 |
|
|
|
Pastor, wife accused of killing 'possessed' childrenBy Paula Hancocks, CNN Seoul (CNN) – A pastor and his wife are in custody accused of killing three of their children by starving them to ward off evil spirits, police in South Korea said Wednesday. The couple told police the children - aged nine, seven and three - had been ill, which they believed was a sign they were invaded by evil spirits after eating too much on Lunar New Year. They then cut the children's hair to chase the spirits out and starved them from January 24 until February 2, only allowing them to drink water. Local media reports said the parents had beaten the children with a belt and a fly swatter numerous times. The pastor, named only by his surname Park, and his wife, Cho, told police they tied the children's arms and legs with stockings. All three died on February 2, the first around 2am, the second at 5am and the third at 7am, according to police in the town of Boseong, more than 186 miles (300 kilometers) south of Seoul. FULL STORY
« Previous entryBelief Blog's Morning Speed Read for Wednesday, February 15
|
  About this blog
The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Dan Gilgoff and Eric Marrapodi, with daily contributions from CNN's worldwide newsgathering team and frequent posts from religion scholar and author Stephen Prothero.  |
|
|
|
© 2010 Cable News Network. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
| Advertise with us | About us | Contact us | Help | Advertising Practices
As bad as these people are... the Christian god makes them seem like saints:
Hmmm...
It is said: "By your fruit you will be known."
Let's look at your god's "fruit".
God directly or at His insistence, murdered men, women and children including babies. This isn't evil? Is this moral?
God killed every living thing on the face of the earth other than Noah and his family, because man was wicked. Afterwards, He decides He won't kill everything again, because man's heart is evil from his youth. This isn't evil? Is this moral? An all knowing god didn't know this BEFORE He murdered everyone on the planet? OOOooopsie!
God had a man believe he was going to sacrifice his son to Him. Do you know how traumatic that would be for a father and his son?
If you had the power would you do this? Would you be so insecure? This isn't evil? Is this moral?
There was a man who loved God. God made a bet with Satan that even if the man were tortured, his Possessions taken, and his children killed, he would still love God and never curse Him. God won the bet.
Would you do that? Would you kill a man's children for a bet? This isn't evil? Is this moral?
God sent a bear to kill a group of children, because they had teased one of His prophets.
Did the children deserve to die, because they teased a bald man? This isn't evil? Is this moral? Is this a just god?
God allowed a man to sacrifice his daughter to Him, for giving the man a victory in battle. Human sacrifice! This isn't evil? Is this moral?
God killed the innocent babies of Egypt. The 10th plague in Egypt involved the murder of every first born of the Egyptians. Only an insane monster would kill children.
Jesus / God says he also will kill children in Revelation 2:23?
God created a place He can send people to be burned for all eternity. Could an all benevolent god construct such a place of misery?
If a puppy wet on the floor, would you hold it over a burner? Even for a second? I couldn't do that. Not to a puppy. Certainly not to a human. I am more moral than the Christian god.
I call Jesus, Himself as a witness!
Jesus had this to say:
Matthew 7:17 Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit.
Luke 6:43 "No good tree bears bad fruit, nor does a bad tree bear good fruit.
1. A god who is not evil, can't do evil things!
This is established, by Jesus' testimony.
2. The Christian god is guilty of horrid crimes against humans
Evidenced by the atrocities recorded in the bible and the Christian god's own admission:
Isaiah 45:7, KJV says the Christian god is responsible for at least some evil: "..I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things."
3. Therefore, god is evil. He bears bad fruit.
If you whine that I am taking these examples out of context, then I invite you to read the examples of god's behavior again. Tell me in what reality or under what circ_umstances, these actions would not be evil? Or the doer of the deeds not vile?
Cheers!
Do you actually think anyone is going to read that long ass drivel? get real.
Get Real,
It might just do you some good to read it. Not everything comes in 15-second sound bites and bumper stickers and rote Bible verses.
I read it all and I thought that it was very apropos. Just like xtian to not read their whole bible and only choose to take the things out that they want to hear. Cafeteria xtians.
I had always hoped for "A Bible for Dummies book" until I realized the original version can't be dummed down more than it already has been.
@David Johson- See unfortunately, you cannot randomly quote texts or verses in the Bible and define God based on these texts. First of all, God is the Creator of this universe. He is all knowing, all powerful and above all we can fathom. We, with our minute minds cannot and should not imagine that we can understand or know Him fully. What we know is only based on what is revealed to us, through His Word (the Bible), creation, our spirits and imporantly the Holy Spirit's revelation to us Christians.
Somehow, poeple who try to act 'righteous' or 'fair' or 'just' based upon certain criteria and weights that we men created here on earth try to portray God as unjust. HOWEVER, God is the only One who is just. He is the only One who is righteous. He is the only One who is Love and thus can Love us perfectly through our believing in His Son, Jesus Christ.
See, our version of justice is not whole. It is like everything on earth – perverted and tinged with our human imperfection. We tend to be biased based on our upbringing, social, cultural, historical, physiological backgrounds come into play too. One of our characters may dominate more than the others. That's why some of us are more emotional than others, some more merry, some more easily offended etc. GOD IS NOT LIKE THAT. All His traits or characters are equal. His love, mercy, might, justness, righteousness, faithfulness, anger, avenging justice etc are all equal and even. He is merciful and loving and kind but to those who harden their hearts towards Him and hate and reject Him, He will avenge and reject them. The problem is that society tries to mold God into something that is more suitable and ideally suited to our image of what a god should be based on what I mentioned above (society, culture, what now is the norm etc). God is not like that, He says to those who will obey and trust in Him, His mercy will endure for a thousand generations, but to those who disobey Him and reject Him, His anger will reign on them to the third and fourth generation. (Notice that the mercy far exceeds the anger towards us here!!)
Because of the just nature of God and because of His righteous nature is why we needed a Saviour. Becasue of Jesus' death on the cross, we can now come boldly to the throne of God with reverence and awe knowing that all our sins and unrighteousness is already forgiven and knowing that we are forever saved from His anger (due to our sinful nature) by His own grace.
You cannot not, are not qualified enough to, don't have enough knowledge to qualify God as just or unjust, good or evil. A pot cannot claim that the potter who created and molded it is imperfect. It's the pot and what it's made of (clay) that is imperfect. It cannot imagine to understand anything about the potter. It is ultimately the potter who has enough knowledge and visibility to know which of the pots he created are good and which are cracked. Those ones in the bin may seem to the other pots on the shelf to be thrown in the bin unfairly, but that's because they in their minute knowledge cannot look at the fine cracks, burns, bumps and scars that made the potter to cast those pots into the bin. Because they were selected to sit on the shelf instead of being cast into the bin, the 'good' pots, thinking themselves worthy have now started passing judgement on the very potter that fashioned them, forgetting that it was the potter who chose and placed them on the shelf to begin with. Such is the nature of man.....
@Ran – You spend several paragraphs telling us all about what God does, how he behaves, what he thinks and then come up with the following:
You cannot not, are not qualified enough to, don't have enough knowledge to qualify God as just or unjust, good or evil. A pot cannot claim that the potter who created and molded it is imperfect. It's the pot and what it's made of (clay) that is imperfect. It cannot imagine to understand anything about the potter.
Can you not see the irony in that last sentence? It always amuses me that so many Christians know how god thinks and what he is going to do and what he would say to people. Why don't you admit that all your thoughts are based on what you have been brainwashed to believe by your church and it's leaders? It really isn't rational to tell the world that this or that is what god would do. It's only what you THINK or BELIEVE god will do, god didn't speak to you and tell you anything. If you hear voices, get yourself some help.
Should we start putting the bet on the table?
There is something I always wondered about schizophrenic people. I knew someone who is schizophrenic and her cat would tell her to do stuff. Okay, let's say for a second that you did hear your cat talking to you. Why would you listen to your cat anyway? Wouldn't you say "Why should I trust you Mr. Whiskers?" It's something I was always curious about. I could have asked her but who knows how she would have taken that question. She ended up burning her house down... because her cat told her to.
To expect rationality is asking them for more than they have.
Madness is relative. If you swap in Jeebus for Mr Whiskers, you could be Jimmy Swagart!
Prayer changes things
I continue to pray you dead. Why hath God forsaken me?
Yup prayer really changed things for these kids. Do you even read the articles you post on or do you just post nonsense on any religious article?
Prayer changes things
Proven
There is no mention of what group these people were associated with. Suspect cult activity.
@Atheism is not healthy for children and other living things
Regarding "Prayer changes things...Proven"
False! Here is only one study from a peer reviewed medical journal putting the lie to your unsupported claim -
http://www.ahjonline.com/article/S0002-8703(05)00649-6/abstract
"Conclusions
Intercessory prayer itself had no effect on complication-free recovery from CABG, but certainty of receiving intercessory prayer was associated with a higher incidence of complications."
What the means, "Atheism is not healthy", is that these patients fared no better when others were praying for their recovery and fared WORSE when they believed others were praying for them. The evidence so clearly indicates that intercessory prayer is worthless, at best, that several researchers have appealed to the medical community to stop wasting resources with regard to "prayer studies." I know you won't accept (or possible even understand) these studies, but you're wasting your time and energy believing that prayer does anything positive for anyone other than the one who prays. Get off your knees and actually work to improve the condition of others!
"There is no mention of what group these people were associated with. Suspect cult activity."
Religion?
Cult?
What's the difference?
Atheism is better for children than religion. At least their minds are unsullied by preposterous fantasy tales that have no evidence of truth or are useful. Sunday school is only emotional and intellectual molestation! Children should be allowed to be free!
