Religion IS crazy!

[bellenuit]

Sudan court convicts Ethiopian woman over 'gang-rape'

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-26286264

I wonder where such barbaric thinking comes from. The ignorant Islamic courts take their direction from the Quran and that in turn included large chunks of the Bible verbatim.

Numbers 31:17-18 King James Version (KJV)

17 Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.

18 But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.

So if the woman hath known man by lying with him, she is to be killed. But if not because she is just a young child, she is to be kept alive to be raped by the conquering tribe. But what happens when a woman child is raped (apart from the obvious). She now moves to the category "hath known man by lying with him", so now can be killed.

Fortunately most Christians have moved beyond that type of thinking, but some will still justify it. Why? Because the Bible says so. If the God of the New Testament exists, I am sure the last people he would want to join him in Heaven are evangelical Christians and Young Earth Creationists.

In fact, the God of the new and old testaments are so different, that it should be fairly obvious that they are not the same entity.

 

[Tink]

I can see they are still standing up for their religion -- ATHEISM.

I thought this sums up a lot.

It is true that it's possible that religion can produce evil, and generally when we look closer at the detail it produces evil because the individual people are actually living in a rejection of the tenets of Christianity and a rejection of the God that they are supposed to be following. So it can produce it, but the historical fact is that outright rejection of God and institutionalizing of atheism actually does produce evil on incredible levels. We're talking about tens of millions of people as a result of the rejection of God.

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn offered the following explanation -

Over a half century ago, while I was still a child, I recall hearing a number of old people offer the following explanation for the great disasters that had befallen Russia: 'Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has happened.'
Since then I have spend well-nigh 50 years working on the history of our revolution; in the process I have read hundreds of books, collected hundreds of personal testimonies, and have already contributed eight volumes of my own toward the effort of clearing away the rubble left by that upheaval. But if I were asked today to formulate as concisely as possible the main cause of the ruinous revolution that swallowed up some 60 million of our people, I could not put it more accurately than to repeat:

'Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has happened'

 

[cbc]

I have probably read more or the bible, studied more of the bible and understand more of the bible than you or Pav. That is why I am an atheist. I can see what it is saying about the God of Abraham, not some make believe story that you want to placate yourself with of someone all loving and all forgiving.



What a pathetic apologist and total hypocrite.



How pathetic and blind you are. Were the children slaughtered by Saul sinners too? And the new born infants? And did you notice God condoning slavery? And worse still condoning the rape of children. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.



And you, Tink and Pav says the Bible is the source of absolute morality rather than subjective morality. That is your God talking and if absolute, then it doesn't change.

CBC, you don't have the honesty or integrity to admit what you are reading is a God calling for the genocide of innocents. It is there in black and white and you are the one that said a literal interpretation of the Bible is the correct interpretation. You are the typical Lying for Jesus mob.

POINT ME TO THE VERSE WHERE GOD SAYS TO GO AND RAPE WOMEN??????

Like I said. Once people start worshipping foreign gods that's it. God can issue judgement. I believe that Saul attacked those people because of their foreign worship. God even issued the judgement.

IM sure ur well aware of the unforgivable sin of teaching there is evil in the Holy Spirit.

 

[FxTrader]

The usual "trump everything bar contemporary science" cards are again being brought into play. The evidence of my experience along with others simply had to be dismissed as drug or fever induced hallucination. How can such a dismissive atttitude be considered scientific? Nothing has been conclusively proven one way or the other. Where's the science in such narrowmindedness?

Let's dissect such rhetoric, the faulty logic deployed being typical of religious argument. Firstly you provided evidence of nothing, rather you made a totally unsubstantiated and fantastic claim that you somehow expect others to accept as valid experience. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and you provided none.

Your claim is untestable, unverifiable, unobservable and hence unscientific. Such claims made without evidence can and should be dismissed without evidence to the contrary. The charge of being narrow minded is a specious argument intended to suggest that any fantastic claim made without supporting evidence should be considered true and valid until proven otherwise - pure nonsense.

 

[FxTrader]

I can see they are still standing up for their religion -- ATHEISM.

The semantic argument that atheism is a religion is tiresome and fallacious in the extreme. But let's revisit it one more time.

To avoid nebulous definitional dispute I will assert that, as a minimum, religion must include something you have to accept on faith and without evidence commensurate with the extraordinary nature of the belief.

