This is the ninth chapter in the series My List: Believe the Bible? Read why I started this list in About Me.
The vast majority of Christians are very good people. They follow Jesus’ teaching to “love your enemies”. But as we see throughout the Bible, this teaching is contradicted over and over again. According to the following verses, Christians should kill anyone who dares not worship their god and would be arrogant enough to reject Christian teaching.
Kill those who speak rebellion against God.
The false prophets or visionaries who try to lead you astray must be put to death, for they encourage rebellion against the LORD your God, who redeemed you from slavery and brought you out of the land of Egypt. Since they try to lead you astray from the way the Lord your God commanded you to live, you must put them to death. In this way you will purge the evil from among you. (Deuteronomy 13:5)
Kill anyone who arrogantly rejects priests.
Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death. Such evil must be purged from Israel. (Deuteronomy 17:12)
Kill anyone who refuses to seek God.
They agreed that anyone who refused to seek the LORD, the God of Israel, would be put to death—whether young or old, man or woman. (2 Chronicles 15:13)
Kill anyone who violates the covenant of God.
If a man or woman living among you in one of the towns the LORD gives you is found doing evil in the eyes of the LORD your God in violation of his covenant . . . and this has been brought to your attention, then you must investigate it thoroughly. If it is true and it has been proved that this detestable thing has been done in Israel, take the man or woman who has done this evil deed to your city gate and stone that person to death. (Deuteronomy 17:2,4-5)
Those refusing to retain knowledge of God deserve death.
They traded the truth about God for a lie. So they worshiped and served the things God created instead of the Creator himself, who is worthy of eternal praise! Amen . . . Since they thought it foolish to acknowledge God, he abandoned them to their foolish thinking and let them do things that should never be done . . . They know God’s justice requires that those who do these things deserve to die, yet they do them anyway. Worse yet, they encourage others to do them, too. (Romans 1:25,28,32)
Thankfully, Christians ignore these Bible verses and/or explain them away with the “new covenant” of Jesus. But it is illogical to describe him as a “god of love” and justify his commandment to kill anyone who dares deny his existence. God’s multiple personality disorder reads more like a Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde novel than a book of divine wisdom and teaching.
According to these verses, God gives us free will to follow him or be murdered.
Tags: Agnostic, Atheist, Bible, Blasphemy, Contradiction, Death, Enemy, False Prophet, God, Hate, Heresy, Jesus, Kill, Lord, Murder, Non Believer, Punishment, Skeptic
May 11, 2009 at 11:54 pm |
My partner is a believer as is her family. At one point, my partners sister said to me “Oh well, I hope you enjoy it when you go to helll.”
Needless to say, for the sake of family peace I just shook my head in despair.
Keep on questioning!
May 12, 2009 at 6:20 am |
That sums up a big chunk of believers in a sentence really: believe what I do or else you’ll rot in hell and I’ll be laughing.
I’ve always found it an impossible idea for someone to claim to love thy neighbour stuff while happy that someone was going to be tortured for all eternity because you don’t believe..
I’d pose the question to them: how would their concept of heaven feel if their loved ones were sent to be tortured by the very god they’re supposed to praise. Is it fair that someone be tortured for all eternity JUST for demanding evidence? Would you continue to praise a god who does that sort of thing?
Sounds like the idea of hell..
May 12, 2009 at 10:35 am |
Hi “Our Man in the Field” and Nathan,
Nathan, you’ve asked a question that is partly very rightful in my view. Actually as a believer (Muslim) I asked that question for years as well. My faith was about to go away because of the painful thoughts about a God who claimed to be merciful yet would torture His servants (i.e. the conscious beings that He created) for eternity.
That was because the dominant view among Muslim scholars as well as lay people is that the punishment of hell is temporary for overly sinful believers, who has to visit hell because of the extremity of their sins, but eternal for those who die as unbelievers.
Praise be for God, I then learned that this was not the only point of view among the classical scholars of Islam (i.e. the ulamaa, variously spelt ulema or otherwise in English). Very prominent and important scholars, both classical and modern, defended the view that based on the evidence from the Quran and the authentic part of the literature of hadith reports, we must arrive at the non-eternity of the punishment in hell for unbelievers as well as the overly sinful believers.
Then I read their subtle but convincing evidence and arrived at the same conclusion in a sure fashion.
Of course, believer or not, the loving and merciful God’s torturing his servants for an eternity does not make sense. It does not make sense especially in the Islamic (and also maybe Christian) context. The Muslim context is that the most often repeated “names” or “attributes, qualities” of God are “the (infinitely) compassionate (Ar: ar-rahmaan)” and “the (boundlessly) merciful (Ar: ar-raheem)”.
Moreover, both the Quran and the authentic hadith reports include several expressions which are all similar or identical to this sentence: “God’s compassion has overcome His (justice-delivering) anger”. If the mercy has overcome the anger, then how can the anger continue in a punishment of hell that is to last without ending for eternity?
There is much other evidence to support this point. But it would take too much time to cite them, and I guess that this is not the place for discussing that intra-Islamic theological question.
But just one last caution: Beware that most translations of the Quran and other Islamic religious texts in Arabic seem to confuse modern Arabic with the classical one. Therefore, they translate as “forever” and “staying eternally” the expressions which actually meant in Classical Arabic “for a very long and unspecified period of time” and “residing somewhere (for a long time and sometimes even for a short time)”.
I have been longing to finish my more detailed writing on this question but has not been able to do so yet due to my occupation with more personal affairs.
Oops, I’ve forgotten to mention something: the part of your question, Nathan, that was not right was the part that atheists or unbelievers in general just want to see evidence and hence it is not fair to punish them (eternally) for that. God would not punish anybody eternally as I have been mentioning thus far in this comment post.
However, the other important point is that those who die as unbelievers are punished not for demanding evidence but for denying the evidence that they are presented, for the sake of their cherished lifestyle and the like.
Furthermore, according to Islam, those who never sufficiently hear of the right religion will not be punished for not adhering to it. Their faith and actions will be evaluated in a different way than other people who did have access to the right religion. (Which has been and will be Islam until the end of this world because the last and the only valid revelation to humankind is Islam since around 620 A.D. The other sacred scriptures have all been corrupted by individuals who had access to them in the past. Muhammad is the last prophet and is one of the most virtuous, righteous humans who have ever lived, if not the most righteous one (despite all the factual, historical and interpretive distortions that are commonly made in the west and the west-dominated world about him).
Regards
May 12, 2009 at 11:35 am
So, the “infinitely compassionate” and “boundlessly merciful” one is only going to torture us for an unspecified period then? This is just a load of absolute bullshit!!
May 12, 2009 at 11:10 pm
Barrie John, it is unspecified to us in this life of ours. I don’t know what we will know on the judgement day.
God will fairly punish, rather than thoughtlessly torture, an overly sinful person or an unbeliever for a period of time that he has well determined and made specific for Himself and probably for some of His angels. It is us that the period of time is unspecified to, for the time being at least (on account of the obvious lack of necessity for such a specification).
And, is this what you understand of intelligent and critical discussion, Barrie John? Not firstly trying to understand what you are being told but hastily attempting to discredit it by resorting to derision? Especially in the face of explanations that start to shatter your prejudices about religion? Believe me, derision, especially when it is not based on good reason, does not work at all. I suggest open-mindedness instead.
May 12, 2009 at 11:58 pm
Not wanting to be pedantic but neither the Bible nor the Quoran is proof of anything other than the ability of humans to write at the time when the books were first written.
Until these texts can be independantly verified and the acts within the books substantiated with proof and tangible evidence (which means that said act is repeatable) it does not qualify as proof of anything.
Quoting the Bible or the Quoran as proof is a false argument. It makes the assumption that these books are actually true but there is no evidence to support this assumption.
May 13, 2009 at 6:45 am
On what basis exactly are you making these grand assertions as to what God will or won`t do in the future? Certainly not on the teachngs of His “holy prophet” Jesus, who said, “It is better for thee to enter into the Kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire: where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched” (Mark 9: 43-48); and please don`t insult our intelligence by saying that He must have been misreported again here, or that the translation is incorrect, or that we are misinterpreting His words, as we`ve heard all that nonsense before! If you and your stupid imams are just going to sit down and decide how God will act, and what it is that He demands of us, why bother with prophets and holy books in the first place!!
May 13, 2009 at 6:51 am
PS I must say I absolutely roared with laughter at your heartfelt plea for “openmindedness” – as I`m sure many other readers must have done! What you are really demanding is unswerving, unquestioning, mindless adherence to the teachings of Islam (as decided by a bunch of fanatics, of course!!).
May 13, 2009 at 11:57 am
“Our man in the field”, you’re talking about a different thing than the thing that I mentioned in my original reply and actually in the one following it too.
My replies were about whether the major two monotheisms really say for certain that God will punish some of His servants (i.e. the conscious beings that He created) in hell for eternity. I’ve spoken about the Islamic subtleties of the issue as you can read above. Therefore, your answer to it was quite irrelevant –it’s completely another issue whether there is conclusive proof for the assertion that Islam is the true faith revealed by God, through His messengers, Himself.
Barrie John, the part that you quote from the gospel of Mark may or may not belong to the original teaching of the Prophet Jesus (blissful security be on him). That the New Testament was altered after Jesus and the generation of his close adherents is seen as certain by most experts and not just Muslims. So, we don’t know exactly which are the genuine teachings in it and which are not.
Nevertheless, the passage that you quoted is interesting in that it doesn’t unambiguously speak about an eternal punishment in hell. It seems to be the prevalence and social strength of dominant interpretation that makes you think that it does.
“It is better for thee to enter into the Kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire: where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched (Mark 9: 43-48).”
This may well mean continuous, persisting rather than eternal punishment during the period of time that the unbeliever or even the overly sinful believer has to spend in hell in order to have become purified from his or her sins. There is corroborating evidence for such an interpretation (which is not even figurative but quite literal) from the Quran, but I can’t say anything about the presence or absence of such corroborating evidence from the present corpus of the Bible itself.
My last point is that please don’t think that I’m trying to convince you, in the singular sense of you (formerly expressed in English as “thee”). Unfortunately, you either don’t know or deliberately don’t utilise the methods of open-minded and productive discussion. My hope is that there are people who read these and reflect on this issue in a much more fruitful way than the way you do.
Regards
Rawi
May 13, 2009 at 2:09 pm
I have a question.
You say, “the last and the only valid revelation to humankind is Islam since around 620 A.D. The other sacred scriptures have all been corrupted by individuals who had access to them in the past.”
But just four paragraphs before you say the following: Beware that most translations of the Quran and other Islamic religious texts in Arabic seem to confuse modern Arabic with the classical one. Therefore, they translate as “forever” and “staying eternally” the expressions which actually meant in Classical Arabic “for a very long and unspecified period of time” and “residing somewhere (for a long time and sometimes even for a short time)”.
So, you’re saying that the Quran is uncorrupted right after saying that it’s been corrupted. Does it not follow that other mistranslations may have crept in?
May 14, 2009 at 12:06 pm
Jeremy, unlike the Gospel whose original text which was probably in Aramaic no longer exists, the original Arabic text of the Quran is available today –available in the home of every Arab and non-Arab Muslim.
Obviously and logically, mistaken translations are not corruption in the real text. If it was so, we would say that Tolstoy’s novels have all been terribly corrupted/altered because most translations in certain languages that I am familiar with are very bad i.e. full of erroneous translations!
Moreover, the exact language in which the Quran was formed –Classical Arabic– is also known in its entirety. Actually, it is almost the same thing as what is termed the “Modern Standard Arabic”. Plus we have various dictionaries of Classical Arabic which were all written in the age of Classical Arabic itself as well as a very huge religious and lay literature in the same language of the same age, including even authentic pre-Islamic information like beautifully composed pre-Islamic Arabic poetry.
For example, the information that I gave above about the original meanings of namely the words “abad” and “khuld” (respectively “a very long time” and “a long and sometimes short residence or stay”) is found in those very dictionaries and not in some exotic, unknown source.