Religion, particularly those we call "non-denominational" sects of Christianity do seem to be a refuge for those of questionable mental health status. This is not to say that all people who are parts of these sects are mentally unstable, but that there must be something within the teaching there that masks the true nature of those with serious mental instability until it becomes too much to hide.
All too often we hear these stories and we dismiss either the perpetrator of the crime as being insane or the religion as being the cause, without really looking at how the two interact. In this case, it would appear that the religion fed the mental illness, which in turn became so acute that children are now dead.
What is frightening here, is this is a Pastor. The man responsible for teaching his congregation. How many of them learned more from his mental illness, thinking it to be their religion, than they did of the actual faith he was meant to be teaching?
This so so tragic but so true.
When one espouses support for a social structure, they are lauded by those within the same structure, even if they are quite mad.
This is how we see right wingers calling themselves supporters of liberty, when in fact they desire to rip liberty from anyone who dosen't support their social norms.
Madness and divinity have walked hand in hand for six thousand years.
I can vouge for this as an ex-Jehovah's Witness. I'd say that easily 75-90% of the people I knew had some sort of mental instability.
@myweightinwords
You said: "Religion, particularly those we call "non-denominational" sects of Christianity do seem to be a refuge for those of questionable mental health status. "
I think you do a disservice to the denominational Christians. They are also looney. Give credit, where credit is due.
Cheers!
@William Demuth
Amen, brother.
Cheers!
Generalization of this magnitude is dangerous to say the least. Why is it that when one religious leader messes up, there are tons of critcis out to get him or her, blaming religion especially Christianity as the culprit. I admit this man and his wife are crazy and deranged to say the least and my heart goes out to the congregation they 'served'. All the more reason for believers to be ware and use wisdom when selecting a Church and Pastor. Having said that, how many tragedies and disasters have been caused by crazy men NOT associated to any Christian denomenational or non-denomenational faiths? Let's see, I'll name a few....Hitler and Mussolini, Sadam Hussein, Idi Amin Lenin, Marx and Stalin, Mao....in fact the last 4 were atheists and they killed, improsined and tortured millions of poeple between them.
@Ran,
"Generalization of this magnitude is dangerous to say the least."
I was not attempting to make a sweeping generalization. I was making an observation based on personal experience and the article.
"Why is it that when one religious leader messes up, there are tons of critcis out to get him or her, blaming religion especially Christianity as the culprit."
First off, because the person is a leader. It may not seem fair, but we hold our leaders to a higher standard. And when that leader claims his or her position because of a religion, we expect them to uphold the tenants of that religion. For the record, I don't care what religion the person claims. I call them as I see them.
"I admit this man and his wife are crazy and deranged to say the least and my heart goes out to the congregation they 'served'. All the more reason for believers to be ware and use wisdom when selecting a Church and Pastor."
We can agree there. I do hope that the congregation has access to good counselors, not only to deal with their grief and sense of betrayal, but also to help them through any crisis of faith this incident may stir up.
"Having said that, how many tragedies and disasters have been caused by crazy men NOT associated to any Christian denomenational or non-denomenational faiths? Let's see, I'll name a few....Hitler and Mussolini, Sadam Hussein, Idi Amin Lenin, Marx and Stalin, Mao....in fact the last 4 were atheists and they killed, improsined and tortured millions of poeple between them."
That doesn't actually speak to the situation. We aren't talking about mass murderers or despots or whatever it is we're calling these people. We're talking about the average person. And, I'm not saying that there are no mental disorders among atheists and agnostics (or Muslims or Jews or Pagans....gods knows us Pagans have some serious whackos)...but rather, I'm making a correlation between a certain KIND of mental disorder and a certain KIND of belief.
In my experience, having been a Presbyterian, an Assembly of God charismatic, a non-denominational Evangelical Pentecostal, an agnostic and a Pagan, and having lived in four of the fifty US states, the kind of mental instability that leads most often to violence against others, particularly against children, seems to be drawn to specific types of Christianity.
Now, whether that is because the person is aware of their problem and is seeking to control it using a socially accepted form of non-pharmaceutical help or if they are unaware of their problems and are naturally drawn to it for reasons we haven't yet seen, I don't know. As I said, I was just making an observation.
@myweightinwords- Thank you for your response, which was rational and not tinged with insult as has been the case on most of the other posts by others. I truelly give you credit for that.
Having said that, I do feel sorry that you have been to all these different churches/denomenations and finally ended up losing faith in them and correct me if I'm wrong, but now you are of the conviction that God doesn't exist, correct?
It's so sad that God the Father, Jesus His Son and the Holy Spirit are so attached and associated with religion and denomenation in our world today. We talk of the Catholics and their priests, the Evangelists and their judgemental ways, etc. Jesus didn't create religion, man did. Paul in his letters said we who believe in Jesus Christ are the Church or the Body of Christ as a whole. The different sects/denomenations of the church evolved over the centuries as leaders/congregation if you could call them that started disagreeing over doctrine, tradition, leaders, rules and what nots.
But again, I want to stress that just because a church preacher or the church congregation treated someone bad or behave badly, that should NOT reflect on Christianity as a whole. God is Love. Anyone who comes to Jesus comes into the fullness of this Love. This is a perfect Love, and perfect acceptance comes with it. Though poeple in the Church (who even Jesus calls sick or with illnesses) may disappoint, segregate, decieve etc...it is only because they are men and are imperfect. They should if they are true Christians be growing towards being more like Jesus....or they may be just there to disperse and disturb God's true called. Whatever the case, man is imperfect, whatever man does is thus imperfect. There is no perfection in man....if we go to church expecting man to fulfill our needs and voids, we end up being disappointed. We have to look to God. We need to come to Church expecting to see and talk to God. Pleae myweightinwords give God a chance to touch your heart today. HE unlike man will not disappoint you.
@Ran,
"Thank you for your response, which was rational and not tinged with insult as has been the case on most of the other posts by others. I truelly give you credit for that."
I believe in civil discourse, regardless of what "side" a person is on. How else do we learn from one another?
"Having said that, I do feel sorry that you have been to all these different churches/denomenations and finally ended up losing faith in them and correct me if I'm wrong, but now you are of the conviction that God doesn't exist, correct?"
My story is a long one, but not unhappy at all. Nothing to regret. I'm not sure I would call it "losing faith"...in fact, in many ways it was about finding faith. I am not an atheist at all. I am...for lack of a better word, a pantheist I guess.
"It's so sad that God the Father, Jesus His Son and the Holy Spirit are so attached and associated with religion and denomenation in our world today. We talk of the Catholics and their priests, the Evangelists and their judgemental ways, etc. Jesus didn't create religion, man did. Paul in his letters said we who believe in Jesus Christ are the Church or the Body of Christ as a whole. The different sects/denomenations of the church evolved over the centuries as leaders/congregation if you could call them that started disagreeing over doctrine, tradition, leaders, rules and what nots."
Religion is what it is because mankind is what it is. It is in our nature to interpret and re-interpret, to build and tear down. Belief is such a personal thing though. And even within all of those religions, you would be hard pressed to find two people, if they were completely and unabashedly honest, who believe exactly the same.
Yet, we long to be with our kin, with those who think like we do, believe as we do, and thus we gather together and we form groups and eventually lay down rules and that becomes dogma...and religion is born.
"But again, I want to stress that just because a church preacher or the church congregation treated someone bad or behave badly, that should NOT reflect on Christianity as a whole."
And yet, it does. Just as if that person were Jewish or Muslim or Pagan. Especially when that person holds themselves up as that first and foremost. In this particular case, we're talking about a Pastor, a man who should be the epitome of the faith he claims to teach.
"God is Love. Anyone who comes to Jesus comes into the fullness of this Love. This is a perfect Love, and perfect acceptance comes with it."
Again, one on one with your god, that might work. However, as soon as you add people to the mix, things take a turn.
"Though poeple in the Church (who even Jesus calls sick or with illnesses) may disappoint, segregate, decieve etc...it is only because they are men and are imperfect. They should if they are true Christians be growing towards being more like Jesus....or they may be just there to disperse and disturb God's true called. Whatever the case, man is imperfect, whatever man does is thus imperfect."
Thus the reason we have so many types of Christianity or Islam or Judaism or Paganism or Buddhism, etc. Mankind is mankind. We are all unique, individuals with our own sense of the world, of Divinity, of each other. We are all mostly interested in ourselves, in our own survival, our own preservation, our own experiences...and when we can share similar needs with others, when we can sense our survival, our life can be made better by forming groups, we do.
"There is no perfection in man....if we go to church expecting man to fulfill our needs and voids, we end up being disappointed. We have to look to God. We need to come to Church expecting to see and talk to God."
In my experience, god is only as good as those who serve him, and if we go to those who serve god, seeking to also serve god, and are turned away or hurt or bled dry, then that reflects poorly on the god they serve.
"Pleae myweightinwords give God a chance to touch your heart today. HE unlike man will not disappoint you."
I have done so repeatedly. My Gods do. Daily. I am truly and amazingly blessed. In fact today I will be heading to a convention of spirituality, I hope to commune with brothers and sisters from around the country who may not share every intimate belief I have, but they are kin of my soul.
When good things happen to people, it's called a random incident. Definitely there isn't any miracle because god doesn't exist.
BUT.....
Hurricanes, typhoons, earthquakes tsunamis, starvation, etc., god is absolutely the one behind all these.
That's why atheists are doing the movement of yellow-green colored slimy fluid in a nose of someone who got caught with colds, just to further their cause.
We don't actually think god did those terrible things, we're just trying to point out that if he is responsible for the good, he is also responsible for the bad.
@Atheist'SmINdS
Really. Must we talk to you like you are a 4 year-old?
Non-believers say that if - that's IF - you allege that your "God" character is responsible for all of the good things that happen, THEN it must be responsible for all of the bad things too.
