www.godisimaginary.com (http://www.godisimaginary.com)

Watch some of the video proofs.

I find it amusing how religion is always built around ignorance. If people actually took the time to open their eyes and decide things for themselves rationally, rather than blindly following their parents and the masses...

Seriously, when a child is born into a religious family, do they really have a choice in the matter? Is this fair?

Even fucking Mennonites (or amish or hutterites, I don't remember) let their youths experience the outside world. They're given a choice between living in the modern world or the old way. These people have the right idea.

What say you Bill Keller? This may be considered a challenge to you.

*ObZ

"Stop spreading your Jewish lies."

-Keller to my friend (he wishes to remain anonymous)

He claims this is what he said to him outside of the studio. You decide.

I believe that God = Tomato

Hey, nobody can prove it wrong! It's the same God, except he's round and moist on the inside.

I've got a friend on the inside who claims he saw Keller go into his dressing room with what he claims to be sure was a transsexual.

Keep in mind he was drunk as a skunk at the time, but still, I could see it, couldn't you?

quote:Originally posted by Nephtys-Ra:

I've got a friend on the inside who claims he saw Keller go into his dressing room with what he claims to be sure was a transsexual.

Keep in mind he was drunk as a skunk at the time, but still, I could see it, couldn't you?

I think he does amps. Just look at that little weasel.

quote:Originally posted by Nephtys-Ra:

I've got a friend on the inside who claims he saw Keller go into his dressing room with what he claims to be sure was a transsexual.

Keep in mind he was drunk as a skunk at the time, but still, I could see it, couldn't you?

I believe Bill Keller was on his knees "praying" for the transexual's salvation.

What say you?

*ObZ

The entire physical world is imaginary.

quote:Originally posted by ObsdianZ:

I believe Bill Keller was on his knees "praying" for the transexual's salvation.

What say you?

*ObZ

I'll believe anything!

I think I'm finally ready for church.

Or maybe he was just taking Jesus into himself.

That's Hay-seuss.

As imaginary as my sense of insight, i'll wager.

And how are you so absolutely certain God is imaginary?

It could just as easially be that God exists, and just chooses not to prove her existence.



See, you tend to assume that since God doesn't perform any fucking miracles, or directly answer prayers, that God doesn't exist. In fact, it could just be that God is making a decision not to answer those, not to directly affect anything that's going on.

Say, that someone is like OMFG KAI LOCK THIS THREAD WTF, and I choose not to. In fact, I choose not to even post in the thread at all. It doesn't mean that I don't exist, it just means that I've chosen to not actually do anything about it. Much like God can still exist, without even deciding to choose to reveal that existence to anybody.

So sure, you can claim God doesn't exist because you haven't actually "seen" anything done by her, but still you can't actually prove that she does, or doesn't exist either way. Your "theory" is too flawed, it reminds me too much of hischool atheists who are like "OMFG GOD DOESNT EXIST LOL FAGZ"

quote:Originally posted by Rizzo in a box:

The entire physical world is imaginary.

Finally someone who understands something.

Saying 'God' doesn't exist is a bit vague, what about other transcendant entities otherwise known as the mass-psychic aura that envelopes the entire planet.

Among other things...

Actually, the older you get, and the more you look around at the big picture of life, the more difficult it is to believe that there isn't some guiding force or grand purpose to everything.

Personally, I've found religion on the whole to be pretty stupid. But some sort of god? My jury is still out on that one.

quote:Originally posted by Kai:

And how are you so absolutely certain God is imaginary?

It could just as easially be that God exists, and just chooses not to prove her existence.



See, you tend to assume that since God doesn't perform any fucking miracles, or directly answer prayers, that God doesn't exist. In fact, it could just be that God is making a decision not to answer those, not to directly affect anything that's going on.

Say, that someone is like OMFG KAI LOCK THIS THREAD WTF, and I choose not to. In fact, I choose not to even post in the thread at all. It doesn't mean that I don't exist, it just means that I've chosen to not actually do anything about it. Much like God can still exist, without even deciding to choose to reveal that existence to anybody.

So sure, you can claim God doesn't exist because you haven't actually "seen" anything done by her, but still you can't actually prove that she does, or doesn't exist either way. Your "theory" is too flawed, it reminds me too much of hischool atheists who are like "OMFG GOD DOESNT EXIST LOL FAGZ"

How about the idea of prayer? Browse through the site, there are a couple videos that deal with that topic.

If god doesn't choose to answer prayers, isn't this directly contradictory to what it says in the bible? I don't know the exact passage (it's in the video) but basically if you pray and you believe, then god should grant your wishes.

If we can't believe the bible, the word of god, then how can we believe in god? And translation differences are not an acceptable excuse.

*ObZ

quote:Originally posted by ObsdianZ:

How about the idea of prayer? Browse through the site, there are a couple videos that deal with that topic.

If god doesn't choose to answer prayers, isn't this directly contradictory to what it says in the bible? I don't know the exact passage (it's in the video) but basically if you pray and you believe, then god should grant your wishes.

If we can't believe the bible, the word of god, then how can we believe in god? And translation differences are not an acceptable excuse.

*ObZ

The Bible isn't the word of God. The Bible is the word of man, trying to interpret the word of God.

And again, I say that just because you choose to pray, doesn't mean that God is somehow obligated to answer it. If I pray for a fucking Lotus, there's not going to be one appearing in my driveway anytime soon.

quote:Originally posted by Kai:

And how are you so absolutely certain God is imaginary?

It could just as easially be that God exists, and just chooses not to prove her existence.



See, you tend to assume that since God doesn't perform any fucking miracles, or directly answer prayers, that God doesn't exist. In fact, it could just be that God is making a decision not to answer those, not to directly affect anything that's going on.

Say, that someone is like OMFG KAI LOCK THIS THREAD WTF, and I choose not to. In fact, I choose not to even post in the thread at all. It doesn't mean that I don't exist, it just means that I've chosen to not actually do anything about it. Much like God can still exist, without even deciding to choose to reveal that existence to anybody.

