆST Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2001
    Messages:
    2,886
    Likes Received:
    10
    there's nothing wrong with science. if there was, I wouldn't be majoring in physics right now. science and religion are perfect compliments of each other.
     
  2. tool

    tool BuFs #1 mom

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2001
    Messages:
    13,365
    Likes Received:
    0
    Of course, not saying science is worthless, many scientific theorys can even prove the existance of God, but I haven't seen anything that disproves the existence of God.
     
  3. OICW

    OICW Reason & Logic > Religion

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2000
    Messages:
    2,374
    Likes Received:
    0
    The Bible is not clear. Why else is there such a range of debates over issues in the Bible over various issues from treatment pagans to homosexuality to working on the Sabbath amongst Christians?

    Even if it was 100% clear, the small fact that we are imperfect and can interpret matters in any number of different ways would negate that.

    Here lies my major fault with religion: I can use it to justify anything, and the text and some other religious leaders will back me up with it. I can be a loving person and use Bible quotes to say that Jesus wanted this, or I can be a fascist and use oher Bible quotes to support and justify my views. Don't give me the "well they aren't real Christians" argument either: they have just as much support from the Bible, if not more, to "prove" that they are true Christians and you aren't.
     
  4. tool

    tool BuFs #1 mom

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2001
    Messages:
    13,365
    Likes Received:
    0
    Wow, you are more ignorant then I thought. Show me a christian church that thinks the Bible supports the view of using violence against people? From your title I can tell you have some major issues with religion that has clouded your mind. For whatever reason you've decided to come up with your own reasons for what you think is true about the Bible, that is nice and all, but why don't you stick to the facts if you are going to discuss it here?

    You cannot use it to justify anything, and no religious leader who has any clue on what the Bible even is will say you can justify anything with it.
     
  5. OICW

    OICW Reason & Logic > Religion

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2000
    Messages:
    2,374
    Likes Received:
    0
    The Catholic Church had no issues with its witch hunts, the Inquisition or the Crusades now did they? Or does that not come under violence for some reason? FYI, I used to be Catholic: I'm very familiar with the Christian perspective, before I became agnostic a few years ago.

    Lets see, the bloodshed in Yugoslavia, where Serbian Orthodox Christians are killing Muslims. Ask MM about Northern Ireland and the Protestants and Catholics. These are just some of the major examples of religion, in particular Christianity, being bloodthirsty and using its teachings and the Bible to stir more up violence.
     
  6. tool

    tool BuFs #1 mom

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2001
    Messages:
    13,365
    Likes Received:
    0
    Don't blame the bible or the christain religion as a whole for the ignorance of a few people. There are over 2 billion christians, to call them all bloodthirty like you just did is not only wrong, but shows how ignorant you are, and how much of a waste of time it is to talk to you about this. I'm even doubting you saying you use to be catholic, are you just saying that to make what you are telling me seem to have a little truth to it?
     
  7. OICW

    OICW Reason & Logic > Religion

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2000
    Messages:
    2,374
    Likes Received:
    0
    Okay, so being baptised, receiving holy communion, being confirmed and going to church didn't make me Catholic, I don't know what does then :rolleyes:

    I told you that information in the event that you would start complaining about how I've never been religious, so how would I know what it's like. I also said it so that it shows I do have some understanding of the Bible and Christian practices as well.

    I said Christianity, amongst other religions has been bloodthirsty and I stand by that. I'm friends with a few Christians, both Protestant and Catholic. The difference is, they're willing to accept that people can justify their actions with the Bible and that those people have caused a lot of hate and fear and violence in the world. They don't give me any lectures on my beliefs and I don't criticise their beliefs. They care about my character, not about my religious beliefs, and I do the same. It works out very well indeed. If all religious people in the world were like them, the world would be better off IMO.

    I also noticed how you've gone all quiet on my response to your "Show me a christian church that thinks the Bible supports the view of using violence against people?"...
     
  8. tool

    tool BuFs #1 mom

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2001
    Messages:
    13,365
    Likes Received:
    0
    So your friends respect you, but you obviously don't have any respect for them. With a title "Reason & Logic > Religion" I can tell you truthfully dont care about these people. You just put up with them because they give you what you want to hear.

    And I did respond to your comments about churchs and violence. And I dont see the pope or anyother church leaders, or churchs as a whole coming out and saying using violence is ok. I see a small minority of religious people who have about the same understanding of the Bible as you, which is no understanding what so ever.

    if you think the bible can be used to justify anything, then you should be pretty neutral on it. Since it has also been used to help millions of people. But hey lets just ignore that little fact ok? Because you know, we christains are all out to kill babies, and rape women. :rolleyes:

    And i'm still trying to find where in the Bible Jesus Christ taught people while he was on the earth that it is ok to use violence. Not finding it though. Maybe because it isnt there? I dunno.
     