No non-believer would ever say that "God" is responsible for anything (bad or good). They do not believe in a god(s).
p.s. In this case, it is the delusional BELIEF that a god is telling one what to do that is the problem.
Everytime Tebow bows his head everytime he tosses touchdowns, he really look an idiot to me because he should've been giving credit to his talent and team effort rather than acknowledging a NON-EXISTENT BEING. God has nothing to do with football he simply DOESN'T EXIST.
BUT....
In this case, god was the one breathing under the neck of these people. He has been telling telling the couple to starve their children to death.
BUT this couple
Thank you for logically explaining why atheists make up ONLY 4% of US populace.
Facts
I suggest you check your facts.
Your percentages are laughable.
@William
Wanna bet?
Facts Reveal
This should be amusing!
Can we get it on?
should we?
I am waiting!
I'll bite. FR, present your sources.
I've seen this before... Theist's saying they have proof or citations but never being able to produce any. If you're going to lie, at least admit it when backed into a corner and don't just run off
@Facts Relieved -
Pew Research surveys since 2006 find that 12% of U.S. adults identify themselves as secular or unaffiliated with a religious tradition(1); however, of those non-believers, only 24% call themselves "atheists"(2). I'd guess this is due to fear of discrimination. Regardless, your 4% figure is an unsupported claim. Match to William Demuth!
(1)http://pewresearch.org/databank/dailynumber/?NumberID=386
(2)http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1181/religious-identification-of-those-who-do-not-believe-in-god
CNN didn't let me post anything even a period/dot (.) earlier.
I have been waiting somebody known as Truth Prevails to join the fun and make a firm stand of his/her/it's BLATANT LIE claiming atheists make up 2in the U.S. on the other article. http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/02/14/gospel-singer-kim-burrell-remembers-praying-with-whitney-houston/comment-page-2/?replytocom=1027731#respond. But apparently he/she/it doesn't have the nerve.
But anyway @REALLY-O thanks for giving me a relief by your effort presenting here your facts as well the link that supports it. Unlike the other down here like "William D'MOOT" who is too lazy waiting for the bait to drop inside his mouth; JimtanSCARE who was saying he bite but too scare to open his mouth letting the hook/bait to tickle his nose; and, lastly but no the least "the worse" that keeps on claiming otherwise.
But before I present the link that support my 4% claim here. Let's check your facts first. You said and I quote,
"Pew Research surveys since 2006 find that 12% of U.S. adults identify themselves as secular or unaffiliated with a religious tradition(1); however, of those non-believers, only 24% call themselves "atheists""
By the figures you presented, it's very clear the fact that 1.) Not the entire 12% is comprised by atheist 2.) ONLY 24% in that 12% are atheist.
To get the true percentage of atheists in the US, we should get their separate number from other non-believers.
Let's us do a little math here:
Let us presume that US has the poupulation of 308M.
Given: 1.) 12% Non-believers 2.) 24% of non-believers populace are atheists
To get the non-believer's population population: US population X Non-believers share
308,000 X .12 = 36,960,000
To get the atheist's population: Non-believers population X atheist's share
36,960,000 X .24 = 8,870,400
To get the percentage of atheist in the US populace: atheist population/US's population.
8,870,400/308,000,000 = 0.0288
Wow, I mean...WOW! I had it wrong! That was ROUGHLY 3% NOT 4%.
Your FACTS has just proven me WRONG! CONGRATULATIONS!!!!!!
Apparently I caught a fish through its mouth here.
Do I need to present my evidence here, your honor? It seems that somebody has just done self-incrimination here.
Nevertheless, I would cherish every for now the opportunity to post my comment here by presenting a link that supports my (4%) claim. Some of which also supports the figures have been presented by "Really-O?".
Please have the previlige to check them yourselves:
freethought/wiki/percentage_of_atheist.html
atheistempire.com/reference/stats/index/php
http://www.adherents.com/reference/stats/index.php
religious.pewforum.org/reports.
My bet was supposedly, if I proved my my (generous) 4% claim was right, everyone who opposed it MUST have their moniker here prefixed/suffixed with "BALD-FACED LIAR. For example: William Demuth the BALD-FACED LIAR.
However, noone would really accept losing. That's why I would rather rest my case to the unbiased commenters here.
I've started to have some fun earlier, too bad CNN has been to bias not to allow my comments to be posted.
The Bible mentions atheism.....it's not a new belief lol.
Their belief is as old as the "bronze age" men they claim to share nothing in common with.
Actually, that is questionable.
Try to be specific, so you might be refuted.
The fool says in his heart,
“There is no God.”
They are corrupt, their deeds are vile;
there is no one who does good.
The Hebrew words translated as fool in this verse denote one who is morally deficient.
Quoting from the bible is the equivalent of calling yourself and idiot.
Why not try quoting something that has a little better moral standing?
That obviously refer to Christianity.
It is referencing those who refute Yahveh, not those who reject Theisim in its entirety
Don't step on William, he asked a reasonable question.
"Well, obviously it's not meant to be taken literally; it refers to any manufacturers of dairy products."
@Truth
I bet the first time Og posited a god, there was a little freethinker in the corner that thought Og was an idiot.
Cheers!
@Doc Vestibule
When I brought home a dog from the humane society there was much more interest and follow up on the part of the humane society than anything my wife and I experienced after we brought our kids home from the hospital. Frequent monitoring and followup are not Orwellian. It should exist and it should lead, when necessary, to effective intervention. Our current CPS system is ineffective. The whole philosophy behind it is warped – it actually seeks to protect and maintain the family at the expense of the child. I could easily see an episode like the one described in this article happening here. There might even be multiple CPS visits, but the outcome could be the same. We need something much stronger that puts the interest of the child first.
And who decides what is best for the child?
The government? The Church? The Boy Scouts?
Imagine if Rick Santorum became president and enacted such a police force. Children who displayed hom.ose.xual tendencies would be taken from their families and placed into government care. Muslim parents would lose their kids for indoctrinating them with "wrong-think".
In any society, there will be bad parents, but do you want a Department of Intrusive Monitoring that scrutinizes every aspect of the private lives of citizens?
I'll go with the government. We as a society are responsible for it's institution, oversight of it, and ultimately it's actions. If we reject that responsibility we may well wind up with Santorum. So be it.
I take it you don't beleive that anybody has a right to privacy.
That all aspects of everyone's lives should be accessed and compiled by the government in order to keep the citzenry in line? Dissenting opinions or behaviour deemed deviant should be subject to direct government intervention.
Neural technology is advancing fast. It won't be long before we can automate teh policing of wrong-think and send a corrective jolt to the brains of anyone who sets off their monitoring devices by harbouring evil ideas. Of course, such neural implants would be mandated by law for all newborns.
Those who decide to use a midwife and have their child away from a hospital would be bad parents and would immediately lose custody.
The government can't find its rear end with both hands.
Darwinisim has a cruel side, but it still runs the show.
If stupid people kill their children (thru whatevr means, either murder or abortion, or neglect) then the genes of the stupid do not continue.
This is MOST important in the area of abortion for ____ victims. Common sense says kill the offspring, or forced pregnancies will become more frequent.
@William Demuth -
"Darwinisim has a cruel side, but it still runs the show."
For the most part our positions are kindred; however, please don't conflate Darwinian Natural Selection with Social Darwinism. The former is an elegant theory of biological evolution by nonrandom processes, while the latter is pseudoscientific sociological justification for brutish behavior (e.g. racism, eugenics, mercilessness). I'm sure it's unintentional, but lumping the two together is a grave disservice to Natural Selection.
Cheers.
@Doc Vestibule -
"And who decides what is best for the child?"
I've read many of your posts and have respect for your positions and agile mind; however, with regard to "who decides", we (society) all play a part. Women are viewed as property in a number of cultures and I'm sure we agree this view is unjust. In the west, we still have a way to go to before children are granted the same rights, respect, dignity, and protection as adult members of society. Children are not property and as they are the most defenseless and vulnerable members of society they deserve at least as much protection as any other group.
Religion flies planes into buildings and kills children. So sad.
Don't you think that's an overly simple, ignorant comment? Moron.
@Same Old? Is it?
If the 9/11 terrorist didn't think they were flying a plane into a building for Allah, would they have done it? If this couple didn't believe in evil spirits, would they have starved their children?
I almost had a wreck the other day because my GPS told me to take a turn that was no longer there. Clearly, GPSes are the root cause of all traffic accidents. So sad. When will we learn?
LostNomad
Actually your ability to IGNORE the voices you heard saved the day.
ALWAYS question authority, be it a GPS, your God, or your ploitical party.
Any of the three can get you, and alot of other killed if you pay them to much hedance!
@WD
True enough. I don't think there's nearly enough questioning going on. People are too ready to accept something just because someone else says so. Don't get me wrong, I'm not jumping to bail religion out of anything in particular. I'm just tired of reading gross generalisations. To me, they have about as much validity as people jumping on a bandwagon "just because".
Lets all gather around and pontificate upon S. Korea's judicial system. I'm definitely sure they, the accused, will receive their just end.
Just ship them north and let them eat the suspects.
Justice for all!
same conversation on the belief blog's morning speed read :
ok so, my question for the day....
Do you think its reasonable to believe in something without taking in all that which has been attributed to it?
The answer to this question just depends on the question being asked. If you were to tell me that you had pizza for dinner last night I would believe you without any question. However if you said that you had a large pizza from Dominos in your pants pocket I would require further proof.
As a great man once said, “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence”.
If you are talking about a supreme being who has all of these magic powers and has a “history” of doing all of these amazing feats then I would require quite a bit of evidence to support your claim.
