Points to Ponder

It's sad.

It's also one of the reasons I am not religious.

AboveAlpha

 

The ultra-orthodox Jews don't want to sit next to women passengers on planes. There was a flight delay the other day when they won't sit in their assigned seats because they were next to women and their religion forbids such closeness if they are not related. But it's funny as heck to see them duded out in their 20th Century black hats and suits instead of First Century robes with tassels. I suppose being old school only goes so far. Besides, even though it's really hard to ride a donkey across the Atlantic Ocean how ultra-orthodox are they if they fly?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/t...hodox-Jewish-passengers-refuse-sit-women.html

 

They don't bother me but what does is those people who tend to be Christian's as they attempt to pass legislation that attempts to place a Christian Ideology into Government upon a State and Federal Level.

These people have money...resourses and powerful friends and cannot see why if you allow a Christian Specific Relief or Statue within or as a part of a Local, State or Federal Building then this means ALL RELIGIONS must have the same right.

And I am sure that they would not be happy with a Satanic Icon in such places as Satanism is a religion.

They just don't get it or they do get it and don't care.

AboveAlpha

 

Tell that to the Atheists who are constantly attacking Christianity and leaving the others out of most of the threads that are discussed.

- - - Updated - - -

Including the unwritten holy book of Atheism... unwritten because it is a philosophy of "if it feels good, then do it."

 

entertainment is the only reason I'm here

 

So you disagree with the idea in Ecclesiastes 5:18-20 (MSG)? = "After looking at the way things are on this earth, here’s what I’ve decided is the best way to live: Take care of yourself, have a good time, and make the most of whatever job you have for as long as God gives you life. And that’s about it. That’s the human lot. Yes, we should make the most of what God gives, both the bounty and the capacity to enjoy it, accepting what’s given and delighting in the work. It’s God’s gift! God deals out joy in the present, the now. It’s useless to brood over how long we might live."

 

that's not the philosophy of atheism. In fact, science tells us specifically, that things that feel good often have unintended side effects and consequences, and therefore, we shouldn't do them. The more interesting question is - if something feels good, and has no adverse consequences whatsoever, either to the individual or to society at large, why should we not do those things? This gets to the heart of why Christianity is such a horrible source for morality. Because morality does not come from god, or any religious source--it comes from logical deduction and scientific reasoning. Religion takes morality that has been established by science and logic and then takes it as its own. Not the other way around. This is why christians are having such a hard time with the issue of gay marriage. Persecution of homosexuality is based on faulty logic and faulty science. Back when the bible was written, we didn't understand homosexuality from a scientific standpoint. We did not understand that homosexuality is common in the animal kingdom--in fact, homosexual relationships are present everywhere we look in nature. We didn't understand that homosexuality is perfectly natural and a part of a healthy functioning society. Today, our modern understanding of homosexuality has changed, and secular society now no longer sees homosexual relationships as morally wrong. Religion (which is always behind the times) is starting to adopt this new moral development from secular society (as evidenced by the catholic church's softening of its stance on the issue). Eventually, as secular society continues to accept homosexuality, the church will have no choice but to embrace it. Hence, the proof is in the pudding. Religion takes its morals from secular society, not the other way around.

People often claim that god is the only source of morality--that without god, people would just run rampant, and start murdering and stealing. Of course, this is laughable. It would imply that any person who decided to stop believing in god one day, would wake up the next day and kill their neighbor. And yet, I don't believe in god, and my neighbors are all still quite alive. Amazing.

 

The level and number of IMMORAL ACTS perpetrated by supposed Prophets, Holy Men and GODS upon innocent people in the Bible, Torah and Koran....BOGGLE THE MIND!!

My personal favorite stupidity is the story of how a GOD asks Abraham to kill his son in order to prove his obediance, loyalty and faith to such a GOD.

In the Bible, Koran and Torah the story goes that a GOD asks Abraham to kill his son to prove these things and ALL these ancient religious books tell us the same idiocy....that Abraham attempted to KILL his son and before he could do this a GOD prevented the death of Abraham's Son and then this supposed GOD was now content with Abraham's love, faith and obediance for this GOD...and that for some stupid reason Abraham's attempt to kill his son WAS A GOOD THING!!!?????

Would not a GOD wish to see Abraham REFUSE to kill his son as is not refusal to kill his son and refusal of such a GOD'S COMMAND THE MOST MORAL THING ABRAHAM COULD DO?????