    Last edited: Apr 9, 2004
  9. OICW

    OICW Reason & Logic > Religion

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2000
    Messages:
    2,374
    Likes Received:
    0
    Those religious friends of mine hardly ever bring up religion. Before you say they discuss it all the time when I'm not around, wrong, they're not preachy types. And even when I raise it (not very often), they still disagree with me at times. So much for them only saying what I want to hear :rolleyes:

    Since you're an expert on my religious friends, give me their full names, birthdates, locations, likes/dislikes and what they're studying or working at right now :rolleyes:

    I respect my friends because they "gasp" realise that they don't know everything just because they are religious. They also know that they aren't perfect. I don't have all the answers either, but at least I'm willing to admit that.

    Clearly the New Testament isn't the end-all, be-all of Christianity, otherwise we wouldn't have fundamentalist Christians using quotes from the Old Testament to justify their hatred of homosexuals, witches and pagans now, would we? It's fine quoting Jesus, but his message kind of gets lost on idiotic people who like the Old Testament better since it gives them the justification to do what they want to others, mainly evil things.
     
  10. Ferd

    Ferd «]§ß[»

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2000
    Messages:
    1,073
    Likes Received:
    0
    Mark 7:9 and after:Jesus criticizes the Jews for not killing their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law.

    Revelation 2:23:Jesus says he will kill the children of Jezebel.

    Out of context? been there done that
     
  11. Shujaa

    Shujaa New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Messages:
    44
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is worse than the Fallujah thread. Some of you ought to do a little better research before spouting ill-informed "facts" on certain religions.
     
  12. W0RF

    W0RF BuF Greeter, News Bagger

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2002
    Messages:
    8,731
    Likes Received:
    0
    There is a difference between faith and blind faith. Blind refers to those who cannot or will not see /obvious So by assigning "blind faith" to those who believe in God you're applying a label of faith absent reason. Of course I'm going to take exception to that.

    Theories are man's faith in science. Given our observations and measurements, it's reasonable to assume the sun will rise tomorrow, but if the Zerkenoids come out of a space fold tonight and destroy the sun, our planet will freeze to extinction within hours and we would never know why. What we call science would never be able to explain that to us, because it's based on observation, so it's limited to things of which we have a priori knowledge. Applying what we know to explain the things we don't know, is faith, and when the sun comes up tomorrow our faith is borne out. It doesn't mean the Zerkenoids don't exist, we have no a priori knowledge one way or the other, and never will until we actually observe them.

    My faith is the same way, I believe that some things are so, even though I don't have enough information to prove it irrefutably. My faith is supported by research and reason and observation, but it's obviously not something so ironclad that everyone is going to reach exactly the same conclusions as I. Not everyone agrees on Einstein's theories on gravity wells but gravity as a general rule is commonly accepted, as things still seem to continue falling to the ground. ;) And it never will be ironclad until I know everything there is to know about the nature of the universe, and the nature of God. Absent that impossible goal, the evidence in front of me is more than enough to make me secure in my faith.

    I don't think it's going to be a question answered by science at all. Science depends on observation and quantification and due to its empirical nature, is confined to the finite universe. As God is supposed to be infinite and outside the confines of universal laws, there's no real way to quantify or measure Him. Science and religion are two different worlds, and to try to use one to prove or disprove the other is an exercise in futility.
    I don't see a single word in there where Jesus says to kill disobedient children. It doesn't even say anything about children being disobedient. You sure you've been there done that?
    ... and that passage of course is not representative of descendents in general rather than young children born of Jezebel, nor referring to people who abide by her teachings as "her children". And of course there's no possibility that this prophecy might be symbolic. Nope, no question of context here.
     
    Last edited: Apr 9, 2004
  13. Hadmar

    Hadmar Queen Bitch of the Universe

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2001
    Messages:
    5,465
    Likes Received:
    29
    Who made the world? God.
    Who made us? God made us.
    Why is it bright at day and dark at night? God makes it so.
    Science tryes to explain how the universe works and therefore removes the 'need' for a god as expaination for everything we didn't understand. I think once everything is understood, which dosn't include the acts of Zerkenoids (or Protonians :p ) and the more society will focus on technology, the less people will be interested in the concept of an almighty god who created everything (and dosn't ever show up on family meetings :D) since exlainations that don't need the presence of an omnipotent beeing will be aviable for everything. True, even if you could call every single atom by it's first name there still would be no proof that god dosn't exist but there also can't be proof that, somewhere out there, a long time ago, Luke realy was fighting his father with a lightsaber - it's not terrible likely however.
     