"Do you think its reasonable to believe in something without taking in all that which has been attributed to it?" I've wondered about this. At one time, there was war to "free the slaves" while genocide was being practived against Native Americans. SHould I still believe in my country? The moon landings were big science. But the purpose was to acheive military superiority in space. Should I believe in science?
ok, well ... i'm gone for the day, taking my family out for a special get the hell outta here type surprize!
but please, dwell on this question – it has huge depth to it and can ,if willing, take you to awesome conclusions of the mind.
later folks!
Selective faith?
Parsing dogma is the first step towards refuting religion.
Once one realizes the "part and parcel" of the belief system has egregious errors in it, it becomes inevitable that within a few generations the entirety of it is rejected if the errors of the system are not corrected.
Be it capitalism or Christianity, many who were born and raised under them are drawing lines in the sand.
Either they be adapted, or they shall be rejected.
As a great man once said, “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence”
Which is absolute bulshit
You walk by created things every day and you don't say "hey look how that car randomly created itself in the parking lot" and you don't demand extraordinary evidence
Creation requires a Creator.
Mike from CT
That is just silly.
I suspect nothing has ever been created. All that is always has been.
It merely changes form.
Research the Laws of Thermodynamics.
Post by Mike from CT contains a Slippery Slope fallacy and an instance of the Prejudicial Language fallacy.
http://www.iep.utm.edu/fallacy/#H6
@ Mike,
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAA!!!!
William Lane Craig wanna be.
Mike form CT..your creator needs a creator....nest,
Should be "next"... god made me do it.
evolvedDNA, that is what makes him what we call God.
To the rest, sorry it went over your head, especially Jim who has heard the argument for lane and does not refute it
William, that is just silly
and Fallibly you should read your own website there were no chain of events only pointing out the logical reason of causality that we use everyday.
@Mike from CT
Your argument is foolish. You would require extraordinary evidence if you were to believe that Muhammad flew into heaven on a winged horse. I would wager there would not be enough evidence for you to accept that Allah or Krishna was the one true god.
If I told you it rained last night, you would probably believe me, because rain is common. You would probably not require me to show you puddles etc., in order for you to take my statement as fact. I would be making no extraordinary claim.
But, what if I told you I had fairies living in my left shoe. This is different. Fairies are not common. There is no proof that they exist. So, you would be expected to be skeptical of my claim, until I provided sufficient evidence to convince you I was being truthful. You would not be satisfied, if I told you to have faith. Or that someone else once saw my fairies. You would want extraordinary evidence. You would want to see and examine my fairies. You would want to make sure I wasn't a lunatic or a liar, before you declared me truthful. If I could provide no convincing proof of my claims, you would be justified in rejecting them.
Believers (you) are positing a god. This is more extraordinary than even my fairies. It is as extraordinary as any of the gods you reject. If you were an outsider (a Hindu), would you not want extraordinary evidence that your religion was true?
It depends on whose ox is being gored.
Believers always want faith to be equal to empirical evidence, It is not. Faith will never lead you to the truth.
Cheers!
Mike from CT
Actually it is becoming the MOST accepted theorem.
Nothing new, nothing static and entropy will be the end of you and me.
I think I could believe that Krishna was the one true god. If I was not a Christian I would probably worship Krishna.
@Mike from CT
You said: "Creation requires a Creator."
No, Sparky. Watch and learn:
Jesus was an urban legend. LOL
Cheers!
J.W
Be cautious my young thiest!
You are entering into the God of last resort area, one of the last stops before you throw in the towel and quit religion completely.
By "needing" a God, any God, you betray the fear of your own mortality.
Would you worship anything that might make you immortal?
The Lawrence Krauss clip is getting a bit tired and worn. It's kind of thin stuff, almost devoid of mathematics. One thing I have wondered: what does Krauss mean by "nothing". Quantum vacuum? Is that actually nothing?
Mike from CT.
That reasoning..."I don't see how it happened right now, so god did it", is juvenile in the extreme.
If you walk by an accident this afternoon, where a car landed on someone's roof, will you say, "oh god did it" ?
The processes by which (all) things came to be in their present condition/state ARE well known. The fact that YOU are ignorant of those processes is YOUR problem. NOTHING requires a "creator", and if it did, the "infinite regression " of the First Cause argument also requires god to have a creator, (and exempting your god from that, is just dishonest, and the "Argument from Special Circu'mstance" fallacy). If god always "existed", then what created the concurrent dimension(s), in which he always existed ? Define "existence". EVERY term you use to do that WILL REQUIRE "TIME" to proceed. Therefore god could not "exist" without space-time, and by definition, could NOT be it's creator.
Cheerio. Tea time @ 4 PM, in the drawing room.
@Observer
There are many well-respected physicists, such as Stephen Hawking, Lawrence Krauss, Sean M. Carroll, Victor Stenger, Michio Kaku, Robert A.J. Matthews, and Nobel laureate Frank Wilczek, who have created scientific models where the Big Bang and thus the entire universe could arise from nothing but quantum fluctuations of vacuum energy — via natural processes.
It's doubtful that anyone but another physicist would understand the math. I am satisfied that these brilliant men all agree that a god was not necessary...for anything.
Cheers!
I will continue to be a Christian William. I have read a little about Krishna and I just think he is cool. I would like to walk around and play the flute all day just like him. Although I do not practice Hinduism I do not necessarily disregard it so easily. It seems to be a very complex religion though. Honestly there is too much we do not know about the afterlife to worry about it. Even biblical references to the afterlife are scarce. I pray that if there is a hell that God would not allow one person to ever have to go there. I would wish some punishment on someone like Hitler, but even him I would not wish to spend an eternity in hell.
David Johnson, those brilliant men are saying that we can circumscribe something, and call it the universe, and claim that it could have emerged spontaneously from quantum vacuum. Based on that some people would like to just call it a day, but there is an outstanding problem recognized by at least a few of those brilliant men: the basis of reality. For example, have a look at (atheist) Roger Penrose's thoughts: http://www.caraleisa.com/blog1/?p=70
David Johnson, just saw the common video, come on, you know this has been disproved time and time again, go back into the archive to look for those discussions, if Jesus was an urban legend please explain the transformation of the area and era between 30-160 AD, that change culture and social economic systems
Yea, because things dont EVER change.
Besides, youre putting the cart before the horse.
Flinders, the butler
***"That reasoning..."I don't see how it happened right now, so god did it", is juvenile in the extreme."
Is it more juvenile "I don't see how it happened right now, and I disregard the historical record and thousands of y4ears of a people who produced fascinating results, so I am going with the it's all random answer"
Even though you cannot live out your life if everything is random and relative.
***"If you walk by an accident this afternoon, where a car landed on someone's roof, will you say, "oh god did it" ?"
No but I wouldn't say look how those atoms coming together in perfect unity on the person roof either. But when I look at something so complex and beautiful as how the lungs close off and the blood reverses direction when a baby is born. I marvel at a Creator greater then myself
***"ARE well known."
Please Explain.
***"NOTHING requires a "creator","
Then when you find your wife with a new coat and new car, you accept that principle that they did not require a creator and materialized in your home.
***"and if it did,"
And then we hedge our bets, guess the answer isn’t that known if you have to present both sides.
***" also requires god to have a creator"
No that by definition makes Him God.
***"in which he always existed ?"
As told, he exist outside of dimensions, think of it as the books you write, you exist outside of them allowing you to create them
at reasoning..."I don't see how it happened right now, so god did it", is juvenile in the extreme."
Is it more juvenile "I don't see how it happened right now, and I disregard the historical record and thousands of y4ears of a people who produced fascinating results, so I am going with the it's all random answer"
-- That's exactly the point. It's NOT "random", and the fact that YOU don't understand how and why it's NOT "random, as I said, is PRECISELY the probem.
"Even though you cannot live out your life if everything is random and relative."
--Your (psychological) NEED to see things as "deistically" determined is NO back-ended justification for making things up.
***"If you walk by an accident this afternoon, where a car landed on someone's roof, will you say, "oh god did it" ?"
No but I wouldn't say look how those atoms coming together in perfect unity on the person roof either.
"But when I look at something so complex and beautiful as how the lungs close off and the blood reverses direction when a baby is born. I marvel at a Creator greater then myself"
--That's also the problem. The fact that YOU don't understand how those evolutionary developments came about, (which are well known), IS the problem. The only conclusion YOU have is, is "god did it", but that is NOT THE only explanation. YOU chose to limit yourself to that one explanation. There are many.
***"ARE well known."
"Please Explain."
--Go get a science education.
***"NOTHING requires a "creator","
Then when you find your wife with a new coat and new car, you accept that principle that they did not require a creator and materialized in your home.
--False analogy. I KNOW she got them from somewhere, and how they were made. I don't say "oh god must have made them".
***"and if it did,"
And then we hedge our bets, guess the answer isn’t that known if you have to present both sides.
--Nope, just pointing out how FAR out on a limb you are, either way.
***" also requires god to have a creator"
No that by definition makes Him God.
--Again, argument by "Special Circ'mstance".
***"in which he always existed ?"
As told, he exist outside of dimensions, think of it as the books you write, you exist outside of them allowing you to create them.
--You missed the point. BOTH I AND the books exist inside the same dimensions, (space-time). If god exists, (and you did NOT define "existence", then he "exists". "Existence, by however you care to define it REQUIRES time. THAT he could not BOTH exist in, and have created.
@Brad
As of late, there have been attacks on science and rational thought.
It is true, that Science can not be certain of the "truth" of their theories. But, theories have a different meaning in science than they do in the everyday world.
A scientific theory must explain all relevant facts, and be contradicted by none.
The predictions of scientific theory are sufficiently close to reality, that we send men and machines into space, make huge advances in medicine, and enjoy a variety of goodies like cell phones and iPods.