I think this has clarified everything.
Regards
Rawi, a future “reporter” of hadith reports in a new blog of his, God willing.
May 24, 2009 at 5:28 am
If mohammed is the most virtuous person ever: no wonder muslims have such a bad reputation for killing people. He was a paedophile for one thing, a mass murderer for another.
I’m far more virtuous than mohammed: I’ve never killed, nor ordered people to be killed, nor owned or made people slaves.
Face it: mohammed was an evil barbaric savage who thought of women as cattle and inferior to men.
The day I think someone who deflowered an 8 year old and murdered hundreds if not thousands simply for not submitting to his superstitious rubbish is a good guy I’ll check myself into a mental institute.
May 24, 2009 at 8:27 am
People think Muslims have a reputation for killing people because they sheepishly believe the warped picture presented to them by the news media, which is largely controlled by people whose primary interests lie in defaming Muslims and their religion Islam for their political aims over the Muslim world. In actual reality, Muslims are the world communtiy who are killed by non-Muslims rather than kill them. For more information on a specific case, see my article entitled “The Islamic Positions Taken Regarding Suicide Attacks” on my blog which you can access through my user name link here.
Muhammad (God bless him and give him blissful security) never murdered people (nor mass-murdered) or never deflowered an eight year old girl. You can’t speak about Isflam with these nonsensical Islamophobic cliches based on overly stupid and warped pseudo-interpretations of a few real events.
I kindly return all your insults in your posts to you, by the way. You must be really careful about what you say and must not speak things that are a million times beyond your knowledge. Words are important and will be accounted for. I am saying all these as a future historian on Islam, God willing.
Regards
June 8, 2009 at 6:38 pm
Somewhat off-topic:
I find it relieving that the religious half of this argument (Reporter/Rawi) is an independent and clear thinking individual.
On the other hand I am ashamed that any atheist/agnostic/humanist could attack an intelligent individual in such a fashion.
I would like to apologize to Rawi and lend him/her my hand in furious internet battle.
One of my closest friends is Muslim, and, in the infancy of our relationship, we had quite the discussion of religion. It was one of the only experiences I have ever had where I, an atheist, and a theist had ever had an engaging and meaningful exchange of religious ideas. I wasn’t instantly attacked or treated like a nuisance, instead I was received and was able to hear his opinions.
May 12, 2009 at 12:26 am |
It’s hate speech and advocating violence.
That’s a crime in civilized countries.
Can we get some unbiased enforcement?
Cult members advocating violence should be locked up. Those pushing such brainwashing on children should never be let out.
Of course, the funny part is that alot of the bible is plagerized from other, older religions.
May 12, 2009 at 5:25 am |
And many Christians go crazy when they read about the same thing in the Qur’an.
May 12, 2009 at 6:11 pm |
by the same logic the bible should be banned to the same extent as Mein Kampf.
May 12, 2009 at 5:33 am |
Ahem.
You are quoting OT verses which Jesus (ie; developed into Christianity) expanded, rectified, answered. And the Romans quote relates to a spiritual death, not a literal one.
May 12, 2009 at 6:43 am |
Jesus doesn’t absolve god’s of responsibility for the evil command for his followers to kill nonbelievers and people worshiping other gods. The rationale is God screwed up and needed Jesus to fix his wrathful mistakes.
I did mention the “new covenant” of Jesus. I realize his teachings didn’t match the OT verses. That is the problem. Either god suffers from a personality disorder, Jesus wasn’t the Messiah, or the whole thing is made up. I’ll go with option #3.
May 12, 2009 at 6:21 am |
are you saying back then it was ok to kill atheists? If that is your belief, that is just as wrong.
May 12, 2009 at 6:47 am |
I’m obviously not saying it was “ok to kill atheist” back then. The Bible does.
Please respond to the verses listed here and explain to me how I’m wrong. You can’t simply tell me I’m wrong and give no explanation to back your statement.
May 12, 2009 at 6:36 am |
I used to be a prominent preacher with the Plymouth Brethren, and I am quite sure that whoever first wrote those words in Romans was NOT alluding to “spiritual death”! This is the old “cop-out” argument!!
May 12, 2009 at 6:51 am |
I think Paul put an asterisk in the original text.
“They know God’s justice requires that those who do these things deserve to die*,”
*I don’t mean they deserve to be murdered or killed, I’m referring to “spiritual death”. -Paul
May 12, 2009 at 7:02 am |
Isn`t it strange how, to understand the Word of God correctly, you need either “marginal notes” or someone more enlightened to interpret it for you? It`s just like the Middle Ages, when the priests were the only ones who were allowed to even read the Bible, and were then able to tell people what it was that they were meant to believe!!
May 12, 2009 at 6:42 am |
DIOS es Amor – Love is God !
Hugs: the cat
May 12, 2009 at 7:05 am |
ten commandments:
…
6th You shall not kill
…
so the commandments aren’t important anymore??
May 12, 2009 at 7:08 am |
God:
6th – You shall not kill. (Unless I instruct you to.)
God commands the slaughter of entire nations in the Old Testament. So there are exceptions to his do not kill rule.
May 12, 2009 at 7:18 am |
It`s really “Thou shalt do no murder”, so that`s a red herring! All societies used to use execution as a punishment for serious crimes, and people are being slaughtered in the name of various gods today, but those involved would not consider themselves as breaking the taboo on murder.
May 13, 2009 at 12:01 am |
Thou shalt not murder, however God killed the majority of life on the planet when he raised the flood for Noah and also destroyed thoushands when he ordered the destruction of sodom and Gomorrah.
Hypocrisy much?
May 12, 2009 at 7:17 am |
Jesus taught us to treat others like we would like to be treated =). I think Athiests are more religious than some people claiming to be Christians in our times. Live and let live.
May 12, 2009 at 7:21 am |
My goal isn’t to attack Christians. Only to question what they believe. I was a Christian most of my life only by ignoring verses like these. Most Christians are Biblically illiterate and should know what this “god inspired” book actually says.
June 8, 2009 at 6:48 pm |
I know somebody whose parents sent them to a private high school.
By then his bible study classes had already converted him. To atheism.
May 12, 2009 at 7:21 am |
“You shall not kill” is incorrect!
It’s is “You shall not murder”.
Murder is unlawful killing.
Sheesh!
May 12, 2009 at 7:46 am |
OK.
I’m not surprised about this. There is a clerical MISTAKE in your position and your writing of it. Put simply God, in this case was talking about ISRAELITES who did these things. Second, you have a being who did all these miraculous things to free you from 400 years of slavery to Egypt…personally, and this is just me here maybe, YOU DO WHAT HE SAYS.
God is a JUST God and a RIGHTEOUS God. Jesus came to save us from what is JUST and RIGHT for ALL OF US. Since the wages of sin is DEATH. I don’t care how good a person you think you ARE…you’re not in the eyes of God. Jesus became to those who believe in him a source of eternal salvation because of his sacrafice. So in a word of correction…
Let me offer the holy trinity of accuracy in advance of your next post…
CONTEXT CONTEXT CONTEXT
May 12, 2009 at 7:55 am |
Your argument is because they were Israelites, it was okay for them to kill other non-believing people? But we are Gentiles, so we shouldn’t. That’s rational.
God rained bread from heaven, sprung water from rocks, parted a sea, sent a pillar of fire, and spoke to Moses directly through a burning bush. They still chose to worship a gold cow instead. These were the brilliant “chosen” people that were to kill anyone different than them and slaughter nations including children and babies. Of course, they kept virgins for their sexual play things.
Does this sound like a JUST and RIGHTEOUS god? No, because imaginary stories written by primitive men don’t have a relevant context.
June 11, 2009 at 9:51 am |
What he means BE, is that this was a punishment FOR the Israelites for any who disobey or have disbelief towards God. Did God command the slaughter of nations? Yes. Is he wrong to do so? No. God is not unjust in anything He does. How can the thing created say to the Creator “Why hast thou made me this way?” You have no rights but those given you by God. If there is no God, as you say, then you have no rights. This country was founded on Biblical principles: mainly this: that all are created equal and that we are all given certain inalienable rights by God: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. By liberty, they are referring to liberty of conscious, ie: religious liberty. Not religious tolerance, religious liberty. We are free to worship God as our heart guides and directs us.
May 12, 2009 at 8:01 am |
I hope you`re not inferring that “The Exodus” really took place here JB! This is a big subject, but is being covered over at http://dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot.com . As I have said there, when I was an evangelical there was just ONE hieroglyph that POSSIBLY referred to “Hebrews”, and they were not living in Egypt, so far from lending weight to the Biblical narrative, this fact completely undermined its reliability!! (Of course, other evidence may have been found more recently of which I am unaware!)
May 13, 2009 at 12:04 am |
Exodus 20:5
You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and the fourth generation of those who reject me.
How’s that for context?
May 19, 2009 at 3:52 pm |
The wages of sin are death… but so are the wages of simply being alive. I have yet to meet an immortal. Sinner or no, everyone dies.
June 12, 2009 at 7:36 am |
You’re right, but the Bible also says that all are sinners, henceforth everyone dies. Ever disobey your parents? There’s one commandment you’ve broken. Ever thought about having an affair? There’s another one. Ever thought about taking something? Woops, Jesus said to think it is the same as doing it. Believe it or not, but you’ve broken all 10 commandments.
May 12, 2009 at 8:02 am |
Be clear, Israelites were chosen, because they were chosen. The Bible, no God himself gives no other reason. They were not a GREAT people. They were almost worst than the rest of us – because THEY had communion directly WITH GOD and they STILL FELL AWAY. I think that’s poignant and relavent. Furthermore I think that it proves the position that the Bible has on man and that his heart is desperately wicked and that there isn’t ONE good person on the earth – no, not one.
Again – with the golden cow. Context. Moses was called up to moun sianai(sp?)…shortly AFTER they were released from egypt. The so called israelites had been enslaved for 490 years. Do you know how many generations that is? It’s either 12, 7 or nearly 5 depending on how you view generations. So that’s ALOT of training to recieve on how to worship a god…so it’s not surprising that in the absence of their leader the fickle bunch of people who didn’t know where moses went to…started becoming afraid. They were in the wilderness afterall…
Lastly, I do not judge God, and furthermore I do not offer man as an excuse for God’s behavior. Man has his own self to blame for the things he does.
Say you were Daniel Webster…and all I ever saw you do was mispell words…does that make the accuracy of the dictionary in question? Or are you just a miserable speller – even when truth lies in front of you?
May 12, 2009 at 9:50 am |
The Israelites were far from GREAT people, but god supposedly commanded them to slaughter thousands that were somehow even less great than them.
Your argument for the golden cow is weak. The Israelites witnessed many miracles that would make any person (including myself) crap their pants. The Biblical story shows how this god proved without any doubt that he was real and very powerful. Yet we are to believe they were still stupid enough to worship a golden cow after witnessing these amazing miracles?
Blaming man for his behavior is exactly what you should do. Men do evil things, not the devil. Men do good things, not god. And men wrote the stories of folklore, evil laws and slaughter you read in the Bible. Yes, give credit to the men behind their words and actions.
October 25, 2009 at 4:34 am |
Yeah, that’s right. Only MEN do evil or good things. No women ever did. Is it so hard to write ‘people’ instead and include everyone? I notice that you can’t use the word ‘women’ in the same way.
October 27, 2009 at 1:59 pm
Oh for crying out loud. Stay on point please.
Men/Man – often used as a form of Mankind which is interchangeable with HUMANkind.
When statements like “Men do evil things” or “Men do good things” just accept that Men = HUMANkind and that men & women are included. The point is still the same… HUMANS do good, HUMANS do bad, neither is the work of an invisible friend or enemy.
May 12, 2009 at 9:15 am |
Ze`ev Herzog says: “The many Egyptian documents that we have make no mention of the Israelites` presence in Egypt and are also silent about the events of the Exodus.” It is absolutely unthinkable that such significant events should have ocurred in Egypt, but that no record of them (outside of The Bible) actually exists!!
