" TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - A woman was executed after a court ordered that she be stoned to death for acting in pornographic movies, a newspaper reported Monday.
The woman, 35, was partially buried in a hole at Tehran's Evin prison and stoned to death Sunday after her conviction was upheld by the Supreme Court, the daily Entekhab said.
Police arrested the woman eight years ago on charges of acting in "obscene sex films."
The woman, who was not identified, denied committing any crime, but evidence and testimony by witnesses led judiciary officials to issue the stoning sentence, the daily said.
The paper gave no further details. Judiciary officials were not available for comment Monday.
Stoning is a rare punishment in Iran, where drug smugglers and murderers are usually condemned to death by hanging. "
------------------
What is the difference between a terriorist and your girlfriend?
- With terrorist, there is a chance of negotiation.
Call.. who is it, France?
------------------
The government that seems the most unwise, oft goodness to the people best supplies. That which is meddling, touching everything, will work but ill, and disappointment bring. - The Tao Te Ching
Sheesh!
------------------
-There can be only Nine !! ..mmm.. maybe 10 !!
- Alshrim Dax
The Other Dax:
More crap.
------------------
"Intelligence People. You guys are unbelievable. You dump a mess like this (that you created) on my lap, and then you come to me whining 'Where is our funding'? Well I'll tell you where your funding is. Can you say Health-Care"
- The President of the United States of America, The Long Kiss Goodnight
------------------
"I don't mind being called a liar when I'm lying, or am about to lie, or have just finished lying, but NOT WHEN I'M TELLING THE TRUTH!-----Homer Simpson.
Can't the "other muslim nations" that supposedly condemned their actions have at them, diplomatically speaking? They are disgracing a perfectly good religion, FFS.
------------------
"Babies haven't any hair;
old men's heads are just as bare;
between the cradle and the grave
lies a haircut and a shave."
Samuel Hoffenstein
------------------
It never stops, when my mama ask me will I change
I tell her yeah, but it's clear I'll always be the same
Until the end of time
- Tupac Shakur, Untill the End of Time
------------------
Access Password
47at
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/9268/index.html
You mean barbarous like that?
------------------
"The Guide says that there is an art to flying...or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss." - Life, the Universe and Everything
Face it people, Lennon knew what he was saying in "Imagine" (...and no religion too).
Religion was an important part of pulling the human race out of barbarism - but it can be compared to using a ladder to climb out of a pit. After you've climbed it - using the ladder only brings you down into the pit again.
- Schmidt's Maxim on Religion
------------------
Faster than light - no left or right.
"They are disgracing a perfectly good religion..."
Bah! There is no such thing... :-)
------------------
"Even the colors are pompous!"
-a friend of mine, looking at a Lexus brochure
quote:
"They are disgracing a perfectly good religion..."
Bah! There is no such thing... :-)
Ahh, but do you see any of this in recent times?
All religions are bad, and I thoroughly beleive that, but the followers of the others have surpassed fundamentalism to a certain level where at least they don't kill people for breaking a religious law.
Most muslims i know aren't like that, but they live in a civilized western society, under the influence of a society with more "enlightened" and liberal views and most of them aren't very religious.
This is the problem, if you listen to a religion you will be a stupid unenlightened shit for brains, and all of the countries that i see in big wars right now are islamic fundies, my oppinion may not be very politically correct, but it is very statistically correct
------------------
It never stops, when my mama ask me will I change
I tell her yeah, but it's clear I'll always be the same
Until the end of time
- Tupac Shakur, Untill the End of Time
And if you don't, you'll STILL be a "stupid unenlightened shit for brains," as you so eloquently put it. What you believe isn't what determines your intelligence. HOW you believe it, and how you put that belief into effect, can be an indicator of your intelligence, but what you believe certainly can't.
------------------
"How do you define fool?"
"I don't attempt it. I wait for demonstrations. They inevitably surpass my imagination."
- CJ Cherryh, Invader
------------------
Star Trek Gamma Quadrant
Average Rated 8.32 out of 10 Smileys by Fabrux (with seven eps posted)
***
"Oh, yes, screw logic, let's go for a theory with no evidence!"
-Omega 11:48am, Jan. 19th, 2001
***
Card-Carrying Member of the Flare APAO
***
"I think this reason why girls don't do well on multiple choice tests goes all the way back to the Bible, all the way back to Genesis, Adam and Eve. God said, 'All right, Eve, multiple choice or multiple orgasms, what's it going to be?' We all know what was chosen" - Rush Limbaugh, Feb. 23, 1994.
Infinity11: I understand how you would have experience in the fight between muslims and christian orthodox.
------------------
"Babies haven't any hair;
old men's heads are just as bare;
between the cradle and the grave
lies a haircut and a shave."
Samuel Hoffenstein
Religion is still a focal point in peoples lives in the East,so although we may not agree with what they do, we need to understand that the west was also once like that and probably still would be without this system of laws.
We use our 'evolved' sensibilities to judge them, something that they yet do not possess. They need to change themselves because the more we criticise, the more ammunition it gives to groups like the Taliban who want to preserve their 'culture' from Western influence. They'll change, it'll take time, but we can't interfere lest we make the situation worse.
------------------
The Worlds Ten Greatest 'Fucks' #10
Where's all that fucking water coming from? - Captain of Titanic
[This message has been edited by Orion Syndicate (edited May 23, 2001).]
------------------
It never stops, when my mama ask me will I change
I tell her yeah, but it's clear I'll always be the same
Until the end of time
- Tupac Shakur, Untill the End of Time
------------------
"The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift."
--Albert Einstein
------------------
"Even the colors are pompous!"
-a friend of mine, looking at a Lexus brochure
quote:
Excuse me, but Christianity and other incarnations of the god of Judaism do not constitute all religions. Saying that about all religions is itself an ignorant thing to do.
------------------
It never stops, when my mama ask me will I change
I tell her yeah, but it's clear I'll always be the same
Until the end of time
- Tupac Shakur, Untill the End of Time
I would point out that several religions do good work. Let us not forget the sterling example of Harold Bishop, Ramsey Street's resident Jelly Belly.
------------------
You know, when Comedy Central asked us to do a Thanksgiving episode, the first thought that went through my mind was, "Boy, I'd like to have sex with Jennifer Aniston."
-Trey Parker, co-creator of South Park
In fact, along those same lines, religion has corrupted the idea of doing good deeds. I've heard people say that, if it weren't for fear of a god, they wouldn't give a shit about anyone else. The only thing shaping their morality is their religion. To me, that's a very bad thing. Religion has accustomed people to the idea of "I should act this way because [insert deity here] says I should". The idea of "I should act this way because it's right, and beneficial to the good of humanity" is a totally foreign concept to too many people.
------------------
"Even the colors are pompous!"
-a friend of mine, looking at a Lexus brochure
------------------
The Worlds Ten Greatest 'Fucks' #10
Where's all that fucking water coming from? - Captain of Titanic
Christians would be stoning women for appearing in pornographic movies.
