I am not interested in making friends with Christians or any religious people for that matter. I am not interested in reconciliation or building bridges or enlightening the religious, I am only interested in destroying their faith and revealing their dysfunction to others. Who cares if you think I am a dick or not? Your opinion does not matter in the slightest, you are nothing to me. There is only pure honest hatred on my part and when you detest something as I do with total conviction you can change something, for the better. You have the focus. The determination to make the world better.
I will not be told what to post or not to post by the likes of you.
Pointing out scriptural inconsistency is but one weapon, I have others with which to kill religion with. They are all valid.
I want the religious to be angry and adversarial with my statements, I want a conflict to arise that will involve the whole world, I want to see the religious blow people up and kill in the name of God and persecute homosexuals and women etc...I want them to do all these things so that we have every reason and excuse to end them. I want the world to see what the religious really are, the unthinking robots they are...and people like you really should get out of the way for your own sake.
I don't want to reach out to them, they do so much to harm others, they would burn you or torture you if they could, for the good of your immortal soul and for the good of the souls of others. They kill and maim and persecute and misinform every day. There can be no mercy and no peace, until all the Holy books are as ashes...all the Churches Mosques and Temples, burnt out rubble.
If you don't like that, I could not care less.
Incidentally you fail to understand that inconsistencies in the Bible mean one thing...it is fallible...it is thus contributory evidence that the Bible is not and never was the absolute word of God, should he exist or not. As others seem to think it is.
PS I have made you an enemy since you are a clearly a left wing Christian apologist of some type, such people can only be my enemies. I cant stand people like you. Your kind in effect excuse them and imply they have a right to believe what they believe, totally unacceptable.
Don't bother responding to this because I have nothing more to say to you and there is nothing you can say that will move me, I will ignore your comments from now on, on this thread.
I will not debate with those that resort to petty name calling.
I am not interested in your interpretations...or your empty laughable denial. The contradictions remain despite your inability to recognize them.
As for your merciful God, He is recorded as a killer of women and children, a God that approves of incest and pedophilia. A dealer in genocide and mass murder. Whatever you say to try to justify it with only serves to make Christianity look even more disgusting and repellent. I look forward to the days when the Churches are set on fire and the Priests are nailed to Trees, I only hope I live long enough to witness it.
To you a Christian any reasonable statement would probably sound insane.
Why would I care what is legal or not in the ME?
I have no power to influence the laws of ME nations.
It would be insanity to believe that there is an absolute moral code for all intelligent life to adhere by...wherever they exist in the universe.
The closest you will get is the unwritten sense of humanity and codes of conduct common to most human cultures.
I noticed that you still failed to answer my earlier question.
Disappointing but entirely predictable.
''I was disputing your assertion that polygamy has nothing to do with sexuality- because it does, and the assertion that it does not is ridiculous.''
I clarified what I meant by sexuality, what is ridiculous is attributing any connection between Polygamy and LGBT movement.
I am not clarifying your argument btw because I am disputing everything you say in the continuous argument. There is no way I could agree with anything someone like you would state. Polygamy has absolutely nothing to with LGBT the subject of this argument. You should not have even mentioned it.
Unwise and obviously false.
If the nation he lived in permitted it, it would be acceptable for his culture for him to bone a Donkey.
It would not be acceptable for my culture, since as outlined it is animal exploitation and that alone is justification to outlaw it.
There is no absolute objective moral code. There is only common behaviors for a particular species.
Humans exhibit a societal order, like many other species.
This way of life involves cooperation and mutuality, caring for each other and sharing resources, in the manner of humans and wolves and other social species.
What is naturally abhorrent to most humans bar psychopathic personalities and the insane, is a result largely of genomic expression.
Your view of morality is subjective to your species and culture in the main.
For the wicked nothing is unacceptable, regardless of culture or species.
For the good what is acceptable is what is honest, fair, just and ethical in the circumstances.
Relative to cultural values and species instinct.
So sorry...there is no absolute moral compass to cling to.
You have to light your own light in the abyssal darkness...
Democracy is only illogical if it is dysfunctional. Socrates may have said that I don't know.
What makes a thing correct is a complex thing. It is mostly what we agree upon as a society is wrong, social codes of conduct, our rules and regulations in law. But it is also about what we might aspire to be.
Since as a civilization we also progress.
We aim to be tolerant we aim to be concerned with our own affairs and have respect for the human dignity of others to live their lives as they see fit without discrimination and prejudice.
Those who offend must and will be punished if they choose to set a belief higher than the rule of law, which in the eyes of the law is unforgivable.
Have a look at these.
2KI 24:8 Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he began to reign, and he reigned in Jerusalem three months. And his mother's name was Nehushta, the daughter of Elnathan of Jerusalem.