May 12, 2009 at 9:21 am |
Since when is the absence of evidence considered evidence?
The fact is, there are many books of the Bible that predict and chronicle these events. No matter what your philosophical bent, the Bible has been proven to be a FAIRLY reliable source of history and certainly coincides with contempories…
So the fact that we can’t FIND…what egyptians wrote…is not evidence of anything. And another thing; and I AM speculating here but as I remember modern science is NOT positive that is has a full lexicon for ancient egyption glyphs…while we have general interpretations, no one is POSITIVE of the accuracy.
May 12, 2009 at 9:26 am |
In a case like this, the “absence of evidence” speaks volumes!!!
May 12, 2009 at 9:28 am |
Frankly, what you don’t really realize that you’re saying is:
Christians are fools because they believe in a God with no evidence…
I’m enlightened because I believe the Israelites never had a mass exodus because there’s no evidence…
Do you not see the hypocrisy?
May 12, 2009 at 9:53 am |
No – the lack of evidence means that I DON`T believe, not that I believe! Your logic is seriously at fault there!!
May 13, 2009 at 2:25 pm |
This argument is specious. I would rewrite what you said as:
Christians are fools because they believe in a God with no evidence and ignore the evidence to the contrary.
I’m enlightened because I don’t believe the Israelites had a mass exodus because there’s no evidence suggesting they did.
May 12, 2009 at 9:56 am |
affirmatively stated or negatively stated, the end result is the same. Whether you believe there wasn’t an exodus, or you don’t believe there was one…it’s the same net result buddy.
May 12, 2009 at 10:22 am |
Your argument is absolutely nonsensical! It is NOT an article of faith with me that the Israelites did not sojourn in Egypt. If the evidence is forthcoming, then I will gladly accept the fact, and any others that can be shown to have happened. You`re going to say next that we can`t say that Noddy and Big Ears didn`t exist purely on the basis that we have no evidence!!
May 12, 2009 at 10:23 am |
And I`m not your “budy”!!!
May 12, 2009 at 10:01 am |
Many Christians I’ve encountered do not realize that this sort of thing is in their precious bibles. I find it helpful to use passages like this as a way of demonstrating that most people are fine with ignoring much of a supposedly holy book. From this point, it may be possible to have meaningful discussions about living in accordance with reality.
May 12, 2009 at 10:18 am |
Vjack, I’m quite aware of how man portrays this passages as atrocities. The mere fact of the matter is that the Christianity has ONE inescapable flaw…it requires humans…people are inherently bad and do not recognize God in all parts of their lives.
Again, I do not use man as a substitude for God. Man has his own evils that God has nothing to do with.
As far as what God commands us to do, I do not expect someone who does not recognize HIM as the Father, and God of all to understand the nature of his requirements. So it’s rather useless to explain. Just the same, if you continue to put yourself on a plane equal with your creator, you have NO hope of understanding.
You’re the proverbial clay pot, you may not SPEAK to your creator unless he wills it so. Do not mistake your sentient awareness for a power inclusion of which you have no part.
If you can intellectually ascend to that point, THEN we can have a meaningful discussion.
May 12, 2009 at 10:33 am |
I’ll let you know when I intellectually ascend to your divine level of understanding. Although I would have a difficult time being arrogant enough to believe I’m intellectually superior to everyone else.
You might want to check out the beatitudes.
“Blessed are the meek.”
May 12, 2009 at 11:42 am |
I find it amusing that you pick and choose portions of scripture to highlight; the ones that suit your purposes of undermining Christian believers. It is important to take the Bible as a whole document that is divided into 2 sections; one based on Israelites’ beliefs at the time, passed on from generation to generation, and one based on Jesus’ and his followers’ teachings about #1. God allowed His Son to interpret His Word AS A HUMAN because He wanted humans to have clearer understanding of their ancestors’ God and only his human appearance and language would draw believers to Him. God and Jesus = one and the same as Father and Son; and supernatural Holy Spirit as the well upon which to draw for deeper understanding and belief. If you have never reached the stage of recognizing God’s grace and allowing the Holy Spirit to guide your life, then there is no way you can reach an understanding of His holy Word. Sorry, but that’s the way it is – all those who don’t want religion (in the Judeo-Christian sense) believe that man is the supreme being and that his rational thought/intellect can dictate morals and make a better world – that humans don’t need a spiritual life. I beg to differ with this. Living in a God-less world is scarier than hell to me, and actually could BE hell. Faith is believing what you cannot see, and sometimes cannot understand. Some are blessed with faith from the day they are born; others learn it by trial-and-error. I am the latter type. I will pray for you to receive God’s grace, even if you don’t want me to!
May 12, 2009 at 12:05 pm |
Feel free to pray for me. No harm done. I’m definately the later type, but could no longer ignore the laundry list of biblical error.
You don’t need to be afraid of me or others who do not believe in god. Evil people do evil things whether they are religious or not. They simply use Bible verses like these to justify their evil agendas. Or they just do a good job of hiding the evil skeletons in their closet.
May 12, 2009 at 12:11 pm |
I wonder why I get sucked into these conversations. I highly doubt anything I say will be received by someone such as yourself; so the only real reason that I do engage in these conversations is for my own immediate satisfaction; any consequences of this will likely be nill. But alas, here is my reply.
Even with the elaboration you made about the different sections of the bible, etc, etc, the character of Jehovah is not rescued, nor is your own character since you praise him. Regardless of whether he had different demands as an OT god and a NT god, his demands as an OT god were perverse AND his demands as a NT god are perverse. As an OT god he frequently commanded his followers to cruelly exterminate, rape, and pillage villages and cities for small slights to his own enormous ego yet never apologizes or makes amends in any of the bible. He then further makes the obscene gesture of unnecessarily killing his own son for the sake of humans who are innocent and then taking credit for the bizarre act and then threatening everyone who doesn’t accept it as blessed to some mysterious horrible punishment. His behavior is unfathomable and can only be explained by the fact that the bible is a mishmash of different stories of very typical narcissistic and superstitious people.
Your character is displayed by praising this character and ascribing your credulity as a virtue (your faith) and then admitting that your fear of a godless world is a factor in your belief and, I suppose, praise of him. Which means you are being a sycophant that is unwilling to stand up and criticize something that is obviously obscene; your own soul is more valuable than the souls that will be sacrificed for Jehovahs’ perverse desires. Okay be a coward, but don’t try to play it off as being virtuous and altruistic. Or, you are just as perverse as Jehovah, accepting his twisted character as “perfect.” And your comment, then makes complete sense.
May 12, 2009 at 12:23 pm |
skeptikat – and you’ve established you have yourself as an almighty…whether induce self worship or not, you are your own god.
That’s fine. But answer me this…
Are morals subjective or objective?
May 12, 2009 at 12:42 pm |
Joshua
How have I established myself as an almighty? I don’t recall claiming I can raise the dead. What makes you think I think I am almighty?
Morals are intersubjective–and that is objective. So sayeth myself. Are we going to have a discussion about metaethics now? Interesting.
May 12, 2009 at 12:48 pm |
I think it’s pretty simple; either morals are subjective to you or they are objective. Obviously if they are objective you need an independent source to either provide or interpret them for you…that’s what makes them objective. If your intersubjective source is YOU – you cannot possibly be objective…so we’re back to subjective. Big picture bottom line is, your subjective morals have no backing to me and I dont’ recognize you as objective…there fore I can impose myself on you however I choose to you and you don’t have an OBJECTIVE basis for telling me I can’t. Law, and legal actions notwithstanding.
May 12, 2009 at 1:08 pm |
Joshua
Okay, and why should it matter to me if my morals have no objective backing? Regardless of whether morals are objective or not, they have an effect on people. A child doesnt know or even consider whether the approval or disapproval of its parents is objective; but it affects the child regardless. Morality neednt be objective to be meaningful. My intersubjective source of morals, btw, is more like an us or a we than a me or an I. But I am certainly a large element of the source of my morality.
And you can choose to impose yourself, or at least try, on me if you like and I will have no objective base for telling you you cant (law and the laws of physics withstanding). And so what? I still have my own intersubjective base for telling you to fuck off. Which is usually sufficient. Of course, I don’t know what this “imposing yourself” on me is. Is it like, how, Jehovah “imposed” himself on Mary? In which case, I would have the legally objective support of using my subjective fist and imposing it on your face.
May 12, 2009 at 1:28 pm |
Morality is subjective whether you read from an ancient book or not. Everyone interprets it differently.
Either you follow the rules of morality from a man from 2,000 years ago, or you make them up for yourself based on the culture you live in. Either way it is very subjective.
May 12, 2009 at 1:11 pm |
Nice…that’s actually pretty funny. I chuckled out loud. You know what, we dont’ agree. But I’m okay with that. We’d prolly get along just fine even tho’ we don’t.
I’m totally with agreeing to disagree. Cheers brutha!
May 12, 2009 at 2:07 pm |
Well… thanks… glad I could make you chuckle. Now I just need to get you to repent from worshiping an evil, and mythical, god. Your honor and rectitude depend on it.
May 12, 2009 at 2:26 pm |
It`s obvious that morality is subjective, and changes over the years. Here`s what one of history`s great teachers said on the subject: “It hath been said, `Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement`: but I say unto you” etc…”It hath been said by them of old time, `Thou shalt not forswear thyself`…but I say unto you” etc…”Ye have heard that it hath been said, `An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth`: but I say unto you”…and so on. All found in Matthew 5 of course!!
May 12, 2009 at 3:27 pm |
I don’t think that it means literally put to death, I think that whoever wrote that was using death as a metaphor, or something.
May 12, 2009 at 3:50 pm |
I am an all-out, can’t be turned away, wholehearted, sold-out, believer in Jesus Christ as my Saviour, and I am commited to believing every word of the Bible even before I read every word. A lot of these debates about whether the Bible is true or not is so worthless. Every person is either going to believe it or not, and as someone stated earlier, the Bible is always going to be scrutinized and misinterpreted. Whether we want to admit it or not, people feel convicted by the words that are in the Bible, and that’s why we have these debates. There were people who walked with Jesus and saw Him perform miracle after miracle that didn’t believe He was who He said He was. I guess, ultimately, we’ll all see in the end. Either you believe or you don’t, but arguing the point is meaningless to say the least.
May 12, 2009 at 4:16 pm |
Who “walked with Jesus and saw Him perform miracle after miracle” I would like to know? There is no real evidence that he even existed outside of The Bible (so THAT isn`t evidence), and there is no record either of any of these earth-shattering miraculous events for which he was supposedly responsible!
May 12, 2009 at 4:47 pm |
“there is no record either of any of these earth-shatter miraculous events”
The Bible is a record of those events.
If I go to my county recorders office and browse the records and find some random account of Mr. X marrying Ms. Y you would say there is no evidence that Mr. X or Ms. Y existed or that they ever got married (outside the recorders written records book).
Hmmm…
May 12, 2009 at 5:17 pm
The gospels were supposed eyewitness accounts from 40+ years after the miracles occurred. Far from an unquestionable valid record. They can’t even prove who wrote the gospels, and who would refute their testimony after so many years? With the short life-spans of the time, it is highly unlikely any of them were even written by Jesus’ disciples.
May 12, 2009 at 5:36 pm
“Noddy Goes To Toytown” provides written evidence of the existence of Noddy, Big Ears, Mr Plod, and a whole host of other characters, but we don`t necessarily believe that they were real, or that the events recorded actually happened! The Bible is NOT a reliable written record of historical events!!
May 12, 2009 at 3:52 pm |
I’m personally an athiest, I don’t believe in living my life under the rules of another.
May 12, 2009 at 3:54 pm |
By the way, how do you get your comments to show up at all times? I’m trying to do that on my blog.
May 12, 2009 at 4:12 pm |
This is just a comment to Min. Michael Ford II
I had trouble figuring that out as well. All you have to do is go to the settings tab, and click on “discussion”. There you can change any comment settings.
