Religious Inconsistencies

[Alien Allen]

Just like atheism. Something I can't understand, if you don't believe in God, why are you so bothered about religion? Religion isn't the cause of wars and bigotry, tyranny, its the person who does that. Anyone can claim to be "Christian" or make their children "Christian" for the sake of a school place. But what I won't do is be judgemental on people. What I will be judgemental is whether the way they behave is the Christian way.

That is denial of the fact that organized religion was the root cause for many wars. In fact damn near all the wars over the ages. Of course individuals are responsible for their own actions but religion is based on the collective. And thus gets no pass in my book for the terror and suffering resulting from religious zealotry.

 

[Kakapo Dundee]

Just like atheism. Something I can't understand, if you don't believe in God, why are you so bothered about religion? Religion isn't the cause of wars and bigotry, tyranny, its the person who does that. Anyone can claim to be "Christian" or make their children "Christian" for the sake of a school place. But what I won't do is be judgemental on people. What I will be judgemental is whether the way they behave is the Christian way.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Crusade

 

[Johnfromokc]

Oh he can, but who are you to put God to the test?

According to Jesus, we are all gods:

John 10:30-38

New International Version (NIV)

[SUP]30 [/SUP]I and the Father are one.”

[SUP]31 [/SUP]Again his Jewish opponents picked up stones to stone him,

[SUP]32 [/SUP]but Jesus said to them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?”

[SUP]33 [/SUP]“We are not stoning you for any good work,” they replied, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.”

[SUP]34[/SUP]Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are “gods”’?

[SUP]35 [/SUP]If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be set aside —

[SUP]36 [/SUP]what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’?

[SUP]37 [/SUP]Do not believe me unless I do the works of my Father.

[SUP]38 [/SUP]But if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father.”

According to this scripture, you are god, and I am god and KD is god. Even Alien Allen is god. (What up Al-Jehova? )

 

[Stone]

According to Jesus, we are all gods:



According to this scripture, you are god, and I am god and KD is god. Even Alien Allen is god. (What up Al-Jehova? )

No.

You don't seem to understand what the dialog was about.

http://www.answering-islam.org/BibleCom/jn10-34.html

Context is what keeps tripping up GIA.
You ought to be smarter than fall in the same traps.

First, let's get one thing clear: Jesus considered himself to be the one and only Son of God, as is clear from many other references.
Now, what of the incident in John 10?
Jesus said 'I and the Father are one'. His opponents reply,
"We are stoning you... for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God."
Now what is often missed is that there are TWO ways that he could have defused this charge of blasphemy:
(1) By showing that he did not claim to be God; or
(2) By showing that it is not NECESSARILY blasphemy to claim to be God.
Which did he do? It was not (1) (as many people seem to suggest), but (2)!
Jesus answered them, "Is it not written in your Law, `I have said you are gods'? If he called them `gods,' to whom the word of God came - and the Scripture cannot be broken - what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world?"
Surely the thrust of Jesus' reply is clear: if it's not blasphemy for part of their Law (Psalm 82) to call certain people 'gods', surely it is not blasphemy if applied to Jesus.
The obvious corollary is this: Jesus is more worthy to be called 'god' than any of the addressees of Psalm 82. Why is he greater? Because he called himself:
the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world
And then in the next sentence, he put it even stronger:
I am God's Son
This passage is also notable for what Jesus did NOT say. If Jesus wanted to avoid the charge of blasphemy by denying he was God (defense (1) above), he could very easily have done so. But he did not. Rather, he showed (by quoting Psalm 82) that the claim to be God was not IN ITSELF blasphemous. His reply could be paraphrased, "It is not blasphemy to call someone 'god' if they deserve the title."
He then showed how he DID deserve the title, by describing himself as "the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world", "God's Son", and by saying "the Father is in me, and I in the Father".
Jesus' opponents understood this claim clearly, so they tried to arrest him anyway (v.39). They followed his reasoning alright, they just didn't believe the claims he made about himself. Therefore they reasoned (correctly, if Jesus' claims were false), that Jesus was guilty of blasphemy.