Whould not a GOD who is testing the strength of moral fiber and strength of being able to know and do THE RIGHT THING even when another such as a GOD is telling you to do THE WRONG THING???

This story is idiotic...and only a Man could write something so convoluted and hypocritical as to justify MURDER OF ONE'S SON!!!

AboveAlpha

 

The interesting thing about the Abraham case is that when it's read one way the conclusion is that Abraham did kill Isaac. The story also ties in with the ones about people who sacrificed their kids to gods in the fire. In any case Abraham was a pure scumbag. He is the classic case of selling one's soul for personal fame and fortune. Even if he didn't kill Isaac (he did) by Jesus' rule he committed murder.

The muslim fanatics are just like the Abraham character. They are willing to sacrifice everyone but themselves in order to achieve their goals. So they cleverly manipulate dummies into being their willing victims. Abraham is the same as a muslim fanatic who convinces a dummy to become a suicide bomber so that the bomber will go to paradise for being a martyr. The true fanatic will never sacrifice himself as long as he has a supply of dummies. That's why I say that Abraham is the most despicable person in the Bible. His very name should be a curse word.

 

Well, if you want to take the verse literally, then remember that verse when a rapist rapes your 15 year old daughter and then tells you that he did it because it make him feel good. Don't complain.

- - - Updated - - -

See my previous post.

 

think of it on an even more basic level. How petty is god? If god is an all powerful being, how petty (and insecure) is he, that he would command us to worship him, and if we don't, then we get condemned to hell for all eternity? All eternity, just for not-believing? Doesn't matter if we were kind-hearted all our lives, that we helped our fellow man, and donated all our belongings to charity - if we don't believe in him, we get punished to the worst punishment imaginable - for all eternity? What a hateful and vengeful principle to live by! We humans have already established that torture is immoral, and here you have a god, who is inflicting the worst torture imaginable on a daily basis for ever and ever? If Jesus were a human being, he would be put in jail for war crimes against humanity! But because he's "god", somehow, that's ok? Imagine if a country passed laws saying - if you dont workship jesus christ, we will pull your fingernails out and poke your eyes out and put your feet over coals. We would consider that to be a gross violation of human rights. But Jesus says the same kinda thing in the bible, and no one seems to have a problem with that?? It seems to me that at the core of Christianity, there is this deep hatefulness and vengefulness that comes with this sort of philosophy - believing that this sort of punishment is justified. This is why religion should never be seen as a source of moral guidance - it is fundamentally immoral at its core. At its very center, there is this evilness to it, that people gloss over, simply because it's labelled as "religion."

 

People who suffer from religious delusions force other people to join them in their madness or else they will kill them. There are numerous examples of such behavior in the Bible and in the Koran. Once a critical mass of fanatics is reached then it becomes a process of brainwashing. So people go along to get along.

 

In 1 Samuel chapter 15 why did Saul refer to God as Samuel's God instead of as his own or their God?

In 1 Samuel 15:15 (NLT) = “It’s true that the army spared the best of the sheep, goats, and cattle,” Saul admitted. “But they are going to sacrifice them to the Lord your God. We have destroyed everything else.”

In 1 Samuel 15:21 (NLT) = Then my troops brought in the best of the sheep, goats, cattle, and plunder to sacrifice to the Lord your God in Gilgal.”

In 1 Samuel 15:30-31 (NLT) = Then Saul pleaded again, “I know I have sinned. But please, at least honor me before the elders of my people and before Israel by coming back with me so that I may worship the Lord your God.”31 So Samuel finally agreed and went back with him, and Saul worshiped the Lord.

And in 1 Samuel 15:35 (NLT) = Samuel never went to meet with Saul again, but he mourned constantly for him. And the Lord was sorry he had ever made Saul king of Israel.

The story has Saul playing the part of a homicidal maniac to the emperor in exchange for being granted the king's role over Israel. Samuel was the emperor's ambassador. When Saul showed a smidgen of initiative and mercy in taking Agag king of the Amalekites alive and some livestock it ticked the emperor off to no end and he regretted placing his chips on Saul. He wanted everything killed as he had directed in 1 Samuel 15:3 (NLT) = Now go and completely destroy the entire Amalekite nation—men, women, children, babies, cattle, sheep, goats, camels, and donkeys.”