May 12, 2009 at 4:25 pm |
Yes there are various comment options in the discussion settings tab.
May 12, 2009 at 3:58 pm |
Assalamualaikum
ok a guys aredy tried to explain the Islamic vies on this which u took as ribbish
ook im muslim yh soo that is lyk waay offensive
and i have christian mates too so this posts pretty offensive too.
u cant jus lyk pick quotes n think u no what something means…
ok so y we’r muslims coz yeh the bibles got errors ….jesus was actually ‘muslim’ it wernt called islam back then was called chritainty and he taight about the oneness of God but the bible which was orginally word of God got changes the meaning got changed and everything and jesus’s teachings got alterd too…so much in fact the the preaching of one God got changed into Jesus bein son of God LOOL hahaaa…..so ppl went off the right path so God sent the last messanger the Prophet Muhammad s.a.w. and revealed the Quran…now that has NEVER been changed all the words in that are EXATCLY THE SAME AS THEY WER AND WILL FOREVER BE THE SAME jus chack any copy if u lyk from any part of the world. …lol now dont go on google and luk it up an english translation that hav 2 slight variations yh im on about the arabic..cuz when translatin arabic to english some of the words might be slightly different but the arabic and meaning has never evver changed….
in Islam everythin for a reason yh everything explained…but thers some ppl hu think that u can go up to any muslim person n if they dont no an answer then islam is fals well nooo..u gotta lyk read the quran 4 urself read the english whatver nn learn about islam and actually learn about religons be4 critisng them yh??
Go taught NOT to kill both in Christianity and Islam
May 12, 2009 at 4:21 pm |
I am so pleased to learn that the same god teaches both Christians and Muslims not to kill – two of the most peace-loving groups of people that ever graced our planet!!
May 13, 2009 at 12:06 am |
Well said barriejohn, Well said!
May 13, 2009 at 11:47 am |
Assalamualaikum(peace be upon u)
jazakallah/thanks 4 replying back nicely..lol unless it was saracstic but im hoping u meant it thanks!!
yh basically what christians believe bout jesus he totaly believed lyk the opposite u get me?? he taught bout ONENESS OF GOD n insted in his name thy taught about jesus bein son wel hes not
and yh its the same God lol coz it is only ONE God our Lord our creator if u think bout it ther can only be 1 or els god will be limitd we believe hes unlimited by all things as he creatd everthing so he cant be limited by sumthin he cretd can he???
yh jesus, moses,davis,solomon,abraham,ishamel, whoever else any other prophets lol they believed in Allah they wer actually prophets in Islam
lol 1 of my christian m8 was yk ‘no offens r u guys anti-christ??? n we wer lyk laughin n stuff n lyk nooo way i cnt believe she thought tht hehe not her fault but no we’r not we’r lyk the mostt jesus lovers lol
May 12, 2009 at 4:00 pm |
Great article. I’ve posted the link on a post I made entitled “Why pro-life politics is hypocritical.” Your article shows further how crazy it all truly is!
http://mathgeneration.wordpress.com/2009/05/10/why-pro-life-politics-is-hypocritical/
May 12, 2009 at 4:07 pm |
Just to add my two cents:
To say that it was Christians who would have followed this is to forget that the Old Testament is actually a Jewish text, used by Jews, Christians, and Muslims long after the traditions described had died out. (and I know you have references the New Testament as well.) And as someone pointed out, we don’t necessarily know what the actual text meant, it was written in a language which has evolved immensely since the time it was written, and had existed as an oral tradition first. Even in 200 CE, when the church wasn’t even formed, there were debates as to the meaning of certain words. So much so that there was need for the Talmud, rabbinic texts discussing laws and meaning of the Tanakh.
But, perhaps I am forgetting your point, which was that people still use the text today as divine word, which is to be followed?
I do agree, the bible is filled with contradictions, and practices which us modern folk would balk at.
May 12, 2009 at 4:10 pm |
Fun discussion. Here are a few others:
Rape is OK in some circumstances. Deuteronomy 22:28. If a man rapes a woman who is not betrothed, he must pay her father 50 shekels and he must marry her and never divorce. Lucky girl.
It is preferable to have homosexuals rape a man’s daughters than for them to proposition the man’s male houseguests. Genesis 19:7-8. Also Judges 19:23-26
Women were created solely for the purpose of men. I Corinthians 11:8-9
Women should not be allowed to even speak in church. I Corinthians 14:34-35
It is acceptable for men to have sex outside marriage. Genesis 25:6,
If you read Exodus 21:7, you will learn the rules regarding how to sell your daughter, and what to do if she fails to please her new master.
It is OK to kill interracial couples, Numbers 25:6-13
I think the main problem with fundamentalists is that they either are unknowledgeable about the history of the bible, or they refuse to take into account that each book of the bible was written as a direct reflection of the social context of the time. Unfortunately, fundamentalism is as alive and well in the United States as it is in the Mideast. It is the triumph of dogma over compassion and reason, and it often masquerades (or is exploited) as populism.
However any of us choose to worship (or not) that leads to a life of compassion, love, reason, and service is good. Any belief system that attempts to rationalize contempt, intolerance, exclusion, or any infliction of pain is bad. It seems pretty simple to me. But perhaps I’m just a simple girl.
May 12, 2009 at 4:32 pm |
There are other commands in the New Testament that are now only obeyed by a minority of fundamentalist Christians. Women are to wear their hair long (possibly meaning NEVER cut), and are to have their heads covered. Whether this only applies in church gatherings is a moot point, but many Christian sects insist on the woman`s head being covered AT ALL TIMES, and at one time all devout women in the western world would have worn a bonnet indoors and out as a symbol of their subjection to the male! Even as recently as the Coronation of 1953, one of the objections to the televising of the event was that women would be watching (and thus praying) with heads uncovered, and men with hats on – how times have changed!!
May 12, 2009 at 4:12 pm |
Interesting that you quoted Old Testament commands to ethnic Israel and one New Testament passage dealing with what God says that sinners DESERVE the physical and spiritual death penalty. You deserve it, I deserve it, Jesus got it. Do you honestly think that passage calls for believers to hand out the death penalty to non-Christians?….really? I expected more of you. Might I also quote Darwin out of context to build my straw man? “To suppose that the human eye….”
May 12, 2009 at 5:05 pm |
“Do you honestly think that passage calls for believers to hand out the death penalty to non-Christians?”
What is the value of these verses to a Christian if they are to ignore them anyway? Why are they necessary to your Bible?
Christians use Old Testament teachings all the time when it is politically correct. A god that commands murder would not turn around and teach to love your enemy. It doesn’t make any sense for a god described as having “perfect” love. The words “hate” and “kill” are scattered throughout the Old Testament.
My point isn’t that I believe Christians are called to hand out the death penalty. That wouldn’t bode well for me. This is just another example of how inconsistent and vengeful the teaching of this god is.
May 12, 2009 at 4:24 pm |
[...] via The Bible instructs how to deal with an atheist or anyone who rejects God . . . Kill them [...]
May 12, 2009 at 5:40 pm |
Good luck with your atheism. There’s an especially cozy spot in hell for you.
Just kidding. But seriously, I think of God as a loving Father because I’ve felt it, time and time again. Can I prove it? Nope. Am I just psyching myself out? Possibly. I can only say that every time I’ve walked away from God (or what I think is God or whatever) my life has grown cold and dark and empty, every single time. As sure as the sun rises and sets. And every time I’ve come back to that love, my life has been changed for the better and I’ve been made a more fulfilled person, every single time.
So yeah are there contradictions in the Bible? Fundamentalists would probably say no and they’d go to great lengths to explain themselves thru them. Power to ‘em. For me personally I think there are a few there, but in my own life to date there has not yet been a contradiction in what I believe to be God’s loving character. I am young though I admit.
May 12, 2009 at 5:59 pm |
The sad thing is I thought your first sentence was serious. It wouldn’t be the first time I’ve heard it.
My goal isn’t to de-convert you from Christianity, only to post topics and questions for discussion. You are free to make up your own mind of what you believe. If Christianity is practiced with a sense of humility and charity, much good can come from it. But from my perspective, belief in a man made god is simply time wasted worshiping something invisible.
May 13, 2009 at 7:49 am |
I can quite honestly say that when I was a Christian I was almost deliriously happy, but that doesn`t mean that that was a healthy state of mind – in fact I can now see that I was very largely divorced from reality, and that fact did get me into serious financial difficulties, which almost lost me some very good friends (and family members) who mercifully stuck by me!! (I treated them appallingly, but that`s another story.) You sound very much like all these crazy Mohammedans here Joshy, who think they can just sit down and, by argument, come to conclusions about the nature and demands of God. At least fundamentalist Christians try to follow the teachings of a book which they believe to have been verbally inspired! I think you need to ask yourself whether this “god” you believe in is not just a figment of your own imagination, who fulfils some deep need for comfort and reassurance in a somewhat threatening and uncertain world. I don`t really agree with BEattitude here that this is all well and good if it doesn`t harm anyone else, because from my own painful experiences I can testify that it is a state of mind that holds many dangers!!!
May 13, 2009 at 8:00 am |
I agree with you barriejohn. Faith is a dangerous line to walk.
As soon as a person loses sight of reality and becomes completely lost in their faith it can be dangerous. Religion can inspire people to fly planes into buildings and bomb abortion clinics.
So yes, tread carefully. When a person starts following voices in their head as commands from god, they need to check themselves into a hospital.
May 12, 2009 at 5:58 pm |
Golly! You forgot Number 241:13-14:
“13 And the LORD told Aaron to give the unbelievers an ice cream cone,
14 that they might enjoy some fudge ripple.”
May 13, 2009 at 12:54 pm |
It wouldn`t have been made with powdered milk though, because Jesus said: “Marvel not” Boom! Boom!
May 12, 2009 at 6:04 pm |
These commands were given for us to recognize how serious sin is to God and how serious it was for God Himself to be slaughtered on a cross for our sins. We have no right to hate our enemies when Jesus sacrificed Himself for a world of His own enemies. The cross is where God’s love is made evident. His love is not left to our warm and fuzzy “self-actualizing” philosophies….it was tangible, selfless, and bloody.
May 12, 2009 at 6:21 pm |
It was certainly bloody. But I fail to see why a god would require a human sacrifice as a ransom payment for our sin. A person giving up their life to save others is the ultimate selfless act. But I fail to see how burnt animal sacrifices and a bloody human sacrifice would be necessary to a creator of our immeasurable universe.
May 12, 2009 at 6:06 pm |
And, personally, references to Right-wing religious hypocrisy have nothing to do with me.
May 12, 2009 at 6:15 pm |
You seem like a well meaning person. I have many Christian friends like you that are very selfless people. I don’t post examples of religious hypocrisy to criticize all Christians. Only to show how easily religion can be used in an attempt to justify evil actions and words.
There is a quote from Steven Weinberg that sums it up:
“With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.”
May 12, 2009 at 6:11 pm |
[...] The Bible instructs how to deal with an atheist or anyone who rejects God . . . Kill them. This is the ninth chapter in the series My List: Believe the Bible? Read why I started this list in About Me. The [...] [...]
May 12, 2009 at 7:27 pm |
Ah yes, let’s ignore that in Deuteronomy God was laying down the Law to a certain people of a certain time and apply it to all time, ignoring the context . . . well done sir.
May 12, 2009 at 7:59 pm |
God commanded “certain followers” in a “certain time” to kill non-believers, horribly mistreat women, and slaughter nations of people including children who worshipped different gods. But the laws are not applicable today.
My mistake. God is good.
May 12, 2009 at 9:14 pm |
[...] by Cory Tucholski on May 12, 2009 Imagine my surprise when I found this post in my list of the most popular posts of the moment. A skeptic who goes by the moniker “The [...]
May 12, 2009 at 9:57 pm |
Really not sure why you chose to use the bible the way you did in this post?
