You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
attack religion without fear
- Thread starter Gordon Gekko
- Start date
Quote from palmbeachdude:
You want to talk about hilarity? How about the dedicated scientists who proved that we were entering a new ice age in the 1970's. Then, a generation later, they are absolutely convinced that we are entering a global meltdown, all based on the strictest scientific evidence, mind you. Next, they will be saying.....well you get the idea. Of course anybody who does not fall for their ideas is...just...not ....a...sophisticate.
At least they admitted they made a mistake when they realized that it was sulfur oxides reflecting sunlight, ie increasing earth's albedo, that was causing the cooling of the 70s. Environmental laws vastly reduced the SOx emissions (remember acid rain) ergo we lost the reflection and the earth heated up.
{QUOTE}
Maybe when Hitler's scientists were doing there scientific experiments on children, you know, amputating limbs to see what types of changes would result, they were gathering just the type of valuable information that enables you to feel so self satisfied.
{QUOTE]
Kind of reminds me of the fun and games of the religious fanatics during the INQUISITION, the CRUSADES, the 30000 give or take witches burned at the stake, and the list goes on and on.
{QUOTE}
How's the dialectical process so far?
And then the great, or so called great scientist carl sagan figured out how to deal with a perplexing problem that has stymied all of science for eons. What is that problem, you ask? Why, the fact that scientists have no plausible idea whatsoever about how or why the big bang took place. But, you see, this creates a monumental problem called the law of the first cause. Something had to cause the big bang and scientists don't have any satisfactory explanations. In fact, thier explanations don't even rise to the level of being called unsatisfactory. They are just plain idiotic. (By the way, have you ever heard the phrase...let their be light?) So, the esteemed scientist sagan realized what a corner he and his fellow non-believers were in and....viola, he simply makes the universe a deity. Yes, an always existant, eternal thing without beginning and without end. This is why he Capitalizes the word cosmos. It is his deity. Guess he is one of the fundies afterall.
{QUOTE}
IMO, most scientists consider some supernatural cause a possibility the "big bang" or whatever you wish to call it, so I don't see a conflict between religion and science at that point. Science deals with the natural world and can not look into the supernatural.
Seneca
another quote from the loving Bible:
"When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. " (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)
Hmmm, Selling your daughter as a sex slave, taken from the same inerrant bible that tells us all about creation, I guess it must be OK to sell slaves especially your daughters.
seneca said:
"Hmmm, Selling your daughter as a sex slave, taken from the same inerrant bible that tells us all about creation, I guess it must be OK to sell slaves especially your daughters."
Hmm, it'll be very hard to have a rational discussion if you are going to lie in this thread. I'll apologise if you tell me where it says "sex slave" in the bible.
"Hmmm, Selling your daughter as a sex slave, taken from the same inerrant bible that tells us all about creation, I guess it must be OK to sell slaves especially your daughters."
Hmm, it'll be very hard to have a rational discussion if you are going to lie in this thread. I'll apologise if you tell me where it says "sex slave" in the bible.
Quote from fhl:
seneca said:
"... you tell me where it says "sex slave" in the bible.
I think in 21.8, the word "please" can be construed as sexual pleasures. In that case, in my mind, these paragraphs imply that one can sell ones daughter so that she can please the buyer sexually. However, if the buyer does not like the way she pleases him, then... Just the way I understand. However, the social and judicial structure of those days were different than modern times. Taking these literally, may conflict directly with the morality of today's society.
EXODUS 21
21:7 And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do.
21:8 If she please not her master, who hath betrothed her to himself, then shall he let her be redeemed: to sell her unto a strange nation he shall have no power, seeing he hath dealt deceitfully with her.
21:9 And if he have betrothed her unto his son, he shall deal with her after the manner of daughters.
21:10 If he take him another [wife]; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish.
21:11 And if he do not these three unto her, then shall she go out free without money.
http://www.godrules.net/library/kjv/kjvexo21.htm
Quote from tradermaji:
I think in 21.8, the word "please" can be construed as sexual pleasures. In that case, in my mind, these paragraphs imply that one can sell ones daughter so that she can please the buyer sexually. However, if the buyer does not like the way she pleases him, then... Just the way I understand. However, the social and judicial structure of those days were different than modern times. Taking these literally, may conflict directly with the morality of today's society.
EXODUS 21
21:7 And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do.
21:8 If she please not her master, who hath betrothed her to himself, then shall he let her be redeemed: to sell her unto a strange nation he shall have no power, seeing he hath dealt deceitfully with her.