So, I think we can come to the conclusion that science's theories are reliable and even though not proven, the observations on which these theories are based are sufficiently close to the way things really are. If not, we would not have the quality of life we have today.
Reality, absolute truth, does not exist, as yet. Gravity is a theory that has been tested countless times. Jump from a 100 story building and see if it is not real enough to kill you. Science can not fully explain why gravity works the way it does.
Empirical evidence and logic in conjunction with the scientific method, are the best tools science has to determine how the universe really works. Even if science is off a tad.
Even the bible repudiates this nonsense:
Which of you by taking thought can add one cubit unto his stature? – Matthew 6:27
If I could control reality with my thoughts, I'd be buying Trojan Magnums.
"Modern physics strongly suggests a surprisingly uncomplicated, non-mysterious "ultimate reality" that may not be what we wish it to be, but is supported by all known data.
Furthermore, this reality is very much like what was inferred by some remarkable thinkers in the ancient world: a universe composed of elementary objects that move around in an otherwise empty void. I call this atomic reality.
This proposal flies in the face of current fashion. That fashion repudiates all attempts, within science and without, to describe a universal, objective reality.
I repudiate that fashion. Where the validity of certain ancient and modern concepts of truth and reality are denied, I affirm them.
Where arguments are made that Western science tells us nothing of deep significance, I assert that it remains our foremost tool for the discovery of fundamental truth."
Source: Dr. Stenger is professor of physics and astronomy at the University of Hawaii.
I personally believe Truth can be known through science. I believe that truth is held in the laws of physics and for something to be real it must have material. As science progresses, we may well unlock all the secrets to the universe.
And if the absolute truth is god, then so be it. But at this point in time, god is not useful.
In the real world, any object that provides no evidence for its existence is classified as imaginary.
Cheers!
@Mike from CT
You said: "if Jesus was an urban legend please explain the transformation of the area and era between 30-160 AD, that change culture and social economic systems"
I'm not arguing the fact that the Christian religion had an impact. You can have a religion, and not have a god. Note all the ancient gods. What I am arguing, is that Jesus was not a real person.
There were no eyewitness accounts of Jesus. The Gospels were written by god knows who in the third person. The Gospels were written with an agenda i.e., Jesus was the Messiah and Son of God.
"But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name." – John 20:31 Biased much, you think?
We know virtually nothing about the persons who wrote the gospels we call Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.
-Elaine Pagels, Professor of Religion at Princeton University, (The Gnostic Gospels)
The bottom line is we really don't know for sure who wrote the Gospels.
-Jerome Neyrey, of the Weston School of Theology, Cambridge, Mass. in "The Four Gospels," (U.S. News & World Report, Dec. 10, 1990)
Jesus is a mythical figure in the tradition of pagan mythology and almost nothing in all of ancient literature would lead one to believe otherwise. Anyone wanting to believe Jesus lived and walked as a real live human being must do so despite the evidence, not because of it.
-C. Dennis McKinsey, Bible critic (The Encyclopedia of Biblical Errancy)
Mark was the first gospel (Markan Priority). Luke and Mathew copied from Mark and from a doc_ument called "Q". 90% of Mathew's gospel, is copied from Mark. Why would an eyewitness need to copy from Mark? Not just the same narratives, but the exact same words?
There are no known secular writings about Jesus, that aren't forgeries, later insertions, or hearsay. NONE!
Most of the supposed authors lived AFTER Jesus was dead. Can you say hearsay? Can you say "the dead tell no tales"?
Philo of Alexandria (20 BC – 50 AD) a contemporary Jewish historian, never wrote a word about Jesus. This is odd, since Philo wrote broadly on the politics and theologies around the Mediterranean.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca (ca. 4 BCE – 65 CE) A.K.A. Seneca the Younger. A contemporary of Jesus wrote extensively on many subjects and people. But he didn't write a word about a Jesus.
Gaius Plinius Secundus (23 AD – August 25, 79 AD), better known as Pliny the Elder, was a Roman author, naturalist, and natural philosopher. Plinius wrote "Naturalis Historia", an encyclopedia into which he collected much of the knowledge of his time. There is no mention of a Jesus.
The area in and surrounding Jerusalem served, in fact, as the center of education and record keeping for the Jewish people. The Romans, of course, also kept many records. Moreover, the gospels mention scribes many times, not only as followers of Jesus but the scribes connected with the high priests. And nothing about the Jesus. Nada! Not even something chiseled on a wall or carved into a tree like: "Jesus Loves Mary Magdalene".
John 21:25 King James Version (KJV)
25And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.
OMG! You would think a fellow this "gifted" , would have at least been mentioned by one of these historians.
There is a line in the musical Jesus Christ Superstar that says:"The rocks themselves would start to sing".
Hmm...
We don't even have a wooden shelf that Jesus might have built. Or anything written by Jesus. God incarnate, and we don't even have a Mother's day card signed by Him.
Mark 3:7- 8 King James Version (KJV)
7But Jesus withdrew himself with his disciples to the sea: and a great mult_itude from Galilee followed him, and from Judaea,
8And from Jerusalem, and from Idumaea, and from beyond Jordan; and they about Tyre and Sidon, a great mult_itude, when they had heard what great things he did, came unto him.
Yet, not one of these adoring fans, bothered to draw a picture, chisel a bust, or even write down a description. Even Mohammad has a description. Virtually all important people do. And god, being god, could have preserved it.
Huge groups of people following a man who had performed miracles...yet no historian of the time, commented on it.
The Dead Sea Scrolls did not mention Jesus or have any New Testament scripture, as some have claimed.
Jesus, if he existed, was not considered important enough to write about by any contemporary person. The myth hadn't had a chance to flourish. The future stories and miracles needed time to grow and spread.
Paul's writings were the first, about Jesus. But, Paul's writing was done 25 to 30 years after Jesus was dead. In a primitive, ultra-supersti_tious society, 25 years is a lot of time for a myth to grow. Twenty-five years was most of the average person's lifespan in the 1st Century.
No television, No electric lights. People mostly sat around and told stories... Ever played "telephone"? A story is started at the beginning of a group. Each person passes the story along to the next person. The person at the end retells the story and it is compared to the original. Often the ending story is totally different from the original.
Also, when you have a superhero, it is beyond belief that this hero's deeds would not get better in the telling.
"The Messiah must be a descendent of King David. (Jeremiah 23:5, 33:17; Ezekiel 34:23-24) Although the Greek Testament traces the genealogy of Joseph (husband of Mary) back to David, it then claims that Jesus resulted from a virgin birth, and, that Joseph was not his father. " – Copyright 2008 – Jews for Judaism
The authors of the gospels, blew it. They gave Spiderman oops, I mean Jesus, two separate genealogies.
There is NO mention of Herod's massacre of the infants, by any scholars of Jesus' day.
There is NO evidence that there was a custom for the Romans to release a prisoner during Passover.
Some people feel that Paul, not Jesus, is the real father of what most Christians believe today (Pauline Christianity).
Paul never actually met Jesus. His knowledge and faith was the result of hearsay and an epileptic "vision".
"In more recent times, this opinion has found support from the fact that sight impediment-including temporary blindness lasting from several hours to several days-has been observed as being a symptom or result of an epileptic seizure and has been mentioned in many case reports."
Source: http://www.epilepsiemuseum.de/alt/paulusen.html
The Christian Right has embraced Paul as the moral lawgiver. Paul's First Ep_istle of Paul to the Thessalonians, is often quoted by the Republicans. You never hear them quote Jesus' advice to the rich. You don't bite the hand that feeds you.
Questions on the Crucifixion story:
"Likewise also the chief priests mocking said among themselves with the scribes, He saved others; himself he cannot save." Mark 15:31
"Let Christ the King of Israel descend now from the cross, that we may see and believe..." Mark 15:32
It would appear, that the chief priests are admitting that Jesus "saved" others. If they knew this, then there is no reason for them to demand that Jesus descend from the cross, in order for them to believe. They already admitted to knowing of Jesus' "miracles".
This is just an obvious embellishment by Mark. A work of fiction possibly constructed to make it appear that some Old Testament "prediction" was fulfilled. Like:
"I offered my back to those who beat me, my cheeks to those who pulled out my beard; I did not hide my face from mocking and spitting." – Isaiah 50:6
The New Testament writers admitted: "These things are written that you might believe"
"The claim that Jesus will fulfill the Messianic prophesies when he returns does not give him any credibility for his “first” coming. The Bible never speaks about the Messiah returning after an initial appearance. The “second coming” theory is a desperate attempt to explain away Jesus’ failure." – Copyright 2008 – Jews for Judaism
Actually the tasks left undone, are the result of Jesus being a myth. Consider, that it's been 2000+ years. I don't think those "other" tasks are gonna be done. LOL
Here is another:
1 Corinthian 15:14-17 – Paul says Christianity lives or dies on the Resurrection.
1 Corinthians 15:4 "4And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures"
Matthew 12:40 – Jesus said, that He would be buried three days and three nights as Jonah was in the whale three days and three nights.
Friday afternoon to early Sunday morning is only 2 days at the most. Or, if you count Friday and Sunday as entire days, then you could get 3 days and 2 nights. This is a gimme though. The Mary's went to the grave at sunrise and it was empty.
Obviously, the believers spin this like a pinwheel. I have seen explanations like: Jesus was actually crucified on Wednesday or maybe Thursday; The prophesy actually means 12 hour days, and not 24 hour days; The partial days are counted as full days. This one is true, but still doesn't add up.
At any rate, the crucifixion day and number of days and nights Jesus spent in the grave, is disputed.
It looks very much like, that Jesus was not in the grave for 3 days and 3 nights. The prophecy was not fulfilled.
And that means...