May 13, 2009 at 8:57 am |
LOLOLOLOLO!
Such a limited opinion.
The Only True God DESERVES loyalty- and demands TRUTH.
This deceptive world is only temporary- where every vice is glorified.
all justify themselves, and few agree on ANYthing!
In the New Heavens and the New Earth to come, there will BE no
Deception- as found in CHURCHianity, the world religions, and the
Governments.
Liars and Deceivers will not EXIST then, as it was, for a time, in ancient
Israel, which later left the Only True God, and became as society is
today- without virtue, without truth!
Athiests are either abominally ignorant, or very honest; turned off by
the Ridiculous Dogma of Churchianity!
the Mad JW
themadjw@comcast.net
May 13, 2009 at 9:37 am |
Where exactly is the evidence for all (or indeed any) of these mad assertions?
May 13, 2009 at 10:03 am |
The “Only True God” would DESERVE loyalty if he were true. Just because you believe it doesn’t make it so. Everyone is convinced with no proof or evidence that their version of god is true.
May 13, 2009 at 10:21 am |
My opinion is bsed on Fact, not religion: I love science- yet hate the hypocrasy in it, that exists in religion!
Consider:
Billions of cells, made of
countless billions of molecules,
made of countless trillions of atoms,
made of countless trillions and more
trillions of sub-atomic particles.
All arranged to co-operate together
in systems- muscles, skeletons, organs,
nervous systems, etc, and designed in
a manner allowing them to exist in
different environments.
Thus, all living things are complex
beyond full comprehension!
The odds are infinitly better for you
or I to go to the store every day for
a long lifetime, and to hit the big
jackpot EACH and EVERY TIME.
Modern technology, with centuries of
science behind it, is FINALLY able to
make some crude robots, based on the
design of biology.
It would be FAR more credible that these
robots (such as the wacaru by
Mitusbishi- pardon my spelling) could
build themselves than to swallow the
Dogma of Evolution!
Then we have the ‘Big Bang’…
Anyone ever hear of an explosion where
the exploded matter gathers together
forming things?
All the planets- and their many moons-
all in perfect orbits?
May 13, 2009 at 10:25 am |
Your argument makes a case for a god, but not necessarily your version of god. Maybe Zeus is behind the whole thing.
May 14, 2009 at 8:19 am
Very TRUE: from here, one continues to learn about Hm by studying Creation!
For examples, we have color vision which is fine-tuned to the spectrum f this atmosphere. He gave us the capability to see Beauty. (Not black & white vision of just Function).
We all have a conscience (which many override) that TELLS us certain things- like murder and theft- are Wrong.
Indications of a Loving and Just God that cares…
May 14, 2009 at 8:19 am
themadjw.wordpress.com
May 13, 2009 at 1:00 pm |
You obviously have absolutely no conception of a virtually infinite universe, so how on earth can you grasp the concept of an infinite god? I`m amazed!!
May 13, 2009 at 3:20 pm |
You don’t seem to understand evolution, the big bang, OR gravity. These are all well understood. I suggest you educate yourself on something (in this case, science) before you claim it is false.
To touch on them a little more:
All those tiny things working together to make you aren’t doing it by chance, it isn’t random… they’re following the rules of the system. You’re just one of the possible outcomes. I’m not going to go any further on this. Evolution has never been a “dogma” and it’s as close to being an accepted fact as anything can be in science… We’ve watched it happen in controlled, laboratory settings. (p.s. you spell it “Wakamaru”)
The Big Bang was not an explosion, per se. It’s a sudden expansion. Even if it were an explosion your argument wouldn’t work. I’d venture to say that every time you’ve seen something explode you’ve seen the remnants (smoke, dust, etc) drawn back down by gravity. The Wikipedia article on it is a decent primer (bonus points: the theory was proposed by a guy who was a Roman Catholic Priest AND scientist).
Can you clarify “perfect orbits”? There’s virtually no such thing. All the planets, moons, etc are in relatively stable orbits, but not perfect. Given a long enough time span they’ll either get flung away from, or crash into the body they’re orbiting (we’re slowly losing our own moon, at the rate of about 1 inch per year).
Also, copy-pasting whole arguments you’ve used in other forums (many of which have been shown false) is kind of poor form, don’t you think? http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/jehovahs-witness/TQJ5KPG2E48TC1LA7
May 14, 2009 at 8:23 am
“These are all well understood.”
Famous Last words.
So are Reincarnation, Astrology, and ‘Hellfire’- yet none are real!
Explain to us what Gravity is, please!
Exactly what is it?
Photons? Electrons?
Mike, the Mad JW
themadjw,wordpress
May 14, 2009 at 3:01 pm
I’d actually say that none of your examples are “well understood”. Based on what we “know” about them you can not make accurate predictions about something in the future.
Really, asking me to explain these things is just arrogance and laziness. There’s plenty of information on them in textbooks, on the internet, etc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron
May 13, 2009 at 9:04 am |
I’m not sure that being a follower of Christ requires such arrogance. At the end of the day Paul said that some pots were setup for honor, and some for dishonor. I don’t care if an atheist or anyone for that matter disagrees with my belief in the one true God. His qualities, unlike mine are immutable. So popping off about how stupid someone is because they don’t see what you see at best weakens your position, and at worst nullifys it.
Christ IS who he said is he. Research can prove that beyond a reasonable doubt, which in this country is all that is necessary to release you or convict you. For me it’s more than enough, but I don’t need everyone to agree with me in order for it to be true. The fact is, if everyone did, I’d question it’s validity more…because who’s offering the opposing viewpoint?!
May 13, 2009 at 9:41 am |
This is even worse than the above – “Christ IS who he said he is. Research can prove that beyond reasonable doubt”. This is without doubt the most ludicrous statement I have ever read in my entire life: you don`t need to be mad to be a Christian, but it sure helps!!
May 13, 2009 at 9:46 am |
Barrie – it is a waste EVERYONE’s time including yours to refute your baseless claims. I have a base. Do you? You can sit here and scream at the top of your lunch, the Bible is wrong lallalalalallala but until you examine REAL evidence I’m not hearing what you say.
The book of Isaiah, of which only 6 words are in question, not for meaning, rather usage, that do not alter the meaning of the sentence are in contention with the original text. This book was written thousands of years ago and has several predictions that HAVE COME TRUE! So you can believe whatever you want to believe. I believe the EVIDENCE leads me to Christ.
A good book for you to read would be Lee Strobels work ” The Case For Christ ” – he WAS an Atheist and now is not.
May 13, 2009 at 10:21 am |
What about the laundry list of predictions (including Jesus’ predictions) that haven’t come true?
Or the folklore that has no historical credibility?
If I make fifty predictions and one comes true, does that make me a prophet?
Using the Bible as a base for your argument does not give it credibility. The scriptures are much too flawed and conflicting to be a valid and trusted historical document. Yes, parts of it are true, but as a whole it is little more than unsubstantiated myths and folklore.
May 13, 2009 at 10:21 am |
I really enjoyed this post.
May 13, 2009 at 10:22 am |
So sad that Emotions control what a person can ‘see’!
May 13, 2009 at 10:24 am |
“If I make fifty predictions and one comes true, does that make me a prophet?”
Well if you made a prediction, before it happened…and then it did…I would say that either makes you very lucky, or in touch with God. Isaiah, Daniel, Nemiah, Jeremiah combined MADE HUNDREDS…300 of which the person names Jesus Christ fulfilled, 3000 years AFTER THEY WERE MADE. Don’t be ignorant…the evidence is there if you want to step outside the anguish of doubt.
“Yes, parts of it are true, but as a whole it is little more than unsubstantiated myths and folklore.”
PROVE IT.
May 13, 2009 at 10:32 am |
“PROVE IT.”
You can’t disprove an invisible god. The purpose of this blog is to shed light on the obvious flaws of the Bible and other religious faith.
Jesus’ fulfillment of Old Testament prophesy proves nothing. The entire story of his divine conception and birth in Jerusalem didn’t even show up until the second written gospel. This is a pretty important fact to accidently omit from the first written document of Jesus’ life.
Fulfillment of Messianic prophesy was the only way to convince Jews to convert to belief in Jesus. 80+ years after Jesus’ death and 50+ years after his death, the authors of the gospels could pretty much make up whatever they wanted to convince the Jews.
May 13, 2009 at 12:40 pm |
The two options you see regarding accurate predictions is either luck or divine knowledge? Seriously? So when the weather man makes a prediction about the weather, and he is accurate, it is because he is either lucky or has a direct line to the gods? If I make an accurate prediction about whether you will post another comment on this thread, it is either because I am lucky or because I have a direct line to the gods? Well, I predict that you will post again on this thread. Now, if I am correct, what is the explanation for why I am correct? It might have to do with making an inference based on information I already know–particularly that you have posted a lot here and you have consistently replied to posts directed at you.
Most “prophecies” are so vague and ordinary that it would be lucky if the predictions did not come true. Oh, there will be wars discussion of wars and earthquakes and rain and oh, there will be an eclipse and someone who does something that rallies a lot of people. Yah, that happens, like, every day. Good job Psychic Joe.
And then you have the writers of the Gospels, for example, who are consciously writing their fairy tale to coincide with vague “prophecies” and making sure they tell the reader every time they invent a fulfilled connection. If I were writing a story, and I wasnt bound by any historical facts or sense of intellectual honesty, it would be pretty easy to correlate my story with a few of the vague pronouncements of other literature.
“‘Yes, parts of it are true, but as a whole it is little more than unsubstantiated myths and folklore.’
PROVE IT.”
Read Alan Dundes’ ” Holy Writ as Oral Lit: The Bible as Folklore” if you want a detailed explanation of why the bible is folklore.
“Don’t be ignorant…the evidence is there if you want to step outside the anguish of doubt.”
I doubt he is going through much anguish for his doubt, anymore than you go through anguish for your doubt about big foot or aliens. Then again, there is probably more evidence for big foot and aliens than Jesus. Certainly more eye witness accounts–as for Jesus there is…drum roll…0.
May 13, 2009 at 10:26 am |
That’s fine that you say that – but only Jesus claimed to be the savior of the world and the son of the creator of the cosmos…and offers only belief as his bar of acceptance…EVERY other god requires something of/from you.
May 13, 2009 at 11:59 am |
Assalamualaikum again
just rememberd sumthin
this applies to all religion i think
well especially 2 christians/muslims/jews
this is 4 thos stupid ppl lol hu think killin non-believer is reli gonna help. as in jus killin em for tht sake.
if u kill em how r they eva gonna follow ur religion????????
i no thers ll these terrorsts n thts wt they r dumb u no how r ppl gonna cum 2 ur religion if u gonna kill em they dead aint gonna get a chance to convert hahaaa evn if they wanted to lol….
so mmuslims n christains arent allowed to kill yh
we well im guessin christains wud probly do this too…
teach others about religion, u dont force it just teach lyk im teachin u thts whats necesary…and we given the message it up 2 u whether u wanna follow or not
but on the day of judgement u cant say to god that i didnt no islam was tru cuz i was never told becoz u wer online by hal786 and whoever else has taught u about islam
muslims n christians r taught 2 luv n help others understnd the religion n especially not kill ppl lol
ok im a kid yh so dont go trashin my comment yh lol
in christianity isnt ther lyk thou shal not kill or sumthin
and in islam -killin 1 person is lyk u killed all of makind, but savin one perso life is lyk saving the life of all mankkind!!
May 13, 2009 at 12:49 pm |
In Islam killing 1 person is like killing all of mankind? I guess Muhhamed killed all of mankind a few hundred times over, eh?
And by the way, I could spell and write better than you when I was 7. Maybe if you read something other than the Koran you could structure a complete sentence.
Perhaps I wouldnt trash your comments if you werent so bold to claim that your ridiculous divine friend was going to judge me for recognizing the stupidity of his proofs.
Besides, I think you are a troll; I think that is the best explanation for how awful your writing is.
