Six Iranians arrested for dancing to promote islam

[Hoofhearted]

Reading some history of the start of WWI just now, 28 June being an anniversary of course, I get a strong reminder of just how little human affairs really change. Religion, politics, nationalism, fear, insanity, pride, shame, ethnic hatreds, feuds, etc.; the skin colors, costumes, and languages change but it's all the same battle and warfare, every reason and excuse from mere survival to grasping the heights of privilege and luxury, century after century into millennia. Pale blue dot.

I feel that way too sometimes, but as you say there is change- even it's very little.

We are closer to world peace than ever before, I believe that wholeheartedly.

Where there were once giant walls, insurmountable, there are now doors wide open and welcoming.

The hardest part for me is to accept all that has been destroyed that can never be gotten back, but as long as we are feuding there is hope that each side can come a little closer to a middle ground.

 

[Trader666]

Let's recap to show what a STUpid, lying troll you are

Almost three weeks ago you wrote the following:

Unfortunately for you, the term "their Creator" is not a passport for you or anyone else to arbitrarily insert the word God for everyone. Had founders intended to mean God they would have surely used the word God. They do not use the word God either in the Declaration or Constitution.

Unfortunately for you, the founders did intend to mean God... which is why they did in fact insert the word "God" and in the very first sentence of the Declaration. And the word "Creator" in the sentence right after that which clearly puts Creator in the context of God. So you were proven WRONG almost three weeks ago.

Which you denied, and a few days later tried to troll your way out of it with this:

Incidentally nature's god is a Deist's god, which is basically not considered a God at all.

But you were proven WRONG yet again:

Then you pulled up a draft of the Declaration to try to minimize the founders' use of the words "God" and "Creator":

"natural god" & "their creator". Not capitalized. That comes later when the "Christians" print it up.

But in the FINAL, SIGNED version "God" and "Creator" are BOTH capitalized. WRONG again! Yet as recently as today you still stick to the DRAFT version.
This image is of the actual Declaration of Independence parchment.
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/charters_downloads.html

Despite being proven WRONG over and over, you kept up your compulsive lying for weeks, still claiming this silly nonsense as recently as two days ago:

All I have mentioned is they firstly didn't write the word "God" anywhere. Which is true.

Which, of course, is WRONG. Like almost everything you post.

"When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html

But please keep digging... apparently you're too STUpid to realize how hilarious your petulant trolling is!

 

[Hoofhearted]

"We hold these truths to be self-evident...". The point being these truths had to be identified by man. Not by any God. The right to hold true, certain values, even when any God is being evil or just wrong.

I agree that those truths were calculated by man, and not God. But still, I get the feeling the founders felt the need to include God into the declaration.

They could have done it for sly reasons, knowing that they wouldn't get the support of a God fearing nation without inserting a grand creator, even as one of the signers of the Declaration..

They may have also done it purely out of respect for God. We can't really say. I believe that they believed in what they were saying-That they had a right to life the way they saw fit, and not the way some queen and her goons from across the ocean wanted them to live.

I believe they believed that God would have their backs, and would basically sign the document as well.

The fact that they didn't capitalize god in an early draft means little if anything. A rough draft is just that- rough, and not finalized.

I believe that had we given the writers a couple of centuries or more to further polish revise the document, they would have.



No offense given or taken from the clown comments. I've had a lot of good laughs reading this one, and enjoy the volley.

 

[Trader666]

Your inalienable rights to those values cannot be taken away. The values you have inalienable rights to can.

More STUpid, self-contradictory nonsense.

You're ASSerting that if one has inalienable rights to b and c, then b and c can be still taken away. Which means you didn't have inalienable rights to b and c to begin with. But you did. Which is a contradiction, thus you're WRONG again.

Of course I don't expect you to even grasp this, let alone admit it.

 

[jem]

So now you are agreeing in a literal sense you were dead wrong. You now agree they did use the word God. (this is a start towards your troll reform)
But, now you are still trying to vindicate you stu pidity in the troll sense.

notice the capital letters below.


The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen United States of America,
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Already covered. A Creator could not have instituted that law because Creators are not universal. And they change their minds.



They wrote nature's god "not Natures' God". If they'd written the words "no god" you'd still be screaming they'd written the word "God".
But then removing context meaning and words themselves is the only way to get your own god in there.

 

[trendlover]

Trimlover, I get the substance of what you are saying, I think.

If God is omnipotent, and supposedly good, why does he allow all the suffering and torture?


No, I am not saying god (allow) suffering and pain. I am saying if the god is creator of everything, than the god create the universe with suffering and pain too. That god do not allow it, that god create it. With all the power the god has?

 

[trendlover]

I think if there is the god that know everything (past, present, future) and that god create everything, why does that god not give that knowledge to people he create? Why does the god do this?

