|
waitwhatno posted:I'm sorry to disturb your important discussion about popery and who dipped his dick in Mary, but I have a question: We don't want you.
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 19:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 14:18 |
|
|
circumventing christianity for judaism is a really bad idea considering how much more bullshit jews have to do. Christianity is p. much the easy mode of Abrahamic religions.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 19:18
|
|
|
DrProsek posted:Pfft, look at this Protestant scrub, not realizing that Mary got pregnant just fine without needing any dick. Because she got pregnant through magic, she made Jesus herself and thus is more perfect than Jesus who is God. God is still the Father - making Him the supreme masculine while Mary is the supreme feminine.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 19:18
|
|
|
Alright this is a serious question for atheists here, could someone explain why quite a few atheists seem to be drawn to the Jesus Mythers? The people who maintain Jesus was made up by the Gospel writers rather than one of many first century speakers in Judea murdered by the Romans for being a possible threat to their domination?McDowell posted:God is still the Father - making Him the supreme masculine while Mary is the supreme feminine. The DaVinci code is a lovely book.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 19:18
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:Alright this is a serious question for atheists here, could someone explain why quite a few atheists seem to be drawn to the Jesus Mythers? The people who maintain Jesus was made up by the Gospel writers rather than one of many first century speakers in Judea murdered by the Romans for being a possible threat to their domination? I'm not really on the Jesus myth side, I've never looked into the argument too deeply to know one way or the other because frankly I don't care. Assuming he was real, it never validated him as the son of god for me anyways. More of a leader figure than a son of god. I don't have much to really answer your question as far as the myth claims.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 19:21
|
|
|
waitwhatno posted:I'm sorry to disturb your important discussion about popery and who dipped his dick in Mary, but I have a question: Strictly speaking in the torah, its not that all Jews go to heaven as that all people not being particularly targeted before death go to the same afterlife, which isn't much good or much bad to it. And can be quite easily be interpreted as simple oblivion.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 19:27
|
|
|
waitwhatno posted:I'm sorry to disturb your important discussion about popery and who dipped his dick in Mary, but I have a question: Sorry bro, the popery comes with the whole "being part of the right religion" thing, and if nobody dipped their dick in Mary that makes her a god and I feel that's significant. quote:Apparently Jews get into heaven for free, because they are the chosen people. So, can't I just circumvent all that Jesus stuff by converting to Judaism? Do converts also get a free ticket? You can try but it's like playing Metro Last Light on Hard mode. Ranger Easy mode looks like it has a bunch of stupid complex rules, but those rules actually help you more often than not, and Hard mode is actually the harder setting.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 19:27
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:I'm not really on the Jesus myth side, I've never looked into the argument too deeply to know one way or the other because frankly I don't care. Assuming he was real, it never validated him as the son of god for me anyways. More of a leader figure than a son of god. Sorry its just that when I come to athiests blogs like this one run by Jerry Coyne who claims to be a "agnostic" on the existence of Jesus. Or else all out claim the he did not exist at all. It just perplexes me. quote:Too bloody bad! What we want is evidence for a historical Jesus, and we suspect that many Biblical scholars tout a historical Jesus because to question that would deeply offend many believers, even if we didn’t see Jesus as divine. I haven’t come down completely on one side or the other, but I must say that I don’t see the “abundant and independent sources” that Ehrman claims. Until I do, I will continue to be a historical-Jesus agnostic, and if that makes me look foolish, so be it. There’s been no smoking gun for me supporting a historical Jesus, unlike the genuinely abundant and independent evidence for someone like Julius Caesar.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 19:28
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:Alright this is a serious question for atheists here, could someone explain why quite a few atheists seem to be drawn to the Jesus Mythers? The people who maintain Jesus was made up by the Gospel writers rather than one of many first century speakers in Judea murdered by the Romans for being a possible threat to their domination? Seems pretty straightforward to me: many atheists are not just cool calm collected dudes who ran the logic and saw there's no actual basis for religious faith, but people who are hostile to religion for one reason or another and enjoy theories that diminish religion or cast doubt on things important to the religion. It's an emotional position. or, y'know, they've looked at the evidence and are convinced. But I'm betting not, because the evidence doesn't convince one way or another and the Okham's Razor interpretation is that there was a guy named Jesus but his attributes are pretty unknown.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 19:28