  14. tool

    tool BuFs #1 mom

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2001
    Messages:
    13,365
    Likes Received:
    0
    beeing? That's awsome! :p

    Anyways, the Bible never says exactly how God made the Earth, or the Universe for that matter. What if some of the scientific theorys on how the Earth was made were the methods God used? I highly doubt he just went and made the Earth appear out of thin air.

    That would actually go against the latter-day saint belief (my religion) because we believe (I don't know if other churchs have this belief too) that when in Chapter one of Genesis, it says the Earth took six days to be created, that was on Gods time. Which is one day for God, is 1000 years for Earth. So 6000 years to make the Earth.

    Although this is still debated, some latter-day saints would tell you that it was six days earth time. Either answer could very well be correct. There actually isn't a for sure answer to this question.
     
    Last edited: Apr 9, 2004
  15. W0RF

    W0RF BuF Greeter, News Bagger

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2002
    Messages:
    8,731
    Likes Received:
    0
    That would make sense if you tried to view the Bible as a scientific text. However, I don't think it makes sense TO view the Bible as a scientific text. It's a religious text. People always point to creation as the big up-or-down proof for-or-against God. I don't see why. 99% of the Bible has nothing to do with creation but the focus always seems to turn to that when issues of scientific validity come up. We have, at best, theories and guesses as to how the universe (scientifically) was formed, but since the creation story is told in very broad, general terms I don't see how the two are comparable to a degree where you can accept one guess to the exclusion of the other.
    In short, science as a means to thwart religion. I thought the truth was the ultimate goal here, and if the existence of God is true, why work to disprove His existence, rather than search for the truth and reconcile our paradigms with what we find?
    No more likely than atoms can disobey the laws of thermodynamics and move from chaos towards order rather than order towards chaos (entropy) but it happens.
     
  16. Hadmar

    Hadmar Queen Bitch of the Universe

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2001
    Messages:
    5,465
    Likes Received:
    29
    No, I think that's how the idea of god was born: The need for an expaination for things that we don't understand. The rest - religion - was build around that need.

    It's merely a side-effect, not the purpose.

    The laws that are currently accepted as the ones that work best - untill we find a better exlaination where it wouldn't be disobeying of the law anymore.
     
  17. W0RF

    W0RF BuF Greeter, News Bagger

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2002
    Messages:
    8,731
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes but the Bible is not a collection of things-that-explain-the-world like the ancient Greek / Roman / Norse myths that try to explain thunder and stars and the motions of the planets. The world doesn't ride on the back of a turtle, nor is it held up by some giant dude. Stars in the Bible are just... stars.

    The Old Testament is a written transcription of the once-orally-tansmitted history of the Jewish people, the New Testament a history of the First Century Christian church. God's intervention is a major theme, of course, but as a religious compilation, it serves in a broader sense as a history of God interceding in the affairs of man to bring him back into communion WITH God. Very little of the Bible has anything to do with natural phenomena being something that God conjured, the overwhelming majority of it focuses on man and his actions. The book of Esther, for example, doesn't mention God at all. In that story, God didn't ride in on a magic cloud and destroy Haman in a ball of holy fire, a righteous woman was in a position to be proactive in saving her people, and she did it (It's your destiny, Arthur! Hug your destiny!).

    In short, I don't think comparisons to the mythology of old really holds a lot of water.
     
  18. Hadmar

    Hadmar Queen Bitch of the Universe

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2001
    Messages:
    5,465
    Likes Received:
    29
    Great A'Tuin won't like to hear that. :con:

    I realise that that's not the primary topic in the bible and that's not what I meant. What I mean is: I think as a side effect to the advancement of science, myffic (mystic with extra myff) things will have less and less space in our daily lifes - apart from entertainment of course.
     
  19. W0RF

    W0RF BuF Greeter, News Bagger

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2002
    Messages:
    8,731
    Likes Received:
    0
    But there's still the problem of the condition of the human soul, which IS the primary topic of the Bible. Thus, God is still a very relevant force in the world, and that's why 85% of the world believes in SOMEthing.

    Which leads me back again to science and religion being two totally different areas, and when one tries to infringe upon the other, it's usually to the detriment of both.
     
  20. Clayeth

    Clayeth Classic

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2000
    Messages:
    5,602
    Likes Received:
    0
    Why the **** is this an excuse? Here you see the number one bull**** in our judicial system. "Oh, I'm sorry, I forgot it was wrong to kill people, thanks for letting me go".... ****ing stupid.

    I mean, sure... if she was psychotic or temporarily insane or whatever, go ahead and give her treatment for it, but that doesn't mean she isn't guilty. Perhaps a slightly shorter sentance, or option for early parole, but she was not innocent... If he were still alive, someone should kill the person who set this precedent and then pretend they didn't know it was wrong.
     
    Last edited: Apr 9, 2004

Share This Page