Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by J Mc on March 18, 2013 at 2:47am

Only a few believed he was the son of god when he was alive and the Jews admit he existed and even islamic muslims claimed he existed but they never agreed he was the son of god. 

Now if all those people 2,000 years didnt believe, why should you? lol.

Permalink Reply by archaeopteryx on March 18, 2013 at 2:55am

What Jews admit he existed? The very first gospel wasn't written until 70 AD, the next one in 75, the third in the 90's AD, and the last, John, not until around 150 AD. And Muslims didn't enter the picture until 700 AD.

Don't just read the Bible, J, learn the history behind it - there's a lot more there than you'll find between the covers.

Permalink Reply by kOrsan on March 18, 2013 at 3:36am

Only a few believed he was the son of god when he was alive and the Jews admit he existed and even islamic muslims claimed he existed but they never agreed he was the son of god.

As opposed to what, non-islamic muslims? There you go again with the inane wordplay.

Of course muslims believe it, "Jesus" is a prophet in their religion.

Permalink Reply by SteveInCO on March 18, 2013 at 8:13am

A jew could well admit he existed but that doesn't actually matter, as they'd disagree that he was the messiah.

Also I should amplify a bit on what Archae said.

the Gospels make it clear that Yeshua (possibly you call him by his Greek name, Jesus) believed the Old Testament stories of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob/Israel and Moses, but there is SO much proof now that those were made-up bullshit stories,

It's more specifically true that whoever wrote Matthew (it almost certainly wasn't the apostle Matthew; and the text itself doesn't even make that claim) clearly believed the Septuagint translation into Greek from the Hebrew, rather than the original Hebrew, or he wouldn't have tried to hijack Isaiah 7:14 into somehow being a prophecy of a virgin birth when the original hebrew word meant "young woman" and (if you read Isaiah 7:14 in context) it's clear that Isaiah was prophesying that he himself would knock up a particular chick he knew.  I guess it's mildly impressive that he knew she wouldn't say no, or perhaps he didn't care if she did or didn't.

So they couldn't even get their bullshit right.

Permalink Reply by archaeopteryx on March 18, 2013 at 1:54am

@Thomas Pickett - who wrote that, and who are they that anyone should listen to them?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by archaeopteryx on March 18, 2013 at 2:15am

Whew, thought for a minute there that we'd lost you to the Dark Side, Anakin --

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kris Feenstra on March 18, 2013 at 1:46am

Out of proportion? People are fag bashed to the point of hospitalization or even death. People are harassed and condemned to the point of depression and even suicide. People have had their ability to form a family with the person they loved challenged time and time again. People have been cast as pedophiles and perverts. People have been disowned by their families and cast out from their homes, even as children.

Many modern Christians who view homosexuality as a sin will talk about how the above things are not true Christianity or state how these things are obviously wrong, yet they cannot see that they are perpetuating the problem themselves by perpetuating this sin myth. They cannot see that in many cultures, it is the supposed followers of Christ kicking up the biggest fuss in opposition. Obviously you have every right to hold and voice your views, but without a coherent or objective argument as to why it is wrong, and in light of the fact that your deity refuses to take the witness stand, we reserve the right to call bullshit. Sorry bud, but you're part of the problem. Minor or major? Why should I care?

But fear not. I forgive you for this sin. Try not to keep repeating it.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Professor Robert on March 18, 2013 at 7:25am

@KrisFeenstra: "People are ... bashed to the point of hospitalization or even death. People are harassed and condemned to the point of depression and even suicide. People have had their ability to form a family with the person they loved challenged time and time again. People have been cast as pedophiles and perverts. People have been disowned by their families and cast out from their homes, even as children."

That sounds like what happens to a lot of Christians in atheist and former atheist regimes like the Soviet Union, China, N. Korea, etc. 

Sometimes it's worth spending as much time examining our own arguments and biases as those of others.  Whenever we choose to stereotype another group, or blame the whole group for the errors of the few, don't we do exactly what you complain about here?  "Perpetuate the problem?" 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by kOrsan on March 18, 2013 at 7:31am

That sounds like what happens to a lot of Christians

So that makes it ok? Do you support school-shooters too because they were bullied?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Heather Spoonheim on March 18, 2013 at 11:07am

@Professor Robert

There is no 'etc' there.  North Korea is not Atheist - in fact it is a theocracy ruled by their god.  As far as communist countries - please name the Atheist doctrine that proclaimed that Christians were an abomination deserving death?  Oh wait, Atheism has no doctrines and does not define 'abominations'.

Perhaps you should examine your own lies/arguments.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dr.Grixis on March 18, 2013 at 11:34am

Labels are not that useful, especially the "atheist" label is about as useful as a cock-flavored lollipop. Since it only means "a lack of belief in god(s)" it does not have any positive statement of belief/dogma. If being an atheist is somehow a philosophical (or even religious) ideology, then not collecting stamps is a hobby.

Instead of investigating further, people tend to be satisfied when they can put a label on a person, classify them and move on with their everyday life.

I find it kinda odd that you label these regimes as"atheist"as this only shows what they are not, in that sense a lot of countries could be considered "atheist" (if you were to think of secular countries as "atheist states"). Then again, I could just as well make a group for "non-Zoltarians" and it would be an equally valid classification, wouldn't it? 

This is the main problem when discussing matters of religion with a lot of theists, to "us" atheists the label "atheist" doesn't mean as much as it seems to mean to the theists themselves. This kind of baggage in terminology is endlessly enforced (on both sides) which seriously hampers a fruitful discussion. 

That being said, I find it despicable that people (regardless of their faith) tend not to examine their arguments and biases. In the end, the reason why people are opposed to homosexuality (for instance) is because they find it "icky", not because some supposed deity said so, but when push comes to shove, that is where theists hide when they are forced to argue. 

The problem being perpetuated is that people do not think for themselves, do not question their motivations and label others easily while thinking that the label holds some kind of meaning. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kris Feenstra on March 18, 2013 at 11:56am

• I am not holding every Christian accountable for promoting homosexuality as a sin, but rather only those who promote it as a sin.
• My problem here isn't even the idea that it is promoted as a sin, but rather the "what's the big deal?" sort of attitude. It is a big deal, just as it's a big deal that I am fully "pro-choice" in the face of those who view abortion as murder. I can at least cop to the seriousness of my viewpoint in that light.
• I have always denounced the rationale behind such mistreatment and violence of other humans beings based on their religious views.
• Such rationale is not (correctly or incorrectly) derived from any codified aspect of atheism, largely because no such thing exists.
• Even if the above was not true and I was a hypocrite, this would in no way excuse the actions of either party anyway.

So Robert, thanks for the vacuous assumption that I have not examined my views, but your point doesn't hold.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 24
• 25
• 26
• 27
• 28
• 29
• Next ›
• Page