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:or, y'know, they've looked at the evidence and are convinced. But I'm betting not, because the evidence doesn't convince one way or another and the Okham's Razor interpretation is that there was a guy named Jesus but his attributes are pretty unknown. Pretty much. Even IF Jesus was just a character created by the Romans, we've lost most of the significant historical record that could back that up, most of the evidence for or against Jesus outside of the Bible and the stories have been lost to time. And honestly, trying to disprove the existence of Jesus feels like a waste of time, its not conclusive or finalizing and in the end won't change anything. Crowsbeak posted:Sorry its just that when I come to athiests blogs like this one run by Jerry Coyne who claims to be a "agnostic" on the existence of Jesus. Or else all out claim the he did not exist at all. It just perplexes me. Its like grasping at straws, because we don't have the records or written history to really disprove his existence OR to firmly prove it. Nobody wins, and its just a waste of breath to argue about.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 19:30
|
|
|
McDowell posted:God is still the Father - making Him the supreme masculine while Mary is the supreme feminine. Right, and that makes God the Father really perfect, but remember; God the Father and Jesus the Son are the same person. And so before Jesus everything was fine, God > Mary, but when Jesus was born from Mary that made everything go sideways because now Jesus was, in part at least, made by Mary. Being born by Mary made God less perfect in relation to Mary and now Mary is the more perfect of the two. Therefore, it's pretty clear we should stop being Christians but Marians.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 19:31
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:We don't want you. It's attitudes like this that lead to misunderstandings. *lights torch*
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 19:32
|
|
|
I do have to say that you guys do give me hope, I have had encounters including (one outside the internet) with Atheists who really seem fixated on Jesus was a myth, actually those encounters probably have made me a little bit of a dick when it comes to Atheists.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 19:33
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:It's attitudes like this that lead to misunderstandings. *lights torch* You reject someone twice, and if they come back a third time, you're like "ok fine we don't want you but you can come in and start learning with us" and if they learn well you can go "ok we like you, you're in."
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 19:34
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:I do have to say that you guys do give me hope, I have had encounters including (one outside the internet) with Atheists who really seem fixated on Jesus was a myth, actually those encounters probably have made me a little bit of a dick when it comes to Atheists. I am an absolute atheist--as in I think even the idea of the supernatural, including god, doesn't make any sense at all--but I both don't care about the historicity of Jesus and think that religiosity is a natural human impulse and attacking people for being 'dumb' for having it is itself deeply dumb. To me, the creative, logical-leaping portion of our brain which also functions to create interesting scientific hypothesis is the same as the impulse that leads to believing in religious things. The only thing I care about is whether someone thinks their religion should be made into law.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 19:37
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:The only thing I care about is whether someone thinks their religion should be made into law. Yup. There it is. My only objection to religion overall. As long as it is out of law and science, I'm okay with it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 19:38
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:I am an absolute atheist--as in I think even the idea of the supernatural, including god, doesn't make any sense at all--but I both don't care about the historicity of Jesus and think that religiosity is a natural human impulse and attacking people for being 'dumb' for having it. To me, the creative, logical-leaping portion of our brain which also functions to create interesting scientific hypothesis is the same as the impulse that leads to believing in religious things. The only thing I care about is whether someone thinks their religion should be made into law. Well I do beleive that the command that Christians give to those without should be the law of the land, ie I shouldn't be arrested for giving a homeless person a sandwich.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 19:39
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:I am an absolute atheist--as in I think even the idea of the supernatural, including god, doesn't make any sense at all--but I both don't care about the historicity of Jesus and think that religiosity is a natural human impulse and attacking people for being 'dumb' for having it. To me, the creative, logical-leaping portion of our brain which also functions to create interesting scientific hypothesis is the same as the impulse that leads to believing in religious things. The only thing I care about is whether someone thinks their religion should be made into law. What about those who mostly agree and ascribe the authority of proper law as from god, and that law should be treaty as a community obligation to uphold and protect?
