Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →

Welcome

Welcome to CEMB forum.
Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email?

Donations

Help keep the Forum going!
Click on Kitty to donate:

Kitty is lost

Recent Posts


Do humans have needed kno...
Today at 03:29 AM

The origins of Judaism
by zeca
June 25, 2025, 03:06 PM

What music are you listen...
by zeca
June 23, 2025, 08:28 PM

Qur'anic studies today
by zeca
June 22, 2025, 03:34 PM

الحبيب من يشبه اكثر؟؟؟
by akay
June 21, 2025, 01:05 PM

Lights on the way
by akay
June 21, 2025, 07:37 AM

New Britain
June 20, 2025, 09:26 PM

Is Iran/Persia going to b...
by zeca
June 17, 2025, 10:20 PM

News From Syria
June 17, 2025, 05:58 PM

Muslim grooming gangs sti...
June 17, 2025, 10:47 AM

ماذا يحدث هذه الايام؟؟؟.
by akay
June 02, 2025, 10:25 AM

What happens in these day...
June 02, 2025, 09:27 AM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Readings from the "Holy Book"

 (Read 75890 times)
  • Previous page 1 2 3 45 6 ... 17 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Re: Readings from the "Holy Book"
     Reply #90 - January 12, 2009, 07:53 PM

    Well sure the bible looks kinda bad when you actually read it and interpret the words the way they were intended.

    But didn't Christianity go through a reformation, which now gives anybody the luxury of discarding any obvious junk in there while maintaining some kind of spiritual significance to the parts they like?

    No Christian today is pro-stoning no matter what it says in the Bible.

    I asked my Catholic mother if she believed in the immaculate conception and she said "it seems a little far fetched." Far fetched? It's one of the pillars of Christianity!

    The churches are full of agnostic hypocrites who attend the weekly social gatherings out of habit and to make a good appearance.

    A very small minority of "Christians" actually read the bible expecting to get something relevant from it. They simply endure their hour every Sunday and hope that they get credit for it in the end.

    B ::)B

    Yet more unsubstantiated rubbish.  You'll fit right in here.  Welcome!
  • Re: Readings from the "Holy Book"
     Reply #91 - January 12, 2009, 07:55 PM

    And I see Hassan has turned into a copy/paste troll.  Is this where the forum is going?

    Edited for typo
  • Re: Readings from the "Holy Book"
     Reply #92 - January 12, 2009, 07:57 PM

    Well sure the bible looks kinda bad when you actually read it and interpret the words the way they were intended.

    But didn't Christianity go through a reformation, which now gives anybody the luxury of discarding any obvious junk in there while maintaining some kind of spiritual significance to the parts they like?

    No Christian today is pro-stoning no matter what it says in the Bible.

    I asked my Catholic mother if she believed in the immaculate conception and she said "it seems a little far fetched." Far fetched? It's one of the pillars of Christianity!

    The churches are full of agnostic hypocrites who attend the weekly social gatherings out of habit and to make a good appearance.

    A very small minority of "Christians" actually read the bible expecting to get something relevant from it. They simply endure their hour every Sunday and hope that they get credit for it in the end.

    B ::)B


    Carry on like this and you will get my vote for poster of the month.  Afro
  • Re: Readings from the "Holy Book"
     Reply #93 - January 12, 2009, 08:00 PM

    Quote
    You don't have to be the only person for appeal to ridicule still to be a logical fallacy.  And if you want to argue 'unjust' the only basis is in the context of that in which the command was given.  Was is 'unjust' to the Israelites?


    But this is what I'm asking you, sparky.  In what context is that command acceptable?  Saying my own beliefs are irrational or emotional or whatever does nothing to answer the question, even if that charge is true.


    "Befriend them not, Oh murtads, and give them neither parrot nor bunny."  - happymurtad's advice on trolls.
  • Re: Readings from the "Holy Book"
     Reply #94 - January 12, 2009, 08:02 PM

    And I see Hassan has turned into a copy/paste troll.  Is this where the forum is going?

    Edited for typo


    I hope you appreciate that I dug out all the references and quotes I used in the video because you mentioned they were absent.