 

[LEAPup]

I think if there is the god that know everything (past, present, future) and that god create everything, why does that god not give that knowledge to people he create? Why does the god do this?

I could type for hours, but it's over the top obvious that you know absolutely nothing about God! Literally nothing, and it's sad, but also very obvious.

God created the Heavens and Earth. He sent his Son here to give the word, and die for the sins of every single person on Earth, so that they who believe, could be saved. God COMMANDS that His word be obeyed! If you read the Bible vs whatever nonsense that's polluting your mind, you would read about so many other very faithful followers RIGHT THERE IN THE BIBLE who God challenged, and yes, they suffered... Try reading the Bible, and you'll find answers!

 

[trendlover]

I could type for hours, but it's over the top obvious that you know absolutely nothing about God! Literally nothing, and it's sad, but also very obvious.

God created the Heavens and Earth. He sent his Son here to give the word, and die for the sins of every single person on Earth, so that they who believe, could be saved. God COMMANDS that His word be obeyed! If you read the Bible vs whatever nonsense that's polluting your mind, you would read about so many other very faithful followers RIGHT THERE IN THE BIBLE who God challenged, and yes, they suffered... Try reading the Bible, and you'll find answers!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Some Reasons Why Humanists Reject The Bible
by Joseph C. Sommer
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Introduction

Humanists reject the claim that the Bible is the word of God. They are convinced the book was written solely by humans in an ignorant, superstitious, and cruel age. They believe that because the writers of the Bible lived in an unenlightened era, the book contains many errors and harmful teachings.

Humanists receive much criticism due to their position on the Bible. Some critics even accuse them of being evil. This article attempts to clarify the reasons why Humanists hold negative views about the Bible.

Importance of the Subject

In the United States, the Bible is often hailed as a divinely inspired book. Television and radio carry religious programs praising the Bible as the holy and infallible word of God. Religious groups also distribute vast amounts of books, magazines, tapes, pamphlets, and other items. The materials promote the idea that, as televangelist Pat Robertson has said, "The Bible . . . is a workable guidebook for politics, business, families and all the affairs of mankind." [1]

The Bible is also extolled by many politicians. For instance, President Ronald Reagan signed into law an Act of Congress proclaiming 1983 to be the "Year of the Bible." The law described the Bible as the "Word of God" and said there is "a national need to study and apply its teachings." [2]

Thousands of other religious and political leaders throughout the U.S. promote the Bible. In most communities, an opposing view is rarely, if ever, heard.

The massive and incessant promotion of the Bible significantly influences the beliefs of millions. A Gallup poll showed that over 30% of Americans believe that the Bible is the word of God and its teachings should be taken literally. [3] Gallup identified an additional 25% of Americans who consider the Bible as inspired by God, but think some verses should be interpreted symbolically rather than literally. [4]

Gallup says many other people, while having doubts about whether the entire Bible is the word of God, still consider the book to be a source of moral truths and regard its teachings as deserving great respect. [5]

Such views about the Bible are surely responsible, at least in part, for Gallup’s finding that over two-thirds of Americans belong to churches or synagogues, and 40% attend services on a weekly basis. [6]

If the Humanist view of the Bible is correct, millions of Bible-believers and churchgoers are wasting much time, money, and energy. Humanity’s condition could be greatly improved if those resources were used for solving the world's problems instead of worshiping a nonexistent God.

Moreover, because so many people have been told the Bible is the "Good Book," biblical teachings shape the attitudes of millions on numerous subjects. When the subjects involve governmental issues, all of society can be affected when Bible-believers express their views in the political arena.

Anyone who becomes politically active can soon discover that Bible teachings influence the opinions of many Americans on issues involving nuclear war, overpopulation, conservation, women’s rights, gay rights, racial equality, corporal punishment of children, church-state separation, sex education, science, abortion, contraception, censorship, capital punishment, and other subjects.

When people view the Bible as the word of a just and omniscient God, and attempt to have society's laws and social practices reflect biblical teachings, serious error and harm will occur if the Bible was actually written by fallible humans who lived in an unenlightened era.

In that case, the Bible would not be a guidebook for attaining human happiness and well-being. It would instead perpetuate the ideas of an ignorant and superstitious past - and prevent humanity from rising to a higher level.


Contradictions

The Bible is an unreliable authority because it contains numerous contradictions. Logically, if two statements are contradictory, at least one of them is false. The biblical contradictions therefore prove that the book has many false statements and is not infallible.

Examples of Old Testament Contradictions

The contradictions start in the opening chapters of the Bible, where inconsistent creation stories are told. Genesis chapter 1 says the first man and woman were made at the same time, and after the animals. But Genesis chapter 2 gives a different order of creation: man, then the animals, and then woman.