Atheism is simply non-belief in God(s) due to lack of evidence to the contrary, nothing more and nothing less. There is no faith component and no fantastic, supernatural claims being made. On this basis then atheism bears no resemblance to religion. Non-belief qualifies as a type of belief - just silly. As someone once said, if atheism is a religion, not collecting stamps is a hobby.

If atheism could be considered a religion is that supposed to strengthen the atheist’s position or weaken the theist’s one? Truly a strange argument on the part of the theists here.

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn offered the following explanation...

'Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has happened'

I would contend that, given the close ties the Russian monarchy had with the Orthodox church, the communists understood what had to be done to establish control. The church's spell on the masses had to be smashed and one totalitarian ideology substituted with another. Theocracy and totalitarian ideology have much in common.

 

[cbc]

Atheism is simply non-belief in God(s) due to lack of evidence to the contrary, nothing more and nothing less.

The evidence is all there. Your just refusing to believe it.

Xplain the population to me then? If you put 6 people on the planet 4000 years ago and they breed out you would end with the same number of people as you currently have now.

But if you put 6 people on the earth 30,000 years ago and they breed out. God only knows what number you would end up with.

So how many would you end up with?

 

[lindsayf]

there will of course be a reply that offers an interpretation of this passage that will somehow conveniently exonerate god from this slaughter.

this was some form of an exoneration of rape, slaughter and slavery....and quite impressive in it's own way...

Well... Well... Well.. Belenuit. Good to see you up to a bit of ol fashion bible study.



Like I said. Any death relating to war isn't murder. So you rule a few verses out there.

God is a God of justice. So if you sin, like a few examples there, then people get put to death / cursed. That's the way things were back then. Mbey you consider the death penalty murder. I don't. I consider it the strongest form of justice.

You also need to understand that once people left god or weren't seeking god that was punishable by death. In fact, seeking other Gods was considered by God to be very evil. Most of the times the result was death.

Soooooooo. Keep digging belenuit. See if you can track down some verses involving death in the bible, and I mean where no sin had been committed.

..but this is not only an exoneration but a celebration!
quite incredible at one level,but not so at another.
Seems to be often the case that believers can present themselves as quite reasonable in most contexts of life
but a little scratching will reveal the fundamentalist/literalist/magical/archaic and abhorrent moral framework
at play.

At least these days beleviers feel the need to ( have been forced to) assimilate to general community standards most of the time. This has historically not been quite as necessary.

God did being judgement on the people in the Old Testament.

A people who were given numerous opportunity to repent but didn't. A ridiculously long opportunity to repent but didn't. After prophets, miraculous signs etc.

God is just in administering his judgement.
Any God who leaves unrepentant sins unpunished is a monster.

God gave the opportunity to repent. It didn't happen.

Obviously it would eventually have severe consequences for them and their descendants.

I find the attempts of some to equate science with religion as fascinatingly disingenuine and intellectually dishonest at the deepest of levels.
But then on reflection, if one is to embrace doctrinal teachings then that is exactly what is required. That is, They must and will find a way to work-around/accommodate a multitude of horrific moral contradictions and still be glad to identify with the teachings-so the intellectual skillset is already in place and this is just another manifestation of that-ie a moral work-around to avoid the existential consequences of admitting to self that the 'moral' framework is untenable.

FX could articulate this a lot better than me.

 

[FxTrader]

I find the attempts of some to equate science with religion as fascinatingly disingenuine and intellectually dishonest at the deepest of levels.

Indeed, yet at the same time many theists (those who are non-fundamentalist and not biblical literalists) like to suggest a harmony between science and religion in an attempt to adapt their theological framework to accommodate scientific discoveries that invalidate religious doctrine (like the earth is 6,000 years old or the 7 day creation myth).

We know however that claims about virgin birth, talking serpents, walking on water, raising people from the dead etcetera directly contradict our scientific understanding of biology and the laws of physics which are temporarily suspended when a magician sky God so deems necessary to prove a point. Where science does not overtly tread on religious myth it receives less opposition from the faithful.

 

[Value Collector]

Not according to the muslims I've spoken to! The last one that I discussed theism with explained the difference in religions as different people standing in a circle around the base of a mountain. Each person needed to travel a slightly different path to reach the pinnacle. All were aspiring to the same point!!