So sure, you can claim God doesn't exist because you haven't actually "seen" anything done by her, but still you can't actually prove that she does, or doesn't exist either way. Your "theory" is too flawed, it reminds me too much of hischool atheists who are like "OMFG GOD DOESNT EXIST LOL FAGZ"

you are Christian right? Isn't the basis of that religion jesus=god. Last I checked jesus had a dick, you refer to your god as "her". This is assuming you are Christian, if not, ignore this comment.

quote:Originally posted by pongsifu:

Isn't the basis of that religion jesus=god.

No, dumbass.



As I posted in the last GOD NOT REAL LOL thread,

quote:

And who are you to say a God is imaginary? You're just as stupid to blindly believe that the current state of science explains everything about reality. Read a bit about quantum mechanics or theoretical physics - we don't even know what reality is.

That's not to say I'm religious at all, but pull your head out of your ass.

quote:Originally posted by pongsifu:

you are Christian right? Isn't the basis of that religion jesus=god. Last I checked jesus had a dick, you refer to your god as "her". This is assuming you are Christian, if not, ignore this comment.

God is genderless, so I can refer to her however the fuck I want. Father is generally used because of male-dominated society.

I see myself as a white man with strong rasta roots and beliefs, not all but I agree with thier way of life and acknowlege and accept it as a way to model my life after.

Jah sees no color.

Avoid poisoning your body as much as possible.

Try to only eat food that is closely related to Ital foods. and stay pure of spirit and live a path of peace. I strive to live on this because I find it true....

quote:Originally posted by Kai:

The Bible isn't the word of God. The Bible is the word of man, trying to interpret the word of God.

And again, I say that just because you choose to pray, doesn't mean that God is somehow obligated to answer it. If I pray for a fucking Lotus, there's not going to be one appearing in my driveway anytime soon.

If the Bible is only an interpretation of god's word, then how can we take it as any sort of authority at all?

Who wrote the bible? Wouldn't they have been subject to all sorts of biases? As is anyone who revises, updates, etc, the bible?

If you accept that man is fallible, and that the bible is simply man's work, that means the bible is fallible. Therefore the bible cannot be relied upon at all.

Admittedly, the same could be said for scientific texts. But at least science generally coherent within itself and works in the real world.

*ObZ

quote:Originally posted by Kai:

God is genderless, so I can refer to her however the fuck I want. Father is generally used because of male-dominated society.

Ok the whole idea is that jesus is god. Jesus was a male. And if god is genderless, it would be referred to as "it". Calling something genderless "her" is just stupid. You have pent up feminine issues.

http://tinyurl.com/ybapoy

Someone should call Mr. Keller and pose as a TOTSE lawyer, telling him that we're suing him for spreading lies about his lawyers meeting with us.



***Assuming there actually are no TOTSE lawyers, which I'm nigh on 100% sure.

[This message has been edited by Auschwitz - Nazi Disneyland (edited 11-29-2006).]

quote:Originally posted by Auschwitz - Nazi Disneyland:

Someone should call Mr. Keller and pose as a TOTSE lawyer, telling him that we're suing him for spreading lies about his lawyers meeting with us.

lol, it would have to be someone very good at prank phone calls to make it convincing though.

quote:Originally posted by Kai:

God is genderless, so I can refer to her however the fuck I want. Father is generally used because of male-dominated society.

Gnostics (like me) believe God is both genders formed together in a divine union.

Makes more sense that way.

quote:Ok the whole idea is that jesus is god. Jesus was a male. And if god is genderless, it would be referred to as "it". Calling something genderless "her" is just stupid. You have pent up feminine issues.



You don't really understand the whole Jesus = God thing.

[This message has been edited by Rizzo in a box (edited 11-29-2006).]

I'm assuming his 1337 |-|aX0r "techs" are scanning my ports right about now...what should I do? Fuck it, Bel-Air...

quote:Originally posted by ObsdianZ:

Admittedly, the same could be said for scientific texts. But at least science generally coherent within itself and works in the real world.

*ObZ

Where did your other thread go, ass?

On this subject of god and jesus and all, the christian church and especially that of roman catholics has always flirted with polytheistic ideas around the whole trinity thing, as far as i understand it jesus was the son in the form of a human man however the spirit and god are genderless higher beings, im still unaware what the official interpritation of the trinity is, wether its one god in 3 parts or 3 gods in one part.

Also, the whole "you cant disprove god therefore he/she is as likely as anything!" argument wont stand up with many people as the laws of probability have quite an impact, many equate the trinity for example in probability with something like quantum theory however the predictions made by QT can be verified by people and are as accurate as to predicting the width of north America to the width of a human hair where as anything religious in the traditional sense can not be proven or disproven however we can also put it on the scale of probability WAY down the list.

I would highly suggest Richard dawkins or sam harris books to you all to read, they give some fascinating insight into the whole religion and science and theism arguments.

quote:prove her existence.

I'm a pantheist and view the world as God, but prefer the term "divine nature" because of all the connotations that the word "god" brings, and prefer to call myself a "monist" and an "atheist". But can I just ask this question, why are so many people so stupid as to think that if there was a personal god, it would be either male or female? It wouldn't need to be, for fuck sake.

[This message has been edited by Raw_Power (edited 11-29-2006).]

quote:Originally posted by ObsdianZ:

If the Bible is only an interpretation of god's word, then how can we take it as any sort of authority at all?



It is INSPIRED by god.

I will put it into an analogy. Imagine an artist paints a picture of a person. To say that the picture IS the person is obviously wrong. To say that it resembles the person is correct.

In this same way the bible could have been ...found, for lack of a better word. God inspired these people and they wrote down...

The authority is not what matters it is the faith, you either believe that this is the inspired word of God or you don't.

Who wrote the bible? Wouldn't they have been subject to all sorts of biases? As is anyone who revises, updates, etc, the bible?

If you accept that man is fallible, and that the bible is simply man's work, that means the bible is fallible. Therefore the bible cannot be relied upon at all.

I won't relay the argument you say below because you acknoledged that(And I agree with your counter-points), but the Bible , if inspired by God would not be inspired in words, it would be related in words, but what need would God have of language? The people who wrote the bible would have to write down as best they could what they felt of God's purpose.

Admittedly, the same could be said for scientific texts. But at least science generally coherent within itself and works in the real world.



However the Bible is NOT a scientific text, once again it is not evidence that matters, it is Faith.

I feel that it is wrong when people compare a religious text to a scientific one. Do you ever compare Socrates' Dialogues to a scientific text?