Genesis chapter 1 lists six days of creation, whereas chapter 2 refers to the "day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens." Genesis 1:2-3 claims that God created light and divided it from darkness on the first day; but Genesis 1:14-19 tells us the sun, moon, and stars weren't made until the fourth day.

Chapter 1 reports that the fruit trees were created before the man, while chapter 2 indicates they were made after him. Genesis 1:20 says the fowl were created out of the waters; Genesis 2:19 alleges they were formed from the ground.

Contradictions are also seen in the biblical story of a worldwide flood. According to Genesis 6:19-22, God ordered Noah to bring "of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort . . . into the ark." Nevertheless, Genesis 7:2-3 relates that the Lord ordered Noah to take into the ark the clean beasts and the birds by sevens, and only the unclean beasts by twos.

Genesis 8:4 reports that, as the waters of the flood receded, Noah’s ark rested on the mountains of Ararat in the seventh month. The very next verse, however, says the mountaintops could not be seen until the tenth month.

Genesis 8:13 describes the earth as being dry on the first day of the first month. But Genesis 8:14 informs us the earth was not dry until the twenty-seventh day of the second month.

The Old Testament contains an interesting contradiction in the story of the census taken by King David and the resulting punishment of the Israelites. God was so angered by the census that he sent a plague that killed 70,000 men. According to II Samuel 24:1, the Lord had caused David to take the census - which makes the punishment appear even more nonsensical. But an attempt was later made, at I Chronicles 21:1, to improve God’s image by claiming that Satan incited the census.

Further, the Old Testament is contradictory as to whether the Lord commanded the Israelites to sacrifice animals to him. At Jeremiah 7:22, God denies he ever gave the Israelites commandments about animal sacrifices. In contrast, Exodus 29:38-42 and many other verses depict God as requiring the Israelites to offer animal sacrifices.
http://americanhumanist.org/humanism/Some_Reasons_Why_Humanists_Reject_the_Bible

 

[trendlover]

continue



Examples of New Testament Contradictions

In the New Testament, there are contradictions between the genealogies of Jesus given in the first chapter of Matthew and the third chapter of Luke.

Both genealogies begin with Jesus’ father, who is identified as Joseph (which is curious, given that Mary was supposedly impregnated by the Holy Ghost). But Matthew says Joseph’s father was Jacob, while Luke claims he was Heli. Matthew lists 26 generations between Jesus and King David, whereas Luke records 41. Matthew runs Jesus’ line of descent through David’s son Solomon, while Luke has it going through David’s son Nathan.

The story of Jesus' birth is also contradictory. Matthew 2:13-15 depicts Joseph and Mary as fleeing to Egypt with the baby Jesus immediately after the wise men from the east had brought gifts.

But Luke 2:22-40 claims that after the birth of Jesus, his parents remained in Bethlehem for the time of Mary’s purification (which was 40 days, under the Mosaic law). Afterwards, they brought Jesus to Jerusalem "to present him to the Lord," and then returned to their home in Nazareth. Luke mentions no journey into Egypt or visit by wise men from the east.

Concerning the death of Judas, the disloyal disciple, Matthew 27:5 states he took the money he had received for betraying Jesus, threw it down in the temple, and "went and hanged himself." To the contrary, Acts 1:18 claims Judas used the money to purchase a field and "falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out."

In describing Jesus being led to his execution, John 19:17 recounts that he carried his own cross. But Mark 15:21-23 disagrees by saying a man called Simon carried the cross.

As for the crucifixion, Matthew 27:44 tells us Jesus was taunted by both criminals who were being crucified with him. But Luke 23:39-43 relates that only one of the criminals taunted Jesus, the other criminal rebuked the one who was doing the taunting, and Jesus told the criminal who was defending him, "Today shalt thou be with me in paradise."

Regarding the last words of Jesus while on the cross, Matthew 27:46 and Mark 15:34 quote Jesus as crying with a loud voice, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" Luke 23:46 gives his final words as, "Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit." John 19:30 alleges the last words were, "It is finished."

There are even contradictions in the accounts of the resurrection – the supposed event that is the very foundation of the Christian religion. Mark 16:2 states that on the day of the resurrection, certain women arrived at the tomb at the rising of the sun. But John 20:1 informs us they arrived when it was yet dark. Luke 24:2 describes the tomb as open when the women arrived, whereas Matthew 28:1-2 indicates it was closed. Mark 16:5 declares that the women saw a young man at the tomb, Luke 24:4 says they saw two men, Matthew 28:2 reports they saw an angel, and John 20:11-12 claims they saw two angels.

Also in the resurrection stories, there are contradictions as to the identity of the women who came to the tomb,[7] whether the men or angels the women saw were inside or outside the tomb,[8] whether the men or angels were standing or sitting,[9] and whether Mary Magdalene recognized the risen Jesus when he first appeared to her.[10]

As a final example of a New Testament contradiction, the conflicting accounts of Paul’s conversion can be cited. Acts 9:7 states that when Jesus called Paul to preach the gospel, the men who were with Paul heard a voice but saw no man. According to Acts 22:9, however, the men saw a light but didn't hear the voice speaking to Paul.