May 13, 2009 at 2:51 pm |
Assalamualaikum
You know what? If you don’t know what you’re talking about, then don’t say anything in the first place, yeah?
If it’s any of your business, right, I’m only a teenager yeah?? And I’m actually pretty good at English, for your information. In this comment I thought I’d do the English slightly better. I live in England and I was born here, so I don’t know what your point is supposed to be-apart from racist.
I don’t know what world you’re living in, but around here in England especially, online we don’t write in perfect English. When we’re chatting online, we write in slang. Slang yeah? Ever heard of the word?
If you actually read my last comment properly, then there should be no problem in understanding it. What on earth are you trying to say?
By the way do you even have a religion?? cuz ur pretty racist init??n yh dese last sentncs r called riten in slang ryt? nw if u hv a problem wid den den deal wiv it lol
May 13, 2009 at 3:33 pm
He was saying that it was difficult to understand you because of the way you were writing, and thus, difficult to take you seriously. You may use slang when “chatting” online, but if you’re planning to have a serious discussion with people who know little else about you that how you write poor grammar, poor spelling, and the apparent inability to form complete thoughts certainly don’t make people want to take you seriously.
Also, I didn’t see anything racist in the parent’s comment. In fact, I can’t even imagine how you inferred anything racist from what he said.
May 13, 2009 at 4:12 pm
Assalamualaikum Jeremy
It was the 1st sentence he said. It’s actually really offensive to Muslims.
I naturally write like that, so sorry.
Yeah, I’ll try to remember that for next time, like now. I was writing it quickly-so I didn’t exactly have time to make it correct English. I’m only a kid, right, so I’m not really going to be writing perfect English everywhere. Yeah chatting to my mates especially it’s slang. Anyway, I hope you guys try looking at the actual message I was trying to give-and not how I wrote it. As you can see I can write perfectly well, seeing as I’m actually British. My actual message was that in Islam or Christianity you aren’t allowed to kill for the sake that someone isn’t of the same religion as you. They never will be if you kill them, would they? They’d be too dead to convert! Only when someone attacks, you defend, but you don’t attack them for any old sake.
May 13, 2009 at 6:45 pm
Hal,
I would reply to your later comment, but it doesnt allow me to Hal.
First, thankyou for writing intelligibly. I’m not one of your mates, and I’m not interested in deciphering foreign slang. You and your friends read “A Clockwork Orange” a bit too much?
Jeremy is perceptive. I didnt say aything racist at all. And my comment about Muhammed has nothing to do with race. If my comment was offensive to you and perhaps other muslims, it’s something I can accept. I don’t respect Islam, and thus it is likely that things I will say won’t come across as respectful. Realize: Islam is not a race. It is a religion–an ideology; an ideology that expresses certain values and beliefs in its exulted book, the Koran. Having dislike toward an ideology is very different than having dislike toward a race; a race, if by race it is meant people having a particular skin tone or coming from a particular geographical location has no direct correlation with a person’s values and beliefs. An ideology, however, is values and beliefs–and a person’s values (there character) is certainly a valid object of criticism. “Nazism”, for example, is an ideology (albeit certainly less structured than most religions) and few people have any problem with nazis or neo-nazis from being ostracized or criticized.
Repeatedly in the Koran, Muhammed says and does things that I find depraved. For example, he encourages his followers to kill and dominate people for the single reason that those people do not believe he talks to angels. He encourages his followers to kill and dominate people for the single reason that those people do not bow to his authority. He tells his followers to seek out and destroy people who do not believe gods exist, and repeatedly insults people and makes absolutely absurd generalizations about people who do not believe gods exist.
And why would the first thing be offensive to muslims? Are you saying Muhammed did not kill people?
You are probably a decent fellow hal–it is unlikely that Islam is worthy of your respect either. But then, if you left islam, for any ideology, even something like Jainism which is completely pacifistic, you would be marked for death for being an apostate.
right, a religion of peace.
May 14, 2009 at 10:52 am
Assalamualaikum
Firtsly, I’m a girl in case you didn’t know!
Ok about Islam and killing:
you aren’t allowed to kill. The only instances are i think, about when someone attacks you as in a proper war against your religion. Then you can defend yourself. Even in war, the Muslims are the most peaceful. Whether you agree or not, these are the facts. In war, Muslims aren’t allowed to kill women, children, i think old people, or harm crops and buildings also i think. Back then in the time of the Prophet s.a.w. the Muslims were in proper wars becasue the Quraish didn’t like them being Muslim. In fact a lot of them became Muslim themselves later on anyway, because they saw the beauty of it. But at first they fought. The non-believers attacked the Muslims. So it was a war. And they had a lot of rules for war, like i mentioned. Even the prisoners, they had to take care of them like a brother. You had to give them food, water etc. Oh yeah, they used to have like proper fights then too not like nowadays.
I would never leave my religion. Why would i want to go to Hell in the afterlife?
So, if you think about it, bombs are probably haram, ’cause when a bomb falls it’s unlikely it will kill just men fit to fight. It’s not right. Suicide bombers-Suicide is HARAM IN ISLAM, totally not allowed.
So the actual religion of Islam IS PEACEFUL. Muslims used to be peaceful too. But, nowadays you get these people who call themselves Muslims, but they don’t follow the teachings of Islam. But that’s still not everyone.
There are still some people Alhamdulillah, who try to live their lives as good Muslims and good people in general. We go to work/school in my instance, pray 5 times a day, read the Quran, give to the poor, try to do the pilgrimage and fast during Ramadan. Follow God as He is your creator. Why do you want to follow Shaitan/devil? And the funny thing is even even the devil knows that God exists. He wants people not to follow God, but he knows that Allah exists, nonetheless and that he was also created by God.
So, who’s better the person who doesn’t believe in God at all or the devil??
and btw what exactly are your views skepticat, about life/religion etc?
May 16, 2009 at 7:13 pm
Hal,
“Ok about Islam and killing:
you aren’t allowed to kill. The only instances are i think, about when someone attacks you as in a proper war against your religion.”
Even if I granted to that the only instances when the Quran or Muhammed encouraged killing as a defense, what I just quoted is internally contradictory. “You arent allowed to kill” and “You are allowed to kill when someone attacks you” Both statements cannot be true.
However, I dont grant you that. the Quran does encourage killing of people and the use of violence against people and the threat of violence against people for other purposes than mere self defense. Simple example: the territory that Muhammed claimed before the moment of his death was greater than the territory he claimed at the moment of his first hallucination. If violence was never used except for self-defense, his territory would not have expanded as it did. Even if violence was initially used for self defense (which it actually rarely was), it was then used to suppress and conquer the people who supposedly provoked self defense. If my neighbor attacks me, it may make sense to say it is self defense to kill him in the process of him trying to hurt me; but it doesnt make as much sense to say it is self defense for me to then, after killing him, go over to his house, kill his sons, and then enslave his daughters and wife. I am simply humoring myself when responding to you about this matter. A) I doubt you will change your mind about this B) Your claim is so utterly ridiculous that is almost not worth even humoring myself over it.
“I would never leave my religion. Why would i want to go to Hell in the afterlife?
A) there is no hell. Just like there is no elysian fields or hades or any other numerous imaginary place people have conceived we go after we die. There is only… the Matrix.
b) I dont understand your motives. After all, you worship a fictional god who feels hell is just.
“We go to work/school in my instance, pray 5 times a day, read the Quran, give to the poor, try to do the pilgrimage and fast during Ramadan. ”
The only thing of any virtue there is going to work/school and giving to the poor. Praying 5 times a day is silly, so is making a pilgrimage and fasting.
“Follow God as He is your creator. Why do you want to follow Shaitan/devil?”"
I don’t follow satan nor want to. Satan doesn’t exist anymore than Jehovah. And, simply because a god were my creator wouldn’t justify me following it. That god could be a complete asshole. Are you of the sort that thinks a child should do everything a parent says regardless of how ridiculous the requests of the parent is? If Jehovah exists and wants me to obey him, he shouldnt have built me with a brain that was inevitably going to come to the conclusion that the evidence for his existence was crap and his behavior and commands absurd. What an idiot.
“and btw what exactly are your views skepticat, about life/religion etc?”
A bit of a vague question Hal.
May 17, 2009 at 1:40 am
No need to be vague in your reply though skeptikat – “My country is the world, and my religion is to do good” (Thomas Paine: 1737-1809). What a great summary of the rationalist`s philosophy!
May 17, 2009 at 11:45 am
Assalamualaikum
I’m a Muslim, so why bring Jehovah into this?
And as for my wuestion, seemed pretty simple to me. Seems like i know about my life. If someone asked me then i could anser straight away-I’m a Muslim, I believe in One God.My religion is Islam. Well, shows the difference between a believer and a non-believer doesn’t it?
OK. There is a Heaven and a Hell. My motives:to teach you about Islam. I’m not one of those dumb people, who are like ‘come to our religion’ and what do they do? they kill them. LOL!!How are they supposed to come to your religion then? Muslim’s are taught to teach about our religion to others. I don’t want you to burn in Hell. Satan’s real too.
So, please, actually study a religion, before you write comments against it. You don’t know about Islam, even if you actually think that you do. If you weren’t interested in Islam at all, then why bother writing comments about it? Learn to respect others.
If a parent tells the child to do something haram, then they shouldn’t do it.
May 18, 2009 at 3:42 pm
barriejohn,
My reply wasn’t vague. I didn’t reply at all.
Hal,
“I’m a Muslim, so why bring Jehovah into this?”
Because Muslim’s purportedly worship Jehovah. Jehovah is the god of the jews; and the muslims claim to worship the same god; the god of the muslims is therefore Jehovah as well.
“So, please, actually study a religion, before you write comments against it. You don’t know about Islam, even if you actually think that you do. ”
Given your comment about Jehovah, perhaps it would be more appropriate for you to study Islam yourself. I know plenty about Islam. Apparently, and not surprisingly, more than you. Praying 5 times a day and writing “Assalamualaikum” doesn’t qualify as knowledge.
“If you weren’t interested in Islam at all, then why bother writing comments about it? Learn to respect others.”
I’m not quite sure what you mean by this. Who said I am not interested in Islam? I am interested in Islam on an intellectual level–understanding its history, its ideology, etc. I am certainly not interested in becoming a member. Regardless of whether I am interested in becoming a member, I am still interested in discussing its place in modern society–which is to say it deserves no place at all, except, perhaps, the same place that Nazism holds.
And I respect people who I feel deserve it, if by “respect” you mean something like “to hold in admiration.” If by “respect” you mean something different, I suggest you specify.
May 13, 2009 at 12:26 pm |
You can’t disprove an invisible god.
I didn’t ask you to prove that – the evidence speaks for itself. I asked you to prove this:
“The scriptures are much too flawed and conflicting to be a valid and trusted historical document. Yes, parts of it are true, but as a whole it is little more than unsubstantiated myths and folklore.”
Your argument is a bunch of mealy mouth complaining that you can’t support your position with evidence…I can’t really assert your opinions as evidence…I need evidence and then we can form an opinion.
SO – will the jury please not exhibit a….what’s your evidence to support your claim?
May 13, 2009 at 12:44 pm |
Read my previous reply… you need to learn how to reply directly to the comments and not just the original post. Could you ask Jesus to help with you that Joshua?
May 13, 2009 at 12:52 pm |
Btw, I can disprove an invisible god. By peeing on your face.
May 13, 2009 at 12:54 pm |
HHAHAHA I turn the other cheek? You obviously need a pot to piss in, so I’m going to give mine.
May 13, 2009 at 12:56 pm
You replied directly to a comment. Maybe Jesus does exist.
haha. Just kidding.
May 13, 2009 at 12:53 pm |
How would your god like that? My pee on your face?
thats what I thought.
May 13, 2009 at 12:55 pm |
By the way – making a prediction and a writing down a prophecy in the biblical sense are clearly NOT the same thing, but I certainly appreciate your ability to marginalize the discussion to:
No it’s not, yes it is, nuh uh, no it’s NOT…I’m tellin’
May 13, 2009 at 1:00 pm
What, you have a problem with my pee on your face? Maybe you should turn the other cheek. Then Ill pee on that cheek too.