Saul's genocide against the Amalekites is noteworthy because it's a continuation of the Israelites' warfare against them that started in Exodus chapter 17. That's when Moses was directing Joshua's attack on the Amalekites. When Moses raised his arm the Israelites would win; when his arm got tired the Amalekites would prevail. So they sat Moses on a rock and Aaron and Hur kept his arms raised.

Anyway, the Saul & Samuel show seems to be related very close in time to Moses and his exodus saga.

 

Have you read about the Indian guru, Gurmeet Ram Rahim, who is being investigated by the Indian Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for criminal intimidation and grievous bodily hurt after he allegedly ordered 400 of his followers to be castrated so that they could be closer to God?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-investigated-grievous-bodily-harm-India.html

As soon as I saw the article I thought about the passage in Matthew 19:4-12
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew 19:4-12&version=ERV;CEV;MEV;CEB;NLT.

Jesus had previously conditioned his believers that they should cut off body parts if the parts would cause them to sin. That way they would stay out of hell. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew 5:27-30&version=ERV;CEV;MEV;CEB;NLT

Now if you think that Rahim is a despicable person you are right. Since Jesus told his dummies to do the same thing he's also a despicable person.

"Become an eunuch to get closer to God." "Become an eunuch for the kingdom of heaven's sake." How stupid is that?

 

You do realize that by giving up your game plan, you are going to cause your team to suffer. As it was said back in WWII..."loose lips sinks ships".... so be careful of what plans you provide to the opposing team.

 

I was thinking about the old Samson and Delilah movie from 1949 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRK3A2JOdg0. It's really hilarious with the mass-produced metal helmets and body armor that's identical in every detail. Those ancient guys must have had some wonderful machine shops.

But what was the real purpose of the Samson and Delilah story in the Bible? Consider Samson's sexual dalliances with the hookers and his subsequent seduction by Delilah as told in Judges 16:1-18 https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Judges+16:1-18&version=MSG.

Samson was born to be a dedicated servant to God and he was supposed to live by strict rules of behavior. As the story shows he broke those rules without a second thought. So the story is actually about the First Commandment in Exodus 34:12-16 https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus 34:12-16&version=MSG

Samson, who was a member of the tribe of Dan, broke the First Commandment by socializing with the Philistine women. He allowed himself to be seduced by Delilah and revealed the source of his power. He was eventually able to redeem himself but only after suffering great harm. His violation of the First Commandment cost him his life.

All of the Old Testament stories can be traced back to one of the Ten Commandments. The New Testament stories don't have that linkage.

 

It's fun discussing the Old Testament stories because some of them are so outrageous. But I think it's missing the point to concentrate on how absurd some of the stories are without tying them to the bigger picture.

As I mentioned in Post #416 all of the Old Testament stories are focused on one of the Ten Commandments as found in Exodus 34:10-28. Several of the Jesus stories can be traced back to some of the Ten Commandments but the majority of them lack any obvious tie-in.

The Judah and Tamar found in Genesis chapter 38 can be associated with the 10th Commandment - "You shall not boil a young goat in its mother's milk."

Tamar's first husband, Er, had been killed. She then became his brother Onan's property. He didn't want to make her pregnant so he was killed as well. Judah had a baby son so Tamar was told to wait until he got old enough to bang her.

Anyway, human nature being what it is Judah ends up knocking Tamar up. That deprived Shelah of his property and also deprived the murdered Er of a heir.

The Sadducees had a discussion with Jesus about the Jewish practice of younger brothers inheriting older brothers' wives in Matthew 22:23-30. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew 22:23-33&version=MSG;CEV;MEV;CEB;NLT It was focused on the concept of resurrection instead of the 10th Commandment.

Tamar ended up having twins. The oldest was named Perez and he's listed as David's and Jesus' ancestor. The younger one was Zerah, which is especially notable because the Ethiopian who swept out of Africa with his million man army to attack Judah and King Asa was also named Zerah. 2 Chronicles 14:7-15.

So in the end the randy Judah deprived Er of a heir under Jewish customs. He had boiled the young goat in its mother's milk in violation of the 10th Commandment.

 

A lot of people think that "once saved they are always saved" regardless of their future actions as discussed in this link
http://www.allaboutgod.com/once-saved-always-saved.htm

The Old Testament does not include any stories to support that contention. The Adam & Eve, Lot, and Saul stories are about people losing their salvation.

The New Testament verbiage waffles but tend to suggest that a person's future actions can cause him to be thrown into the lake of fire. http://www.preparingforeternity.com/oncesave.htm Jesus' family didn't believe in him although they knew that God was his daddy. Jesus went on to deny them as family although he continued to associate with them. Will Jesus show them mercy or will he toss them into the lake of fire?

