Author Topic: Religion (Read 20754 times)

VijchtiDoodah · « **Reply #200 on:** October 11, 2006, 09:51:10 pm »

Are you really suggesting that I'd want Christians to believe that they have to kill people who worship other gods? I'm not. I am not.

However, perhaps I skipped a step when I assumed that "And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die" was literal just because it seemed very specific to me. Is it really figurative?

Graham · « **Reply #201 on:** October 12, 2006, 01:48:46 am »

I am definitly not a Bible scholar(don't know if this is the best time to bring that up

) It does seem a little more literal after a little more reading. I'm not saying its right at all, those were laws back in that time. Christians don't sacrafice lambs now. Like I said before the Old testiment was violent. Basically its showing the ying and yang of it all. The Old Testiment shows us (christians) the power of God and the New Testiment shows the love. To be honest Vijtch you prolly will not like this answer, but look at it this way, do you see us sacraficing lambs or pulling people into the street and stoning them for thinking differenly. The whole wrath deal died with Jesus on the cross. This is just my opinion though. To be honest since you dig into certain verses talk to someone that studies the Bible, a local pastor or something.

VijchtiDoodah · « **Reply #202 on:** October 12, 2006, 02:13:37 am »

I'm not interested in what a pastor has to say about the Bible or even what the Bible says itself. I'm asking for your beliefs. Explain it the way you know how. Unless you've never examined why you follow the Bible, in which case just use this as an excuse to examine your beliefs and show me your thought process.

Also, don't be confused when I make broad statements about Christianity, I'm really just applying what you're saying to it, even though I know that's wildly inaccurate.

So, let's take several steps back and see if you answer these questions differently: why do you believe that the Bible was right when it says that sodomy is wrong and why don't you stone people when they worship another god? We'll get to the general ideas later, but I want to focus on the specifics for now.

Graham · « **Reply #203 on:** October 12, 2006, 02:32:22 am »

Really read my last post about stoning if you want my answer about stoning, says what i think about it and why I think God would give such a law and whether is it done now... Again I'm no Bible scholar just keep that in mind please. I mainly read Proverbs since it the book of wisdom and thats really what I want most in my christian life since I have a tendency to do stupid things sometimes... Anyway Ill post what i think about stoning( with sodomy I really don't know if your still talking about homosexualty or butt sex.) Stoning is wrong, like i stated before stoning was a "wrath" deal back when God had a strict set of rules for everyone to follow. Human punishing human for sin stopped when Jesus died. Jesus was the bridge, God doesn't smite cities or anything now, punishment is in His hands now.(For Biblical law, not our laws)

-edit-
Forgot to add this, christians are suppose to follow the laws of our government. Stoning someone for thinking different is called murder... so I don't think we are really suppose to be doing that.

echo_trail · « **Reply #204 on:** October 12, 2006, 02:52:28 am »

I don't see what the big fuss' all about, really. Seems to me that the two of you arguing, as actually just making eachother right.

I must admit I haven't taken the time to read the hole deal(it's freakin 11 pages, man!

), and I might be joining in a little late. Allthough, I'd still like to state my opinion here.
It's obvious to most people that religion hasn't always served the most... humane purposes. Ofcourse it was always excused with that, but sometimes other desires really lay behind. Ofcourse that's always easy to say now in the present, when the times has changed. We no longer use medievil methods, which was back then considered normal. Nowadays they're considered barbaric and cruel.

People, even back then, were very different from one another - Just like today. Even people of the same religion executed their beliefs in various ways, and though they were not always allowed to back then, they refused to bow to the supressing powers. Some believers became minorities, and they were slaughtered all over the world. Fortunately, todays methods are alot more... humane. Not nescessarily more mercyfull,Â but blood isn't spilled.. In europe/the west at least.

In the modern society, you gotta let people believe what they want to. What is religion anyway, if not but the struggle for ppower, if you can't accept your fellow man for what he is. I think it's nothing short of spiritual racism. I'm an atheist myself, as some of you may know from previous threads, and I think it might be hard for a none-believer like me to fully understand what religion truely is, and what it gives. I do see and understand the basics for it, though; To live a life of joy, and to bring joy into the life of others. that's a fine thing, I think, and it's a shame it's so rarely seen.

Seems to me that most christians(and every one else, probably) use their 'powers', their preyers, to actually "damn" the beliefes of others, instead of focusing on the wellbeing of others. In other words, religion is no longer used to appreciate what we have, but it's focused on what we would like to have.. That's called envy, and it's one of the seven sins of death, right? Somethings just not adding up these days.

Sorry if my english is confusing you - I just woke up.

Crap, and now I'm late for school. See you people later..

VijchtiDoodah · « **Reply #205 on:** October 12, 2006, 03:33:23 am »

Echo, we weren't arguing. We were having a bit of a one-sided discussion.

Sodomy is anal sex. Might as well tell us what you believe about homosexuality as well, though.

