More Foolishness in the bible
Options
Comments
-
ThaChozenWun wrote: »The amount of athiest who commit mass killings are far less than diety based religion. Buddhist for example dont have a diety, yet Pol ? believed heaven wanted him to guide Cambodia into what it should have been.
None the less your right their are religions outside of Deity ones who do at times commit these things, and again Ive always said religion is detrimental to people, that would include the other religions outside of Diety controlled ones.
A atheist would reverse a ban on churches if they felt they were under their control and wouldn't be disruptive. China does this. It's called PR.
By the way, most religious wars are fought over poltics not religion. The Crusades were over who would control the trade routes to the East. Jerusalem was a strategic place at the time The fighting in Israel is over political reasons. Not to establish a way of life. The Inquisition was based on the wresting Control of Europe from Jews and Muslims, not for religious purposes. -
Their political stance notwithstanding, they still killed people on the basis of their religious beliefs. Many Christians and Russian Jews were killed because they were just that. The Jacobins made special provisions to persecute Christians. So all they did was put a spin on it.
That's not the same. You can't say that they killed because of atheism. That's not the reason why. Their victims may have been killed because they were religious, but that doesn't make atheism the motivation of the killer. If you want a perfect communist society and religious people happen to be a hurdle to do that, then communism is the problem. You just can't say "all they did was put a spin on it" and think that that will fly...because it doesn't. Like I said it's kind of tough to find atheists who ? just for atheism. I'm not saying that every atheist has to have great intentions, but as atheists, we don't give a ? about a ? so for a religious view to be a main motivation is silly. That's why these mass killings are talked about when people talk about beliefs outside of religion (i.e., Marxism), not atheism. The only time you get that is when someone says "religion is responsible for too many killings", then the religious guy/chick says, "yeah right, ever heard of ? ?" and so on. Were there atheist leaders who were responsible for mucho killings? Yes. Some of them were also right-handed. I'm just saying, it's this simple...atheism wasn't their motivation. -
theillestrator wrote: »That's not the same. You can't say that they killed because of atheism. That's not the reason why. Their victims may have been killed because they were religious, but that doesn't make atheism the motivation of the killer. If you want a perfect communist society and religious people happen to be a hurdle to do that, then communism is the problem. You just can't say "all they did was put a spin on it" and think that that will fly...because it doesn't. Like I said it's kind of tough to find atheists who ? just for atheism. I'm not saying that every atheist has to have great intentions, but as atheists, we don't give a ? about a ? so for a religious view to be a main motivation is silly. That's why these mass killings are talked about when people talk about beliefs outside of religion (i.e., Marxism), not atheism. The only time you get that is when someone says "religion is responsible for too many killings", then the religious guy/chick says, "yeah right, ever heard of ? ?" and so on. Were there atheist leaders who were responsible for mucho killings? Yes. Some of them were also right-handed. I'm just saying, it's this simple...atheism wasn't their motivation.
My point is not what they claim, but their motives and deeds. Religious hatred was their motive. Same thing as the religious person who kills because you don't share their views. And if you think religious wars were fought over religion, you are mistaken. It was politics masked in religion. Just like the proclaimed atheist masks their killing in communism, socialism, or whatever. -
Athiest run a strong second.
If your not athiest you belief in a diety, theirfore im pretty sure this would be right, congratulations genius you figured common senseA atheist would reverse a ban on churches if they felt they were under their control and wouldn't be disruptive. China does this. It's called PR.
By the way, most religious wars are fought over poltics not religion. The Crusades were over who would control the trade routes to the East. Jerusalem was a strategic place at the time The fighting in Israel is over political reasons. Not to establish a way of life. The Inquisition was based on the wresting Control of Europe from Jews and Muslims, not for religious purposes.
The crusades were to find the evidence of Jesus which they didnt find btw unless you are a true believer in what the knights templar did.