Um... no. You've never read the Bible, have you? Do. The Gospels, at the very least. There was a story where a married woman was caught in flagrante delicto (hope I spelled that right) with another man, and some dudes wanted to stone her. Jesus stopped them. Why would we stone a woman for something like this? It's not in our philosophy. More importantly, why would you think that we would? You speak without knowledge, and that helps give us Christians a bad name.
i11:
Okay, a point on religion..
It sucks, in all forms...
Your opinion is noted and logged. Care to explain how it relates to the fact that there never would have been a renaissance without some monks protecting ancient scrolls?
If someone were to ask God, he'd agree with me, it sucks....
And people call me arrogant...
It's not God's word, it's the word of some schmoe from way back when that felt like writing a book...
Except that that's in contravention of all evidence. Heck, even Rob knows better than to propose that it was all written by a solitary human.
Tim:
charitable work carried out by religious groups is good, but that's because charitable work carried out by anyone is good.
Even the government? It steals money from productive people, then gives it to others with no regard to whether they deserve it or not. And they do it inefficiently, at that.
Just because people do good things in the name of religion, that doesn't make the religion itself good.
It does if they wouldn't be doing the good deed without the religion. Don't you realize that all semblance of morality would have disintegrated long ago without religion?
------------------
"How do you define fool?"
"I don't attempt it. I wait for demonstrations. They inevitably surpass my imagination."
- CJ Cherryh, Invader
I don't know, why would you burn women at the stake for practicing witchraft?
Or frag heretics?
Or participate in wars at all?
Remember that you don't speak for all of you, as history clearly demonstrates.
------------------
The government that seems the most unwise, oft goodness to the people best supplies. That which is meddling, touching everything, will work but ill, and disappointment bring. - The Tao Te Ching
quote:
Even the government? It steals money from productive people, then gives it to others with no regard to whether they deserve it or not. And they do it inefficiently, at that.
So. . . any charity is therefore bad? And what's this stealing? It's called "taxation." We may not like it but it's necessary. And I don't like the sound of this "deserving" clause you've worked in, after all, you're not the most tolerant of people, Omeychops. I'd hate to be in some sort of trouble yet have to try to qualify by your standards as "deserving" charity.
------------------
"If Morden is afraid of green penguins, and Draal is shown to have
access to them, a speculation would be that Draal will use them
against Morden in the future. However if Draal only has a purple
moose, saying that he could use it against Morden would be a story
idea."
- rastb5m FAQ
------------------
Wes Button � [email protected]
TechFX Studios � The United Federation Uplink �
------------------
I don't like Wesley Crusher.
Organized religions are a pain in the ass. Why can't (insert religious affiliation here) followers simply follow their faith - NOT tell us about it, and live in the serene hope of their eternal reward? And meanwhile let us apostate agnostics worry about real life - not their bearded version of the Easter Bunny.
Talking about one's faith in (insert diety here) is like talking about the quality of your morning's BM. (We're glad for him - but we don't want to hear about it).
------------------
Faster than light - no left or right.
Those who 'deserve' charity are those who are in trouble through no real fault of their own, for instance if the plant or the mill closed, if the house burnt down, if they became ill, or if mother nature decided to get capricious.
Those 'undeserving' of charity are those who have gotten into trouble entirely on their own, through the choices they've made, such as habitual drug/alcohol use (these are things you CHOOSE to do, they're not a REAL illness), sleeping with everybody without taking adequate precautions, or simply deciding they'd rather not work (I know a lady like that who likes to visit our library. She constantly talks about how much money she can get out of the system.)
------------------
The government that seems the most unwise, oft goodness to the people best supplies. That which is meddling, touching everything, will work but ill, and disappointment bring. - The Tao Te Ching
"Even the government? It steals money from productive people, then gives it to others with no regard to whether they deserve it or not."
Well, if they don't deserve it ("deserve" meaning what Rob just said, which sounds reasonable), it wouldn't really be charity, would it? Just because something is called "charity", that doesn't make it so.
"Just because people do good things in the name of religion, that doesn't make the religion itself good.""It does if they wouldn't be doing the good deed without the religion. Don't you realize that all semblance of morality would have disintegrated long ago without religion?"
As I already pointed out, but you apparently missed, that's precisely why religion is bad in this situation. It teaches people that the only reason to be nice to each other is because such-and-such deity says so, and will kick your ass if you don't. People need to learn that morality comes from the common good, not some supernatural overlord. But religion has totally screwed that up.
------------------
"Even the colors are pompous!"
-a friend of mine, looking at a Lexus brochure
>"Don't you realize that all semblance of morality would have disintegrated long ago without religion?"
I couldn't disagree with this more, for obvious reasons.
------------------
The government that seems the most unwise, oft goodness to the people best supplies. That which is meddling, touching everything, will work but ill, and disappointment bring. - The Tao Te Ching
quote:
It's not God's word, it's the word of some schmoe from way back when that felt like writing a book...Except that that's in contravention of all evidence. Heck, even Rob knows better than to propose that it was all written by a solitary human.
------------------
It never stops, when my mama ask me will I change
I tell her yeah, but it's clear I'll always be the same
Until the end of time
- Tupac Shakur, Untill the End of Time
Religion was an important part of pulling the human race out of barbarism - but it can be compared to using a ladder to climb out of a pit. After you've climbed it - using the ladder only brings you down into the pit again.
- Schmidt's Maxim on Religion
Only those who look upwards can see that we're not out of the pit.
Rob:
I don't know, why would you burn women at the stake for practicing witchraft?
Christians don't. People CLAIMING to be Christians have, but I can hardly be held responsible for the actions of my dopplegangers, can I?
Lee:
So. . . any charity is therefore bad?
No, just ones you're forced into.
And what's this stealing? It's called "taxation."
Taxation for unauthorized purposes. They're taking our money for things that we never said for which they could do so. Thus, stealing.
And I don't like the sound of this "deserving" clause you've worked in
Too bad.
after all, you're not the most tolerant of people, Omeychops.
You have a screwy definition of "tolerant". Have I tried to burn you at the stake because you disagree with me? No? Then I'm tolerant.
Treknophyle:
Why can't (insert religious affiliation here) followers simply follow their faith - NOT tell us about it, and live in the serene hope of their eternal reward?
Because then we WOULDN'T be following our faith.
------------------
"How do you define fool?"
"I don't attempt it. I wait for demonstrations. They inevitably surpass my imagination."
- CJ Cherryh, Invader
------------------
It never stops, when my mama ask me will I change
I tell her yeah, but it's clear I'll always be the same
Until the end of time
- Tupac Shakur, Untill the End of Time
Has it ever occured to you that your belief that religion is stupid might BE what leads you off a cliff?
------------------
"How do you define fool?"
"I don't attempt it. I wait for demonstrations. They inevitably surpass my imagination."