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 19:40
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:Well I do beleive that the command that Christians give to those without should be the law of the land, ie I shouldn't be arrested for giving a homeless person a sandwich. Why not just source that in basic human decency and not being a dick, instead of saying that it's a godly command? Or, if you like, in utilitarianism or something else? Why bring god into it? My Imaginary GF posted:What about those who mostly agree and ascribe the authority of proper law as from god, and that law should be treaty as a community obligation to uphold and protect? It's a really really dangerous position to hold and it proves nearly impossible to separate out the random crap like anti-abortion sentiment from the good stuff like 'humans are worthwhile, don't kill 'em.'
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 19:42
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:Well I do beleive that the command that Christians give to those without should be the law of the land, ie I shouldn't be arrested for giving a homeless person a sandwich. That's just being a compassionate person My Imaginary GF posted:What about those who mostly agree and ascribe the authority of proper law as from god, and that law should be treaty as a community obligation to uphold and protect? "If you don't believe in god....then murder has no consequences!" That is how stupid that sounds, no offense. Social contracts and morality can survive without a religious basis. CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 19:45 on Nov 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 19:43
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:I do have to say that you guys do give me hope, I have had encounters including (one outside the internet) with Atheists who really seem fixated on Jesus was a myth, actually those encounters probably have made me a little bit of a dick when it comes to Atheists. I actually think the message of Jesus is super important and we'd just be watching non-stop human sacrifice reality TV if it didn't exist.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 19:43
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:That's just being a compassionate person Well, 'murder' has a very long and pedantic jurisprudence debate around how you define it. God commanded that you shall not murder; he said little about refraining from killing others.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 19:46
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Well, 'murder' has a very long and pedantic jurisprudence debate around how you define it. God commanded that you shall not murder; he said little about refraining from killing others. That's great, buddy. Your schtick is still dumb.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 19:47
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Well, 'murder' has a very long and pedantic jurisprudence debate around how you define it. God commanded that you shall not murder; he said little about refraining from killing others. Yes, true. But that still doesn't make arguments like law being founded upon the 10 commandments valid. Even if the 10 commandants had never been created, murdering your neighbor and stealing your stuff is likely to be frown upon by the local community. That's how being a social creature works.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 19:48
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:That's just being a compassionate person Did I say any of that? No I said that I support such a law though because it is as expected of Christians. Yes I am aware of the utilitarian argument that this would be utilization of resources, I am aware of care ethics. Am I demanding that Anyone who works on Sunday or Saturday be killed? SedanChair posted:I actually think the message of Jesus is super important and we'd just be watching non-stop human sacrifice reality TV if it didn't exist. Maybe you guys could get alot more people like myself on your side if you didn't put words in our mouths.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 19:48
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:Did I say any of that? No I said that I support such a law though because it is as expected of Christians. Yes I am aware of the utilitarian argument that this would be utilization of resources, I am aware of care ethics. Am I demanding that Anyone who works on Sunday or Saturday be killed? Maybe you guys could get alot more people like myself on your side if you didn't put words in our mouths. The bottom portion of that argument was not addressed at you.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 19:49
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Yes, true. But that still doesn't make arguments like law being founded upon the 10 commandments valid. Even if the 10 commandants had never been created, murdering your neighbor and stealing your stuff is likely to be frown upon by the local community. That's how being a social creature works. The issue is defining 'local community' as something greater than those one knows. That has never evolved in human society without religion.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 19:49
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Well, 'murder' has a very long and pedantic jurisprudence debate around how you define it. God commanded that you shall not murder; he said little about refraining from killing others. And that's why Christianity is better than Judaism.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 19:49
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:Did I say any of that? No I said that I support such a law though because it is as expected of Christians. Yes I am aware of the utilitarian argument that this would be utilization of resources, I am aware of care ethics. Am I demanding that Anyone who works on Sunday or Saturday be killed? Maybe you guys could get alot more people like myself on your side if you didn't put words in our mouths. You kind of jumped the gun there, chief. Nobody put any words in your mouth at all. If Christianity didn't say anything about being generous to the poor, would you think a law criminalizing feeding the homeless was fine? or would you still think it was dickish?