The Roman Catholic Inquisition was one of the greatest disasters ever to befall mankind. In the name of Jesus Christ, Catholic priests mounted an enormous effort to ? all "heretics" in Europe and Britain. Heretics is defined whichever way Rome wanted it defined; it ranged from people who disagreed with official policy, to Hermetic Philosophers [Black Magick Practitioners], to Jews, to Witches, and to the Protestant reformers.
Slaughtering one's enemies is clearly rotten spiritual fruit. During the early part of His ministry, Jesus was approached by two of His disciples -- James and John -- who had just returned from preaching the Gospel message throughout parts of Israel. These two disciples were upset, for some entire towns had refused to even hear their message; they asked the Lord:
"Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them, even as Elias did?" [Luke 9:54]
Jesus was horrified. He replied:
"You do not know of what sort of spirit you are, for the Son of Man did not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them from the penalty of eternal death."
They acted on behalf of this and set out to ? the non followers. -
ThaUnpreparedWun wrote: »If your not athiest you belief in a diety, theirfore im pretty sure this would be right, congratulations genius you figured common sense
Not so. There is the agnostic who doesn't fit squarely in any category. I guess common sense is not the common.The crusades were to find the evidence of Jesus which they didnt find btw unless you are a true believer in what the knights templar did.
The Roman Catholic Inquisition was one of the greatest disasters ever to befall mankind. In the name of Jesus Christ, Catholic priests mounted an enormous effort to ? all "heretics" in Europe and Britain. Heretics is defined whichever way Rome wanted it defined; it ranged from people who disagreed with official policy, to Hermetic Philosophers [Black Magick Practitioners], to Jews, to Witches, and to the Protestant reformers.
Slaughtering one's enemies is clearly rotten spiritual fruit. During the early part of His ministry, Jesus was approached by two of His disciples -- James and John -- who had just returned from preaching the Gospel message throughout parts of Israel. These two disciples were upset, for some entire towns had refused to even hear their message; they asked the Lord:
"Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them, even as Elias did?" [Luke 9:54]
Jesus was horrified. He replied:
"You do not know of what sort of spirit you are, for the Son of Man did not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them from the penalty of eternal death."
They acted on behalf of this and set out to ? the non followers.
You lifted this from cuttingedge.org from this location www.cuttingedge.org/news/n1676.cfm and tried to pass it off as your own. Do you have any original thoughts or do you go around plagarizing ever one elses stuff to make yourself look smart and others dumb?
That is what they call ghetto scholarship.
Do you like apples? Do you like apples? Well, I did a google search, how you like them apples? LOLOLOLOLOLOLO! -
Not so. There is the agnostic who doesn't fit squarely in any category. I guess common sense is not the common.
Agnostics believe in a diety, I said if you dont believe in a diety then you have to be an athiest, guess your common sense doesnt apply itself
You lifted this from cuttingedge.org from this location www.cuttingedge.org/news/n1676.cfm and tried to pass it off as your own. Do you have any original thoughts or do you go around plagarizing ever one elses stuff to make yourself look smart and others dumb?
I dont feel the need to explain myself to you, no matter what I say you will have something negative to say, I can say a carrot is a vegtable and you will reply with some ? how its not a vegtable but a agricultural illusion desinged by a white man to opress and capture rabbits or some ? like that. Its easier to take 5 seconds copy n paste and let you go bring it up instead of countering what i pasted
That is what they call ghetto scholarship.
You know the white man doesnt give scholarships to blacks so i had to get mines elsewhere
Do you like apples? Do you like apples? Well, I did a google search, how you like them apples? LOLOLOLOLOLOLO!