    Would you like to go through them all and tell me the correct meaning?
  • Re: Readings from the "Holy Book"
     Reply #95 - January 12, 2009, 08:03 PM

    Quote from: Submissive Bob
    No Christian today is pro-stoning no matter what it says in the Bible.


    Unfortunately, some are although they are very much on the fringe and usually reduced to picketing funerals with placards declaring "God Hates Fags".

    Quote
    I asked my Catholic mother if she believed in the immaculate conception and she said "it seems a little far fetched." Far fetched? It's one of the pillars of Christianity!


    The Immaculate Conception is not a pillar of Christianity.  I think Catholics are the only branch that even believe in it, and even to them it would hold no major implications for theology if it were struck down.

    Apart from those two quibbles, I agree with your post, and welcome to the forum.   Smiley

    "Befriend them not, Oh murtads, and give them neither parrot nor bunny."  - happymurtad's advice on trolls.
  • Re: Readings from the "Holy Book"
     Reply #96 - January 12, 2009, 08:03 PM

    This vidoe is a must see ...

    Instruction Manual for Life
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kAIpRRZvnJg&eurl=http://www.atheistforums.com/instruction-manual-for-life-t12002.html&feature=player_embedded

    I was not blessed with the ability to have blind faith. I cant beleive something just because someone says its true.
  • Re: Readings from the "Holy Book"
     Reply #97 - January 12, 2009, 08:13 PM

    And I see Hassan has turned into a copy/paste troll.  Is this where the forum is going?

    Edited for typo


    Since when was copy pasting something only the act of a troll?  Roll Eyes

    Jeebus hari and krishna, you have no come back hence your need to resort to "oh my god, look over there, it's a troll Over react" .

    Inhale the good shit, exhale the bullshit.
  • Re: Readings from the "Holy Book"
     Reply #98 - January 12, 2009, 08:15 PM

    You have to put it in context Hassan, it was only for that time and place, god is love at all other times.  Tongue


    I'm still waiting for anyone to enlighten me as to what context could make those passages acceptable.

    I responded to the one passage you mentioned.  'Acceptable' in the context of this discussion means only 'do they contradict anything else that the bible teaches about God?'.  Otherwise it is your personal emotional criteria that has no relevance to anyone but yourself.


    Sure.  I'm the only person in the world who thinks that death by stoning is cruel and unusual punishment, or that execution by any means for not being a virgin on your wedding night is unjust.   

    You don't have to be the only person for appeal to ridicule still to be a logical fallacy.  And if you want to argue 'unjust' the only basis is in the context of that in which the command was given.  Was is 'unjust' to the Israelites?


    Are you arguing from a moral relativist point of view? I thought you prided yourself on the fact that you know what's right and wrong? Don't you know if stoning someone for adultery is right or wrong?

    The viewers of my video can certainly decide for themselves whether they find it unacceptably barbaric in any context - or not.
  • Re: Readings from the "Holy Book"
     Reply #99 - January 12, 2009, 08:16 PM


    I'm not inclined to do this until you have bothered to do a bit of research yourself, express an opinion on them and tell me why you think they are problematic.

    I would also suggest that if you are not willing to provide evidence that you withdraw your 'al Qaeda sympathisers' comment.


    Why do I need to express an opinion on it - the collateral is provided by the Bible itself, no need to express an opinion on it.  Its all in black & white with these quotes.

    Secondly you refer to my quote "as they are coming up with the same arguments I have heard from Al-Qaeda sympathisers time & time again"

    It becomes ever more apparent by the second. Note by arguments, I meant the way you argue in forums.  

    In the way you obfuscate , the way you translate to taste,  the current one where you decide which questions you are prepared to answer, and those you are not, and the next one which will be doing a runner when the going gets tough (to be cont...).  

    In fact I would go so far as to say the quotes here provide the same type of platform used to justify 9/11 by Bin Laden's lame brained monkeys.

    If your religion was so great, straightforward answers would be good enough for me, but I suppose this is not possible given the scale of what you are attempting to justify.  

    Until you or any other Christians on this website attempt to justify each and every quote provided in this thread, then I for one will always lump Christianity & Islam together when referring to xenophobic, hate mongering and murderous religions.  