- CJ Cherryh, Invader
"Christians don't. People CLAIMING to be Christians have, but I can hardly be held responsible for the actions of my dopplegangers, can I?"
So am I right in assuming you wouldn't consider the administration of the Spanish Inquisition Christian? How about the people who fought in the Crusades who massacred, raped, and pillaged in God's name? How about the people who excommunicated Gallileo for simply stating the Earth wasn't the centre of the universe?
Or what about missionaries who spread disease in North America so they would be more convincing to the natives when their local medicine man looked helpless?
How about the 20 million who fought and died in China for who they thought was another Jesus Christ?
Or how about the papacy that even Dante condemmed to Hell in Dante's Inferno?
Would anyone who participates in an abortion be Christian?
Where exactly do you draw the line?
------------------
"The Guide says that there is an art to flying...or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss." - Life, the Universe and Everything
[This message has been edited by Mucus (edited May 26, 2001).]
Man, I don't care religion and what not, when you kill woman for prositution, then it's just plan wrong. And in this case, they choice probably some of the most painful and barbarious way to kill, STONED TO DEATH!
Man, it's the freakin' 21 century man? There is such a thing call compassion man!!
------------------
What is the difference between a terriorist and your girlfriend?
- With terrorist, there is a chance of negotiation.
In any case, from a Christian viewpoint:
I can't see how stoning is any worse than say: abortion.....or capital punishment by electrocution.
At least she committed a crime...wheras that un-born child is blameless for its own creation and has committed no crimes.
------------------
"The Guide says that there is an art to flying...or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss." - Life, the Universe and Everything
[This message has been edited by Mucus (edited May 26, 2001).]
------------------
"And as it is, it is cheaper than drinking."
-DT on arguing with Omega, April 30
They didn't follow the teachings of Christ, and thus would not constitute Christians. Now since their actions were born of enforced ignorance, they can't be held quite as guilty as they would be had they known the truth. I can tell you with a great deal of certainty, though, that some popes are gonna burn.
How about the people who excommunicated Gallileo for simply stating the Earth wasn't the centre of the universe?
Disfellowshipping someone is only permissable for continued sin, and then only after every attempt has been made to resolve the situation. Disagreeing with the pope does not constitute a sin.
Or what about missionaries who spread disease in North America so they would be more convincing to the natives when their local medicine man looked helpless?
There's no evidence of that.
How about the 20 million who fought and died in China for who they thought was another Jesus Christ?
They didn't follow Christ's teachings.
Or how about the papacy that even Dante condemmed to Hell in Dante's Inferno?
As I said, a number of them will most certainly burn in Hell. It's written (in James, IIRC) that teachers should be careful, lest they teach falsely, for they will be judged more strenuously than the rest. There were popes that PURPOSEFULLY taught that which they knew to be false, who deceived entire generations, and were responsible for thousands of deaths.
Would anyone who participates in an abortion be Christian?
Ah, now you're getting into people who are actually still alive. I refuse to comment on the eternal state of people for whom said state has not yet been finalized. Needless to say, abortion is the killing of an innocent human being, and is thus sin (assuming no mitigating circumstances, such as total fetal inviability). However, all have sinned, and sin can be forgiven, if asked. Draw your own conclusion.
As for your so-called Christian viewpoint, Mucus...
Abortion is the worst single crime that I can imagine. It is the murder of the very essence of innocence. Stoning someone for something as minor and harmless as this, however, is pretty close. Executing a deranged serial killer, however, is perfectly justifiable. It saves lives.
------------------
"How do you define fool?"
"I don't attempt it. I wait for demonstrations. They inevitably surpass my imagination."
- CJ Cherryh, Invader
And I didn't say that "electricution" is fun either.
I said stoning is consider to be more barbarious and more painful then the other.
When stoned, you die of a slow death, unless a big one hits you on the head and nock you out. By exectricution, things can be over in 10 seconds.
------------------
What is the difference between a terriorist and your girlfriend?
- With terrorist, there is a chance of negotiation.
Not that I ever said I supported electrocution.
------------------
"How do you define fool?"
"I don't attempt it. I wait for demonstrations. They inevitably surpass my imagination."
- CJ Cherryh, Invader
Anytime one of them (or a lot of them, in the cases of the Inquisition and the Crusades) go bad, the other ones just blithely claim "Oh, those guys weren't like US, they're PSEUDO-Christians! We're the REAL Christians. We'd NEVER do anything like THAT..."
Of course, you don't see them actively condemning what was done, or opposing it, or taking steps and making sure that such things could never happen again (by, for instance, making the wall of separation of Church and State HIGHER and STRONGER.)
I mean, if I was an advocate of "Bob-ism," and I went around seeing other Bobists doing things that I KNEW were wrong in the name of Bob, I'd be REALLY pissed off, and most certainly take up whatever was necessary to oppose them. Actively. Not sit passively back and go 'oh, those aren't REAL Bobists.' No sir, as an adherent to a creed, it is one's DUTY to see that that creed is not abused by other adherents.
------------------
The government that seems the most unwise, oft goodness to the people best supplies. That which is meddling, touching everything, will work but ill, and disappointment bring. - The Tao Te Ching
We do, when it comes up.
or opposing it
What, the crusades are still going on?
or taking steps and making sure that such things could never happen again (by, for instance, making the wall of separation of Church and State HIGHER and STRONGER.)
Now Rob, that's just paranoia. Christians would never do anything like that, 'cause it's against our beliefs. Plain and simple.
I mean, if I was an advocate of "Bob-ism," and I went around seeing other Bobists doing things that I KNEW were wrong in the name of Bob, I'd be REALLY pissed off, and most certainly take up whatever was necessary to oppose them.
You know what, Rob? You're absolutely right. Next time I see Toquemada, I'll tell him to back off 'cause he's givin' us all a bad rap.
------------------
"How do you define fool?"
"I don't attempt it. I wait for demonstrations. They inevitably surpass my imagination."
- CJ Cherryh, Invader
You should be BRINGING it up.
"What, the crusades are still going on?"
In the minds of the Fundies in whose county I live, there are. And if you ask LaHaye or Roberson or that guy north of here who burned the Harry Potter books, they are.
"Now Rob, that's just paranoia. Christians would never do anything like that, 'cause it's against our beliefs. Plain and simple."
Excepting, of course, the aforementioned atrocities. I say if you're capable of doing something once, you're capable of doing it again. I'm not willing to take the chance, given how many of you have obviously NOT learned from history.
"Next time I see Toquemada, I'll tell him to back off 'cause he's givin' us all a bad rap."
Better than Torquemada, you could go ruin a few televangelists' days.
And stop tacitly supporting those doctor-shooters.
Then there was the woman who was denied joint custody of her child because she was Wiccan.
And that idiot FL Senator.