Lol wow lmao ? hell naw lol hahahhaahhahahaahhahahhhahahah WOWWWWWWWW. Did you still that line from Wayne Brady? ? is cornier than Nicole Scherzingers feet
.............................. -
ThaUnpreparedWun wrote: »
Agnostics believe in a diety, I said if you dont believe in a diety then you have to be an athiest, guess your common sense doesnt apply itself
Not true. Agnostic hold the view that they are not commited to belief or disbelief in a deity. They say it is unknowable. Boy, you really tell it like it ain't.ThaUnpreparedWun wrote: »I dont feel the need to explain myself to you, no matter what I say you will have something negative to say, I can say a carrot is a vegtable and you will reply with some ? how its not a vegtable but a agricultural illusion desinged by a white man to opress and capture rabbits or some ? like that. Its easier to take 5 seconds copy n paste and let you go bring it up instead of countering what i pasted
Translation: You just sonned the ? out of me and I am going to bring up your supposed affixation with the white man, because that is my trump card. I really don't have an explanation of why I thought I could get away with not knowing what I am talking about.ThaUnpreparedWun wrote: »Lol wow lmao ? hell naw lol hahahhaahhahahaahhahahhhahahah WOWWWWWWWW. Did you still that line from Wayne Brady? ? is cornier than Nicole Scherzingers feet
Actually, it was Good Will Hunting. Matt Damon's first film. One of the best films in the last 25 years. That was actually the most memorable line in the classic bar scene. Now I could make fun of the way you spelled "still" instead of "steal". Butt eye wheel let ewe bee. -
Not true. Agnostic hold the view that they are not commited to belief or disbelief in a deity. They say it is unknowable.
Translation: You just sonned the ? out of me and I am going to bring up your supposed affixation with the white man, because that is my trump card. I really don't have an explanation of why I thought I could get away with not knowing what I am talking about.
Actually, it was Good Will Hunting. Matt Damon's first film. One of the best films in the last 25 years. That was actually the most memorable line in the classic bar scene. Now I could make fun of the way you spelled "still" instead of "steal". Butt eye wheel let ewe bee.
If I get a spot on Larry King live want to come debate ? with me? I think we can get our own tv talk show -
ThaChozenWun wrote: »Nothing, Getting rid of religion would solve some of it, the getting rid of religion would also effect our ability to do more scentific studies. It wouldnt attribute to ending it but it will help to lower it, nothing will ever end suffering someone will always suffer. But getting rid of religion and once people learn to stop being racist and that other people arent as bad as they think it will take a significant dip.
But is the goal to stop evil and suffering completely? Getting rid of religion isn't going to stop discrimination. If people can't use religion as a means to discriminate, then it's on to the next one. Someone will find something to feel superior about. -
ThaChozenWun wrote: »If I get a spot on Larry King live want to come debate ? with me? I think we can get our own tv talk show
I think we could get a show. Sort of like the Hannity and Colmes show. Supposed Conservative and Supposed Liberal.
What will be our angle? -
I think we could get a show. Sort of like the Hannity and Colmes show. Supposed Conservative and Supposed Liberal.
What will be our angle?
I dont know yet, i gotta think about it -
alissowack wrote: »But is the goal to stop evil and suffering completely? Getting rid of religion isn't going to stop discrimination. If people can't use religion as a means to discriminate, then it's on to the next one. Someone will find something to feel superior about.
I know this but getting rid of religion is a start in the right direction, just as civil rights. ending slavery, standing against communism etc... is. Religion is still a very big part of discrimination. Im not sayin it will completely abolish it but its a step in the right direction, and someone as myself who doesnt believe in any religion, I dont see a need why it shouldnt be done with just for that little bit. -
ThaChozenWun wrote: »I know this but getting rid of religion is a start in the right direction, just as civil rights. ending slavery, standing against communism etc... is. Religion is still a very big part of discrimination. Im not sayin it will completely abolish it but its a step in the right direction, and someone as myself who doesnt believe in any religion, I dont see a need why it shouldnt be done with just for that little bit.
Well just end it for you. -
ThaChozenWun wrote: »I know this but getting rid of religion is a start in the right direction, just as civil rights. ending slavery, standing against communism etc... is. Religion is still a very big part of discrimination. Im not sayin it will completely abolish it but its a step in the right direction, and someone as myself who doesnt believe in any religion, I dont see a need why it shouldnt be done with just for that little bit.
I believe if you get rid of discrimination, that stops the problem that people have with everything. Strip away every ideology, creed, and status and you will still have discrimination. People will find reasons to biologically discriminate against somebody.