    Why dont you do the honest thing, and become an apostate.  Perhaps you could start of an ex-Christian website with all the knowledge we have provided you with here.

    Dont waste your time, Jesus is not your saviour, we are.

    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: Readings from the "Holy Book"
     Reply #100 - January 12, 2009, 08:57 PM



    Dont waste your time, Jesus is not your saviour, we are.



    Fuckin hell ! - you havin' an Obama moment?

    We are in favor of tolerance, but it is a very difficult thing to tolerate the intolerant and impossible to tolerate the intolerable.

    -George Dennison Prentice
  • Re: Readings from the "Holy Book"
     Reply #101 - January 12, 2009, 10:05 PM

    Quote
    You don't have to be the only person for appeal to ridicule still to be a logical fallacy.  And if you want to argue 'unjust' the only basis is in the context of that in which the command was given.  Was is 'unjust' to the Israelites?


    But this is what I'm asking you, sparky.  In what context is that command acceptable?  Saying my own beliefs are irrational or emotional or whatever does nothing to answer the question, even if that charge is true.

    I'm not saying your beliefs are either irrational or emotional.  Just that saying 'I don't like that' is not a logical basis on which to criticise something.

    The question for me is 'does the command contradict God's revealed nature in some way?'.  Which is a different thing from saying 'is it acceptable?' which could mean anything from 'I think such a law would be acceptable if it was in force today' to 'it warms my heart to think that such a law existed!'.

    This may be labouring the point, but I think it's important in the context of this thread because the main thrust of Hassan's video is emotional appeal which is a logical fallacy.  He doesn't define his terms ('blood-thirsty'?', 'loving', etc), he doesn't really interpret the passages apart from a one-line 'impression' (which is often plain wrong - i.e. 'kill the unbelievers' - they were idolaters not unbelievers) and he doesn't make a logical argument (the Old Testament God contradicts the NT God because of X,Y,Z).

    So if you think the verse is problematic in some way, the burden of proof is on you to say why.  To do so, you might want to think about the context of ancient Israel, the importance of blood-lines for inheritance and family name, the primitive nature of medicine and lack of pregnancy tests and what goals God might have had in mind in setting the commands for the new nation of Israel.
  • Re: Readings from the "Holy Book"
     Reply #102 - January 12, 2009, 10:12 PM

    And I see Hassan has turned into a copy/paste troll.  Is this where the forum is going?

    Edited for typo


    I hope you appreciate that I dug out all the references and quotes I used in the video because you mentioned they were absent.

    Would you like to go through them all and tell me the correct meaning?

    See, the thing is, Hassan.  What do you want?  Do you want to present an effective critique of Christianity?  Do you want to provoke discussion and thought?  If so, it is in your interest to present a well-thought out and reasoned argument.  If you just want to validate your own already-formed opinion - then you'll just list verses out of context because they seem to support what you think.  The video and your copy-pastes really don't indicate someone who wants to engage at all.

    Adding the reference helps people to be able to find them but doesn't show that you have considered the arguments in context or considered how Christians see them.

    As for telling you the 'correct meaning'.  I now have the quotes in one place and your interpretations in another.  I don't really want to keep playing the video to try to pick up how you are interpreting them.  If you really have a problem with a verse, present an argument about what it is and why it gives you a problem and we can talk about it.

    Cheers,
    sparky
  • Re: Readings from the "Holy Book"
     Reply #103 - January 12, 2009, 10:16 PM

    And I see Hassan has turned into a copy/paste troll.  Is this where the forum is going?

    Edited for typo


    Since when was copy pasting something only the act of a troll?  Roll Eyes

    Jeebus hari and krishna, you have no come back hence your need to resort to "oh my god, look over there, it's a troll Over react" .

    You lost me at the end there.  I didn't say copying and pasting was only the act of a troll but that Hassan was behaving like a copy/paste troll.  Copying and pasting very long lists without presenting an argument or even attempting to engage in a discussion is very much the act of a troll.
  • Re: Readings from the "Holy Book"
     Reply #104 - January 12, 2009, 10:47 PM

    Hassan was not trolling at all. He was responding with the references you asked for. If anyone is trolling it is you, Sparky.