 

This is an interesting article on how women are treated around the world and points out that there's a definitely lack of legal equality between men and women, even here in the US.

http://The World’s Craziest A... 44 governments for their laws against women.

For all practical purposes women are still stuck in 2,000 B.C.

For instance:

"Where in the world can a man abduct a woman, marry her, and immediately become impossible to prosecute? That would be Lebanon and Malta. Where can’t a married woman get divorced without her husband’s permission? Try Israel. In Russia, women are still forbidden from “hard, dangerous and/or unhealthy trades.”

This is straight out of the Old Testament:

"Where You Can Freely Abduct a Woman
In Malta and Lebanon, crimes are literally erased once the offender marries the victim. For instance, in Malta, if a kidnapper “after abducting a person, shall marry such person, he shall not be liable to prosecution,” the law says. If the marriage occurs after a trial and conviction, the abductor’s sentence will immediately be wiped. Similarly, in Lebanon, crimes including rape and kidnapping, will be halted at the time of marriage. If there’s divorce within five years of a felony crime, the prosecution or penalty can resume."Moses is alive and kicking:

"Where a Woman Can’t Get Divorced

In Israel, where marriages and divorces between Jewish citizens are under rabbinical law, women have a lesser right to leave their husbands than men do their wives. When this inequality was challenged in the Rabbinical High Court in 1995, the judges decided not to force a husband to grant his wife a divorce after six years of separation. Citing ancient Jewish law that states definitively that it can be granted “if the husband wants to divorce her,” the court ruled that: “that the matter depends only on what he wants, and we should therefore grant his appeal.” A judge on that case noted that it would be preferable to be a slave than a wife under Jewish law. What’s more—women are not allowed to serve in these courts. Only in 2013 were they even allowed to sit on the committee that appoints rabbinic judges."

And in the U.S. forget about equal protection under the 14th Amendment:

"Where Women Can’t Get Children Citizenship
A child born out of wedlock to an American father and foreign mother has a trying process to gain US citizenship, with requirements including a written promise by the father to provide financial support, and a longer residency requirement than mother’s. This makes it much harder for foreign women to acquire U.S. citizenship for their children. If the child is over age 18 when attempting to gain citizenship, it will only be granted if the mother already became naturalized."

 

Doctor scientists think that they will shortly be able to do full body transplants. That is, they will be able to transplant a sick person's healthy head from his sick body onto a more healthy corpse. The big obstacle is being able to do the spinal cord connection.

First full body transplant is two years away, surgeon claims
http://www.theguardian.com/society/...-body-transplant-two-years-away-surgeon-claim

Suppose the surgeon is successful. Would you be willing to undergo such an operation yourself if you could get a better, healthier, body? I can see where it would appeal to a lot of people, such as those who want to undergo sex change operations or those who want certain body attributes. Imagine an old head on a trim teen body. Imagine billionaires trying to get their heads on buff bodies. Do you think anyone would want your body?

I think it raises all kinds of religious questions since it would certainly change the way we have looked at sickness and death. The religious nuts would be foaming at the mouth in rage.

It would definitely affect employment and retirement laws. Suppose a guy got a criminal's body. When the cops run a fingerprint/DNA search the body shows up as a fugitive but the head belongs to the local cardinal. Will the cops lock up the body?

 

Did the Bible actually exist before the English wrote the Codex Amiatinus around the year 700? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Amiatinus

 

Which person in the Bible achieved perfection but gets a bad rap for supposedly doing a bad thing? You have to know your metaphors in order to answer.

 

The perfection award goes to Lot's wife. She gets a bum rap because she looked back as Sodom and Gomorrah were being destroyed. For her display of empathy and humanity toward her friends and neighbors who were being destroyed she was supposedly turned into a pillar of salt as punishment. But in reality she achieved perfection because salt was used in religious rituals and for purification. By being turned into a pillar of salt it indicates that she was without blemish, completely pure and without fault. If she had done something bad by looking back she would have been turned into garbage or something similar. Instead she became the ultimate symbol of purity. She also escaped being caught up in Lot and his skanky daughters' debauchery. No other character in the Bible every achieved her level of perfection and purity. But the common idea was that she was punished when in fact she became the symbol of purity and perfection by becoming a pillar of salt.

You will have to read the passages about salt to fully understand her status.