Once again a religious text doesn't seek to give evidence of a theory. A religion is not a theory , it holds itself to be true, and it takes faith on part of the believer to believe this.

If religion could be proved it would cease to be religion.

Also what you said earlier about prayer.

From my understanding of the bible it is not the prayer but the Faith that matters, "I tell you the truth,if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, "move from here to there" and it will move." [this is somwhere in matthew http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif)]

People may Believe in God but they do not have faith. Jesus was able cure and perform miracles because he had absolute unwavering faith that god would help him.

Regardless of the Objective truth,no matter there being a real God, faith is what matters. it is a moot point as to whether Religion is imaginary or not, reliable or not, the point is that it is something that people can believe.

Hope I didn't ramble too much.

quote:Originally posted by -Morb-:

Actually, the older you get, and the more you look around at the big picture of life, the more difficult it is to believe that there isn't some guiding force or grand purpose to everything.

Personally, I've found religion on the whole to be pretty stupid. But some sort of god? My jury is still out on that one.

Actually, the older you get, the less likely (statistically) you are to believe in God.

quote:Originally posted by JesuitArtiste:

It is INSPIRED by god.

I will put it into an analogy. Imagine an artist paints a picture of a person. To say that the picture IS the person is obviously wrong. To say that it resembles the person is correct.

In this same way the bible could have been ...found, for lack of a better word. God inspired these people and they wrote down...

The authority is not what matters it is the faith, you either believe that this is the inspired word of God or you don't.

Who wrote the bible? Wouldn't they have been subject to all sorts of biases? As is anyone who revises, updates, etc, the bible?

If you accept that man is fallible, and that the bible is simply man's work, that means the bible is fallible. Therefore the bible cannot be relied upon at all.

I won't relay the argument you say below because you acknoledged that(And I agree with your counter-points), but the Bible , if inspired by God would not be inspired in words, it would be related in words, but what need would God have of language? The people who wrote the bible would have to write down as best they could what they felt of God's purpose.

Admittedly, the same could be said for scientific texts. But at least science generally coherent within itself and works in the real world.



However the Bible is NOT a scientific text, once again it is not evidence that matters, it is Faith.

I feel that it is wrong when people compare a religious text to a scientific one. Do you ever compare Socrates' Dialogues to a scientific text?

Once again a religious text doesn't seek to give evidence of a theory. A religion is not a theory , it holds itself to be true, and it takes faith on part of the believer to believe this.

If religion could be proved it would cease to be religion.

Also what you said earlier about prayer.

From my understanding of the bible it is not the prayer but the Faith that matters, "I tell you the truth,if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, "move from here to there" and it will move." [this is somwhere in matthew http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif)]

People may Believe in God but they do not have faith. Jesus was able cure and perform miracles because he had absolute unwavering faith that god would help him.

Regardless of the Objective truth,no matter there being a real God, faith is what matters. it is a moot point as to whether Religion is imaginary or not, reliable or not, the point is that it is something that people can believe.

Hope I didn't ramble too much.

If youre a christian your view on the bible is simple, it is the exact word of god. This is the same with the other religious texts such as for Islam and the Jewish faith.

Moderates are blinded by their own irrationality so much that they know deep down its all a crock of shit and that really the bible is just another text and isnt the divine word of god, fundamentalists who HAVE read the bible know what their religion is about and in the bibles case god and his followers are evil, vindictive, sadistic, racist, masogonistic, homophobic and a whole host of other things.

If you believe in the christian faith then you buy into the whole idea that the bible is the divine word of god, thats the faith, if you reduce the bible to the status of other texts then it becomes just another book, an important one but non the less just another book which shouldnt be worshiped.

quote:Originally posted by among_the_living:

If youre a christian your view on the bible is simple, it is the exact word of god. This is the same with the other religious texts such as for Islam and the Jewish faith.

Perhaps, but god himself does not directly take up pen to paper. It is through the medium of men, and as such while god, inspired ,it is not written directly by God. At the very least this is my interpretation

I feel that the view it is the direct word of god is an enforced view used to control relious believers. We should be able to get past this now, however we ca all see that people are just as easy to manipulate as they were hundreds of years ago (or however far you want to go back.)



Moderates are blinded by their own irrationality so much that they know deep down its all a crock of shit and that really the bible is just another text and isnt the divine word of god,

Being flexible doesn't suggest being wrong in my mind. Being able to accpet other views, alternative interpretations seems to me to be a strength. I'm sure that many "moderates" have far more faith than any fundies.

fundamentalists who HAVE read the bible know what their religion is about and in the bibles case god and his followers are evil, vindictive, sadistic, racist, masogonistic, homophobic and a whole host of other things.

I will agree this is the case in the Old Testament (Which admittedly I haven't read that much of.) but all of this is more or less discarded in the NT.

besides, following the 2 commandments should be enought to prevent any of that. And even failing that the OT 10 commandments should pose a barrier to any that are believers.



If you believe in the christian faith then you buy into the whole idea that the bible is the divine word of god, thats the faith, if you reduce the bible to the status of other texts then it becomes just another book, an important one but non the less just another book which shouldnt be worshiped.[/QUOTE]



Saying it is just a text does reduce it to the status of other texts. However it is the faith that is inspired. It doesn't matter what the book is, I could believe in the dictionary, it is the Faith that matters.

This is a little jumbled , I haave to leave soon...

"but all of this is more or less discarded in the NT."

Read the bible.

If we go by the old certainly, AND the new Jesus and god expect us to keep slaves, it says so right in the old AND new, they just state not to beat them too badly that their eyes or teeth fall out or else we have to set them free.

Jesus on the most part doesnt retract any of the word of god from the old, infact in much of the new testament it ramifies the word of the old, in the NT Jesus states "whom,ever does not worship me let you bring him forth and slay him before me" i dont think thats the direct quote but it does say that phrase.

If you were to take your morals from the Bible as a whole, old and new then we should be living in a society where working on a sunday is punishable by stoning, homosexuality and bestiality by stoning for the man AND beast, cheating, women not being a virgin on the wedding night, if your children speak back to you....all of these ands a much longer list that require execution.