The primary difference between making a prediction and writing down a “prophecy in the biblical sense” is the person who does the latter calls his prediction a prophecy because he delusionally thinks his thoughts are special love letters from a god.
May 13, 2009 at 12:55 pm |
Prove my pee isn’t proof. Pee drinker.
May 13, 2009 at 1:00 pm |
Look through this blog for my evidence of why the Bible is flawed. And there will be more to come. I’m not going to jump at your command and write a novel of why the Bible is flawed in the comments section of this blog.
I’ve given many examples and you are free to attempt to refute them. The Bible isn’t true just because it says it is.
May 14, 2009 at 8:25 am |
I haven’t seen ANY evidence- except your Opinion…
Mike the Mad JW
theMadJW.wordpress
May 14, 2009 at 8:42 am
Posting obvious biblical contradictions, flawed teaching and evil laws is evidence. It is opinion when people attempt to explain them away with illogical reasoning.
May 13, 2009 at 5:48 pm |
This is silly. It seems like YOU WANT a “religious war.”
May 13, 2009 at 7:59 pm |
You mean, like a Jihad?
May 14, 2009 at 10:37 am |
Assalamualaikum
just in case you have heard wrong, or maybe this is the misconception even between Muslims lol, Jihad DOESN’T MEAN HOLY WAR, it actually means:the inner struggle, or struggle for God. It’s basically struggling for the way of God. The inner struggle. The best Jihad is said to be the one against one’s own desires/egos. You know when ther’s like a voice inside you, saying to do something bad, but you go against your own bad desires/nafs that’s the best Jihad. Just ’cause some people on TV think that it means war, everyone seems to believe it is. That’s one of the biggest misconceptions of Islam, and maybe why people think it’s violent. In fact it’s the most peaceful religion. Hope that clears up any misconceptions!
May 14, 2009 at 1:41 pm
As a student of the religion of Islam and its history, I want to provide you etymological information on the origin and meaning of the word jihad in Arabic, which even many Muslims don’t know unfortunately:
Jihad derives from the usual three-consonant Arabic root jahd (the consonants: j-h-d). The word “jihad” is very close in meaning to jahd.
Jahd means “struggle” or “trying hard” or “effort, labor, toil” in Arabic.
And jihad is a derived form of this root and means “intensive and/or reciprocal exertion of effort”. In other words, it means “great struggle”.
Therefore, all kinds of struggle are properly called “jihad”, especially when they are against odds and opponents. Then jihad includes much more than military effort. It’s much wider in meaning than that.
So we come to the Quranic term “jihad fi sebili Allah” i.e. “struggle/great effort for the way of God”.
Hence, struggles such as countering, with wisdom and steadfast effort, those who spread lies and false propaganda about Islam and even countering the sinful invitations of the Devil and your own lowly desires with a great struggle have always been regarded as “jihad” by adequately-informed Muslims as well as the scholars throughout history and not only nowadays.
In sum, armed resistance to the enemies that want to suppress the believers’ respect for God and His messages and orders (hence, to suppress Islam) is one of the many aspects of the concept of jihad. But it is far from being the only one. Jihad is great struggle of any kind. The Quranic order of “jihad fi sebili Allah” is therefore great struggle for the protection and promotion of God’s way, of Godliness.
P.S. Do you now understand why I’m trying to kindly inform you here about the issue of correctly interpreting religion, Godliness and Islam? It’s my way of trying to counter, with great effort and with adequate wisdom, the many malicious opponents of Godliness, including all those who want to spread pseudo-informed prejudice, hatred and ignorance about religion, about Islam and about “the other”.
May 14, 2009 at 1:52 pm
Assalamualaikum Rawi
jazakallah for writing that bro!
btw who was the comment aimed at?
May 15, 2009 at 2:54 am
Obviously it wasn’t aimed at you because you already knew and agreed with what I explained. It was for the purpose of supporting and elaborating your point.
By the way, if some people here want no more information (which they call propaganda) about Islam from people who do know, then they should beware that I’m not dying for informing them or contributing to this blog. I came here just to make one comment and then stayed a little to remove some misunderstandings about it. That’s all.
Goodbye folks. Take care.
May 14, 2009 at 1:49 pm |
I am not reading any more propaganda posted by Mohammedans on this blog!!
May 14, 2009 at 1:52 pm |
Ditto.
May 14, 2009 at 1:56 pm |
Assalamualaikum
lol i know no such ppl called mohammedans! We worship God, like Christians n jews etc. not Muhammad s.a.w.
May 14, 2009 at 1:53 pm |
No more Moham-aganda please.
May 14, 2009 at 2:28 pm |
Assalamualaikum
Yeah i totally agree.
Stop spreading lies barriejohn.
May 17, 2009 at 5:11 pm |
Predictions are just the tineiest evidence that the Bible is from a Supreme Being- and we are not talking about the author of this site….
May 24, 2009 at 5:23 am |
Rawi: I think the big thing you overlook with your belief in Islam is that it has EXACTLY the same “proof” (notice the quotes) as Christianity, flying spaghetti monsterism, scientology, Judaism etc. That is: none other than saying “my book says so”.
You’re obviously not too schooled in the origins of the Qur’an: it was coddled together off stuff on bits of bark, leather, rocks etc just as the bible was from earlier scrolls. The people doing it made sure they burnt the evidence however to try and prevent people from later looking back to see what might have been changed. Something akin to “the dog ate my homework but here’s a rewrite that I made perfectly you just have to trust me”.
Anyhow, debates over which text is correct are a waste of time: they’re all written by men, make unsubstantiated claims about extraordinary supernatural stuff.. You simply cannot choose one over any other as they all say similar things.
So if you’re wasting time wondering why there seem to be so many problems with your religion (e.g. it’s stance on slavery however is pretty abhorrent.. much as you’d like to overlook or try to explain away why the quran doesn’t simply say “slavery is forbidden” ): it doesn’t make sense because it is nonsense. Full stop.
May 24, 2009 at 8:09 am |
Nathan, I am greatly schooled in the origins of my sacred book. I’m quite an expert on it compared with 99.9 per cent of western scholars of Islam and with that percentage of Muslims and atheists etc. of Muslim origin.
Unfortunately, you are unschooled and very shallowly and badly informed about the origins of the Quran. Otherwise you wouldn’t make those overly incorrect, invalid and, excuse me, arrogant comments.
The Quran was actually preserved by the strong memories of dedicated companions of the Prophet (God bless him and shower blissful security on him) who came from an orality-based society whose sole reliance for information was on the human memory. If you took one or two courses relating to orality and oral history, you will learn that people in oral societies tend to have much stronger memories than us. Lots of devoted preservers of the Quran therefore knew the Quran by heart very well and preserved it in this way in addition to the parchments on which it was always recorded.
The “burning alternative versions” story is a farce in terms of its exact content. The copies made by people who were not the companions of the Prophet and who were not good at written record-keeping were burnt during the reign of Caliph Uthman, the eminent, devoted companion and son-in-law of the Prophet.
Instead of those copies which were almost certain to include a load of spelling and other mistakes, the companions of the Prophet themselves formed a committee to correctly write down the Quran which was present not only in the parchments and other pieces of objects but also firmly in their memories. They did this twice. The first committe was held during the caliphate of Abu Bakr, the first caliph. The second review committee was held during the reign of Uthman himself, all by people who were the closest to the Prophet, who all witnessed the revelation of the Quran and knew the Quran by heart and with absolute accuracy.
The original scrolls were never burnt. They were lost through the centuries after the Prophet because they got old and illegible and also there was no necessity for them any more.
There are various intellectual, historical and factual/scientific reasons for accepting the Quran. The call to Islam is not based on such a stupid argument as “you should believe because I say so.”
Because you’re not schooled much about Islam and have been badly misinformed, your arrogant pretensions are forgiveable. But you should at least try to learn more about Islam and the Quran before the next time you find it for you to talk about it.
May 30, 2009 at 9:03 pm |
“If you took one or two courses relating to orality and oral history, you will learn that people in oral societies tend to have much stronger memories than us.”
Which is why you accept the validity of the Iliad and the Odyssey right? I hear Homer had the greatest memory any man has ever had.
And if you took one or two courses on eye witness testimony, you would learn that people think they have extraordinary memory but typically do not. And of course, if you took one or two courses relating to orality and oral history, people in oral societies reaaaly like to embellish their stories–or in keeping it real speak: make shit up.
What is most extraordinary is not the memory of muhamed’s followers, but of the credulity of them. That is, perhaps, only matched by their obsequiousness toward muhamed (may all people shun his teachings for ever and ever).
Assalamualaikum
June 6, 2009 at 8:47 am |
Skeptikat, I’m afraid your argument is totally invalid and the logic behind it is erroneous: I was talking about memorizing a text which you believe you have to memorize. I was not talking about recounting random events and embellishing them.
Even we children of the written record can memorize a poem and even more when we have to. The people of oral societies who did not have the chance to rely on written records had to rely on their memories for all the information that they needed. So, their memories were even stronger than ours and a lot of them were normally very well capable of memorizing quite easily those long texts that they found necessary to know.
By the way, I’m a historian, educated at an American, western university. Soon beginning to specialize in Islamic history, God willing.
Muhammad’s earliest followers were quite discerning and capable men and women. Intelligent men and women… Their tremendous spiritual and moral feats against all those odds and the initial suffocating enmity of the entire world against them have well proven this. But if you read only that anti-Islamic, pseudo-scholarly trash most of which has been debunked in time by the orientalist tradition itself, you won’t see this of course.
If they had been credulous, they would have easily believed that louder and much more intense black propaganda against him instead of re-examining what kind of a person he now was and whether he was still a most sane and most honest person after his declaration of prophethood…
Finally, I advise you to read books with depth on Islamic history. Jonathan Berkey’s Formation of Islam could be a good start if you are still as narrow-minded as holding the irrational thought that Muslim professors and scholars always err and those who hate Islam by definition are to tell the truth. The substance is what matters, not the label. However, you should also learn that the Islamophobia of western study of Islam is dying down because it has no other way in the face of the new, more accurate historical data emerging.
Regards,
Reporter
June 13, 2009 at 2:14 am
Im sorry but any religion that says a woman is worth only half a man is ridiculous to me…if God created us from his own image….how is a woman then worth half a man…you speak a lot about respected men AND women…look at today…many middle eastern countries have imposed shari’a law….imposed by men of course…who only see the teachings of the Qu’ran in their own view…i used to be a muslim…born in Bosnia…tell me why i should believe a book that is 1400 years old…and not written by Mohammed…also look at how the different sects of Islam view one another…how can people say you are true muslim if only Mohammed’s relatives are caliphs…what gives them the right…why should not any willing and true muslim have that right…this is where humanity’s imprefections come into accord….we are selfish…both sects have problems with one another…and the same is with Christianity…they all believe in the same man-jesus and God yet look down on one another…and this was very prevalent during ancient times…how would God see this…if all wish to submit to God and worship him…why worship him in a manner that is decreed by some man…i wouldnt need a man telling me how to worship God…he has never seen God…he reads the same book as me…what gives him the right to do what wishes???
June 17, 2009 at 3:15 am
Edin, Islam never ever says that a woman is worth only a half man or half of a man. This is a slyly and sinisterly spread misinterpretation whose falseness is evident to anyone who knows something about this religion and is capable of enough analytical thinking.
The most prominent alleged basis for this argument is the fact that in Islam a woman is given half the share of a man in the division of the heritage of a dead person among the heirs. Before explaining the rationale behind this law, I ask you people this question: In medieval and early modern Europe, women and very often younger brothers were not given any share in the division of heritage at all. Given this, do you people believe that women and younger brothers were not considered human at all by the Europeans of only a few centuries ago? No, you never do that. So, why this hypocrisy when it comes to Islam? Ask this question to yourself, please.