------------------
The government that seems the most unwise, oft goodness to the people best supplies. That which is meddling, touching everything, will work but ill, and disappointment bring. - The Tao Te Ching
OK, from now on, everywhere I go, I'll say, "I'm a Christian, and I'm sorry for the Inquisition." Sound good?
Hey, why not apply this to the Germans, too? "I'm a German, and I'm sorry for causing tens of millions of deaths." Or, heck, Daryus, you're a communist, aren't you? Why don't you go around apologizing for the, what, hundred million people that have been killed by communist regimes?
Your logic taken to its conclusion leads to patently rediculous things. That's always a good indicator that your logic is flawed.
Better than Torquemada, you could go ruin a few televangelists' days.
If I ever run into one, I may do that.
I say if you're capable of doing something once, you're capable of doing it again.
Yes, but I didn't do it, nor did any other Christian. It was a bunch of ignorant people under the influence of one evil or stupid person. If the Nazis had called themselves Democrats, would you be going around saying that the Democratic party is dangerous because they caused WW2? Your entire argument is based on the premise that my beliefs are somehow related to those of the Crusaders or Inquisitors. This premise is false. Their ONLY belief was that the Pope was the messenger of God. It all stemmed from that.
And stop tacitly supporting those doctor-shooters.
What in the name of John Diefenbaker are you talking about, here?
Then there was the woman who was denied joint custody of her child because she was Wiccan.
I am not familiar with this case.
------------------
"How do you define fool?"
"I don't attempt it. I wait for demonstrations. They inevitably surpass my imagination."
- CJ Cherryh, Invader
If today's Democrats held the same basic beliefs as the "Nazi" Democrats, you're damned right I would.
(On an unrelated note, however, while having nothing to do with Nazis, today's Democrats hold many of the same basic beliefs as the Communists, and are thusly STILL dangerous.)
>"Their ONLY belief was that the Pope was the messenger of God."
This is either a MASSIVE oversimplification, or an out-and-out lie, I'm not sure which. The Crusaders were Christians. Moreover, like you, they claimed to be the "REAL" Christians, unlike those heathen Greek Orthodoxers, and the "REAL" followers of God, unlike the Jews and Mohammedans. They worshippped God, they went to church, they followed the instructions church elders, their 'superiors,' and all that other rot. All those basic beliefs are still part of Christianity. Therefore the danger remains, and always shall. If their superiors led them astray, that just shows the danger of listening to people who claim to be speaking for God. (Which every preacher/minister/rabbi/prophet/televangelist/charismatic/evangelistic/witness does.)
------------------
The government that seems the most unwise, oft goodness to the people best supplies. That which is meddling, touching everything, will work but ill, and disappointment bring. - The Tao Te Ching
There's actually an interesting debate on that: http://www.refuseandresist.org/resist_this/021899stoning.html
and http://www.chalcedon.edu/report/99jan/einw_stoning.html
I'll reserve the right to make a comment later
In any case...now that we've established how vehemently you're against abortion, we could rewrite the opening article like this.
" ANYCITY, United States (AP) - A fetus was executed after a mother ordered that it be destroyed for acting in pornographic movies...oops...we mean absolutely nothing, a newspaper reported Monday.
The baby, "<1", was partially buried in a hole at Anycity's medical waste pile and died Sunday after its conviction was upheld by the Supreme Court, the daily Entekhab said.
Police arrested the fetus eight years ago on charges of acting in a lack of "obscene sex films" and after it has done nothing at all...whatsoever.
The fetus, who was not identified, denied committing any crime, but evidence and testimony by witnesses led judiciary officials to issue the abortion sentence, the daily said.
The paper gave no further details. Judiciary officials were not available for comment Monday.
Abortion is a rare punishment in the United States, where babies and children are usually condemned to death due to boredom by a long and tedious speech by President Bush. "
Get the gist? You might dismiss the Taleban as being needlessly cruel, but they could dismiss the US as being exactly the same.
------------------
"The Guide says that there is an art to flying...or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss." - Life, the Universe and Everything
[This message has been edited by Mucus (edited May 26, 2001).]
The birth of Karl Marx. His half-baked philosophy has been responsible for more deaths than every war this century combined.
Fo2:
"If the Nazis had called themselves Democrats, would you be going around saying that the Democratic party is dangerous because they caused WW2?"
If today's Democrats held the same basic beliefs as the "Nazi" Democrats, you're damned right I would.
Your logic is sound. And since neither I nor other Christians today hold the same basic beliefs as the Crusaders, you can therefore not hold that we are capable of the same attrocities.
"Their ONLY belief was that the Pope was the messenger of God."
This is either a MASSIVE oversimplification, or an out-and-out lie
Simplification, not OVERsimplification. Yes, they held other beliefs, but they all stemmed from that one. They believed what the Pope told them, regardless of whether it was consistant with the teachings of Christ, and thus they were NOT Christians.
Moreover, like you, they claimed to be the "REAL" Christians
Yes, but UNLIKE me, they didn't follow the teachings of Christ. Thus, not Christians. The definition of "Christian" is not someone who CLAIMS to follow the teachings of Christ, it's someone who DOES follow the teachings of Christ.
They worshippped God, they went to church, they followed the instructions church elders, their 'superiors,' and all that other rot. All those basic beliefs are still part of Christianity.
No. The only basic belief of Christianity is that we should follow the commands of Jesus Christ, the Son of God. Their philosophy was totally disparate, in that they believed that they should follow the commands of those who claimed to represent the Son of God. A completely different concept.
If their superiors led them astray, that just shows the danger of listening to people who claim to be speaking for God. (Which every preacher/minister/rabbi/prophet/televangelist/charismatic/evangelistic/witness does.)
I have never, ever heard any preacher in any church I have ever attended claim to be speaking for God. The only person that even claimed to be Christian, aside from various cult leaders (Koresh, etc.), that I've ever known to do that in the last couple millenia is the Pope, and I ain't Catholic. All my preachers do is say, "You know, I've found somethin' really neat in here. Lemmie show you."
Your beliefs are based on many misconceptions, Rob.
[ May 27, 2001: Message edited by: Omega ]
You're not responding to the point. You asked for an example of major human suffering not caused by religion. I gave you one. Unless, of course, you count your irrational belief in a failed, unworkable system as a religion, but that sounds more like a cult.
I for one do not think there is anything wrong with marxism.
Even though it's never worked, and has led to tens of millions of deaths where it's been tried? Even though it's an affront to human freedom? Even though the basic tennants of it are diametrically opposed to human nature? Then you, sir, are a moron.
It may not have worked but it was due to the fact that the US and the rest of the capitalist world did their utmost to make SURE it didn't.
It attempts to remove the basic humanity from its people. It didn't work because it is flawed, not through any action of ours. Now its DESTRUCTION, that was and will continue to be hastened by us. It may be doomed to fail, but its proponents have this nasty habit of trying to expand, and thus take others with them when they go.