2CH 36:9 Jehoiachin was eight years old when he began to reign, and he reigned three months and ten days in Jerusalem: and he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD.
and
Matt 5:16 "In the same way, let your light shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father in heaven." (NIV)
Matt 6:3-4 "But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving may be in secret. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you." (NIV)
and
PSA 145:9 The LORD is good to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works.
JER 13:14 And I will dash them one against another, even the fathers and the sons together, saith the LORD: I will not pity, nor spare, nor have mercy, but destroy them.
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/
The test is as objective as possible in practical application in daily life.
Your second answer is evasive.
I repeat...
Why does hurting children cease to matter if God does not exist?
Are you a psychopath with no conscience and capacity for pity or sympathy?
Consent cannot be given by those who are judged to lack the mental capacity to make an informed decision.
Such as Children and Animals and those with diminished responsibility eg Someone with late stage Alzheimer's disease.
Incest is inherently exploitative...most victims of incest will not tell a happy tale.
The reason it is wrong to have sex with a child is because the child by definition of being a child is still developing and it is a scientific fact that sexual activity with children is psychologically harmful as well as potentially physically harmful. Certainly early pregnancy is potentially harmful and not in the interests of the child.
I am concerned this is not obvious. Perhaps the story of Lot has led you to believe incest and pedophilia is acceptable.
Christianity will never grip the world again as it did...it is dying now and not soon enough,
Nema... ;)
If the object of your desire cannot give legal consent to sex then you might well have a legal duty not to attempt to have sex with it...regardless of what the Bible says.
Having sex with your sister children and animals and vulnerable people etc.. is illegal and is outlawed because it is inherently exploitative, it is rape or incest in the case of humans.
If you don't understand why animals and children should not be excluded then you do not understand the concepts of exploitation or rape, since obviously unrelated homosexuals above the age of consent who freely engage in sexual activity are not being raped or being incestuous.
One does not have to allow all forms of sexual expression or revert to religious puritanical bigotry and persecution in order to maintain a healthy moral society.
Mutual consent between individuals able to make that decision freely without fear or coercion.
That is the dividing line between sexual right and wrong.
That means homosexuals and heterosexuals and bisexuals can all stand on one side of the line together.
The incestuous, the pedophiles, the necrophiliacs, the bestiality enthusiasts...on the other. Should they act on their desires.
Sexuality in the LBGT context is and should remain exclusively related to sexual orientation and sexual orientation only, with regard to preference for a particular gender or both. Any expansion with things like Polygamy would lessen the recognition sought for by the gay community and with Incest Pedophilia and Bestiality and Necrophilia...they really have little connection either, since gender preference is not the issue..
Sexual orientation and gender identity, that is what the LGBT organisations stand for.
'I and my father are one' implies that one is equal to or indivisible from the other, that there is no differentiation. The other verse states that one is higher than the other, thus there is a degree of separation. These two verse are thus conflicting. There are many more obvious contradictions if you want further examples, I chose that one because it is fairly subtle.
It (The Bible) has numerous contradictions.
JOH 10:30 I and my Father are one.
JOH 14:28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.
It depends on what is meant exactly by talking about sex.
Clearly not discussing sex or making sex a taboo subject is unhealthy and very likely to lead to much dysfunction. Sexual repression leads to all kinds of evils as the Catholic Church and it's sorry record of child abuse demonstrates admirably. If people are not open about sex then there can be no discussion as to what is healthy sex and what isn't...no guidance for the young in particular, leading to obvious issues like teenage pregnancy. Also when people are coming to terms with their sexuality it is necessary for them to feel able to discuss such matters, openly and frankly.
Perhaps the problem is the causal and perhaps distasteful open discussions of sex and sex acts between people, when really such gratuitous discussions about sex serve no real purpose and should perhaps be toned down in public.
I believe war can be eliminated if nationstates decide that for the greatest good for the greatest number of people and for ultimately the altruistic benefit of our species it would be wise to abandon a multi government world and create a global unity government, a federal government of nation states.
Where instead of competing like Rats and Locusts for natural resources and third world nations to exploit, nations cooperate, pooling and re distributing resources fairly and sustainably.
With a centralised federal world government that can make real decisions...and not just 'bring change' change isnt always good is it?...what we need is progress.
Agreed, Global Warming is a watertight argument supported by peer reviewed research conducted by hundreds of independent scientific establishments and thousands of researchers around the globe. The decreasing salinity of the Atlantic ocean caused by polar ice melt will present Britain in particular with challenges for the future, the atlantic drfit is responsible for the UK's balmy temperate climate, if that fails due to the relative densities of the ocean changing then the UK is going to be more like Siberia...being on the same latitude.
Different challenges for different places.
I mention this as the effects of rampant fossil fuel use, cattle rearing etc may have direct and pressing consequences for any of us wherever we live, in good time.
Obviously fusion is the way out of reliance...fission isnt enough...and too problematic.