As for the rationale of this Islamic rule. In Islamic law, their husbands and in the absence of a husband, their relatives or else their neighbors have to look after women financially and women don\’t have to spend for their own needs a penny whereas men are obliged to look after their family altogether. Therefore, men need lots of money and women need very little. Despite this lack of need on women\’s part for money, God, the sender-down of the Quran, wants women to have financial independence from their menfolk and thereforetells the Muslim community to give them half of the share of a man from inheritance. The Muslim inheritance law even appears to favor women when thought in this larger context rather than abuse them or reduce them to less than a man in the value of their humanity.
Regards,
Reporter
June 17, 2009 at 4:42 am
I know I said that I wasn`t going to read any more Mohammedan propaganda on this blog, but when Rawi`s comment turned up amongst my emails I just collapsed in laughter! You don`t seem to realize it, matey, but you`ve just shot yourself in the foot here. Muslim women are looked after by the men, so they don`t need to \”spend for their own needs a penny\” then. But this is PRECISELY what we are objecting to here!! Why should the women not have independent financial means, and spend their own money in the way that they wish, for God`s sake? And when you defend the practices of Islam by comparing it with the way that Christians carried on in the Middle Ages, I would just say, yes, that`s our point exactly – Islam is a primitive, backward, mediaeval religion which has made no progress since it was instituted, and thus has no place in the modern world!!
June 17, 2009 at 4:00 pm
Barriejohn’s question: “Why should the women not have independent financial means, and spend their own money in the way that they wish, for God`s sake?”
Enough proof that you did not understand the text that you claim to have “read”: Here is the part of my comment that you should have read: “Therefore, men need lots of money and women need very little. Despite this lack of need on women’s part for money, God, the sender-down of the Quran, wants women to have financial independence from their menfolk and therefore tells the Muslim community to give them half of the share of a man from inheritance.”
As can be seen, the women have absolute freedom to spend their money as they wish. The fundamental point here is that in Islamic law, her menfolk’s money is considered the woman’s own money whereas a woman’s money is considered only her own money and no man’s.
In other words, it’s the men who cannot spend their own money as they wish in Islamic law, rather than vice versa. Do you get it now?
I am afraid that those prejudiced and arrogant people who resist understanding such simple statements have no place in the modern world.
June 19, 2009 at 5:05 am
“Skeptikat, I’m afraid your argument is totally invalid and the logic behind it is erroneous: I was talking about memorizing a text which you believe you have to memorize. I was not talking about recounting random events and embellishing them.”
The Iliad and the Odyssey were memorized by bards and then performed. The validity of the Iliad and the Odyssey and the validity of the Quran are about the same, although the former books are much more interesting and have superior literary worth. The Quran is mostly interesting only for the fact that millions of people seem to think that it is inspired by a supernatural being and not simply the product of a delusional sociopath. Even if the people who preserved the Quran in their memories preserved it perfectly doesn’t make it any more valid than if people preserved the Iliad and the Odyssey perfectly. Furthermore, a feat of memory does not bestow any special validity on the object of memory, it only means, perhaps, the subject is very obsessed with the object.
And we all know how Muslims love to be sycophants.
“By the way, I’m a historian, educated at an American, western university. Soon beginning to specialize in Islamic history, God willing.”
Probably shouldn’t tell us the university. It would just make the university look bad.
“But if you read only that anti-Islamic, pseudo-scholarly trash most of which has been debunked in time by the orientalist tradition itself, you won’t see this of course.”
I’ve read the Quran. Which is sufficient material to confidently condemn Islam for the trash it is. Reading scholarly literature on the history of Islam is superfluous, but I’ve done that too.
“Jonathan Berkey’s Formation of Islam could be a good start if you are still as narrow-minded as holding the irrational thought that Muslim professors and scholars always err and those who hate Islam by definition are to tell the truth. ”
I’ll take my chances with those who hate Islam over those who love Islam. After all, those who hate Islam probably have read the same Quran as me;those who love Islam have to be reading some other version, cause there isn’t anything worth loving in the Quran I have read. Fortunately though, there are plenty of scholars of Islam, not necessarily muslim themselves, who neither love nor hate Islam, but take a pretty detached interest and present Islam in a cold and clinical perspective. And with that perspective, it only requires the additional heart of a human being to see how fucked up Islam is.
“Edin, Islam never ever says that a woman is worth only a half man or half of a man. This is a slyly and sinisterly spread misinterpretation whose falseness is evident to anyone who knows something about this religion and is capable of enough analytical thinking.”
Which is why, as we look into the history of Islam, we see that women consistently hold as many positions of political power as men. Oh wait… we don’t see that… but we do see a lot of empty placations resembling what you have written.
Regards,
Skepticat
June 22, 2009 at 3:17 am
Oh my… This is what we call the boldness of the ignorant…
Spektikat, your comparison of the compilation of Homer’s tales and the Quran plus authenticated hadith is beyond ridiculous. Entirely different historical, social and political conditions… Homer’s tales were folk myths that had existed for centuries and had never ever been supposed to be kept accurately, whereas the Quran was the holy book of thousands of convinced believers who had themselves witnessed and documented the life of the man who had been telling them these verses. Moreover, due to their tremendous political success, the closest followers of the Prophet were able to establish immediately a literary and scholarly tradition that would keep the message free from any politically motivated corrupting intervention from the outside and from those who had not listened to the prophet personally and thus had not been dictated the divine words in the process of its commitment into writing…
Besides, they had showed their determination to keep the verses accurate by committing them to writing as soon as they were revealed during the lifetime of the Prophet (peace and blessings be on him eternally)…
This intense, continuous intellectual effort which was corroborated and confirmed by thousands of well-known scholars or partial scholars in various parts of the Muslim world and this vigorous documentation from the actual moment of divine revelation… And you’re comparing it to the writing down of folk tales by obscure people in an obscure part of ancient history, just during the Greek Dark Ages! Are you joking? Trying to show me how blinded prejudice and hate can lead people to become?
The intensity of your prejudice is matched only by the bad manners that you have. I have read the Quran many times and I’m on the path to discover much more of its beauty with my increasing knowledge of Classical Arabic. As I read it and become more aware of the subtleties of its meanings as well as literary form, I become even more appreciative of the humanitarian and at the same time realistic and magnificent literary power of it. That power is matched by no literary work that I have ever encountered among the works of literary giants of world literature.
This time I send you no respectful regards, dear. I hope you learn about the badness of talking in this ignorant and self-complacent way. We have been taught this principle: “Speak based on knowledge and calm and honest judgement. If you can’t, then keep silent.”
Peaceful security be on those who choose to follow the veritable guidance.
Reporter
May 30, 2009 at 10:40 pm |
I’ve been reading though your posts, as a former christian I surprised myself with having mixed feelings on reading this blog. Its interesting when you realize part of your old brainwashed self was still lying around. Aside from that my main point in posting this was to say I actually was more interested in reading the responses the post invoked.
Very interesting, unfortunately some of the pro-religion responses were rather nonsensical. I enjoy reading a good debate!
June 13, 2009 at 1:58 am |
If God does exist and when i do eventually do die…do i not have the right to question him…he created us in an image of himself…i dont like saying that because that makes him human when he is suppose to be a higher being…but back to my topic…should i not be able to question gods actions…his choices….why give us life if we will live in eternity in heaven which is something we humans cant even begin to comprehend…why allow angels as they are spoken of a lot in the Quran and Bible a “free” pass to happiness and eternal life while we humans drudge away living our infantile lives away…the concepts of God are so outdated…if a man came out today and called himself a prophet of God…we would laugh at him…all of us would say give us your proof…and if all you had was a book…would you not call that man crazy?
this is where i believe that our brains are too big for our own good…then again if they were bigger we could possibly prove the existence or lack their of that God does exist and then this debate would finally be settled…but we as humans need something to fall back on…our imaginations and dreams allow us to come up with these fantasies of God, heaven and hell that you start believing in them
July 10, 2009 at 3:52 pm |
All religion is a crutch for those who cannot face the reality of death.
Your loving god made typhoid, malaria, polio etc…. nice guy! (sadistic bastard!)
After a recent earthquake people prayed to god to save the people buried in the rubble, but their all knowing, all powerful, loving god is the one who caused the quake in the first place! (sadistic bastard!)
If god made humans, why did he do such a poor job of it? Any first year engineering student would know that it is a bad idea to have a common opening for both the respiration and feeding systems, it’s just an accident waiting to happen! Why give humans an apendix, another bad idea. I could go on, but you get the idea, if “perfect” god made us, why is the whole design of the body so crap?
February 27, 2010 at 3:31 am |
Why would evolution create such things? If the respirator/food intake was a disaster, humans should never have been “invented”, at least not the whole food/breathing mouth thing.
Plus, that body system is keeping you alive today (I hope), so don’t talk too bad about it.
February 27, 2010 at 10:09 am |
Evolution does create such idiocy because, well, it truly is random.
It does NOT claim to have some order, some reason (often “for the good of all” or “to test us” or “it’s the Devil’s work”) for inflicting random flaws upon any living being, at any point on their lives.
Seriously, there’s no need to put dogma in this. I appreciate religion’s efforts to comfort sufferers, but you’re undoing their work by arguing for God’s involvement in the creation of disasters.
November 18, 2009 at 8:53 am |
This is some major mistake.
Seriously – most Christians make some real good things in life…and you have taken most of the places out of context.
November 18, 2009 at 10:28 am |
I didn’t claim Christians don’t do good things. I only point out the words of the Bible on how non-believers were dealt with in Old Testament times. And what they “deserve” if they don’t believe in Jesus.
The verses are not taken out of context. Read the context and point out my error and I would be happy to discuss it with you.
Consistently throughout the Bible, this god either orders the slaughter of non-believers or at least says they deserve death. Not believing in Yahweh was worthy of death in Old Testament times. The New Testament claims not believing in Jesus means you deserved to die.
Christians can continue to do good things, but you can’t sugar coat the words of these ancient texts.
February 27, 2010 at 3:21 am |
“Though they are fully aware of God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve to die, they not only do them themselves but approve and applaud others who practice them.” -Romans 1:32
People deserve to die for a lot of things. Almost anything. “For the wages which sin pays is death…”(Romans 6:23a) If we commit ANY sin whatsoever, we deserve death. We are not worthy of living in God’s shadow, not worthy of living ANYWHERE. Paul does not state, nor does it state anywhere in the new testament, that we need to kill non-believers, or even blasphemers such as yourself. He is stating in his epistle to the Romans, that salvation is attained through Jesus Christ, and Jesus Christ alone. Anyone else will die. All of us deserve to die, “for we all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.” (Romans 3:23)
God decreed in the old testament that anyone who defied him was to be executed. God decreed many things of such natures. All these laws were confined to the Jewish people. When God sent his Son (came down in human form, he’s God, he can do that) to die on a cross for our sins, he shattered all his former rules. He put the rules there after the people were doing bad things, but had no laws by which to go. When the Saviour came, the rules were no longer needed, because *ALL* sin is washed clean by the Saviour’s blood.
I understand where your arguments are coming from, and would like a response on this to further defend my faith. Please post more.
February 27, 2010 at 3:23 am |
Noted: After he sent his son, he opened the door for EVERYBODY. Sorry, didn’t clarify after that. I’m sure that you, at the Beattitude know this already, but I was just clarifying that I was already informed of that subject. It was something I meant to put on my original post.
February 27, 2010 at 10:17 am |
The problem with that approach is that it’s accusatory. By the way the message is passed to others, it is implied that despite the death of his son erasing Sins Then And Forever, God apparently HASN’T FORGIVEN any sin after all, which is why His Followers Must Spread His Message And Make People Turn To Him in order to save them.
The Presbyterians have the right idea on that respect: God Loves You Just The Way You Are. If you are good of heart, there really isn’t any need to change, and God is a good samaritan and friend, not an authoritative ruler who *demands* worship… or else.