1 Corinthian 15:14-17 – Paul says Christianity lives or dies on the Resurrection. Hmm... RIP LOL
And what of this?:
Jesus had healed a woman on the Sabbath!:
Luke 13 31:33 KJV
31The same day there came certain of the Pharisees, saying unto him, Get thee out, and depart hence: for Herod will kill thee.
32And he said unto them, Go ye, and tell that fox, Behold, I cast out devils, and I do cures to day and to morrow, and the third day I shall be perfected.
33Nevertheless I must walk to day, and tomorrow, and the day following: for it cannot be that a prophet perish out of Jerusalem.
NOTE that Jesus is saying, it is impossible for a prophet (Himself) to be killed outside of Jerusalem.
Yet, the prophet Jesus WAS killed outside Jerusalem!
Calvary or Golgotha was the site, outside of ancient Jerusalem’s early first century walls, at which the crucifixion of Jesus is said to have occurred. OOoopsie!
And there is this:
According to Luke 23:44-45, there occurred "about the sixth hour, and there was darkness over all the earth until the ninth hour, and the sun was darkened, and the veil of the temple was rent in the midst."
Yet not a single secular mention of a three hour ecliptic event got recorded. 'Cause it didn't happen!
Mathew 27 51:53
51 At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The earth shook, the rocks split 52 and the tombs broke open. The bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. 53 They came out of the tombs after Jesus’ crucifixion and went into the holy city and appeared to many people.
How come nobody wrote about zombies running through the cities? 'Cause it is all b.s.
An interesting note, which should not be ignored:
"The same phenomena and portents of the sudden darkness at the sixth hour, a strong earthquake, rent stones, a temple entrance broken in two, and the rising of the dead have been reported by multiple ancient writers for the death of Julius Caesar on March 15, 44 BC." – Sources Wikipedia (John T. Ramsey & A. Lewis Licht, The Comet of 44 B.C. and Caesar's Funeral Games, Atlanta 1997, p. 99–107
OMG!
If you can't even believe the crucifixion story how likely is the resurrection account to be true? In a book that is a mix of fiction and "fact", how do you know which is which? Especially, since all of the bible seems very unlikely and does not fit with the reality we see around us.? Talking snakes and unicorns, and satyrs, and knowledge and life giving trees...
Then there is the "testimony" of Jesus himself, who explicitly stated that some of his disciples would not die until Jesus inst_ituted the Kingdom, and that his generation would not pass away until all his prophecies of the end of the world had been fulfilled:
[Jesus Speaking]
Matthew 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
I know, spin, spin, spin. But the truth is, the authors of the Gospels wrote that Jesus would be back in the 1st Century.
Jesus could not be wrong and be god. All of Jesus disciples believed He would return...'cause He said He would.
They didn't see any spin to their master's words.
If Jesus was the Messiah and the Son of God, who died for man's redemption, then this would be the MOST important event in the history of man. Nothing else has or ever could equal it.
Having gone to the trouble of impregnating a human and being born god incarnate and dying for mankind's sins, why wouldn't god have ensured there was tons of evidence that this was true? Multiple Writings by contemporary eyewitnesses – Jews and Romans and Greeks.
You are going to want to say that there IS lots of evidence, but look at reality: There are way more people, in the world, who are not Christians (67%) than who are (33%). Obviously, the evidence is not adequate to convince even a majority of the world's people.
I would expect better performance from an almighty god.?
You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep-seated need to believe. – Carl Sagan
Cheers!
I personally believe Truth can be known through science
Eggs are they good for you or bad for you?
Now as far as you "know"
"The fact that YOU don't understand how those evolutionary developments came about, (which are well known)," please point us in the right direction of all you seem to know, I have asked you to explain and all you scream out is SCIENCE, no better than Timmy from South Park
"I don't say "oh god must have made them".
But why don't you say oh look at the caos theory of science in action
"You missed the point. BOTH I AND the books exist inside the same dimensions, (space-time)."
You missed the point Middle Earth, you and Tatooine do not share the same dimensions. Neither does your God most of the time except when He became incarnate.
"not BOTH exist in, and have created."
Please explain why God is so limited to your knowledge.
Science cannot answer why gravity exists, that is a philosophical question, not a scientific one. Science cannot answer who shot Lincoln, or who won the 1986 world series, these are not scientific question, these are historical question. Which we know is still a valid form of knowledge because you still pay good money to learn it in college
Elaine Pagels
Jerome Neyrey
C. Dennis McKinsey...
I was waiting for Fallacy spotter to point out that is is a
Appeal to Authority Fallacy
http://www.iep.utm.edu/fallacy/#Appeal%20to%20Authority
or a Appeal to the People Fallacy
http://www.iep.utm.edu/fallacy/#Appeal%20to%20the%20People
Guess, s/he only picks out the ones he doesn't want to be true.
If you heard a voice in your head and were absolutely 100% CONVINCED that it was your god would you take your son out into the wilderness and put a knife in his heart and then set him on fire? If you say yes to this then you need to be committed. If you say no, then you are more moral than any character in your book and you have no need for your fairy tales.
I've asked this before too, but I've never recieved a response.
The event you describe happened a few millenia ago. That event was considered the "voice of God". Today we would attribute it to something like schizophrenia or substance abuse, or just mean human nature. When the idea of god is driven out of the picture, we'll see human nature for what it really is. And THAT is no fairy tale dream land.
If you heard a voice in your head telling you anything, it's time to seek psychiatric help?
I've never heard such a voice, but I'd like to think I would obey it. God can certainly define what is right if he chooses to break into reality and do so. Where do you stand on this, jimtanker? That is, if you were 100% convinced you were confronted by God?
"When the idea of god is driven out of the picture, we'll see human nature for what it really is. And THAT is no fairy tale dream land"
and you know this how exactly? This is like saying "if we allow people to legally conceal weapons, there will be more murder" or "if we let people smoke pot, there will be more DUI and health problems". Your comments are based on nothing but SPECULATION, just like your faith.
My first thought would be that I need mental help. It would take a lot more than a voice in my head to make me even THINK about hurting my kids. Yet Abraham is revered as a hero by xtians. Now that is crazy.
jimtanker you did say 100% convinced. Why then would it ever occur to you to seek mental help?
@jimtanker
I love my child way more than I could ever love a God. I would give my life for my child. God is not worth a lock of her hair.
If a puppy wet on the floor, could you hold it over a burner...even for a minute, as punishment? I couldn't. Not to a dog and certainly not to a human.
Yet the Christian God of Love, constructed a fiery place of torture where He will administers His justice. He will burn His victims for all eternity. Their screams, music to His ears. The smell of their burning flesh, sweet in His nostrils.
The Christian god is vile.
I am more moral than the Christian God...And there was a rumor of my being born of a virgin.
Cheers!
well, its about time we got rid of those demons...thanks be to god!
And you people religious belief doesn't harm anything! Morons!
Belief never killed anyone?
You are such a liar and a hypocrite. Belief is number one cause of human suffering, torture and mass murder in al of human history.
Take for one the phrase "Kill them all, God will know his own" was the response of Pope Innocent III, just one of many during the 1,000 year long dark ages, that responded to his soldiers about who to kill in a town when ordered to murder every Jewish man woman and child. They couldn't tell by looking at people who was a jew and who was a christian. so the POPE ordered every single man, woman and child murdered. This pope was later declared sa saint and to this day people still wear his charm and pray in his name, the man was nothing more than a mass murdering sociopath, a serial killer of monstrous proportion yet is revered as a hero of religious faith.
There are many popes that have the blood of thousands to millions on their hands all in the name of belief, the soldiers followed their orders and murdered more than 36 million in the name of their god and their belief. All by hand and marching on foot the managed to murder more than 6 times the amount of people the Nazis were able to do with automatic weapons, explosives, poison gases, trains and trucks using relatively modern means to achieve the mass murder of 6 million. Even with modern transportation and weaponry they paled in comparison to the volume of murder committed by men that had to do it by hand and on foot century’s earlier.
SO, belief, as you say is not dangerous. That is a flat out lie. Like I often tell people Guns don't kill people, People Kill people and often use their belief as an excuse to use the gun to kill people, or the sowrd, or whatever weapon of choice they can get hands on.
So Belief doensn't actually kill people, nut it is the motive and the excuse that people use to kill people. Belief is far more deadly than the gun. That is a fact and cannot be refuted.
Belief, especially christian belief, has been the excuse for more mass murder and is the number one cause of all human deaths in all of human history.
Even as recent as today we still see stories of parents that use their belief to starve and torture their own 3 children to death over a period of month because of their faith and their religious belief.
Belief is just another excuse for acts of pure evil.
Faith and belief are signs or moral bankrupty and mental weakness.
It doesn't do any harm if you're not some crazy catholic Korean (I'm sorry I just had to use alliteration there lol).
Oh and by the way what about Joseph Stalin? He was an atheist who caused the death of countless millions of his own people! Don't even get me started on chairman mao.
When God talks to people, he sure does give some strange messages.
In Texas in 2002, Deanna Laney received a direct message from God telling her to "get her house in order".
To comply with God's will, her sons, 8 year old Joshua, 6 year old Luke and 15 month old Aaron were summarily bashed in the head with rocks. Only Aaron survived.
Adrea Yates is another mother from Texas. In 2001 she drowned her 5 children in the bathtub becuase "It was the seventh deadly sin. My children weren't righteous. They were doomed to perish in the fires of hell."
Vivian Gamor had God tell her that she was Jesus' twin and that her children were not her own. She bludgeoned her 10-year-old son Antoine with a claw hammer and suffocated daughter Kenniece, three, with cling film.
In 2007, God had a chat with LaShuan Harris, ordering her like Abraham to make a human sacrifice. She tossed her three children into teh San Francisco Bay. Unlike with Abraham, God didn't intervene to save those kids.