As for stoning (and sodomy and homosexuality, when you get to them), I'm looking for a bit more of a specific answer. As in, if you had to look at yourself without any influence from the Bible, what conclusions would you come to and why, and how do those enhance/detract from the beliefs you have from the Bible? Said another way, if you were one of the philosophers that predated even the Old Testament, would the ideas you create agree with the Bible and how or how not?

This tends to be a difficult question for many religious people or those who have always relied on society for their answers, so I'll probably end up asking you to redefine what you mean several times. I'm looking for something along the lines of "I believe what I believe because I independently came up with..." or "Even though I don't agree with the Bible here and for this reason, I trust it because..."

echo_trail · « **Reply #206 on:** October 12, 2006, 09:01:32 am »

You know, on many occations I find myself totally agreeing with the bible. In fact, it's hard not to, and you would probably be pretty twisted not to. I mean, the bible is a book of joy, and it is excellent marketing for christianity. Still, you can't relie on the bible to define our lives, and the ay we live it. You cannot let it tell you how to live. Do so, and we'll end up with an ignorent society like we see in the third world. *I mean no offends hereby. I really don't. Now, I know that's probably not what you meant, but I just thought I'd make it clear.

To clear other things up for a start, I think homosexuality has as much right to 'exist' as every other form of sexual desire has. Who get's to decide what's right? God? In that case, I suggest everyone get's out there and fuck the hell out of every opposite gender - to reproduce, just like every other mammal does.

We humans have taken it upon ourselfs to define what's right and what's wrong. Most people would agree that stuff like murder, rape or stealing is pretty much in the !WRONG! section, but not everything is that easely defined. In the old days, the definition of these things were often concluded either by force, or by the Saint Peter on earth - the pope. These days it isn't all that simple, and that creates something of a paradox. People are alot more 'lose' nowadays, and the hole "do-as-I-say-or-you'll-burn-in-hell" things doesn't frighten people as it used to.
You can think whatever you want to on the subjects, but you cannot alowe yourself to change the oppinion of others. Not as long as they're not trying to change yours, ofcourse. You gotta stand up for yourself(and for those who can't for themselfs), but supressing other isn't the way to do it.

Okay, for instance, I could never imagine myself get turned on by the gender I present.. Which is the male gender, should any of you doubt(you'd better not!

). As well as I cannot possibly imagine gaining pleasure of getting some fleshy thing up my ass, but if someone does, who am I to say it's wrong? Who am I to tell these people, what you're doing doesn't go along with my beliefs, and therefor I will not alowe you to continue your infidelic practice of what I can only pressume to be the dirty work of the evil lord that is satan himself? Curse you.. CUUUURSE YOU!!.. C'mon people, this is the 21st century, you can do whatever the fuck you want.

Personally I don't mind people being different, aslong as they don't mind me being different from them. Ex., my mother has this friend who's gay. Not just, "yeah, I fancy men" kinda gay, more like Jack McFarland gay(man, I can't believe I actually know his name..). And it's like, everytime I see him, he's like all over me. Not that he's trying to gay me out or nothing, but he spends so much energy letting everyone know he''s gay. Now THAt's annoying.. I mean, get off me you buttwrecking Homonkey!

"Not that he's trying to gay me out".. Can you even say that?

Ethics allways has and always will be discussed. No one can really tell what's right and what's wrong in detail, but then again, that's not really important, is it? If you don't like gay people, fine, don't become one. If you don't like black people, fine, don't visit Harlem. If you don't like muslims, fine stay christian or whatever you DO like. If you don't like people in general, then stay indoors, 'cause there's no way in hell you're ever gonna change everyone, and there'll always be various oppinions.

Graham · « **Reply #207 on:** October 12, 2006, 12:06:49 pm »

Stoning - Wrong since its such a savage execution. If someone neds to be put to death then lethal injection is the way.
Sodomy - Well never really thought about it or even read it up in the Bible. I guess I'm kinda neutral to it.
Homosexuality - Of course I'm agaisnt it, God made a Man and a Woman (HE DIDN'T MAKE ADAM AND STEVE,

sorry i just love it when people say that.... its hilarious) Sex in nature is reproductive(Let me go ahead and say yes sex is very important for relatinoships, but it factors in after marrage for me) guy on guy or woman on woman can't make a baby. Babies are made when a man and woman go at it.

VijchtiDoodah · « **Reply #208 on:** October 12, 2006, 01:22:19 pm »

What are your feelings on sex before marriage?

Also, if you're relating humans to the rest of nature, are you saying that we're equal with animals?

Graham · « **Reply #209 on:** October 12, 2006, 01:35:02 pm »

Sex before marrage, its a no. Thats something that is said in the Bible and I follow it.
Animals to be honest aren't on the same level as humans, but they are to be respected and cared for the best we can.