21:9 And if he have betrothed her unto his son, he shall deal with her after the manner of daughters.
21:10 If he take him another [wife]; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish.
21:11 And if he do not these three unto her, then shall she go out free without money.
http://www.godrules.net/library/kjv/kjvexo21.htm
Yep. The Catholic Church really blew it when they failed to remove Exodus from the Bible. This section is a constant reminder that the Bible was written by men, not God.
And, maybe that's why it's there -- as a reminder from God, not to get too caught up in a battle over exactly whom God is, or what His plans and purposes are.
Better to submit yourself directly to God's judgments through prayer and good works, and without the intercession of some human interpreter, whether clergy or layperson, telling you how many points your making on God's scorecard.
Quote from fhl:
seneca said:
"Hmmm, Selling your daughter as a sex slave, taken from the same inerrant bible that tells us all about creation, I guess it must be OK to sell slaves especially your daughters."
Hmm, it'll be very hard to have a rational discussion if you are going to lie in this thread. I'll apologise if you tell me where it says "sex slave" in the bible.
Did you miss that part about "If she does not please the man who bought her" ???????????????????????????????
Seneca
today's insprirational Bible quote, I did not post one yesterday as Saturday is the Sabbath:
"If a man commits adultery with another man's wife, both the man and the woman must be put to death." (Leviticus 20:10 NLT)
I guess that is why the USA's laws are not based on the Bible
Some of the stuff I have seen is good, other stuff was pitiful. This is my one contribution to this thread, some food for thought. I am not favoring one religion over another, just bringing a proof (NOT scientific) of God's existence, and of the roots used in three major religions in the world, as follows:
There is one claim in religion that is IMPOSSIBLE to refute. The claim is that God appeared to the Jewish people at Mount Sinai and gave the Jews the Torah/ "Old Testament". The Muslims and Christians also agree this is true--only they have their own branch outs.
I will explain why it is IMPOSSIBLE to refute by posing the following question:
If a person wanted to make up a religion, would it not be far more convincing to say God appeared to "ALL of us" as opposed to just ME or just a handful of people? Since the majority of religions were made-up, would it not be a more believable fiction for thousands of people to come together and to ALL claim they were had the SAME simultaneous Divine revelation to them, instead of just a single individual or group of individuals claiming the revelation? Answer: it is clear a made-up religion could NEVER do that.
The Torah, however, says 600k men between the ages of 20-50 received the Torah from God at Mount Sinai, which totalled about 3 MILLION people. There is NO way this could be made-up, NOBODY could ever get away with that! If I can add, a father always is looking for the "easy way out" for his children, but the Torah is filled of laws and restricitions, totalling 613 of them. There is NO way a father would ever trick his son into accepting hundreds of restrictions, and if he dare tried the children would ON THE SPOT have refuted it and the Torah could not have been transmitted through them.
Again, I am not favoring any religion, just supporting the roots.
There is one claim in religion that is IMPOSSIBLE to refute. The claim is that God appeared to the Jewish people at Mount Sinai and gave the Jews the Torah/ "Old Testament". The Muslims and Christians also agree this is true--only they have their own branch outs.
I will explain why it is IMPOSSIBLE to refute by posing the following question:
If a person wanted to make up a religion, would it not be far more convincing to say God appeared to "ALL of us" as opposed to just ME or just a handful of people? Since the majority of religions were made-up, would it not be a more believable fiction for thousands of people to come together and to ALL claim they were had the SAME simultaneous Divine revelation to them, instead of just a single individual or group of individuals claiming the revelation? Answer: it is clear a made-up religion could NEVER do that.
The Torah, however, says 600k men between the ages of 20-50 received the Torah from God at Mount Sinai, which totalled about 3 MILLION people. There is NO way this could be made-up, NOBODY could ever get away with that! If I can add, a father always is looking for the "easy way out" for his children, but the Torah is filled of laws and restricitions, totalling 613 of them. There is NO way a father would ever trick his son into accepting hundreds of restrictions, and if he dare tried the children would ON THE SPOT have refuted it and the Torah could not have been transmitted through them.
Again, I am not favoring any religion, just supporting the roots.
If I may clarify, the Jewish people do not exclude other faiths from eternal life. Jews hold that a gentile who: A) acknowledges the Torah was given to the Jews at Mount Sinai, B) keeps the "Seven laws of Noah" (see Google search) based upon the mandate of the Torah entitles a non-Jew to eternal life.