Blind faith is not a virtue – it is a short step off from supernatural delusions. If you hold a two sided conversation with an invisible being, it's time to check into the psych ward.
Guess your stories prove what I always suspected – "God" is a serial killer.
THIS is the reason why religion, all religions, need to be done away with. If you’re not fundie enough to do things like this then your beliefs are legitimizing people who will do things like this.
Jim, before you take away Christianity, can you explain to us where in the doc.uments it tells its followers, especially the gentiles, to behave as this woman did?
It doesn’t matter what the bible states or where. People will believe whatever crazy things that they want to believe. How else can you explain that there are over 38,000 different denominations of xtianity with all kinds of crazy beliefs? All of this from one book that is supposed to be the inerrant word of god. If he is as all powerfull as that then why can’t he do a better job of making a book that can be misread in so many ways and has so many contradictions? Oh yea, you have to be saved to understand the “word”. What a crock.
Simply put they believed the children to be possessed by demons...that is not a secular thing, so yes religion has to be looked at here. These people harmed their innocent children in the name of their belief's and obviously mental illness was involved (no sane person believes their children are possessed) but their beliefs set off that illness in regards to this issue.
I always wondered about this. If heaven is supposed to be the ultimate reward and if children go to heaven automatically before a certain age then why don’t more xtians kiII their children early in life? But then again, they don’t make much sense anyway.
jimtanker leaps on this event to arrive at his solution which is to do away with the thing that makes him most uncomfortable: religion. He misses the obvious conclusion. Parents killed these children, not religion. Parents too often assume complete control over their children's lives. Too often that leads to tragedy. In our society we should do away with isolated "nuclear" families. The lives of children should be frequently monitored and guided by people qualified to do so. Feeble as it is, we have a system in place of child protective services. Elaborate it. Make it much more powerful. Get it involved in every family and get it off its strange mission of protecting the family unit and involved first and foremost in the protection of children.
@πολεμικός
You seriously want a government agency to dictate how to raise your children?
How very Orwellian of you. Why not remove all citizens from their parents at birth and send them directly to indoctrination centres to ensure they'll behave just teh way Congress thinks they should?
he is as all powerfull as that then why can’t he do a better job of making a book that can be misread in so many ways and has so many contradictions?
Because they choose to and not wanting to submit to what it actually says. Here is a simpler example for you, if I misread Romeo and Juliet, does that change the character and abilities of Shakespeare?
You even see people like Dave just pulling out the parts he likes. It's like a 4 year old watching beauty and the beast only for the dance scene and then claiming they understand the entire story when they do not want to watch the movie in full.
Mike from CT: "can you explain to us where in the doc.uments it tells its followers, especially the gentiles, to behave as this woman did?"
Don't make me go look up the number of times where your Bible says to "Trust in the Lord", or "The Lord will guide you" or "Listen to the words of the Lord"... stuff like that.
What IF, please do, especially in the NT, but when you do look at the promises of God surrounding the statement.
@Mike from CT
Notice how many denominations of Christianity there are (~ 38,000 – World Christian Encyclopedia (2001)).
Each denomination can show you scripture, that "proves" they understand the wants of Jesus/god.
All of the denominations could not be correctly interpreting the bible. Many are contradictory.
Many of these denominations believe only their members will be saved.
If the Christian god exists, and He is all knowing and all powerful and all good, why didn't He provide a bible that could not be misinterpreted? That everyone's comprehension of His wants would be the same?
The bible says:
1 Corinthians 14:33 – KJV
33For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.
Christians believe god's purpose in creating the Bible is to guide human beings towards a knowledge of God, and to help them lead moral lives. If this is so, then Christians must be certain of the meaning of the Bible.
ambiguity – a word or expression that can be understood in two or more possible ways : an ambiguous word or expression.
"There are in excess of 1,000 Christian faith groups in North America. They teach diverse beliefs about the nature of Jesus, God, the second coming, Heaven, Hell, the rapture, criteria for salvation, speaking in tongues, the atonement, what happens to persons after death, and dozens of other topics.
On social controversies, faith groups teach a variety of conflicting beliefs about abortion access, equal rights for ho_mo$exuals and bi$exuals, who should be eligible for marriage, the death penalty, physician assisted suicide, human $exuality topics, origins of the universe, and dozens of other topics.
The groups all base their theological teachings on the Bible. Generally speaking, the theologians in each of these faith groups are sincere, intelligent, devout, thoughtful and careful in their interpretation of the Bible. But, they come to mutually exclusive conclusions about what it teaches.
Further, most are absolutely certain that their particular interpretations are correct, and that the many hundreds of faith groups which teach opposing beliefs are in error." Source: Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance
If the bible is ambiguous, then it cannot be said to be inerrant. If the bible is not without error, then how do we know which parts to accept as truth and which to reject as fiction?
If there is one god, one holy spirit, how can all these denominations exist? Why doesn't the holy spirit whisper in everybody's ear and tell them the Jehovah Witnesses are right.? Or the Mormons? Or the Evangelicals? LOL
Cheers!
Mike from CT,
Promises attached to them make no difference. People should not be taught to believe that imaginary voices in their heads are "God" speaking to them.
@Mike from CT
You said: "You even see people like Dave just pulling out the parts he likes. It's like a 4 year old watching beauty and the beast only for the dance scene and then claiming they understand the entire story when they do not want to watch the movie in full."
I quoted you two passages from the bible. Both showed that Jesus was not omniscient. One showed Jesus and Satan thought the earth was flat and the other showed Jesus predicted a 1st century return. I replied to your answers and listed people who also think Jesus predicted a first century return.
I also told you, you would deny the literal meaning of these passages, and try to spin them. I even gave you a number of suggested ways to do this.
Believer's Rule of Thumb: If a bible verse furthers the cause, it is to be taken literally. If a bible verse is detrimental to the cause, it is either: taken out of context; is allegorical; refers to another verse somewhere else; is a translation or copyist's error; means something other than what it actually says; Is a mystery of god or not discernable by humans; or is just plain magic.
Your god is very unlikely to exist; Jesus was an Urban Legend
Cheers!
@Dave
1 Corinthians 14:33 – KJV
33For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.
Correct, peoples’ sinful desires blind us, surely you can see how that is true. That is why it is in the text.
@Mike from CT,
Re: 1 Corinthians
You believe some antique guy (Paul of Tarsus), who in the very next lines following your citation says:
" 34Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.
35And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church."
@jimtanker
And what of this, sir?
GOD's HEALTH PLAN:
Why do you spend any money on medical care? You have the promise of god:
Mark 11:24: Jesus speaking
Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours.
John 14:14: Jesus speaking
If you ask anything in my name, I will do it.
Mark 16: Jesus speaking
16 He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned. 17 And these signs will accompany those who believe: in my name they will cast out demons; they will speak in new tongues; 18 they will pick up serpents, and if they drink any deadly thing, it will not hurt them; they will lay their hands on the sick, and they will recover.
James 5:15:
And the prayer offered in faith will make the sick person well; the Lord will raise him up.
Believers babble on about faith and belief and how the bible is the inerrant word of god.
Yet, most ignore His word, and buy health insurance and seek the knowledge of man.
They are tweaking the nose of god!
Some, have actually believed what the bible tells them. They prayed for their child, trusting in the word of god, and withheld medical care. Apparently, God was not impressed with their faith. The child died. OOOooopsie!
Not to fret! This was part of god's plan for the young'in.?
A true believer would never set foot in a doctor's office!
But, they do. They seek medical care, because they don't believe the promises of god. They know, that in the real world, prayer rarely works (exception: coincidence / random chance).
Believers attempt to smooth this over by saying a little prayer, receiving medical treatment and then giving the credit to their god, if they get well... Hmm...
The bible says: " Sick people are oppressed by the devil. Acts 10:38
If this is true, then how can medical care be effective? A shot of penicillin would have no effect on demonic oppression. LOL
The bible isn't worthy of lining a bird's cage. It is nothing more than ancient men's values, beliefs, and limited knowledge of the world.
Christians do not believe in Christianity because it is true. To them Christianity is true because they believe it.
IF YOU CAN'T COUNT ON JESUS TO KEEP HIS PROMISES IN THIS LIFE, HOW CAN YOU POSSIBLY BELIEVE HIM ABOUT AN AFTERLIFE?
Cheers!
@Mike from CT
@Dave
1 Corinthians 14:33 – KJV
33For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.
You said: "Correct, peoples’ sinful desires blind us, surely you can see how that is true. That is why it is in the text."
God is not the author of confusion, yet He wrote/inspired a bible that is ambiguous. Are you saying only the people that believe as you do, are not blind? People who do not agree with your interpretation of the bible do so, because they have sinful desires? Pfui! Those are the words of a bigot.
This bible has generated 38,000 different denominations of Christianity. They arrived at their beliefs by reading their bibles and fasting and praying. Why is God/Holy Spirit not correcting their errors?
The bible is ambiguous. It was written by men. The fact there are so many versions of Christianity would be what I would expect, if there were no god.
Cheers!
Dave
38,000 denominations ? There are perhaps a billion that have thought themselves Christian yet each has a slightly different heart towards Christ. God did not create robots but unique individuals thus no two are alike. We all praise the Lord yet each like a snowflake are different . That is the wonder of God yet you cannot see it because your busy looking for dirt on God Tell me atheist Dave, since your godless ness is slightly different than the next atheist does that make the Dawkins bible any less valid?
Dave good question the answer is found in Romans 1
Also the bible did not create, again sinfulness of man has chosen to go his own path, as have you.