Well he is obviously not taking literal interpretation of the Qur'an, many would disagree with him. Just like many Christians would disagree with pav and CBC that atheists will go to heaven. There are as many opinion as there are religious people.

Most of those unfilled gaps are still present today

!

There are some specific things that Newton gave god credit for that have since been proven, for example his calculations were not perfect as to the movements of the planets, so based on his calculations after a number of the planets orbits would have changed and been thrown out of balance. He assumed god stepped in to fix it every few hundred years, however modern calculations show they are kept in balance by the planets gravitational pull on each other. So that a big god gapped filled.

Many of his ideas certainly seemed crazy. Calculus, gravity and his other laws of motion were totally outre, (and let's not forget his passion for astrology!)

.

Astrology is crazy, so was his passion for alchemy. Hence we accept his discoveries about gravity, calculus, motion and astronomy and telescopes. But we don't accept his ideas about alchemy, astrology or gods

The good thing here is that we are now in partial agreement. Extraordinary people cannot be assumed to hold superiority over all fields! Even extraordinary people are capable of error

Given that you already know this, what entitles you to presume exemption from fallibility, and how can you justify the automatic disavowal of alien belief systems?

What do you mean by "alien belief systems"

 

[Value Collector]

Without actually dying how could we possibly know?

Well i am not claiming an absolute knowledge here, but generally things asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. So without evidence that any part of our personality can survive the decay of our brains I will assume that we do not live on after the death of our brains.

Last century, a deceased friend of mine visited me a couple of times. On the second occasion I became concerned because he was behaving as though he were still alive!

I cautiously broached the subject with him by gently enquiring if he realised that he had died. Thankfully he received the question with a good humoured nod and grin and then continued recounting his recent visit to his brother in Canada.

That was the last time I saw him. A very good man plucked from this earth years before his time. Sometimes things just happen!

I do not claim that apparitions of this nature are proof of an afterlife, but I am certainly not alone in having such experiences.

A couple of atheist friends of mine had a similar experience after the passing of their mother/mother-in-law.

Although they were shaken by the experience, neither changed their views on the afterlife. When asked what they believed they had seen they both said they saw their mother/mother-in-law.]

I have no doubt that you may think that is what happened, but i fear you are probably delusional. Thats all i can say on that topic.

I mean i think its all in your head, because if spirits were real, why has Ellen never interviewed one on her show? Surely they would be much more common place.

 

[Value Collector]

The evidence is all there. Your just refusing to believe it.

Xplain the population to me then? If you put 6 people on the planet 4000 years ago and they breed out you would end with the same number of people as you currently have now.

But if you put 6 people on the earth 30,000 years ago and they breed out. God only knows what number you would end up with.

So how many would you end up with?

Population growth is not steady, there is natural limits to population. A wild population of any animal will boom and bust and can be steady for hundreds of thousands of years, its only the advent of modern farming techniques, sanitation and healthcare that has let the human population get where it is today, if we all still lived like aboriginals, we wouldn't have 7 billion people.


Think of it like this, if you put 2 rabbits on a football field and fenced them in, their population would double every 3 months, but that doesn't mean eventually you would have a million rabbits, because the football field can not grow enough grass and the population would collapse.

The rabbit population would boom and bust around a certain max population size, unless the rabbits learned new technogly they would never increase

 

[bunyip]

POINT ME TO THE VERSE WHERE GOD SAYS TO GO AND RAPE WOMEN??????

6) David's Punishment - Polygamy, Rape, Baby Killing, and God's "Forgiveness" (2 Samuel 12:11-14 NAB)



Thus says the Lord: 'I will bring evil upon you out of your own house. I will take your wives [plural] while you live to see it, and will give them to your neighbor. He shall lie with your wives in broad daylight. You have done this deed in secret, but I will bring it about in the presence of all Israel, and with the sun looking down.'

Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord." Nathan answered David: "The Lord on his part has forgiven your sin: you shall not die. But since you have utterly spurned the Lord by this deed, the child born to you must surely die." [The child dies seven days later.]



This has got to be one of the sickest quotes of the Bible. God himself brings the completely innocent rape victims to the rapist. What kind of pathetic loser would do something so evil? And then he kills a child! This is sick, really sick!

http://www.evilbible.com/Rape.htm

 

[bunyip]

The bible says lots of things, some of them evil enough to make a decent person's skin crawl with revulsion. Do you believe them too, and support/condone them?
Or is it easier to talk about the parts you like, while ignoring the parts you don't like?