I believe that aquinas and augustine read the new testament, and the messages within it and they both believed that herretics should be executed, in one of their cases they believed they should also be tortured....now, both of these men had read the new testament and verified their beliefs FROM the new and old testaments....people cherry pick the good jesus from the bad jesus and the good god from the bad god.

Moderates arent the way forward, they preach understanding and respecting other peopels views and faiths.....this cloaks fundamentalists because as we know they dont respect anyone elses views or beliefs, everyone but them is wrong, moderates look at something like a suicide bomber asnd cant believe he or she would do such a thing, but i assure you....this behaviour is perfectly understandable, these people arent stupid....theyre engineers and architects and they HAVE read their holy texts and they know what it says inside those books.

Im not saying that religion is the only reason to engage in this suicide, but you can see just by reading how someone would justify that. Fundamentalists on both sides have read their texts back to front and know that it preaches hate, i assure you that if we lived in a society according to the "morals of the bible" then we would find execution an everyday occurence for even the most mundane such as working on the sabbeth.

I take the word faith and belief as something that you believe in without the need for evidence, now, if you listen to someone who has a faith then their reasons as a moderate break down..."i wouldnt want to live in a world without this" "we derive our morals from religion" and "it gives my life so much meaning" "i do good work due to my religion"....fundamentalists on the other hand believe it because their bible says so and thats it, now imagine taking this away from religion for a second....say i believed there was a giant diamond in my yard....i dont have proof yet i go out every weekend and dig, i say its because it gives my life meaning, or that i wouldnt want to live in a world without this giant diamond! if anyone says this theyre a lunatic or an idiot however shift it over to religion and no one can question.

Religion is dangerous especially int odays climate where especially int he US something like 44% of the electorate believe jesus will swoop down within the next 50 years and save them all and the president is electing "common sense judges who know that we derive morals from the word of god"......think about that, the most obvious question is well, what about those that derive their common sense from thor, or other gods....it isnt like anyone has proven the existance of god and dispriven thor yet here we have the leader of the worlds last super power preaching christianity and impeeding such vital research as setm cell research, i wont go too deep into it but there are 150 cells in the 3-5 day old "human" and there are 100,000 in the brain of a fly, and if we go by their word every time the president scratches his nose he is engages in a holocaust of "potential human life"



[This message has been edited by among_the_living (edited 11-29-2006).]

You realize that if religion were gone, the opiate masses would just find something else to blindly follow.

quote:Originally posted by nametag:

You realize that if religion were gone, the opiate masses would just find something else to blindly follow.

I agree. They have.

quote:Originally posted by Viraljimmy:

I agree. They have.

Consumerism is the new opiate of the masses.

quote:Originally posted by nametag:

You realize that if religion were gone, the opiate masses would just find something else to blindly follow.

I dont see why though, if we find replacements for secular people in the traditions of religion such as marking important times in lives, birth, death, marriage and such then i dont see why people would need religion.

The fact of the matter is the only people going to paradise are the findamentalists, and even they wont because they havent killed a single gay person, or they work on a sunday or something.

Religion is out dated and isnt needed in society and i believe a society without religion would be better off, something like 95% of people in sweden openly think theres no god and their standard of living far out weighs that of the US or the UK, on the whole secular society is a better functioning society.

quote:Originally posted by Kai:



It could just as easially be that God exists, and just chooses not to prove HER existance

God damn it BITCH SHUT THE FUCK UP!!!!! I hate women like you..........you and deadendgirl.

quote:Originally posted by THE ONLY SANE MAN:

God damn it BITCH SHUT THE FUCK UP!!!!! I hate women like you..........you and deadendgirl.

Kai is a guy....

And whats to suggest god is a man? the only reason it is seen as so is because of the role of women in christianity which admitedly is a good reason heh.

Women arent even second or third class citizens in chrsitianity and in Gods eyes.

One story that springs to mind is when a guest wsas staying at a mans house and some people came and wanted to take the guest away to harm him, the owner of the house offered the men his own daughter to "do with as they wish" namely...rape and harm but not to being hard to the guest who was after all, male.

So....the argument for god being a male, or genderless is higher than that of it being female kai.

quote:Women arent even second or third class citizens in chrsitianity and in Gods eyes.



BS. Mary Magdelan was one of Jesus' closest disciples, if not his closest.

quote:Originally posted by Rizzo in a box:

BS. Mary Magdelan was one of Jesus' closest disciples, if not his closest.

If you want me to seriously quote from scripture to prove my point that god was the biggest misogynist of all time im very happy to do so. Read my one example i posted about the family for instance.

Okay, jesus does to SOME extent take back what God said and did in the old testament but Jesus was FAR from moral and if you read alot of things from him he didnt think much of women also.

Just because you can view MM from some parts of the NT and think, wait, thats a woman and he liked her he must think hightly of women then youre deluded.

quote:Originally posted by Rizzo in a box:

BS. Mary Magdelan was one of Jesus' closest disciples, if not his closest.

Yeah, but read the rest of the Bible. The OT's pretty bad, but I know everyone will just say "well NOW it's the New Testament we're supposed to be looking at!"... but that's pretty bad too! Paul's letters especially show a contempt for women. 1 Corinthians 11:3, 1 Corinthians 11:7 - 9, 1 Corinthians 14:34 - 35, Ephesians 5:22 - 25, Colossians 3:18, 1 Timothy 2:9 - 15, Romans 7:2, Titus 2:3 - 5, 1 Peter 3:1 - 3... the list goes on and on, and that (http://members.shaw.ca/tfrisen/Bbl/Sexism/Sexism.html)'s not even half of them! (http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/god15.htm)

[This message has been edited by Twisted_Ferret (edited 11-30-2006).]

quote:Originally posted by among_the_living:

If you want me to seriously quote from scripture to prove my point that god was the biggest misogynist of all time im very happy to do so. Read my one example i posted about the family for instance.

Okay, jesus does to SOME extent take back what God said and did in the old testament but Jesus was FAR from moral and if you read alot of things from him he didnt think much of women also.

Just because you can view MM from some parts of the NT and think, wait, thats a woman and he liked her he must think hightly of women then youre deluded.

I'm not talking about the NT, I'm talking about Gnostic texts that were banned from the Bible because they were considered heretical by the authorities. Why? Because they were trying to twist religion in to something to control the masses. And it worked.