Stalin and Mao, in executing Marxist philosophy, killed tens of millions of people. Period. Now this is different from what I'm saying about Christianity in that they WERE following Marxist philosophy, whereas the Crusaders were NOT following the commands of Christ.
So you want to blame my entire religion for the actions of a few manipulative leaders that WEREN'T part of my religion, whereas I can't blame your flawed theories for the millions of deaths caused by manipulative leaders that DID subscribe to your theories?
Hypocricy.
Honestly, First of Two has dealt with the first and we've already established that they WERE following Christian beliefs.
As for the second....in Russia:
It is noticable that even Lenin wanted to remove Stalin from the Communist party...a relevant quote is dated January 4, 1923...if I had more time I would type it out in its entirety.
Stalin's purges were partially directed at the older Communists that actually paid attention to Marx because it threatened Stalin's power...which is ironic considering you're trying to use that as proof that he actually listened to Marx.
In China, Mao didn't follow Marxist beliefs either because he emphasied the peasant over the factory worker/proletariat. In fact, this and other ideological differences (Due to the fact that Mao emphasied the need to change Marxism to make it relevant to China) that lead China and Russia away from cooperating early on to actually having border incidents in the 60's.
So in short your logic is rather unsound.
Which leaves us with two possibilities:
A) Marx is responsible for how Stalin and Mao twisted his writings and by the same token, Jesus is responsible for how the Inquisition and Crusades twisted his sayings.
or
B) Jesus and the other founders of Christianity are not responsible for how others reinterpreted their sayings and thus Marx is not responsible for Stalin or Mao....and you'll have to give up your current violently illogical and unfounded hatred of Marx.
We'll leave the more radical view that the Christians fighting the Crusades and doing the Inquisition WERE following the Bible....a book which includes directions to smite, or fight a holy war against, anyone that worships idols, other Gods, more than one God, etc.. to another post after I sleep. 
Marx was a philosopher, i don't think his plan involved Stalin's gulags, his works may have been flawed, but they did have their merits.
here's a question
Why can't you just be nice guy. Isn't that what Christianity is about. Just be nice and leave the faith part out. After all, i don't see jesus's name on the bible as the author. Its all been interpretted before by disciples. So unless you know jesus christ personally, making you oh, about 2000 years old now, there's no way you can be sure you're being a good christian following the "christian way"?
"...its proponents have this nasty habit of trying to expand, and thus take others with them when they go."
Hm... Sounds like Christianity...
Honestly, First of Two has dealt with the first and we've already established that they WERE following Christian beliefs.
Oh, yes? And how did he do that? All he said is that they CLAIMED to be Chrisitian, which, as anyone with two brain cells to rub together should realize, is a totally different thing. They did NOT follow the teachings of Christ, and thus were NOT Christians. Period. Dot it, file it, and stick it in a box marked "DONE".
Jesus and the other founders of Christianity are not responsible for how others reinterpreted their sayings and thus Marx is not responsible for Stalin or Mao....and you'll have to give up your current violently illogical and unfounded hatred of Marx.
Fair enough. You all stop your illogical attacks on Christianity for things we didn't do, and I'll stop blaming Stalin on Marx.
I was hoping someone would make that suggestion. I think I found a new debate tactic. You deal with illogic by throwing back the exact same illogic in a slightly different form.
We'll leave the more radical view that the Christians fighting the Crusades and doing the Inquisition WERE following the Bible....a book which includes directions to smite, or fight a holy war against, anyone that worships idols, other Gods, more than one God, etc..
No, they were NOT following the Bible. Where does Christ say that Christians should go to Israel and commit all manner of attrocities?
Why can't you just be nice guy. Isn't that what Christianity is about.
I am nice. Is it now considered mean to show your opponent to be wrong? Oops, guess it's a good thing I never got into that debate team, or I'd be goin' ta hell for sure.
Just be nice and leave the faith part out.
Can't do it.
Tim:
Hm... Sounds like Christianity...
Except that we're not doomed to fail, as communism is. We're you're only chance for survival. Come with me, if you want to live.
Sol:
despite sharing a name they had surprisingly little in common.
Aside from the attrocities, eh?
Your arrogance truly knows no boundaries.
"What you believe isn't what determines your intelligence. HOW you believe it, and how you put that belief into effect, can be an indicator of your intelligence."
And how have you put your belief in effect? You pick fights with anyone over ancient and insoluble questions and claim to be the winner of the argument pretty much every time, all in the name of Christianity. You don't seem to separate "I believe" from "I know".
And you can never be comfortable in your own faith and leave it out, no. This seems more and more like a personal crusade.
Well, it's getting increasingly harder to take you seriously, I'm sorry to say.
Maybe that's just my non-constutioned bible.
[ May 28, 2001: Message edited by: *InFiNiTy* ]
[ May 28, 2001: Message edited by: *InFiNiTy* ]
[ May 28, 2001: Message edited by: *InFiNiTy* ]
I mean, this thread was destroyed seven posts into it, BlueElectron is sitting in a chair somewhere, staring out of a window and is being spoonfed jello. What are we gonna say to him, huh?
It was partly my fault, commenting the islamic bit about talibans. That eventually started the natural element that is omega, and here we are.
Now I figure I might as well get into the soft porn business. Get a pony tail and half-shaded glasses.
We're proving that the very belief in an aggressively evangelical relgion/cult.....whether it be Islam or Christianity is inherently dangerous because its followers cannot believe that they have the only "truth" while on the other hand still being tolerant towards others and respecting their different systems of belief....as you have so dramatically demonsrated.
What this means is, I don't think that Islam is inherently more dangerous than Christianity or vice versa.....its just hypocritical for Christians to slag Islam for being intolerant when they've done, and continue to do many of the same things.
PS: So...Omega I genuinely hope that we can work by our agreement. I won't blame Jesus for the inherent faults of Christianity as it has developed, and you won't blame Marx for the inherent faults of Marxism, as it has developed. Fair and square.
PPS: Infinity.....you have a wet-ware problem, not a Mozilla problem...
[ May 28, 2001: Message edited by: Mucus ]
)
you're trying to to prove the assertation that Marx was responsble for how others misinterpreted his writings.
Did you even read my post? I said that I wasn't trying to prove this, but that I was trying to get you to see the flaw in your own logic.
We're proving that the very belief in an aggressively evangelical relgion/cult.....whether it be Islam or Christianity is inherently dangerous because its followers cannot believe that they have the only "truth" while on the other hand still being tolerant towards others and respecting their different systems of belief
*SIGH*
Even after all the times I've pointed it out, you STILL don't know the definition of "tolerance"? I AM tolerant, precisely because I DON'T stone people for disagreeing with me. I don't do that because not doing so is an inherant part of my system of beliefs. Tolerance isn't refraining from saying, "You're wrong." Tolerance is refraining from HARMING someone because they're wrong.