    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Re: Readings from the "Holy Book"
     Reply #105 - January 12, 2009, 11:03 PM

    Quote
    The question for me is 'does the command contradict God's revealed nature in some way?'.  Which is a different thing from saying 'is it acceptable?' which could mean anything from 'I think such a law would be acceptable if it was in force today' to 'it warms my heart to think that such a law existed!'.


    The question for me was, in what context does that command become acceptable?  I guess this is your answer - if it is consistent with God's revealed nature throughout the rest of the Bible it is acceptable.

    Mere consistency strikes me as a very low standard to hold God to. 

    "Befriend them not, Oh murtads, and give them neither parrot nor bunny."  - happymurtad's advice on trolls.
  • Re: Readings from the "Holy Book"
     Reply #106 - January 13, 2009, 01:06 AM

    Sparky wrote

    Quote
    "I'm going to create man and woman with original sin which will anger me"

    Not a good start.  Perhaps you should read the bible too.


    Do you deny that the doctrine of Christianity is that an omniscient, omnipresent all powerful being created man and the twisted idea of original sin? If he created everything then this can not be denied.

    How could man sinning have been a surprise to an all powerful, all knowing supreme being?

    Man sinning and angering him must have been in his plan, do you deny that according to Christian myth/"fact" the creator of the universe impregnated a woman with himself was born then sacrificed himself too himself to appease his anger at us for doing what he knew we would do.

    I may not be soft soaping the story with the appropriate reverence or delving into the lengthy mythology of the Bible but as Richard Dawkins says I don't need to read all of the literature on pixies to know they don't exist.

    Do you deny that what I said is the Christian story or not. Is god all knowing, did he impregnate a woman, did he sacrifice himself to himself?

    If that is not the basis for your irrational belief please teach me how rational Christianity realy is.

    I do agree with you that Christians have not adhered to the genocidal Old Testament for centuries and that's a good thing. A religion is what it's followers make of it and Christians have done a grand job of making Christianity a lot more acceptable than it was but Christianity is still based on illogical and immoral old fables from the desert.

    PS: I have Catholic and Protestant family members and I love them dearly but I know enough about Christianity to know how silly it is.
  • Re: Readings from the "Holy Book"
     Reply #107 - January 13, 2009, 03:54 AM


    The Immaculate Conception is not a pillar of Christianity.  I think Catholics are the only branch that even believe in it, and even to them it would hold no major implications for theology if it were struck down.



    Well even though I was the product of an estranged catholic (at the time) and an agnostic, We lived next to Pentecostals who enthusiastically took me to their Church for a few years while my parents relaxed on Sunday mornings.

    There I learned that Mary was indeed a virgin when she gave birth to Christ.

    But she was married to Joseph at the time and I think especially in those days it would be very odd for a wife to remain a virgin very long after marriage. Unless Joseph was gay.

    B :-*B

    My style is impetuous, my defense is impregnable and I'm just ferocious. I want your heart. I want to eat your children. Praise be to Allah." -- Mike Tyson
  • Re: Readings from the "Holy Book"
     Reply #108 - January 13, 2009, 04:02 AM


    The Immaculate Conception is not a pillar of Christianity.  I think Catholics are the only branch that even believe in it, and even to them it would hold no major implications for theology if it were struck down.



    Well even though I was the product of an estranged catholic (at the time) and an agnostic, We lived next to Pentecostals who enthusiastically took me to their Church for a few years while my parents relaxed on Sunday mornings.

    There I learned that Mary was indeed a virgin when she gave birth to Christ.

    But she was married to Joseph at the time and I think especially in those days it would be very odd for a wife to remain a virgin very long after marriage. Unless Joseph was gay.

    B :-*B


    The virginity of Mary has nothing to do with the Immaculate Conception.  This is why I tend to be a read only poster when it comes to the finer details of Islamic texts.  I am afraid of confusing a surah with a hadith, and in the process confirming some poor muslim in his prejudice that  critics of Islam don't really understand it, therefore Islam is true.

    You have probly achieved the same effect on Sparky and Dio with that gaffe.  The Immaculate Conception is a doctrine which deals with the conception of Mary in her mother's womb, it has nowt to do with whether or not she was a virgin.