The God of the OT isn't the "true" God, so to speak. It's fairly apparent if you just read through the OT that there is an extreme change in personality in God. Jesus was extremely moral, to say other wise is ridiculous.

quote:Yeah, but read the rest of the Bible. The OT's pretty bad, but I know everyone will just say "well NOW it's the New Testament we're supposed to be looking at!"... but that's pretty bad too! Paul's letters especially show a contempt for women. 1 Corinthians 11:3, 1 Corinthians 11:7 - 9, 1 Corinthians 14:34 - 35, Ephesians 5:22 - 25, Colossians 3:18, 1 Timothy 2:9 - 15, Romans 7:2, Titus 2:3 - 5, 1 Peter 3:1 - 3... the list goes on and on, and that's not even half of them!



Yes, Paul could be a dick, in fact he was a dick to Mary because she was so close to Jesus and that made him feel all inferior like. Paul was not perfect, he was human just like the rest of us.

quote:Originally posted by Twisted_Ferret:

Yeah, but read the rest of the Bible. The OT's pretty bad, but I know everyone will just say "well NOW it's the New Testament we're supposed to be looking at!"... but that's pretty bad too! Paul's letters especially show a contempt for women. 1 Corinthians 11:3, 1 Corinthians 11:7 - 9, 1 Corinthians 14:34 - 35, Ephesians 5:22 - 25, Colossians 3:18, 1 Timothy 2:9 - 15, Romans 7:2, Titus 2:3 - 5, 1 Peter 3:1 - 3... the list goes on and on, and that (http://members.shaw.ca/tfrisen/Bbl/Sexism/Sexism.html)'s not even half of them! (http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/god15.htm)



Romans and Paul also have masses and masses of homophobic refferences in them and basically say you should stone any homosexual to death, theyre a really nasty collection of texts.

"Jesus was extremely moral, to say other wise is ridiculous."

Yes, stoning to death children who talk back to parents or question is moral isnt it.

Sure he has the golden rule but jesus can be anything by moral, just read the sermon on the mount

quote:Originally posted by among_the_living:

"Jesus was extremely moral, to say other wise is ridiculous."

Yes, stoning to death children who talk back to parents or question is moral isnt it.

Sure he has the golden rule but jesus can be anything by moral, just read the sermon on the mount

Please show me where Jesus said to stone children.

quote:Originally posted by Rizzo in a box:

Please show me where Jesus said to stone children.

Jesus didnt preach what "god" has preached that the stoning of children who question or talk back should be done but he didnt ever say "oh wait a sec, dont do this"

He did however preach intolerance and slavery and jesus in some cases is god as a human reprisentation depending on what you believe about the trinity, so depending on what or who you believe jesus to be, or god to be, he is either indirectly allowing us to do these things, or think that it is okay to do such things or...directly telling us to/think it is okay.

[This message has been edited by among_the_living (edited 11-30-2006).]

quote:Originally posted by among_the_living:

Jesus didnt preach what "god" has preached that the stoning of children who question or talk back should be done but he didnt ever say "oh wait a sec, dont do this"

He did however preach intollerance and slavery and jesus in some cases is god as a human reprisentation depending on what you believe about the trinity so depending on what you believe jesus to be and god to be he is eithe rindirectly allowing us to do these things, or...directly telling us to.

Wow, okay, before I try to reply to that, edit your post and clean up your spelling, I can't understand what you're saying.

quote:Originally posted by Rizzo in a box:

Wow, okay, before I try to reply to that, edit your post and clean up your spelling, I can't understand what you're saying.

It's not hard to comprehend.

quote:Originally posted by among_the_living:

Jesus didn't preach what "god" has preached: that the stoning of children who question or talk back should be done - but he never said "oh wait a sec, don't do this"

He did, however, preach intolerance and slavery. And in some cases Jesus is god as a human representation, depending on what you believe about the trinity. So depending on what you believe Jesus and god to be, he is either indirectly allowing us to do these things, or...directly telling us to.

quote:Originally posted by Rizzo in a box:

Wow, okay, before I try to reply to that, edit your post and clean up your spelling, I can't understand what you're saying.

I will be the first to admit that I'm not good at spelling and such, I never really have been but the fact you cant understand it is amazing to me, I'm guessing you can but you're just trying to be condescending or something.

I will go up and edit it though, and see if you actually HAVE an answer or were just trying to seem like a smart ass http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif)

[This message has been edited by among_the_living (edited 11-30-2006).]

If as Kai says, a God is transcendent and impersonal and chooses not to impact in our lives, then such a belief in God is irrelevant to our lives.

quote:Originally posted by Raw_Power:

I'm a pantheist and view the world as God, but prefer the term "divine nature" because of all the connotations that the word "god" brings, and prefer to call myself a "monist" and an "atheist". But can I just ask this question, why are so many people so stupid as to think that if there was a personal god, it would be either male or female? It wouldn't need to be, for fuck sake.



The more I read your posts, the more and more I like you as a poster. I give this post a boner and one sagging ball.

quote:Originally posted by Kooper0:

If as Kai says, a God is transcendent and impersonal and chooses not to impact in our lives, then such a belief in God is irrelevant to our lives.

Kai was saying that a God could be such.

Like Raw, I'm big on the pantheist view that any God that is, is All that is. From holding that view, I've found that it does bring comfort to me in that all things are connected and are working towards an end; whether it's some sort of rapture shit, or a peaceful slumber in death. Essentially, there is SOMETHING going on, and it's something good.

quote:Jesus didnt preach what "god" has preached that the stoning of children who question or talk back should be done but he didnt ever say "oh wait a sec, dont do this"



He said all the laws of Moses didn't apply anymore.

quote:He did however preach intolerance and slavery and jesus in some cases is god as a human reprisentation depending on what you believe about the trinity, so depending on what or who you believe jesus to be, or god to be, he is either indirectly allowing us to do these things, or think that it is okay to do such things or...directly telling us to/think it is okay.



No, Jesus preached love, for Jew and Gentile alike. And personally, slavery wouldn't be a problem if it was done out of love. I'm sure you'll find though, that any motivation for having a slave does not coincide with love.