Oh really. Where in the bible does it say all this evilness?? There is none.

Here you go - enjoy the read! http://www.evilbible.com/

Do you honestly think that Jehovas Witness are going to knock on ur door and start talking about all the wars and blood and gore of war?

No – what I think the JW’s will do is what they and other Christians always do, which is to focus on what they see as the good parts of the bible, while ignoring the bad parts. In other words, doing their best to mislead me. But then I’m used to that, having grown up in Christian family that had me attending church and Sunday school and bible classes every week. Of course I swallowed it all, hook line and sinker like little kids tend to do, but only until I was old enough to think for myself and see through the bulls**t that is Christianity.

 

[cynic]

Why not, let's hear once again how scientists are actually religious worshipers and somehow comparable to the hoards of gullible sheep who flock to churches every Sunday to hear pontifications from the pulpit. It's yet another taste of the linguistic magic you try to perform here to drag down science and scientists to the level those who put faith in the inerrancy of iron-age scrolls and declare invisible, morally bankrupt beings as factual reality and their magic books as the sole source of moral authority in society.
Religion is more than just fallible, it's a dangerous mythology that gives millions a false confidence and surety that they know something for certain that they don't (amply demonstrated in these threads). If religion is knowledge then it's best described as insight into a brand of superstition, largely useless "knowledge".

How often do I hear someone insisting that their chosen beliefs are grounded in fact, truth, evidence or dependable practices and that any contrary belief must therefore be assuredly wrong, dangerous and sinful?
(See what I mean?!! You are just like so many other feligious folk!)

A highly debatable statement that seems to imply mysticism (of the spiritual kind) should somehow be credited with the birth of modern science. Yet we know from history that religion has been a significant impediment to the advancement of science and still is to this day.

Virtually everything is debatable!
However, in this case the historical facts can certainly be an embarrassment to those arrogantly claiming the superiority of science over all other religions!

You cleverly cloak yourself in a veil of objectivity and play games with semantic argument but your clear intention throughout is to be an apologist for religion and the religious here. If your favorite "religion" is science, then you should invest more time here elevating it above the religious superstition scribed in magic books.

That's exactly what I am doing! How did you fail to notice?

P.S. Thanks for crediting me with the "veil of objectivity". Personally, I do not consider myself sufficiently conceited to claim absence of prejudice.

In relation to the various comments from posters about my disclosed experiences of apparitions, I reiterate:

...I do not claim that apparitions of this nature are proof of an afterlife, but I am certainly not alone in having such experiences.

 

[cbc]

Population growth is not steady, there is natural limits to population. A wild population of any animal will boom and bust and can be steady for hundreds of thousands of years, its only the advent of modern farming techniques, sanitation and healthcare that has let the human population get where it is today, if we all still lived like aboriginals, we wouldn't have 7 billion people.


Think of it like this, if you put 2 rabbits on a football field and fenced them in, their population would double every 3 months, but that doesn't mean eventually you would have a million rabbits, because the football field can not grow enough grass and the population would collapse.

The rabbit population would boom and bust around a certain max population size, unless the rabbits learned new technogly they would never increase

Sorry val, mbey I didn't bring this up properly. What I meant was the population curve (graph) ends roughly around 4000 years ago. This is very simple evidence that points directly to the fact that Noah started repopulating the earth about 4000 years ago.

But you said there is a complete lack of evidence. What about this evidence? If you said there was none?

 

[Value Collector]

Sorry val, mbey I didn't bring this up properly. What I meant was the population curve (graph) ends roughly around 4000 years ago. This is very simple evidence that points directly to the fact that Noah started repopulating the earth about 4000 years ago.

But you said there is a complete lack of evidence. What about this evidence? If you said there was none?

I understood exactly what you were saying,

Now, try to understand what i am saying.

Do, you think it is possible for people living like aboriginals, to populate the earth to 7 billion people?

The answer is no, 7 billion is only possible because of all the technolgy advances that have happened in the last 4000 years, in farming, water management, sanitation health, food distribution etc etc.