    "Befriend them not, Oh murtads, and give them neither parrot nor bunny."  - happymurtad's advice on trolls.
  • Re: Readings from the "Holy Book"
     Reply #109 - January 13, 2009, 04:33 AM


    The virginity of Mary has nothing to do with the Immaculate Conception.  This is why I tend to be a read only poster when it comes to the finer details of Islamic texts.  I am afraid of confusing a surah with a hadith, and in the process confirming some poor muslim in his prejudice that  critics of Islam don't really understand it, therefore Islam is true.

    You have probly achieved the same effect on Sparky and Dio with that gaffe.  The Immaculate Conception is a doctrine which deals with the conception of Mary in her mother's womb, it has nowt to do with whether or not she was a virgin.


    Well I think you will find that when it comes to putting my foot in my mouth I am completely fearless.
     Yes I meant Mary giving birth to Jesus while being a virgin. I guess I misused the term "Immaculate Conception" thinking that is what it was referring to the second miraculous conception. Obviously that aspect of Catholicism I missed. Surely many critics of religion will be less read than the followers. You don't need to finish a bad meal before sending it back.

    My style is impetuous, my defense is impregnable and I'm just ferocious. I want your heart. I want to eat your children. Praise be to Allah." -- Mike Tyson
  • Re: Readings from the "Holy Book"
     Reply #110 - January 13, 2009, 04:52 AM

    Quote
    Well I think you will find that when it comes to putting my foot in my mouth I am completely fearless.


    I can be equally so, but I have found that it does not lend towards
    accuracy.

    Quote
    Yes I meant Mary giving birth to Jesus while being a virgin


    Every Christian and ex-Christian reading knows what you meant, but you got it wrong. 

    Quote
    I guess I misused the term "Immaculate Conception"


    You did more than misuse the term, you confused one doctrine for another.

    Quote
    thinking that is what it was referring to the second miraculous conception.



    Now you have invented an entirely new one.   The second miraculous conception?  WTF does that mean?

    Quote
    Obviously that aspect of Catholicism I missed.


    I think you missed the whole lot.

    Quote
    Surely many critics of religion will be less read than the followers. You don't need to finish a bad meal before sending it back.


    Surely many critics of religion will be better read than the followers.  So maybe those that don't know what they are talking about should just STFU.





    "Befriend them not, Oh murtads, and give them neither parrot nor bunny."  - happymurtad's advice on trolls.
  • Re: Readings from the "Holy Book"
     Reply #111 - January 13, 2009, 05:31 AM

    Quote from: Submissive Bob
    But she was married to Joseph at the time and I think especially in those days it would be very odd for a wife to remain a virgin very long after marriage. Unless Joseph was gay.

    The concept you are referring to is the "perpetual virginity" of Mary. The immaculate conception is the theological claim that Mary was supposedly born without any traces of original sin.

    Islam: where idiots meet terrorists.
  • Re: Readings from the "Holy Book"
     Reply #112 - January 13, 2009, 09:59 AM

    You have to put it in context Hassan, it was only for that time and place, god is love at all other times.  Tongue


    I'm still waiting for anyone to enlighten me as to what context could make those passages acceptable.

    I responded to the one passage you mentioned.  'Acceptable' in the context of this discussion means only 'do they contradict anything else that the bible teaches about God?'.  Otherwise it is your personal emotional criteria that has no relevance to anyone but yourself.


    Sure.  I'm the only person in the world who thinks that death by stoning is cruel and unusual punishment, or that execution by any means for not being a virgin on your wedding night is unjust.   

    You don't have to be the only person for appeal to ridicule still to be a logical fallacy.  And if you want to argue 'unjust' the only basis is in the context of that in which the command was given.  Was is 'unjust' to the Israelites?


    Are you arguing from a moral relativist point of view? I thought you prided yourself on the fact that you know what's right and wrong? Don't you know if stoning someone for adultery is right or wrong?

    The viewers of my video can certainly decide for themselves whether they find it unacceptably barbaric in any context - or not.

    Well, we won't know, will we?  Because you have no interest in attempting to understand the passages at all.