Thank you for cleaning up your post. I did understand it before, at least somewhat, but I wanted to make sure I actually knew what you were saying.

quote:Originally posted by Rizzo in a box:

No, Jesus preached love, for Jew and Gentile alike. And personally, slavery wouldn't be a problem if it was done out of love. I'm sure you'll find though, that any motivation for having a slave does not coincide with love.

Thank you for cleaning up your post. I did understand it before, at least somewhat, but I wanted to make sure I actually knew what you were saying.

Jesus says you can keep slaves just "don't beat them so hard their eyes or teeth fall out" because then you have to set them free.

Also Jesus clearly states in the the Gospel of Matthew that He came not to abolish the law, but to fulfil it.

Jesus also explicitly upholds the law of Moses, rather than abolishing it (5:17-20; 22:35-40;

So in Matthew, not in any other gospel, we have Jesus saying he has not come to dissolve the law but to fulfil it. And that no part of the law will disappear....

[This message has been edited by among_the_living (edited 12-01-2006).]

quote:Originally posted by among_the_living:

Jesus says you can keep slaves just "don't beat them so hard their eyes or teeth fall out" because then you have to set them free.

Also Jesus clearly states in the the Gospel of Matthew that He came not to abolish the law, but to fulfil it.

Back up your first statement.

Jesus quite clearly stated that the laws of Moses no longer apply. Don't make me take out my Bible. I'll beat you with it. http://www.totse.com/bbs/tongue.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/tongue.gif)

I should just start memorizing the damn thing.

[This message has been edited by Rizzo in a box (edited 12-01-2006).]

quote:Originally posted by Rizzo in a box:

Back up your first statement.

Jesus quite clearly stated that the laws of Moses no longer apply. Don't make me take out my Bible. I'll beat you with it. http://www.totse.com/bbs/tongue.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/tongue.gif)

I should just start memorizing the damn thing.



Well...go look up the gospel of mathiew, he clearly states that he isnt here to dissolve the law of moses but to fulfil it.

And on the slaves thing.

"When a man strikes the eye of his slave, male or female, and destroys it, he shall let the slave go free for the eye's sake."Exodus 21: 1-27

Jesus never once refuted this, nor any other laws of moses, as said in mathew, if you go read he says he is here to fulfil them.

quote:Originally posted by among_the_living:

Well...go look up the gospel of mathiew, he clearly states that he isnt here to dissolve the law of moses but to fulfil it.

And on the slaves thing.

"When a man strikes the eye of his slave, male or female, and destroys it, he shall let the slave go free for the eye's sake."Exodus 21: 1-27

Jesus never once refuted this, nor any other laws of moses, as said in mathew, if you go read he says he is here to fulfil them.

You do realize that Matthew is not the only book in the New Testament, right? And fulfilling it doesn't mean everyone else has to follow it.

I'll find the verse where Jesus talks about the law of Moses, I think it's in John. I'll edit this post when I find it.

This isn't the verse that I was talking about, but it will work. This is from John(I'm copying this from my bible):

quote:

The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group and said to Jesus, "Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?" They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.

But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, "If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her."



[This message has been edited by Rizzo in a box (edited 12-01-2006).]

quote:Originally posted by Rizzo in a box:

You do realize that Matthew is not the only book in the New Testament, right? And fulfilling it doesn't mean everyone else has to follow it.

I'll find the verse where Jesus talks about the law of Moses, I think it's in John. I'll edit this post when I find it.

So now you're cherry picking between books, you cant change the views of Jesus between books, then it shows that they're totally inconsistent.

And you have yet to go up against my other retort of if pople dont follow jesus they may be murdered, jesus says this.

As seen, Jesus recognized the authority of the law in his life and taught others to keep the law (Lk. 10: 25-28). Jesus instructed his disciples to obey the law (Matt. 23: 2, 3). Christ defended the law and severely condemned those who perverted the Hebrew scripture (Mk. 7: 7-13; Matt. 23: 16-22).

Thats also in mark as well as Mathiew

"For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled" (vs. 18).



[This message has been edited by among_the_living (edited 12-01-2006).]

quote:Originally posted by Rizzo in a box:

You do realize that Matthew is not the only book in the New Testament, right? And fulfilling it doesn't mean everyone else has to follow it.

I'll find the verse where Jesus talks about the law of Moses, I think it's in John. I'll edit this post when I find it.

This isn't the verse that I was talking about, but it will work. This is from John(I'm copying this from my bible):



The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group and said to Jesus, "Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?" They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.

But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, "If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her."





Jesus wanted all to follow the law however as humans can not be without sin he didnt see fit to have all of them kill that woman when all of them will have sinned.

Jesus followed and wanted others to follow the law, look at all my quotes also.

""But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me" (Luke 19.27)""

And the ones in my other reply. Cherrypicking the good from the bad doesnt deter from the fact jesus was sent to fulfil the law but realised men can not be without sin and died to forgive all their sins, and the original sin of the apple thing.

If you follow the bible you should be out, even by the word of jesus killing non believers and homosexuals.

There are a lot of inconsistencies in the Bible at a first, superficial glance. When taken into context, however, it becomes much clearer.

quote:And you have yet to go up against my other retort of if pople dont follow jesus they may be murdered, jesus says this.



I highly doubt that.

quote:

"For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled" (vs. 18).



And Jesus fulfilled it, so now we don't have to follow it. Get it?

I'll address the other verses as I get to them.

quote:Originally posted by Rizzo in a box:

There are a lot of inconsistencies in the Bible at a first, superficial glance. When taken into context, however, it becomes much clearer.

And Jesus fulfilled it, so now we don't have to follow it. Get it?

I'll address the other verses as I get to them.

"I highly doubt that."

""But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me" (Luke 19.27)""

quote:Originally posted by among_the_living:

"I highly doubt that."

""But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me" (Luke 19.27)""

Yes, that's not people who just don't believe in Jesus, but people of the Devil. Literally people whom God made(I guess) that would never follow Jesus. They would be shown the light and yet they would still turn away. If they can never find God, then they will always sin and always be evil.

Would you mind putting the whole verse into context though, please? It's obvious Jesus was talking about something else before that. Maybe that could shed some light, as well.

quote:Originally posted by Rizzo in a box:

Yes, that's not people who just don't believe in Jesus, but people of the Devil. Literally people whom God made(I guess) that would never follow Jesus. They would be shown the light and yet they would still turn away. If they can never find God, then they will always sin and always be evil.