I'm no fan of religion ... but this story really has nothing to do with what is "wrong" with religion ( Althought there IS a lot wrong with religion ). This woman was psychologically and socially unstable. She just used religion as a vehicle to supplement her (unstable) resoning. I'm sure that if she had never heard of god or any religious practices she still would find some other 'reason' to commit the act that she did. Religion was just the easy fruit.
Sorry include the pastor in the above statement
BM,
You're wrong. This is what is wrong with religion. Even moderate and liberal believers are the people who legitimize the religions that make people go and do things like this. You can say all you want that this person isn’t a real christian but they thought that they were. Just like muslims are saying that the 9/11 bombers were not true muslims. Same exact thing.
THIS is what religion does. So tragic.
It also motivates the same sinful humans to feed the poor, cloth the hungry, take care of widows and orphans, and put an end to Western Slavery
Feeding the poor and housing the homeless would have more weight if you did it because you want to not because of a threat of eternal suffering or a reward in paradise.
What are you talking about Mike? The Bible condones slavery. Many of the ones who supported Western slavery were Bible thumpers.
@Mike from CT
Faith is indeed a powerful motivator! It can inspire the best and the worst in humanity.
The problem is that faith, by definition, is ardent belief despite the total absence of evidence.
Once a believer has accepted a proposition by faith, whether good or bad, they cannot thereafter judge that proposition by reason.
“What are the facts? Again and again and again – what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history” – what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!”
― Robert A. Heinlein
Hey Doc! Morning!
On a tangent here. Heinlein was an amazing writer. When are they going to come out with a Stranger in a Strange Land movie?
I'm an Athiest and I do a lot of good things for others. You should do good as a human being, not because God told you to.
@JimTanker
I've been wondering that myself!
The only movie they've made based on his books was a big 'ol turd (unless you count Destination Moon all those decades ago).
If Stanley Kubrick were still alive, I think he'd be the perfect one to make SIASL into a movie – but you know they'd have to water it down to make it palatable to North American audiences.
I still cringe when I think of what they did to Starship Troopers.
Joe T. welcome to the conversation, you can easily google this answer that has been discussed time and time again, do not compare the slavery of middle eastern times to Western/British slavery... also look for who were the first abolitionist.
@Doc, slightly incorrect
Faith is Validated by the one who makes the promise.
You driving home with your eyes closed.... blind faith, no reason to believe that
The belief that your wife will be faithful to you is based on the promise of her character.
It is not a threat of eternal punishment, it is a response that pours out from the heart, from a love and understand of what God has done for you, you impart unto others.
Mike from CT..it would be more than a promise of her character..you physically know her, and she is real. You talk and have conversations and from that you have assessed her character. God is not known to you..you have only hearsay and an book which is written by men. To put blind faith , which is what you have, in a fictional character is a dangerous thing to do with the human mind.
evolved, I liked how you disagreed with me then went on to confirm the point
"you physically know her, and she is real. You talk and have conversations and from that you have assessed her character"
You read this story and it is hearsay, doesn't bother you. But if it does, start with Matthew, John, 1 Peter, 2 Peter, 1,2,3 John, all the Pauline epistles and then Revelation. Then read the other books to see the harmony within the accounts and the reporting done by Luke, in the same manner as Paula Hanc.ocks (love how you can’t even reference the author)
I'll read Harry Potter" or "Lord of the Rings" and take more meaning from that. Just another work of fiction. My choices are better written.
Faith without evidence is worthless.
Cheers!
@Mike from CT
Why do you spend any money on medical care? You have the promise of god:
Mark 11:24: Jesus speaking
Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours.
John 14:14: Jesus speaking
If you ask anything in my name, I will do it.
Mark 16: Jesus speaking
16 He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned. 17 And these signs will accompany those who believe: in my name they will cast out demons; they will speak in new tongues; 18 they will pick up serpents, and if they drink any deadly thing, it will not hurt them; they will lay their hands on the sick, and they will recover.
James 5:15:
And the prayer offered in faith will make the sick person well; the Lord will raise him up.
Believers babble on about faith and belief and how the bible is the inerrant word of god.
Yet, most ignore His word, and buy health insurance and seek the knowledge of man.
They are tweaking the nose of god!
Some, have actually believed what the bible tells them. They prayed for their child, trusting in the word of god, and withheld medical care. The child died. OOOooopsie!
Not to fret! This was part of god's plan for the young'in.?
A true believer would never set foot in a doctor's office!
But, they do. They seek medical care, because they don't believe the promises of god. They know, that in the real world, prayer rarely works (exception: coincidence / random chance).
Believers attempt to smooth this over by saying a little prayer, receiving medical treatment and then giving the credit to their god, if they get well... Hmm...
The bible says: " Sick people are oppressed by the devil. Acts 10:38
If this is true, then how can medical care be effective? A shot of penicillin would have no effect on demonic oppression. LOL
The bible isn't worthy of lining a bird's cage.
Christians do not believe in Christianity because it is true. To them Christianity is true because they believe it.
IF YOU CAN'T COUNT ON JESUS TO KEEP HIS PROMISES IN THIS LIFE, HOW CAN YOU POSSIBLY BELIEVE HIM ABOUT AN AFTERLIFE?
Cheers!
Speaking for me personally
Why do you spend any money on medical care? You have the promise of god:
1 Corinthians 6:19-20,
I think the verses you stumble on can be better flushed out from Luke 11:9-13, there you will see what you are receiving and again in Matthew 7:7-11
Would you give your son matches to play with if he asked, what kind of loving Father would do that?
Acts 10:38
38how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power. He went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with him
No were in this verse or in scripture does it say all sick = all oppressed, review Matthew 8, Peter’s mother-in-law sick with fever and the fever left, not the demon. Or any case of curing leprosy
“Christians do not believe in Christianity because it is true. To them Christianity is true because they believe it.”
I believe in God and who God has revealed himself as, not because I like it review Romans 7:7ff, but because of the amazing accuracy in the historical record and the over 5000 manuscripts agreeing to an infinitesimal degree. That when you review the life and teachings of Jesus Christ, that He was honest and accurate in His account.
@Mike from CT
You said: "It also motivates the same sinful humans to feed the poor, cloth the hungry, take care of widows and orphans, and put an end to Western Slavery"
Apparently, not if you are a Republican. The Republicans serve two masters: The rich; and the Christian Right.
The Republican Party is the puppet of the Religious Right and the rich.
The Religious Right have morphed Jesus into a blood thirsty demigod, that can't wait to get back to earth, to punish all those that disagree with the them.
The Republicans use the "First Ep_istle of Paul to the Thessalonians", to justify their cutting programs for the p_oor and elderly. They ignore Christ's advice to the rich.
The Republicans believe they deserve the wealth that they have. The Prosperity Gospel!
Maybe they do. Maybe god is blessing them. So, if the rich follow the words of Jesus, won't god bless the rich all the more?
Who was the Messiah, Jesus or Paul?
The Tea Baggers / Religious Right screamed "YES", when asked if a man without health insurance should be allowed to die.
These Evangelicals should read The Parable of the Good Samaritan – Luke 10:25-37.
The Evangelicals / Tea Bag Party don't want to please Jesus. They want to dominate the country in Christ's name.
The Christian Right is the American Taliban.
Cheers!
This is what religion does to people. It makes them insane, dangerous, and incapable of acting rationally.
People like that should not be allowed to have children or be around children at all.
As much as I dislike the idea, strict controls over childrearing are needed to protect all children.
Even though this happened in South Korea, there have been many similar happenings around the world and in the US.
Religion is not a rational basis for anything and is definitely harmful to children.
Whenever a Catholic commits a crime other denominations label all RC as evil. If a Christian then Moslems have one more reason. a Muslim terrorist inspires hatred of Islam and an atheist like Pol Pot says it all. People are evil regardless of religion and so are their moral behaviour independent.
Nii: First off, Pol Pot was not an Atheist...he was in fact a Buddhist (not at all the same). Second, where is there any mention of catholics here? And Catholic crimes need to be put out there in order to save more children from falling victim to the cult of pe.do.philes (when the perps are turned over to the police for proper indictment, I will stop picking on them but until then everyone should be having an issue with this cult)
Muslims core belief system comes from the same book you use....they just adapted their own book in accordance to their interpretation of yours.
While I agree that belief does not need to be in place for people to kill, in this case (where they believed their children were possessed) belief is the cause. This is one more example of what belief can do (children die every day due to belief...parents who would rather pray for their ill child than to get them medical help...medical help that would potentially save their lives).
I thank your god I'm an Atheist...belief doesn't stand in my way when it comes to anything and most of all not when it comes to my child's well-being!
TruthPrevails
There is a lot of repressed anger in your tone on a consistent basis in your posts against Christians. That is inconsistent with your last statement: “I thank your god I'm an Atheist...belief doesn't stand in my way when it comes to anything and most of all not when it comes to my child's well-being!”
Your core belief is hung up on some dark event in your life which you consistently project on Christians. It would be impossible for you not to transfer that core darkness onto your children. Regardless of what goodness you claim to instill the fact that your actions are deeply rooted in hurt will mold the character of your children, like it or not.
The solution of course is to return to the love of Christ. Now, if you insist in remaining atheist then for the sake of your children put a rubber band around your wrist. Every time an evil hateful thought (against Christians or whoever) enters your mind snap that rubber band hard. Ask your self where is the root of that hate and anger? Now, get rid of it. Christians have a path for forgiveness and reconciliation in order to bring love back into the center of their being. As a former atheist self help books never did the trick however, you can still make progress to emptying yourself of hate and anger.
As atheist the assumption is we are but animals. Animals are governed by habit so form some new habits. Go love a Christian, write positive replies to post or get off this site for a period of time. Move onto sites where discussion is positive and loving. Look for good and goodness make it a habit.
Just more evidence that people with religion do not have their lives based in reality.