VijchtiDoodah · « **Reply #210 on:** October 12, 2006, 01:52:22 pm »

So, people can't have sex before marriage, but you're neutral when it comes to people having anal sex as long as they aren't homosexual and therefore don't love eachother. That means that the only way people could have anal sex is if they had a loveless marriage, perhaps for the sole sake of having sex, yes?

Graham · « **Reply #211 on:** October 12, 2006, 02:00:25 pm »

Who ever said every marrage is a loveless one?

a-4-year-old · « **Reply #212 on:** October 12, 2006, 02:09:48 pm »

Quote from: VijchtiDoodah on October 11, 2006, 09:10:47 pm

Quote from: a-4-year-old on October 11, 2006, 08:51:34 pm
as a general rule, (with few exeptions) when there are specific examples, like an eye/tooth they are figurative, and when it is general, than it is most likely literal.

Then "And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die" is literal. So why don't you attempt to stone people when they choose another god?

If you read the whole chapter, and not just the one verse like we already told you, than you would see that they are talking about the jewish people in that time period, it is not uncommon for the bible to list things that apply to specific time periods, like revelations, which is almost totally figurative, is specific to a time period.

homosexuallity is pretty clear in the bible: no butt buddies.

Marriage is not about sex, marriage is about two people that love each other.

VijchtiDoodah · « **Reply #213 on:** October 12, 2006, 06:37:16 pm »

Quote from: â€ on October 12, 2006, 02:00:25 pm

Who ever said every marrage is a loveless one?

I'm not sure how you got that, but I was saying that if you believe in sex after marriage, that anal sex is a type of sex, and that you don't care if people have anal sex as long as they aren't homosexual, then the only way two people could have anal sex the right way would be to have a loveless marriage -- sex without being homosexual and waiting until after they're married.

a-4-year-old · « **Reply #214 on:** October 12, 2006, 08:22:41 pm »

well than you wont be having anal sex will you.

VijchtiDoodah · « **Reply #215 on:** October 12, 2006, 09:22:53 pm »

I'd need a butt buddy first, wouldn't I? He'd be FABulous. Or FLABulous...

Graham · « **Reply #216 on:** October 12, 2006, 10:38:08 pm »

Vijtch I'm against homosexuals totally, not just sex. Sex is just the first thing people think about. Also how I got "lovesless marrage" well you just said in two posts you have to be in a loveless marrage to have anal sex apparently. If you're thinking thats what I said then I really have no idea how you got that. Besides I have talked to alot of nonchristians about sex and they tell me I am right by waiting.

XYZ · « **Reply #217 on:** October 12, 2006, 11:28:22 pm »

Although religion isn't the best thing to discuss on a forum for a game where you viciously murder countless people, I guess I'll have a go. I'm a Satanist (STFU.) and I strongly believe in self-indulgence. If it makes you happy, go ahead. It's not like anal sex kills.

I forgot about AIDS. Nevermind.

Anyway, If somebody wants to be gay, let them. Who's to say they don't love each other? It's not like you can instantly label anyone who's homosexual as a loveless beast.

Also, smileys. Woot woot.

echo_trail · « **Reply #218 on:** October 13, 2006, 01:34:21 am »

I think the one thing we really need to discuss, is whether love is actually an artificial thing we've made up as we go, or if it is in fact a human emotion. I personally believe that we humans are no more than ordinary animals, blessed(or cursed) with the highest IQ found on planet earth. You don't see other animals loving eachother. I mean, some animals are drawn to eachother, even for all of their life, but that's got nothing to do with love. Originally, back with the very first homosapiens, love was also nonexistant. The lapha male choose himself the best female(s), and that was it, he made a clan by that.

Undoubtly there can be some attraction between one human being and another, but I think that is just basic mating instincts reacting, and since that is such a strong emotion, we have choosed to make something more of it. When you think of it, most relationships where one of the parts wont have sex, don't work out. I'm not saying this is the case for every relationship of that kind, but most.
Today, rape is a punishable crime, but how many haven't played around with the thought of going for some hot chick, willing or not, if she couldn't see you or whatever.. It is that basic instinct that drives us, people.

Don't get me wrong, I love.. love. I depend on it. If i get the feeling, just for a second, that my girl isn't all that interrested, I'm totally devestated. I need her to tell me she loves me, and I need her to need me telling her(

). It's not that I don't enjoy "love" as much as anyone else, I just don't think of it the same way.

That being said, you can probably see why I have nothing against, and in fact I support gay marriage(should you want this). As I believe "love" is more like lust, I believe two males or two females can be just as much in love as your average Guy/Girl couple.

"I'd need a butt buddy first, wouldn't I? He'd be FABulous. Or FLABulous..."

^^hehe, That's a good one!

MofoNofo · « **Reply #219 on:** October 13, 2006, 04:24:31 am »

I'm atheist. Though legally orthodox.

News:

Author Topic: Religion (Read 20754 times)