Would you mind putting the whole verse into context though, please? It's obvious Jesus was talking about something else before that. Maybe that could shed some light, as well.

If he did mean this why didnt they write it as this, or, jesus articulate this? he is meant to be intelligent.

This whole thing is a lie though, its a modified parable of the man and his followers which mathiew changed to just 3.

One of many MANY times the books of the bible contradict themselves.

[This message has been edited by among_the_living (edited 12-01-2006).]

quote:Originally posted by Rizzo in a box:

And Jesus fulfilled it, so now we don't have to follow it. Get it?

But heaven and earth haven't passed. http://www.totse.com/bbs/confused.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/confused.gif)

quote:Originally posted by Twisted_Ferret:

Originally posted by Rizzo in a box:

And Jesus fulfilled it, so now we don't have to follow it. Get it?

But heaven and earth haven't passed. http://www.totse.com/bbs/confused.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/confused.gif)

Not in a purely physical sense, but who's to say Jesus didn't mean it in a metaphorical sense? I really need more context to explain it better.

Not that my explanation is the right one, it's just that my interpretations usually make more sense to people.

quote:Originally posted by Rizzo in a box:

Not in a purely physical sense, but who's to say Jesus didn't mean it in a metaphorical sense? I really need more context to explain it better.

Not that my explanation is the right one, it's just that my interpretations usually make more sense to people.

So some parts of the bible are literal now and some metaphorical?

This is why its all so WARPED, everyone picking and chosing their own passages to suit their vision of how god should be and how the bible is "right"

quote:Originally posted by among_the_living:

So some parts of the bible are literal now and some metaphorical?

This is why its all so WARPED, everyone picking and chosing their own passages to suit their vision of how god should be and how the bible is "right"

What the fuck? Of course some are metaphorical, they're called PARABLES. Of course people are going to interpret things differently! FFS, people interpret the Constitution tweleve ways from Sunday and that's entirely literal! Are you kidding me?

quote:Originally posted by Rizzo in a box:

What the fuck? Of course some are metaphorical, they're called PARABLES. Of course people are going to interpret things differently! FFS, people interpret the Constitution tweleve ways from Sunday and that's entirely literal! Are you kidding me?

You criticise me on spelling then go and put "tweleve" *shakes head*

Anyway, that's my exact point and you seem to be missing it, how can one buy into the Judaeo-Christian faith when the Bible is as it is and this is supposed to be the best book on the matter.

Fundamentalists and literalists take it all as hard fact where as moderates look at it as more of a symbolic metaphorical text.

Therefore, lets imagine that the Adam and Eve story is a metaphorical text, Jesus also supposedly died for THEIR original sin, which means Jesus died for a sin that wasn't even committed, the whole Jesus on the cross thing is core to the belief so that cant be taken as a metaphor usually.

The problem with picking and choosing is just this, the warped beliefs some people can hold and then quote random verses from the bible to justify those beliefs. Which is my argument.

How can you separate fiction from fact when the whole bible is up for interpretation on every single point in there as either fact or some sort of metaphor for something else, how do we know the entire use of God and Jesus aren't metaphors?

What it is to be rational human beings, looking at evidence and fact and weighting up a persons reasons and then deciding on THOSE is what's important....the truth, not some text hats neither here nor there which may bring comfort (in SOME places if you fish them out) but certainly not truth.

Sorry I took so damned long to reply, I've been working or at college for the last few days, so I haven't had much time.



[QUOTE]Originally posted by among_the_living:

"but all of this is more or less discarded in the NT."

Read the bible.

If we go by the old certainly, AND the new Jesus and god expect us to keep slaves, it says so right in the old AND new, they just state not to beat them too badly that their eyes or teeth fall out or else we have to set them free.

Jesus on the most part doesnt retract any of the word of god from the old, infact in much of the new testament it ramifies the word of the old, in the NT Jesus states "whom,ever does not worship me let you bring him forth and slay him before me" i dont think thats the direct quote but it does say that phrase.

"One of them, an expert of the law, tested him with this question: "Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?"

Jesus replied: "'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbour as yourself.' The Law and the prophets hang on these two commandments." Matthew 23:35-41

The greatest commandments are these. Regardless of what else is said it is THESE that are the greatest commandments. To love God would be to follow the commandments, and the second greatest, and by extension the greatest is to to love your neigbour as yourself. No matter how many men are slain for God it is These commandments that matter. Would you wish yourself slain? So you would not wish another slain. Would you wish to be stolen from? So you do not wish to steal.

I do agree however that the Bible is more thna a little garbled, there are several times when something quite abhorrent is said, or ,for example, somewhere in Acts a man sells his land, but keeps some of the money behind for himself. I find this quite prudent, yet Peter knows this and the man is struck dead when he lies. The same happens to his wife.

If you were to take your morals from the Bible as a whole, old and new then we should be living in a society where working on a sunday is punishable by stoning, homosexuality and bestiality by stoning for the man AND beast, cheating, women not being a virgin on the wedding night, if your children speak back to you....all of these ands a much longer list that require execution.

I coul repeat the above quote, but lete's face it, it's worn itself pretty thin over the years.

However Luke 6:32 onward,

" If you love those who love you , what credit is that to you? Even sinners love those who love them. And if you do good to those that do good to you, what credit is that to you? ....

....But love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to recieve anything back...

... Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful."

Also Luke 6: 37 onward,

"Do not judge and you will not be judged. Do not condemn and you will not be condemned. Forgive and you will be forgiven."

I can't find the final quote that I was going to use, but I'm guessing that the idea of he who is without sin being the one who can judge sin.

I believe the story goes that the pharisees came to Jesus with prostitute and asked if they should stone her, Jesus replied that the one without sin should cast the first stone. I believ that someone may have posted it above.

But in anycase, what I mean with all these meaningless quotes is that we should not be in the position to judge. That we do is because we cannot count on all people to exist together peacefully, however if we judge it should be with mercy.

I cannot counter argue all the points in the bible that contradict what I am saying, what I am giving is My interpretation. However if anyone treats someone else in a negative way they should expect this to come back to them, in the same way anyone who uses the bible as a way to justify being harmful towards another is ignoring the greatest commandements.