    And no, a true moral relativist (like yourself) wouldn't bother making the argument about what is 'unjust' at all - because 'unjust' is a personal value judgement that has no general application at all.  There is simply no argument to make!  You either 'like it' or you don't.  The person who says 'it is just to stone someone for adultery' is just as 'right' as the person who says 'it is unjust'.  Both are expressing nothing more than their personal preferences.

    The question of 'was it unjust for the israelites' assumes the justice has an absolute value (due to its origin in God) - even if the implications of that value may be different for different people at different places.
  • Re: Readings from the "Holy Book"
     Reply #113 - January 13, 2009, 10:09 AM

    Quote from: IsLame
    Why do I need to express an opinion on it - the collateral is provided by the Bible itself, no need to express an opinion on it.  Its all in black & white with these quotes.


    Well, we have seen numerous incorrect assumptions already. So no, I don't think it is black & white - unless of course you are simply looking to justify what you already believe.

    Quote from: IsLame
    Secondly you refer to my quote "as they are coming up with the same arguments I have heard from Al-Qaeda sympathisers time & time again"

    It becomes ever more apparent by the second. Note by arguments, I meant the way you argue in forums. 

    In the way you obfuscate , the way you translate to taste,  the current one where you decide which questions you are prepared to answer, and those you are not, and the next one which will be doing a runner when the going gets tough (to be cont...).


    Yes, and I asked for a quote to support your argument.  If my translations or interpretations are wrong - by all means present better ones.  And until you have bothered to present an actual argument - your accusations of running away are rather hollow.

    Quote from: IsLame
    In fact I would go so far as to say the quotes here provide the same type of platform used to justify 9/11 by Bin Laden's lame brained monkeys.


    Then make your argument.  Bring some quotes, explain them - bring some 9/11 quotes and tell us how it is the same.  Continuing to spout your opinions says nothing.

    Quote from: IsLame
    If your religion was so great, straightforward answers would be good enough for me, but I suppose this is not possible given the scale of what you are attempting to justify. 


    Who said it was 'great'?  Do you also think that 'liking something' is a criterion for whether it is true or not?
    Quote from: IsLame
    Until you or any other Christians on this website attempt to justify each and every quote provided in this thread, then I for one will always lump Christianity & Islam together when referring to xenophobic, hate mongering and murderous religions.

    Which only shows the fact that you, like so many atheists, are willing to believe almost anything as long as it fits your preconceptions.  It says nothing about Christianity.

    Quote from: IsLame
    Why dont you do the honest thing, and become an apostate.  Perhaps you could start of an ex-Christian website with all the knowledge we have provided you with here.

    I've asked you three times for parallel quotes from an Al-Qaeda sympathiser to back up your accusation and you haven't brought anything.  Don't talk to me about honesty.
  • Re: Readings from the "Holy Book"
     Reply #114 - January 13, 2009, 10:11 AM



    That was really interesting. Thanks for sharing  Smiley
  • Re: Readings from the "Holy Book"
     Reply #115 - January 13, 2009, 10:15 AM

    Hassan was not trolling at all. He was responding with the references you asked for. If anyone is trolling it is you, Sparky.

    Seriously?  You don't consider posting long lists of quotes from other sites with no argument or discussion not to be trolling?  I said that he should provide references for quotes that he gives in the video - because it's generally good practice to show where you got your material.  I didn't ask him to copy and paste long lists of references from other sites.  This is the trolling.

    What have I done that is trolling?  I've given Hassan some critical feedback.  I've responded to the points raised.  I haven't insulted anyone.  What have I done that would make you say this?
  • Re: Readings from the "Holy Book"
     Reply #116 - January 13, 2009, 10:21 AM

    Quote
    The question for me is 'does the command contradict God's revealed nature in some way?'.  Which is a different thing from saying 'is it acceptable?' which could mean anything from 'I think such a law would be acceptable if it was in force today' to 'it warms my heart to think that such a law existed!'.


    The question for me was, in what context does that command become acceptable?  I guess this is your answer - if it is consistent with God's revealed nature throughout the rest of the Bible it is acceptable.

    Mere consistency strikes me as a very low standard to hold God to. 