What this means is, I don't think that Islam is inherently more dangerous than Christianity or vice versa.....its just hypocritical for Christians to slag Islam for being intolerant when they've done, and continue to do many of the same things.
"Continue to do?" Oh, please elaborate on that.
See, the difference is that Islamic beliefs as I understand them REQUIRE the death of anyone who does certain things in disagreement with them. Mine flat-out PROHIBIT such actions. It's the difference between built-in intolerance and built-in tolerance.
All these words are real, but the sentences they're in make no sense at all.
Hate to break this to you, but saying to someone that they are wrong means that you don't tolerate their beliefs.
Tolerance means accepting other views.
You don't accept other people's views (especially when they question details about christianity and the bible).
Instead, you have invested tens or maybe even hundreds of hours to say to everyone you meet in the threads that oppose you that they are wrong and have flawed logic.
You need to get more confidence in your faith so that you don't feel the urge to judge us all the time. We'll get by, I swear.
No, that would be called "acceptance". Tolerance means TOLERATING other views (duh). Putting up with them, allowing their existence, no matter if it causes you inconvenience or what.
You don't accept other people's views (especially when they question details about christianity and the bible).
That's because they disagree with mine, and I'm not going to change my views just to make someone else happy.
Instead, you have invested tens or maybe even hundreds of hours to say to everyone you meet in the threads that oppose you that they are wrong and have flawed logic.
If they're wrong, and their eternal soul depends on their realizing it, what do you expect me to do?
You need to get more confidence in your faith so that you don't feel the urge to judge us all the time.
When have I judged you?
We'll get by, I swear
And I swear, you won't.
Since history seems to indicate clearly that ALL of the people followed the Church...
One must ask, WHERE were the 'Real' Christians? What happened to them? They disappear ENTIRELY from that point in history!
When a religion loses the entirety of its followers, it dies.
Looks to me as though 'Real' Christianity died in Europe centuries ago. You and the other 'Fundies' are simply trying to resurrect a dead belief system and claim it as your own.
>
quote:
Mine flat-out PROHIBIT such actions. It's the difference between built-in intolerance and built-in tolerance.
OOH, it's DINNERTIME! I'm so glad you said that.
Like 19:26-27, immediately AFTER (and clearly not part of, but relating to, the story) the parable of the master who gives money to his servants.
"For I say unto you, That to every one which hath shall be given; and from him that hath not, even that shall be taken away from him.
But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me."
[ May 29, 2001: Message edited by: First of Two ]
My friend, the ten year old.
No one's asking you to change your views, but you shouldn't have to step in every time you think you have to defend your honour or something.
An adult with confidence in himself can have a man scream in his face that Austria is a continent or Jesus was a fraud or the lunar landing never happened, it wouldn't matter because he knows what HE believes and that's all that matters.
Now, by the tone of your last post I gather you don't take this conversation seriously, you're just having the time of your life when you got someone on the hook, eh?
A misguided idealist, thinking he's got answers? :-)
Well this one's on me.
I understand I'm doing the same thing you're doing here, going out of my way and trying to get you to see the warning signs, so I'll take my own advice and stop trying to reason with you.
You just let me worry about my eternal soul, okiedokie?
egomaniac 
One must ask, WHERE were the 'Real' Christians? What happened to them? They disappear ENTIRELY from that point in history!
Possible. The protestant movement didn't get started for some centuries after the Crusades. People only started thinking for themselves again around the sixteenth or seventeenth century.
Of course, the Catholic church had a bad habit of silencing people who disagreed with them, so people who DID think for themselves probably kept quiet about it, and thus weren't recorded. Either way.
When a religion loses the entirety of its followers, it dies.
I would disagree. Paganism has made a comeback of late, and it'd been dead, for, what? A millenium or two?
Luke 19:26-27, immediately AFTER (and clearly not part of, but relating to, the story) the parable of the master who gives money to his servants.
No, it's part of the parable. Try other translations.
Nimrod:
No one's asking you to change your views, but you shouldn't have to step in every time you think you have to defend your honour or something.
Oh, yes I do. I don't want people believing lies told about me. I suppose that would qualify as defending my honor, wouldn't it?
An adult with confidence in himself can have a man scream in his face that Austria is a continent or Jesus was a fraud or the lunar landing never happened, it wouldn't matter because he knows what HE believes and that's all that matters.
Not quite. It wouldn't matter to the man. However, it MIGHT matter to people within earshot who don't know any better. They might very well believe the falsehoods being shouted if the man doesn't contradict them, might they not?
You just let me worry about my eternal soul, okiedokie?
As you wish, Nimmie. Drop me a line if you change your mind, and don't say I didn't try. And don't think that'll stop me from trying with anyone else.
Poor, misunderstood Jebus...
The entire parable except for that last bit, is told in the third person. That last bit is in the first. That's a drastic change, even for poorly-trained translators and marginally literate writers.
I have to assume he represents Yahweh, and that seems to support what Rob is saying.
Not quite. It supports that those who do evil, and actively rebel agaist God, will be harshly punished; AFTER Jesus returns.
OUR purpose is to give sinners every chance to be saved. Killing them would defeat the purpose, no?
Rob:
What the heck are you talking about?
"His master replied, 'I will judge you by your own words, you wicked servant!...'"
That's from vs. 22. The master refered to himself in the first person throughout.
v25-26
"'Sir,' they siad, 'he already has ten!'
"He replied, 'I tell you that to everyone who has, more will be given, ut as for the one who hasnothing, even what he has will be taken away.'"
And the pattern doesn't change here.
The master doesn't represent God, he represents Christ. He left, and then returned as a king for what was his. He's saying that those who rebel will be destroyed once he returns. If the command was to do so NOW, BEFORE he returned, then the master would have given that order to his servants before he left, not after he returned.
But even if it was, God CAN break the rules set for humanity, 'cause he's GOD, and the rules are for HUMANITY.
I beleive in a good god, one that cares for people, and doesn't force them to go around preaching to everyone
Well, let's see. If God loves you, and you're on your way to eternal damnation if you don't learn a specific thing and execute what you then know, then that loving God would be REQUIRED to tell me to teach you, would He not?
one that won't hurt others for their mistakes
No, no, the idea is that we've already hurt ourself by making the mistake. The question is whether you'll let Him heal you.
There's your leadership by example, or at least the one that's been followed for centuries.
Of course. "He that lives by the sword shall die by the sword" is another quote from the same source, so it's no wonder the poor people are conflicted.
quote:
If we haven't saved more souls by the time He returns, we haven't done our job.
So, if the Church is like the non-investing man, who does God give what the Church HAD to?
And doesn't that same parable imply that the lord in the story is prone to making 'money' by less-than-ethical means?
[ May 31, 2001: Message edited by: First of Two ]
So, if the Church is like the non-investing man
No, the Church doesn't exist as an entity in this parable. Where'd you get that? Each member of the Church is one of the servants.
And doesn't that same parable imply that the lord in the story is prone to making 'money' by less-than-ethical means?