Or at least this is MY take on it.

I Believe that aquinas and augustine read the new testament, and the messages within it and they both believed that herretics should be executed, in one of their cases they believed they should also be tortured....now, both of these men had read the new testament and verified their beliefs FROM the new and old testaments....people cherry pick the good jesus from the bad jesus and the good god from the bad god.

I'm more or less assuming that this is what I'm doing. And if that is ther interpreation of the bible then who am I to tell them they're wrong.

but... They ARE wrong. http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif)

Moderates arent the way forward, they preach understanding and respecting other peopels views and faiths.....this cloaks fundamentalists because as we know they dont respect anyone elses views or beliefs, everyone but them is wrong, moderates look at something like a suicide bomber asnd cant believe he or she would do such a thing, but i assure you....this behaviour is perfectly understandable, these people arent stupid....theyre engineers and architects and they HAVE read their holy texts and they know what it says inside those books.

I can't comment on any other Holy Books, I've only just started with my desire to read the bible, but in my mind the only people that find death and destruction in what Jesus says are those LOOKING for something violent.

Some people are natural fuck-ups. It's the way it is. It is obvious to me that we shouldn't use the bible as an excusefor violence.

As for other , like I said I haven't read them yet. But I will.

Im not saying that religion is the only reason to engage in this suicide, but you can see just by reading how someone would justify that. Fundamentalists on both sides have read their texts back to front and know that it preaches hate, i assure you that if we lived in a society according to the "morals of the bible" then we would find execution an everyday occurence for even the most mundane such as working on the sabbeth.

Jesus' disciples didn't always observe the sabbath, Jesus himself often healed on the sabbath. The point is that doing bad on the sabbat, (or any day) is wrong, but how can it be wrong to do right?

Jesus was pointing out the foolishness of the sadducees and pharisees.

I take the word faith and belief as something that you believe in without the need for evidence, now, if you listen to someone who has a faith then their reasons as a moderate break down..."i wouldnt want to live in a world without this" "we derive our morals from religion" and "it gives my life so much meaning" "i do good work due to my religion"....fundamentalists on the other hand believe it because their bible says so and thats it, now imagine taking this away from religion for a second....say i believed there was a giant diamond in my yard....i dont have proof yet i go out every weekend and dig, i say its because it gives my life meaning, or that i wouldnt want to live in a world without this giant diamond! if anyone says this theyre a lunatic or an idiot however shift it over to religion and no one can question.

Who's to say that the diamond isn't there? There may be no evidence for it being there , but it may.

You may be considered an idiot , bvut how many people would object if it caused you to do good? If the man looking for his diamond was so assured that he was quite free to help people, lend with expecting back , because he was so sure that the diamond would be there and he would find it. Is this bad?

Religion is dangerous especially int odays climate where especially int he US something like 44% of the electorate believe jesus will swoop down within the next 50 years and save them all and the president is electing "common sense judges who know that we derive morals from the word of god"......think about that, the most obvious question is well, what about those that derive their common sense from thor, or other gods....it isnt like anyone has proven the existance of god and dispriven thor yet here we have the leader of the worlds last super power preaching christianity and impeeding such vital research as setm cell research, i wont go too deep into it but there are 150 cells in the 3-5 day old "human" and there are 100,000 in the brain of a fly, and if we go by their word every time the president scratches his nose he is engages in a holocaust of "potential human life"





Reducing an argument to absurdity does not make it wrong. I believe that that teaching is more of a catholic and fundamentalist teaching.

Such people, however, are probaly not fit to rule. If this is the case then the people should do something. It is supposedly a democracy.

But maybe it's not.



[This message has been edited by JesuitArtiste (edited 12-01-2006).]

quote:Originally posted by among_the_living:

Jesus wanted all to follow the law however as humans can not be without sin he didnt see fit to have all of them kill that woman when all of them will have sinned.

Jesus followed and wanted others to follow the law, look at all my quotes also.

"'Love your neighbour as yourself.' The Law and the prophets hang on these two commandments."

""But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me" (Luke 19.27)""

This is a parable. Jesus does not say this directly. I will read on it some more however and get back to you.

And the ones in my other reply. Cherrypicking the good from the bad doesnt deter from the fact jesus was sent to fulfil the law but realised men can not be without sin and died to forgive all their sins, and the original sin of the apple thing.

If you follow the bible you should be out, even by the word of jesus killing non believers and homosexuals.[/QUOTE]



Another theory could be that the Bible itself is a test. It blatently states that the greatest commandment is love. Loving God is a given.

I also have yet to see where Jesus directly states to kill non-bleievers an homos.

Also, Jesus states that he came here for the Unbelievers and the Sinners. Not to slay them , but to save them.

Of course later on, Jesus is gonna fuck us up nice'n'good.

The bible IS full of contradictions, and variations and so forth. But my undertanding is that under this there area lot of Good messages.

quote:Originally posted by JesuitArtiste:



Another theory could be that the Bible itself is a test. It blatently states that the greatest commandment is love. Loving God is a given.

I also have yet to see where Jesus directly states to kill non-bleievers an homos.

Also, Jesus states that he came here for the Unbelievers and the Sinners. Not to slay them , but to save them.

Of course later on, Jesus is gonna fuck us up nice'n'good.

The bible IS full of contradictions, and variations and so forth. But my undertanding is that under this there area lot of Good messages.

I was having this kind of conversation with a christian i know the other day and shebasically put it as this.

"jesus came to earth and died for all of our sins because as human no one can follow moses law (old testament law) perfectly"

And, ofcourse my next question was:

"So what happened to God between the old and new?....the only reason he can put up with all this sin is because of jesus, but deep down he is STILL a hate filled deity?"

And she didnt really have an answer.

My point is, if you follow the bible then God as he is presented to us is a pretty unpleasant bully however christians seem to bypass this and just preach Jesus, however, as i understand it it is a monotheistic religion and Jesus is the "son of god" yet they follow the teachings of Jesus rather than the teachings of their God.

I may have perceived this completely wrongly, but my observation of the trinity is that it is the father son and holy ghost (spirit) and all 3 are one and one is all three, which is flirting with polytheism anyway but Jesus is STILL the son, not the perceived super intelligence in the sky - God