The foregoing examples are just a few of the hundreds of contradictions contained in the Old and New Testaments. Each contradiction is an instance where at least one of the verses is wrong. Thus, hundreds of contradictions mean there are at least hundreds of incorrect statements in the Bible.

Cruelties

Humanists also reject the Bible because it approves of outrageous cruelty and injustice. In civilized legal systems, a fundamental principle is that the suffering of the innocent is the essence of injustice. Yet the Bible teaches that God repeatedly violated this moral precept by harming innocent people.

Cruelty in Basic Christian Teachings

Instances of cruel and unjust behavior by the biblical God are seen in the most basic Christian doctrines. Some of God’s acts that harmed the innocent are as follows.

He damned the whole human race and cursed the entire creation because of the acts of two people (Genesis 3:16-23; Romans 5:18); he drowned pregnant women and innocent children and animals at the time of the Flood (Genesis 7:20-23); he tormented the Egyptians and their animals with hail and disease because pharaoh refused to let the Israelites leave Egypt (Exodus 9:8-11,25); and he killed Egyptian babies at the time of the Passover (Exodus 12:29-30).

After the Exodus he ordered the Israelites to exterminate the men, women, and children of seven nations and steal their land (Deuteronomy 7:1-2); he killed King David’s baby because of David’s adultery with Bathsheba (II Samuel 12:13-18); he required the torture and murder of his own son (e.g., Romans 3:24-25); and he promised to send non-Christians to eternal torture (e.g., Revelation 21:8).

More Slaughters Ordered by the Lord

Besides the unfairness and heartlessness contained in many well-known Christian teachings, the Bible has other violent tales that are opposed to civilized standards of morality. Among the most shocking Bible passages are those that portray God as ordering or approving the extermination of various people, including children and the elderly. Here are examples:
•At I Samuel 15:3, the prophet Samuel gives King Saul this commandment from the Lord: "Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass."
•Ezekiel 9:4-7 has this harrowing account: "And the Lord said unto him, Go through . . . the midst of Jerusalem, and set a mark upon the foreheads of the men that sigh and that cry for all the abominations that be done in the midst thereof. And to the others he said in mine hearing, Go ye after him through the city, and smite: let not your eye spare, neither have ye pity: Slay utterly old and young, both maids and little children, and women: but come not near any man upon whom is the mark. . . ."
•Hosea 13:16 describes a punishment from the Lord: "Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up."
•Deuteronomy 32:23-25 says that after the Israelites incited God's jealousy by worshiping other gods, he vowed: "I will spend mine arrows upon them. . . . The sword without, and terror within, shall destroy both the young man and the virgin, the suckling also with the man of gray hairs."
•In Numbers chapter 31, the Lord approves of these instructions that Moses gave to the Israelite soldiers about how to treat certain women and children captured in war: "Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves."
•Isaiah 13:9,15-18 contains this message from God: "Behold, the day of the Lord cometh, cruel both with wrath and fierce anger. . . . Every one that is found shall be thrust through. . . . Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes . . . and their wives ravished. Behold, I will stir up the Medes against them. . . . [T]hey shall have no pity on the fruit of the womb; their eyes will not spare children."

These verses expose the biblical God as having the morals of a sociopathic mass murderer.

Examples of God’s Other Cruel Methods

The God of the Bible displayed his sadistic tendencies by employing a variety of other means to torment and kill people.

He caused the earth to open and swallow entire families (Numbers 16:37-32); he used fire to devour people (e.g., Leviticus 10:1-2; Numbers 11:1-2); and he punished the Israelites with wars, famines, and pestilences (e.g., Ezekiel 5:11-17).

He sent wild animals such as bears (II Kings 2:23-24), lions (II Kings 17:24-25), and serpents (Numbers 21:6) to attack people; he sanctioned slavery (e.g., Leviticus 25:44-46); he ordered religious persecution (e.g., Deuteronomy 13:12-16); and he caused cannibalism (Jeremiah 19:9).

Disproportionate Punishments by the Lord

The biblical God is also guilty of inflicting punishments that are grossly disproportionate to the acts committed. In the American legal system, such disproportion violates the U.S. Constitution’s Eighth Amendment, which prohibits cruel and unusual punishments.

Obviously, to punish people who are completely innocent, as seen in the preceding Bible verses, constitutes punishment that is horribly disproportionate to the moral culpability of the recipients. And there are other instances where the biblical God's punishments are shockingly harsh compared to the acts committed.
http://americanhumanist.org/humanism/Some_Reasons_Why_Humanists_Reject_the_Bible