Wha? If I give money to my stock broker, and tell him to do with it what he pleases, I'm entitled to everything that comes out of that. At least, in this analogy, because the stock broker is working for me voluntarily. If the stock broker makes nothing, he gets nothing, and I give what he was working with to someone who might do me some good with it. Where's the dishonesty?
I may be mistaken about this, I'll check it when I get home, which may not be until late, as I have a date to watch videos with the to-be missus.
So, if Omega is right about what it represents, it means that Jebus is saying "Go out and make me powerful. When I come back, if you've done so, I'll be good to you. But anyone who doesn't like me is fucked.".
Let's see... I think there's a name for someone who exerts power over people w/o their consent... Oh, yeah... "Tyrant".
So you're admiting that you beleive in persecuting non-beleivers?
This is such an idiotic, baseless statement that I am totally dumbfounded. Where, in any of my posts, could you POSSIBLY get that? It is the diametric OPPOSITE of everything I've said.
Tim:
Basically, the story goes that this guy obtains rule over a kingdom, even though the people don't want him to be their king.
Ah, ah, SOME people don't want him to be king. Some do. Some don't believe that they even have a king to begin with. But either way, He's GOING to be King, by birthright. Deal with it.
it means that Jebus [sic] is saying "Go out and make me powerful."
Not quite. He's going to be powerful, one way or another. He's saying, "Look, I've made you happy. Go make others happy, and in doing so, make ME happy." He wants the maximum number of people to live in happiness with him, and accomplishing that is our job. The monitary investment is the Holy Spirit, and the return is in how many people we can spread that to.
You have to realize something.
God = Love
Yeah, it's cliche, but it's as simple as it gets. God loves you, and He's going to incredible amounts of trouble to make you happy. And yet you fight Him. You CAN NOT LIVE away from God. You, right now, are without God, and if you die without God, THEN you're screwed.
I think there's a name for someone who exerts power over people w/o their consent
Hang on, weren't you all complaining a while back about how God should say, "Screw free will, I'm stopping this [insert undesirable action]?" Make up your minds, would you?
But one guy tells him "This isn't right. You're taking money that isn't yours, so I didn't invest it."
And the one guy is a moron. It IS His money, because He invested it. Again with the stock brokers.
So God allowed the Holocaust ... out of "love"?
Sounds like an abusive guy to me.
That's funny. I said the same thing back in March to you on ICQ:
Me: Love is the universal constant that links everyone and everything. And hell will be the day I stop believing it.
Omega: I wasn't aware that Hell was a point in time.
Me: Then perhaps you aren't aware that hell is a state of mind. : )
Omega: In your beliefs.
Of course, that love bit was forsaken in favor of the hell argument. How ironic.
"Yeah, it's cliche, but it's as simple as it gets. God loves you, and He's going to incredible amounts of trouble to make you happy. And yet you fight Him. You CAN NOT LIVE away from God. You, right now, are without God, and if you die without God, THEN you're screwed."
Let's see, God loves you unconditionally, right? So why do you need to be Christian? Isn't that a condition? If you can not (not able to) live away from him, how is it that us heathens are living? And if I remember, isn't God within each of us? If so, how's it possible to live without God to begin with?
Frankly, I find it irritating that you talk about love with no love at all. I did it in that ICQ conversation, but not since I've realized what I did.
Jeff: I've noticed a common theme in religious debates. All religions have multiple facets; God = love is one. You'd have to factor in other circumstances (depending on your beliefs), such as free will or fate (which are compatible, btw), otherwise you're just simplifying the argument for brief satisfaction. But since Omega does the same thing to other people, I don't see why you need to stop.
That would be because I didn't have any argument with it. Obviously.
Let's see, God loves you unconditionally, right? So why do you need to be Christian? Isn't that a condition?
He loves you either way. You can only be WITH Him one way. And without Him you die.
If you can not (not able to) live away from him, how is it that us heathens are living?
Simple: You're not.
And if I remember, isn't God within each of us?
No, that's not stated anywhere in scripture. God can't be in you, for you live in sin.
Frankly, I find it irritating that you talk about love with no love at all.
I love all of you. Why do you think I keep beating my head on a brick wall, just to get you all to see it all as clearly as I do?
Come with me, if you want to live.
[ May 31, 2001: Message edited by: Omega ]
Oh man, I just had a mental image of Arnold Schwartzenagger as Jesus.
"Simple: You're not."
By your definition, anyway.
"No, that's not stated anywhere in scripture. God can't be in you, for you live in sin."
Perhaps it's not stated, but at least that's what I remember from Catholicism and maybe Protestant also, I'm not sure.
"I love all of you."
Fine way of showing it. I suppose you yell and call your mother an idiot all the time, too.
"Why do you think I keep beating my head on a brick wall, just to get you all to see it all as clearly as I do?"
Simple. WE ARE NOT YOU. If you argue without assuming we think exactly the way you do, you might find yourself with some new understanding. I recommend The Art of Speedreading People by Paul & Barbara Tieger for starters. Or email me for a quick overview on personality differences.
To quote that book, it's not "treat others as you would like to be treated", it's "treat others as THEY would like to be treated." Does anybody else see a common link in all the debates? If I thought everybody else think as I do, and if I clearly see that conservatism is completely good, then it follows that whoever argues the opposite must be completely wrong, right? And if I believe something so much that I take it as simple fact, yet others deny it as fraud, it must be the devil's influence, right? I've made my point, even if you don't see it, Omega.
"In fact, along those same lines, religion has corrupted the idea of doing good deeds. I've heard people say that, if it weren't for fear of a god, they wouldn't give a shit about anyone else. The only thing shaping their morality is their religion."
Different religions exist for the benefit of people at differet stages of spirituality. There are religions out there whose gods are NOT to be feared, so why not those? It's their choice, isn't it? On the other hand, I was raised with no religious background whatsoever until age 12 (after that I entered Catholic school), yet I always give a shit about other people (not literally). Don't ignore the other side of the equation.
Omega: First off, I spelled it "Jebus" on purpose. It's a reference to The Simpsons. Also, as I've pointed out, "Jesus" isn't even close to his real name, either, so "Jebus" is no less valid. And it sounds funnier. :-)
"Ah, ah, SOME people don't want him to be king. Some do. Some don't believe that they even have a king to begin with. But either way, He's GOING to be King, by birthright. Deal with it."
But, if some people don't want him to be their king, he shouldn't be. If people don't like their system of government, they change it. Are you saying the US Revolution should never have happened? The colonials should simply have accepted the fact that George III was their king, and lived w/ it? If George had simply said "execute anyone who doesn't want me to be in charge", and it had happened, would you uphold his actions as "right"?
"Hang on, weren't you all complaining a while back about how God should say, "Screw free will, I'm stopping this [insert undesirable action]?" Make up your minds, would you?"
I don't think I ever said that.