It's not about Jesus claiming everyone is a god, it's about Jesus defending himself against blasphemy by using Jewish scripture in response.
Jesus did not say everyone is a god, he was quoting Jewish law, Psalm 82 as part of his defense.

 

[Johnfromokc]

No.

You don't seem to understand what the dialog was about.

http://www.answering-islam.org/BibleCom/jn10-34.html

Context is what keeps tripping up GIA.
You ought to be smarter than fall in the same traps.

And you ought to be smarter than posting some biblebot web site for an interpretation of scripture Stone-Allah

Therein lies 100% of the problem with biblical bullshit - "context" is a built in excuse for biblebots to claim the words do not say what they actually say. Well - those words say we are all gods regardless of some made-up context. The bible says all kinds of shit about murdering non-believers just like the koran - except the biblebotters make excuses to attampt to get people to believe the words say something other than what they actually say.

Never figured you for a biblebot Stone. What tribe are you in? I was once a member of the Southern Baptist Taliban Tribe - by birth only. I cast out those demons some years ago.

 

[Stone]

And you ought to be smarter than posting some biblebot web site for an interpretation of scripture Stone-Allah

Therein lies 100% of the problem with biblical bullshit - "context" is a built in excuse for biblebots to claim the words do not say what they actually say. Well - those words say we are all gods regardless of some made-up context. The bible says all kinds of shit about murdering non-believers just like the koran - except the biblebotters make excuses to attampt to get people to believe the words say something other than what they actually say.

Never figured you for a biblebot Stone. What tribe are you in? I was once a member of the Southern Baptistist Taliban Tribe - by birth only. I cast out those demons some years ago.

That's not a rebuttal........it's a diversion.
You didn't bother to research the scripture and there is simply no way for you to save face.

But there is the tactic of diversion.

You fucked up.
Better to own your mistakes than have to relive them

 

[Johnfromokc]

That's not a rebuttal........it's a diversion.
You didn't bother to research the scripture and there is simply no way for you to save face.

But there is the tactic of diversion.

You fucked up.
Better to own your mistakes than have to relive them

So you are trying to get people to believe words do not say what they actually say? Really Stone?

 

[Stone]

So you are trying to get people to believe words do not say what they actually say? Really Stone?

Like I posted before........you don't understand the dialog that was going on.
Like GIA, you seem to depend on snippets to make a point.....


The words are there.....But Jesus did not claim we are gods.


The quote:
Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are “gods”’?
The 'I' does not refer to Jesus.......it refers to what was written in Jewish Law. It's Jewish law that is being referred to.



You fucked up.

 

[Johnfromokc]

OK - The almighty Stone-Allah has proclaimed words do not actually mean what they say - they mean what Stone-Allah and the biblebots say they mean. So Stone-Allah has said, so it it written, so shall it be. Amen.

:kneelsuckers:

 

[Stone]

OK - The almighty Stone-Allah has proclaimed words do not actually mean what they say - they mean what Stone-Allah and the biblebots say they mean. So Stone-Allah has said, so it it written, so shall it be. Amen.

You fucked up, johnny-poo
Even GIA spins better than that

You fucked up and nothing you post is going to reverse it

 

[Johnfromokc]

You fucked up, johnny-poo
Even GIA spins better than that

You fucked up and nothing you post is going to reverse it

Repeating yourself does not change the fact that words have meaning and that words arranged into sentences say what they say.

When Jesus said we are all gods, he was saying god is just as fucked up as we are. So you are a fucked up individual Stone-Allah.

Truly, it's all horseshit until I get my Armadillo ribeyes.

 

[Stone]

Repeating yourself does not change the fact that words have meaning and that words arranged into sentences say what they say.

When Jesus said we are all gods, he was saying god is just as fucked up as we are. So you are a fucked up individual Stone-Allah.