Without these advances hunter gather population would never grow this large even if you gave them a million years,

 

[cbc]

6) David's Punishment - Polygamy, Rape, Baby Killing, and God's "Forgiveness" (2 Samuel 12:11-14 NAB)



Thus says the Lord: 'I will bring evil upon you out of your own house. I will take your wives [plural] while you live to see it, and will give them to your neighbor. He shall lie with your wives in broad daylight. You have done this deed in secret, but I will bring it about in the presence of all Israel, and with the sun looking down.'

Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord." Nathan answered David: "The Lord on his part has forgiven your sin: you shall not die. But since you have utterly spurned the Lord by this deed, the child born to you must surely die." [The child dies seven days later.]



This has got to be one of the sickest quotes of the Bible. God himself brings the completely innocent rape victims to the rapist. What kind of pathetic loser would do something so evil? And then he kills a child! This is sick, really sick!

http://www.evilbible.com/Rape.htm

Really bel? David sinned and God gave his wives to som1 else?

So what?

Every time a woman changes partner that is rape is it? Since when did this start happening?

 

[cynic]

...Seems to be often the case that believers can present themselves as quite reasonable in most contexts of life
but a little scratching will reveal the fundamentalist/literalist/magical/archaic and abhorrent moral framework
at play.

At least these days beleviers feel the need to ( have been forced to) assimilate to general community standards most of the time. This has historically not been quite as necessary.
...
I find the attempts of some to equate science with religion as fascinatingly disingenuine and intellectually dishonest at the deepest of levels.
...

Too right Lindsay!
Damn those heretics for their sacriligious acts! Stamp those pagans out! How dare they embrace teachings other than science!

For thou shalt worship no other god: for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God:

Am I the only one that recognises the parrallel here?!!

 

[bunyip]

Bunyip, we obviously see things differently. People will do what their hearts and minds tell them to, whether it be journos, doctors, or missionaries, and I don't criticize them for that and it takes all kinds to make the world.

If people risk their lives for personal gain like smuggling drugs, or exploiting the desperately poor, or getting their names into the record books, etc., I have NO sympathy for them, but if they do it for altruistic purposes, I won't criticize them and John Short certainly has a lot more courage than I have and I admire him for it.

Yes Chris, we see things differently in some ways, but on the other hand we see things pretty much the same as well. For example, we both admire people who try to help others. But while you admire those who are willing to take unnecessary risks to do it, I regard these people as foolish and inconsiderate to their families and loved ones.

The sort of people I admire are those who devote their lives, or even a small part of their lives, to helping others while at the same time having regard for their own safety, and consideration for their families.

Examples...

Volunteer firemen/women

SES volunteers

Volunteer coastguard personnel and surf lifesavers

Mother Theresa

Dr Fred Hollows – famous for his volunteer work in restoring sight to thousands of people

Dr Mark Loane – spends time doing similar work to Fred Hollows, but does it for aborigines in North Queensland. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/mark-loane/story-e6frg8h6-1111114101544

Dr James Morton (my oncologist who saved my life after I was diagnosed with Leukemia, I see him every six months for a blood test and checkup – a really decent and likeable man) has spent more than a million dollars of his own money in setting up the not for profit AEIOU organization for autistic children) http://www.australianoftheyear.org.au/honour-roll/?view=fullView&recipientID=332

The thousands of men and women around Australia who are in community service clubs that raise money for such worth causes as hospitals, building of public parks etc.

The many people who work voluntarily with disadvantaged people to improve their lives. One such woman is a regular contributor to this forum, Julia - she has for many years taught literacy, numeracy, and budgeting skills to people from disadvantaged backgrounds so they’re better equipped to gain employment and live decent lives.

No need for me to go on further – I’m sure you get the idea. There's no need to get yourself thrown into a North Korean jail cell in your efforts to help others, thereby leaving your family in a constant state of heartache. No need to get yourself murdered by Islamic whackos who can’t accept that you’re trying to help them get rid of killer diseases.
There’s plenty of opportunities right here in your own country for anyone who wants to help their fellow humans.

 

[bunyip]

Really bel? David sinned and God gave his wives to som1 else?

So what?

Every time a woman changes partner that is rape is it? Since when did this start happening?

Oh, I think you know that these women wouldn't have voluntarily changed partners or voluntarily had sex in broad daylight with whoever god gave them to. Clearly it was forced upon them.