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 19:51
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:And that's why Christianity is better than Judaism. Tell me about the christians who don't murder others and have never been tempted to kill in the name of their idols.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 19:51
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:The issue is defining 'local community' as something greater than those one knows. That has never evolved in human society without religion. But it is often not defined by any ONE religion, nor are laws and social expectations founded upon religious documents and doctrine. They are founded upon basic social understandings between human beings. You didn't build that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 19:52
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Tell me about the christians who don't murder others and have never been tempted to kill in the name of their idols. Hey. Haven't killed anyone, can't say I've ever been in the mood to start.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 19:53
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:But it is often not defined by any ONE religion, nor are laws and social expectations founded upon religious documents and doctrine. They are founded upon basic social understandings between human beings. They are, so long as they are patrilinial. To escape the patrilinial tendancies of man, and develop more stable structures of political order, it is necessary for ethnicities to emerge with judicial codes regarded as aspects of the divine, rather calvinballs of man. DrProsek posted:Hey. The more important question is, at what mood does it become ok to start, and how do you determine that mood is legal?
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 19:54
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:You kind of jumped the gun there, chief. Nobody put any words in your mouth at all. Yeah suggesting that I believe that without Jesus someone cannot be moral is putting words in my mouth.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 19:55
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:They are, so long as they are patrilinial. To escape the patrilinial tendancies of man, and develop more stable structures of political order, it is necessary for ethnicities to emerge with judicial codes regarded as aspects of the divine, rather calvinballs of man. Patrilinial would be more a religious oriented society. We are actively working towards LEAVING a patrilineal society. There is nothing divine about the local criminal code, and considering the number of 'devout' people that violate criminal code, they hardly take it as divinely inspired. Crowsbeak posted:Yeah suggesting that I believe that without Jesus someone cannot be moral is putting words in my mouth. We were talking to My Imaginary GF
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 19:55
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:Yeah suggesting that I believe that without Jesus someone cannot be moral is putting words in my mouth. CommieGR didn't do that. I didn't do that. SedanChair, who is a nutjob, may have. What I did do was ask you a question, politely. I'm genuinely interested in the answer. If Christianity didn't say anything about being generous to the poor, would you think a law criminalizing feeding the homeless was fine? or would you still think it was dickish?
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 19:57
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Tell me about the christians who don't murder others and have never been tempted to kill in the name of their idols.  (ignore royal filth at far left)
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 19:57
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:CommieGR didn't do that. I didn't do that. SedanChair, who is a nutjob, probably did, which is why I have him on ignore. I probably wouldn't be a Christian than. Of course than there would be no Christianity than. SedanChair posted:
Yeah she was certainly filth, forgiving the murderer of her husband, dedicating her life to helping the poor and selling all her possessions to accomplish that goal. Crowsbeak fucked around with this message at 20:01 on Nov 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 19:58
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:
*impossible to ignore royal filth during state develooment, for they will always be assholes and absolutists or weak and groveling pawns of nobles Theres a reason why the Queen is the most important chess piece. Crowsbeak posted:I probably wouldn't be a Christian than. Of course than there would be no Christianity than. You may be interested in reading up on the concept of mitzvots
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 20:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 14:18 |
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:*impossible to ignore royal filth during state develooment, for they will always be assholes and absolutists or weak and groveling pawns of nobles So we have to judge Jews on their most venal representatives' interactions with the state as well? e: Crowsbeak posted:Yeah she was certainly filth, forgiving the murderer of her husband, dedicating her life to helping the poor and selling all her possessions to accomplish that goal. Too late! Takebacks don't count
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 20:01
|
|