Truly, it's all horseshit until I get my Armadillo ribeyes.

Repeating yourself does not change the fact that words have meaning and that words arranged into sentences say what they say.

Indeed.

When Jesus said we are all gods...

But Jesus didn't say that in the quote.

Jesus asked.......is it not written in your law........

I have said you are 'gods'?

Line up all three of your brain cells ( ) and consider this.......the Hebrew law in question ( "is it not written in your law" ) was in existence before Christ and the reference to 'I' couldn't possibly be of/by Christ unless he had a time machine. Christ wrote nothing into Hebrew law.
Can you understand this simple fact?
Not only does your interpretation violate the punctuation and logic of the dialog, it obviously violates history at the same time.

Your logic is no better than GIA's
My advice to you is to stick to politics and quoting mindless bloggers so that you don't have to think. :24:


You fucked up.
There are many inconsistencies in the Bible.......this isn't one of them

he was saying god is just as fucked up as we are

You are definitely fucked up, but I didn't need scripture to figure that out

Truly, it's all horseshit until I get my Armadillo ribeyes.

That's your opinion and you are welcome to it.
But you still fucked up on this particular issue and you're too small a man to admit it .
I told you before....it's easier to own up to mistakes than play them out.
It just makes you look silly in your own thread :eek

 

[Stone]

He first takes his thoughts in French and translates them to English which in my book makes him brighter than most - hell - most people butcher English as a first language. Then, he demonstrates the absurdity of religious texts by making comparisons with other obvious absurdities. One must possess an IQ above 50 to grasp it.



Oh dear - there's no veil over my sarcasm. My intent is to insult religobots - adults who still believe in a cosmic Santa and the Easter Bunny. Nothing Freudian about it.

about GIA

He first takes his thoughts in French and translates them to English which in my book makes him brighter than most - hell - most people butcher English as a first language.

It does explain why and how he continually butchers logic and contradicts himself.

Then, he demonstrates the absurdity of religious texts by making comparisons with other obvious absurdities.

Not as often as one might think.
There is much quote mining and often the comparisons conflict as to context and source.
Add in his own interpretations and personal definitions that defy logic and it's a bias based on lunacy.

One must possess an IQ above 50 to grasp it.

That comment explains a lot
What you don't seem to grasp is that he's selling his own form of religion.
The point is.......he's proselytising just as intensely as a Bible thumping Fundamentalist would, and you are buying into his act.

My intent is to insult religobots

So you claim.
But you seem to encourage GIA, who is the most fanatical religobot at this site and probably much of the Internet. He's a prolific poster/traveler of many various web sites.
He's a combo gnostic 'warrior/priest'. ( yes, I have run into those terms in researching the crap he posts )
He isn't into Santa nor the Easter Bunny.......but demons and a hierarchy of gods are among his favorites. To him, science and religious myth compliment each other.
That's not sane.

 

[Tuffdisc]

That is denial of the fact that organized religion was the root cause for many wars. In fact damn near all the wars over the ages. Of course individuals are responsible for their own actions but religion is based on the collective. And thus gets no pass in my book for the terror and suffering resulting from religious zealotry.

Sorry, religion was just "the excuse" that some people wanted as in they used it as a driving force to those who did believe in God, not the cause of war. There are still wars that are created by atheists, namely WW2, Korean War, Vietnam War. Plus there are wars that were created by the Romans, Spartans, Persians in times of BC where Christianity didn't exist. Saying that religion is the cause of wars is just a misconception. I mean, if people really did believe in God, they wouldn't go out their way to make one if it says in the Bible "those who live by the sword, die by the sword", just because we have guns and other advanced weaponary, doesn't make that statement outdated, it is still relevant as it was in those days

 

[Johnfromokc]

Stone-Allah,

Increasing the number of words in your post does not change the fact that words have particular meaning when arranged into sentences. The bottom line is that those words that formed those sentences say exactly what they say. Attempting to convince people that those words mean something other than what they were arranged to say proves the lunacy of religion - and you're sounding even more looney than you claim GIA is.