    It's not God's standard were talking about, it's our standard of what should be believed and consistency is fairly important for that.  If is was inconsistent you might have some reason to think that it wasn't true.
  • Re: Readings from the "Holy Book"
     Reply #117 - January 13, 2009, 10:28 AM

    Quote from: sparky
    Quote from: brucepig
    "I'm going to create man and woman with original sin which will anger me"

    Not a good start.  Perhaps you should read the bible too.


    Do you deny that the doctrine of Christianity is that an omniscient, omnipresent all powerful being created man and the twisted idea of original sin? If he created everything then this can not be denied.

    Which is not what you said.  You said 'with original sin'.

    Quote from: brucepig
    How could man sinning have been a surprise to an all powerful, all knowing supreme being?

    I didn't say it was.

    The rest is little more than an off-topic rant.
  • Re: Readings from the "Holy Book"
     Reply #118 - January 13, 2009, 10:52 AM

    Quote from: IsLame
    Why do I need to express an opinion on it - the collateral is provided by the Bible itself, no need to express an opinion on it.  Its all in black & white with these quotes.


    Well, we have seen numerous incorrect assumptions already. So no, I don't think it is black & white - unless of course you are simply looking to justify what you already believe.

    Quote from: IsLame
    Secondly you refer to my quote "as they are coming up with the same arguments I have heard from Al-Qaeda sympathisers time & time again"

    It becomes ever more apparent by the second. Note by arguments, I meant the way you argue in forums. 

    In the way you obfuscate , the way you translate to taste,  the current one where you decide which questions you are prepared to answer, and those you are not, and the next one which will be doing a runner when the going gets tough (to be cont...).


    Quote from: IsLame
    In fact I would go so far as to say the quotes here provide the same type of platform used to justify 9/11 by Bin Laden's lame brained monkeys.


    Then make your argument.  Bring some quotes, explain them - bring some 9/11 quotes and tell us how it is the same.  Continuing to spout your opinions says nothing.

    Quote from: IsLame
    Until you or any other Christians on this website attempt to justify each and every quote provided in this thread, then I for one will always lump Christianity & Islam together when referring to xenophobic, hate mongering and murderous religions.

    Which only shows the fact that you, like so many atheists, are willing to believe almost anything as long as it fits your preconceptions.  It says nothing about Christianity.

    Quote from: IsLame
    Why dont you do the honest thing, and become an apostate.  Perhaps you could start of an ex-Christian website with all the knowledge we have provided you with here.

    I've asked you three times for parallel quotes from an Al-Qaeda sympathiser to back up your accusation and you haven't brought anything.  Don't talk to me about honesty.


    Didn't think it was necessary as many quotes have already been provided (with sources), and we already know the type of things that come out of the quran.

    In a vain attempt to get you to answer the question, here is a quote that an Al-Qaeda sympathiser would use;

    But if they fight you, slay them.  Such is the reward of those who reject faith.  But if they cease, God is oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. 
    And fight them on until there is no more persecution. And the religion becomes Gods. 
    (The Qur'an, Surah 2:190-193).

    Here is a quote from your Holy book:

    Deuteronomy 7:1-2    When the Lord your God brings you into the land you are entering to possess and drives out before you many nations . . . then you must destroy them totally. Make no treaty with them, and show them no mercy.

    20:10-17    When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace.
    If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you.
    If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city.
    When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it.
    As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. . . .
    This is how you are to treat all the cities that are at a distance from you and do not belong to the nations nearby.





    If anything, I would say the Quran is taking a softer approach, but they are both talking about, what in effect, is ethnic cleansing. 

    The only wrong of those being murdered is they happen to live where they live and believe what they believe.

    And you still accept Christianity as the truth?

    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: Readings from the "Holy Book"
     Reply #119 - January 13, 2009, 11:07 AM

    ...he doesn't really interpret the passages apart from a one-line 'impression' (which is often plain wrong - i.e. 'kill the unbelievers' - they were idolaters not unbelievers)


    So are you saying its OK to kill them if they were idolaters?

    Knowing Islam is the only true religion we do not allow propagation of any other religion. How can we allow building of churches and temples when their religion is wrong? Thus we will not allow such wrong things in our countries. - Zakir Naik
  • Previous page 1 2 3 45 6 ... 17 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »