I want to examine some of the philosophies of the Bible that many people accept as inerrant...
I'm curious, phat. Just about every fundamentalist here thinks that the extermination of the Cannanites (men and women, young and old) was just and right. Just about every fundamentalist here thinks homosexuality is evil and that gay people should not be allowed the same benefits as the rest of us. Just about every fundamentalist here thinks that scientists are dumbasses and that a quick google search allows you to speak authoritively on disciplines that take people decades to learn.
I fail to see the significance of this thread.
In fact, we don't even have to look at current issues. Just look at some of our more popular examples from the past. Every time in our history when society was facing a change, like women's suffrage, civil rights, abolition, etc., the fundamentalists always said that the end of the world was coming and if women, blacks, etc. were allowed to vote god would bring his/her/its wrath upon this nation and rain down fire and brimstone.
What good is all this biblical moral high ground bullshit if the followers of this biblical moral high ground bullshit keep trying to oppress other people with their biblical moral high ground bullshit?
Probably because no one is using to oppress, but to free the captives.
I'm a bit puzzled on this. So, based on what you said, would you agree that it was the right thing for christians to have captured non-christians from africa and civilize or "free the captives" by enslaving them and teaching them the word of god? Was it a right thing for christians to have driven the natives of the Americas almost to extinction to "free the captives" from their non-christianness?
I'm sorry, I'm not a poetic person at all. I tend to read things directly rather than try to drown the other person in obscurity.
The easy position for an atheist is that you can't pin them down to anything. And for the most part, whether they are conscious of it or not, they prefer to live life this way.
Not necessarily. I'm an atheist and I haven't raped or murdered anyone.
A Christian has clear guidelines for life that easily identifiable.
But history have clearly shown us that these so-called clear guidlines also changes over time. It was the christian thing to burn witches at the stake. It was the christian thing to hang witches a salem. It was the christian thing to consider non-christian subhuman. It was the christian thing to bring about the white man's burden.
What you state as "clear guidelines" are exactly like any other form of moral guideline. Every moral guideline that's ever existed either changes over time or simply disappear. Was it a christian thing for the crusaders to kill every man, woman, and child who inhabited Jerusalem before the first crusade?
I simply don't know why you would claim, or imply, that there is such a thing as a christian guideline that is unchangeble.
Its easy for the atheist to say moralize and judge the Christian because they know exactly what they believe. Should the Christian do or say anything counter to the biblical claim, they feel obligated to point it out.
We feel obligated to point out everytime one of you do something against what you preach is because christianity is currently a very powerful force in the richest and most powerful nation in the world and it continues to seek out new groups of people to oppress.
Rock 'n Roll used to be music of the devil, remember? All homosexuals used to be pedophiles, remember? God used to not want women to vote, remember?
But the main reason why we point out everytime one of you do something counter to biblical claim is because on other issues "the bible says so" seem to be your only defense. Quite simply, people like me are quite tired of seeing christians try to use their own holy book to legitimize their own personal agenda and prejudice. If you think women are only good in bed, just say so. Why drag the bible into it?
But really, atheists have their own set of morals. They simply don't usually relay that. Or if they do, there is always contained in the subtext a perpetual escape clause through their relativistic standards. How convenient. However......
Yes, and our own set of morals are very simple. While they vary from person to person, my own moral is to always use common human decency on others. If I am straight and married to a wonderful woman, I absolutely don't see any reason why I should go out of my way to make sure that gay people can't get the same happiness and benefits as I take for granted. I mean, it really has absolutely nothing to do with me. It's not like I'm going to start shooting people for fun if gay people are allowed to get married.
Common human decency tells me that people of other races and cultures are people, too, and should be treated with respect. CHD tells me that if someone needs help, I ought to help him. CHD tells me that hanging people because some self-hating teenager decided to go on a power trip and accuses people of witch craft is simply wrong. CHD tells me that going to other lands and forcefully destroy other people's cultures and convert them to my own beliefs is so obviously wrong. In fact, CHD tells me that since I know nothing about geology that I should keep my mouth shut when people are talking about geology.
Now, let's look at all the above examples from a christian perspective. A christian would help another person to buy a ticket into heaven. Either that or they don't want to burn in hell. Because of a few accusations of witchcraft, over a dozen innocent people were hanged by otherwise good christians. Just how many valuable artifacts and monuments have been destroyed so the local people could be converted to christianity? And let's not forget this very EvC debate that we have. Do you know how many times I've cringed my teeth because a christian have decided that a single google search would make him smarter and more knowledgable than the rest of us?
These christian guidelines you speak of have done nothing to protect the rest of us from the christian majority. If anything, minority groups have always had to struggle for their "godgiven rights" without the support of the major churches.
The human condition is the prevailing disposition of man between joy and suffering. And for the sake of a really good argument, perhaps there is no one more acquainted with such a disposition than the carnal Christian who understands the invisible battle between good and evil, and yet lives a duplicitous life anyway. Followed not far behind him is the Christian who wants to befriend the world and Christ. He has one foot in the world, and one foot in the Church, because he wants the best of both worlds. His humility could be perceived as false, because self-deprecation is not really about humility, its about fishing for compliments. It ends up not being about God at all, but about themselves.
Sorry, I'm more left-brain person than right brain. Could you be kind enough to translate what you wrote there to something less... nonsensical? It's not you. It's me. I consider myself handicapped when it comes to all this poetic bullshit.
You are conflating a fringe community in a small city to speak on behalf of all Christendom. That would be as unfair for me saying that because you are an atheist, and so was Stalin, that you must somehow agree that the mass murder of millions of people was perfectly fine behavior.
Well, you were the one that claimed there are specific christian guidelines and that you implied these guidelines are perfect. Salem is an example of a christian community following your christian guidelines and killed innocent people. Also, I'd hardly call Europe a small town during the inquisition.
Your Stalin example would make more sense if I make a claim that there is an "atheist" guideline to morality that is perfect. But as you can see, people like me make no such claim.
When was it okay to consider non-christians as subhumans?
You should look up Sicut Dudum, Dum Diversas, and Sublimis Deus. Read them (or read about them) and tell me what you think.
The white man's burden? I'm not familiar with this terminology. Can you expound for me please?
Sure. It was the idea that the white man has the burden to "educate" the rest of the world our superior way of life, speicifically our religion (christianity) by enslaving other races and telling them that if they obey their white masters they will be rewarded in heaven.
Not really, because the moral guideline is established as absolute in the Bible. People's severe audacious misinterpretation of scripture is something totally different.
Oh, so we still can't eat shellfish? What about wearing clothing made of different types of fabrics? The shirt I am wearing now is made of cotton and polyester. Am I going to hell for it?
The reasons and history behind the Crusades is seriously in question as to what actually happened and what the motivations were. The Crusades were every bit political as it was a religious endeavor. There is too much to cover concerning the Crusades, so I'm going to defer to an article that I read fairly recently that attempts to rescue fact from fiction.
I'm not talking about the reason(s) behind the crusades. Do you or do you not agree that every man, woman, and child inhabiting the city of Jerusalem were slain by the christian crusaders during the first crusade? If so, then you've admitted that the christian guidelines you've referred to didn't seem to stop the crusaders from killing tens of thousands of innocents. What make you think these guidelines are going to make people good these days?
I mean that the gospel narrative is the guideline and that it is not subject to amendment and that it is as applicable today as it was when it was first penned.
Ok... so, am I going to hell for wearing clothing made of different types of fabric?
Seek out new people to "oppress?" Can you explain this to me, and please leave out the melodrama?
Oh, sure. First, it was the heathens. Then the jews. After Oliver Cromwell took over, the irish catholics were oppressed. Then the wise women were burned at the stake for witch craft. Then the muslims.
Fast forward in time.
Africans were regarded as subhuman (read the 3 I cited above) and enslaved. Then they were emancipated but they were still segregated. Then god didn't want them to be equal. Then god didn't want women to vote. Then Rock 'n Roll became the music of the devil.
Now, the gays are targeted by christians. Please don't even try to deny this. I've read enough church signs about how evil the gays are.
According to fringe Christians in America, during a very specific time. You are aware that Christians exist, and have always existed in other nations, right?
Again, it was an example, out of many, that this so-called christian moral guideline thingy is far from perfect.
Would you, then, call yourself a fringe christian for opposing evilution while advocating a world wide flood that left behind absolutely no evidence?
Look, we don't have to look far to see what I've been saying. Remember Rob? Your christian guidelines didn't seem to stop him from talking about things he knew nothing about. If anything, there should be a passage in the bible that forbids people from talking out of their asses to save the rest of us some dentist money... people like me cringe everytime we see something like this.
No, I don't remember that. Show in the Bible where God doesn't want women to vote. You seem to misunderstand culture and custom with religious beliefs.
You really want me to start citing the same bible passages people used back in the old days to justify their unwillingness to see women as equal?
That they are set so low that breaking it is virtually impossible, or that it has special clauses and amendments for why something doesn't really go against their own morals?
Oh? Such as...?
Then you are in agreement with Jesus' Golden Rule.
Um... jesus didn't come up with the golden rule. It existed long before jesus was ever born. And no, jesus did not invent the internet either.
Taz, its obvious that you don't have the faintest idea about the Christian perspective, otherwise, you wouldn't make these erroneous claims. You can't "buy" your way into heaven. The Bible is littered with things that clearly say otherwise. Before you knock the Bible, understand what it actually says. And if you still agree with your original sentiment, then at least you will be well-informed.
Hey, I used to be one of you. But don't take my word for it. Check out the following link.
I know what you are saying, but clearly christians aren't really doing what the bible says, like love thy neighbor and fucking leave the gays alone.
You seem to know the answer since you are making the claim, which I can guess means that you have evidence of this destruction.
Hmmm, I wonder what happened to all those mesoamericans after the spanish came...
How many times? I should add that Google doesn't make anyone smarter, and that knowledge and intelligence shouldn't be confused as the same thing.
Your friend buzsaw doesn't seem to agree with you on this.
Since this country is unambiguously borne under the umbrella of the Christian ethos, I don't think you are in any position to say otherwise.
Unfortunately... what happened to the first amendment?
I would translate it for you if I didn't strongly suspect that it would make a difference.
No problem. I have a feeling that that paragraph was just more evangelical stuff anyway.