So what religious tribe are you a member of Stone? Lend a little perspective here so we can better understand the source of your particular religious insanity.

 

[Joe the meek]

You fucked up.
Better to own your mistakes than have to relive them

Blaspheme!

John knows the bible way better than anyone I know. Heck, he even knows the Koran better than anyone I know.

I miss the good old days when John just though it was Muslims intent on killing everyone in the world who didn't believe what they believed. He could even quote the Koran to prove it:thumbup

 

[Stone]

Stone-Allah,

Increasing the number of words in your post does not change the fact that words have particular meaning when arranged into sentences. The bottom line is that those words that formed those sentences say exactly what they say. Attempting to convince people that those words mean something other than what they were arranged to say proves the lunacy of religion - and you're sounding even more looney than you claim GIA is.

So what religious tribe are you a member of Stone? Lend a little perspective here so we can better understand the source of your particular religious insanity.

Repeating yourself with an absence of rebuttal isn't debate John and it's also boring.

The bottom line is that those words that formed those sentences say exactly what they say.

Indeed.
The problem is you have reading comprehension issues and punctuation and context mean nothing to you. Logic escapes your own reality.

Attempting to convince people that those words mean something other than what they were arranged to say proves the lunacy of religion

Anyone reading this thread can easily see that you only repeat yourself and don't offer any logic to your claims other than.....'it is so because I say it's so'.
You are wrong as I have explained and you have posted nothing in any way of a rebuttal.
No doubt you've even spent some time desperately searching for one

So what religious tribe are you a member of Stone?

I'm not a member of a church.
Never have been.
And I've posted this fact at this site long before this thread.

Lend a little perspective here so we can better understand the source of your particular religious insanity.

There is no 'we' .....only your three brain cells to address


I don't give a shit what either you or your religobot buddy GIA believe, I'm here to debate the crap you both post.......if it looks interesting to me.
And you made this thread interesting on a particular point.
You let the hate with in you over ride logic and now it's come back at you
You fucked up

 

[Johnfromokc]

Blaspheme!

John knows the bible way better than anyone I know. Heck, he even knows the Koran better than anyone I know.

I miss the good old days when John just though it was Muslims intent on killing everyone in the world who didn't believe what they believed. He could even quote the Koran to prove it:thumbup

Joe, you're just as fucking dumb as you ever were. You have reading and comprehension issues - I'll say it agin for your dumb ass - I never said that - you made it up. You, like so many biblebots make shit up to fit your own intent. Keep making up shit like that and I'm going to call you a fucking intentional liar instead of a simple honest dyslexic dumbass. Give it a rest.

And you and the rest of the fucktard biblebots here would actually benefit from reading the book you claim gudes your lives. I don't think a single one of you have ever actually read the bible through for yourselves - and that would account for the outright stupidity demonstrated in threads like this by you biblebots. You're all like the idiots that rely on FOX News and Rush Limbaugh for your political information - pretty fucking sad.

Now take your happy ass down to your church of the month and bask in your self rightious self inflicted religious cranial rectumitus and have a blessed day.

 

[Joe the meek]

John

You ever notice that I normally don't start religious but end up responding to them?

There is a reason for that.

You know everything and yet you most likely do nothing other than type. Good for you.

Oh, VERY nice calling me "fucking dumb", "dumb ass" and calling others "fucktard biblebots", nice to see that you truly haven't changed that much from the old days, although you'd like to think you have.

Please don't tempt me to go to other place and pull up some of your older words of wisdom per those who practice the Muslim faith.

 

[Stone]

Blaspheme!

John knows the bible way better than anyone I know. Heck, he even knows the Koran better than anyone I know.

I miss the good old days when John just though it was Muslims intent on killing everyone in the world who didn't believe what they believed. He could even quote the Koran to prove it:thumbup

Google and software like e-Sword seem to make experts on the Holy Bible, of a lot of people.