"If you can not (not able to) live away from him, how is it that us heathens are living?"Simple: You're not."
Well, if we're not alive, why are you trying to convert us? We must be either figments of your imagination, or some sort of robots. So, what good does it do?
Has anyone played the game Black & White? It came out a few months ago for the PC. It's basically a god game where you train a Creature (sort of a henchman) to help you do your job, which is to keep your followers happy and try to convert villages away from other gods. Now, you can either be a benevolent god or an evil god; you'll get belief points for either one. One of the strategies is raining hellfire and lightning bolts on the villages, setting houses on fire, then sending in your Creature to dowse the fires, cast healing and food miracles when they most need it.
Punishing god, benevolent sidekick--sound familiar? 
I'm tempted to start a new game and call myself God and my Creature Jesus, but I really don't want to go through the quest with the singing ark-builders again.
Anyone who wants to play this game, be forewarned. If you can train your Creature well, that's great. Otherwise be prepared for a lot of frustrating micro-management and multitasking. The game has great reviews, but those are sometimes misleading.
Perhaps it's not stated, but at least that's what I remember from Catholicism and maybe Protestant also, I'm not sure.
Well, you sorta got it right, but you don't have a grasp of the whole. God lives in US, through the Holy Spirit. He doesn't live in you. He'd LIKE to, but, hey, that's your call.
I suppose you yell and call your mother an idiot all the time, too.
No, but sometimes I'd like to. Besides, how many people here have I called idiots? Three? Maybe? And you can't deny that those three were acting like them at the time.
If I thought everybody else think as I do, and if I clearly see that conservatism is completely good, then it follows that whoever argues the opposite must be completely wrong, right?
No, no, it would follow from THAT that whoever argues with me would not be capable of using (or willing to use) their natural, God-given thought processes.
And if I believe something so much that I take it as simple fact, yet others deny it as fraud, it must be the devil's influence, right?
You think this is a common link between all the debates? Then you're a very silly person, Ziyal, 'cause that ain't got nothin' to do with me.
Tim:
I spelled it "Jebus" on purpose. It's a reference to The Simpsons. Also, as I've pointed out, "Jesus" isn't even close to his real name, either, so "Jebus" is no less valid. And it sounds funnier.
Fair enough.
But, if some people don't want him to be their king, he shouldn't be.
You're applying human rules to God. That generally doesn't work out too well. Jesus WILL be King, because it's His right to be. He's inherited the kingdom from His Father. If you don't want to live with Him, then believe me, you won't. But still, I wonder. Would you rather live for all time under the dictatorship of an omniscient, all-loving being who would do anything for you? Or would you rather die eternally? 'Cause those are your choices.
I don't think I ever said that.
Perhaps you should have objected when Rob did, then?
Well, if we're not alive, why are you trying to convert us?
Because you can be MADE alive. God's nifty like that. "Born again" is the exact phrase. As far as God was concerned, you died the moment you first sinned. So did I. But you can be reborn, as I was, and begin anew.
"Here, here's my oll-gotten gains, go put it in a bank somewhere so I can make even more money off of it, coz I'm greedy like that. Then, death to all who oppose me!"
A) Ill-gotten? Where'd you get that? Heck, that sounds like something a Democrat might say, Rob. Anyone who's wealthy MUST have cheated to get it.
B) You still don't get that the returns are the eternal souls of people like you? God doesn't want riches, He wants YOU, and He's going to incredible trouble to get you. You want to know why? Because He LOVES YOU, and otherwise, you die.
C) Death to those who caused all the dying in the first place, you mean? Like, oh, Satan?
quote:
He LOVES YOU, and otherwise, you die
That statement has NO logic content.
No matter how you look at it, God's love IS conditional. It's conditional upon your loving and following him BACK.
That's not overwhelming love. That's not even toughlove. It's not as pure as a good mother's love for her children, which goes on even if the children desert her and never speak to her. It's not as pure as the love I feel for my best female friend, who I would go on the Orpheus Quest for even though I know she'll never have any romantic interest in me.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: "Love me or Go to Hell" isn't love, it's stalkerlove.
That would be because you took it out of context. Let me make it as plain as possible
A) God loves you.
B) Without God, you die.
C) Thus, God wants you to be with him.
No matter how you look at it, God's love IS conditional. It's conditional upon your loving and following him BACK.
No, it's not. God's HELP is conditional. God my be omnipotent, but even omnipotence has its limits. God can't defy logic ("I am lying", make a rock so big He can't lift it, etc.), nor can He defy His basic nature. God can not be in the presence of sin. God WANTS to help you. He's moved heaven and earth to help you. But He can't do everything. Take one little step. God's already done the rest.
Premise 1: You don't want to die.
Premise 2: Without God, you die.
Premise 3: With sin, you can't be with God.
Conclusion: Be rid of your sin, and thus live with God for eternity.
"Love me or Go to Hell" isn't love, it's stalkerlove.
Only if God's the one forcing the choice on you. You put yourself into the position of being damned. God's showing you the only way that He can help you out of it. Think outside the box. You think that God SENDS people to hell. Rob, you're ALREADY going to hell. God's trying to stop you.
You're trapped in a fissure in an ice field. You have no food, you have no water. You will die. There's a man up on the surface that has done incredible things just to reach you, and to lower a rope down to you. Take the rope, Rob.
Erm, huh? Surely, by definition, omnipotence HAS no limits. That's why it's called omnipotence, and not almost-omnipotence.
There is the idea that a few Christians subscribe to, in that God, having set up the laws of the universe, tries not to break them. He didn't create the Earth in six days, but he set up how planets form, and all that, so that the Earth would end up forming. yeah, it's more long-term, but he's god. I'm sure he has plently of time on his hands.
Still, I remember being taught, like Tora, that God is in each of us. And that his love IS unconditional. In an actual Unconditional type of way. He'd like you to worship him, and all, but it's not necessary.
B) God loves everyone, unconditionally. That's exactly what I've been saying. But He can't SAVE you unless you let him.
As for omnipotence, your definition is flawed. Omnipotence can't make 2+2=5, because mathematics is an abstract concept. An omnipotent being can't make a rock so big that He can't lift it. An omnipotent being can't say, "I am lying," and have it be true. There are limits.
Omnipotence doesn't mean the ability to do anything. Omnipotence means the ability to do everything, meaning all things that can be done. Certain things, by design or definition, simply can not be done, God or no.
Then he's not been anywhere on THIS planet for a LONG time.
You know, God could wiggle his littlest pinky digit and cleanse people of 'sin' (a concept I don't accept) with less effort than it takes me to blow my nose.
And He can do it, whether or not I ask Him to.
Apparently, humans are far more powerful than God in this respect. We can do good things for people whether they want us to or not, because WE want to. And nobody stops us. (In fact, in my experience, it's BETTER - or at least, more uplifting - to do a good deed without being asked first.)
But without our consent, Almighty God is powerless? How puny.