Ex Christians

[Vadergirl123]

I think he was arrested and executed, just like it says in the Bible. I don't see any reason to believe he did that on purpose. Being arrested and executed is a passive act. IOW, somebody else does the arresting and executing. You don't do it to yourself.

He allowed them to arrest him. InChrist already gave you some claims he made, and you, yourself said you weren't interested in them. Those claims and the books themselves show you that Jesus came to our planet to die for us.

 

[Vadergirl123]

Why not? Doesn't the belief that God makes people write books require the accompanying belief that YOU could be one of those people, hypothetically speaking?

Hypothetically speaking, sure, but God gives no reason why we should expect more biblical books.

From a strictly logical perspective, I mean? The people who wrote the gospels were human, you are a human. If you believe God speaks through humans, it's only logical to also believe God could speak through you. If not, you should at least be able to provide a reason why not.

Indeed God could speak through me if he wanted, but there's no reaosn for him to. The Bible tells us everything we need to know about God. I could write a Bible commentary though or a book discussing the Bible.

Surely you don't believe there is more than one God?

I do, I have no reason to believe otherwise.

 

[Vadergirl123]

This is your defense of Biblical morality? Don't you find this disgusting? If you were to read a story in tomorrows newspaper about a newlywed woman who was stoned to death because she was "promiscuous in her father's house", would you approve?

If there was a law that said being promiscuous was wrong and the penalty is stoning. Then yes I would approve. The woman chose to break the law, she didn't have too. In breaking it she was accepting the consequences.

 

[Alceste]

Yes he's male, But God's not a human being.

Then how can it be "male"?

 

[Alceste]

He allowed them to arrest him. InChrist already gave you some claims he made, and you, yourself said you weren't interested in them. Those claims and the books themselves show you that Jesus came to our planet to die for us.

They don't "show me" any such thing. Bible stories tell, they don't "show". Science "shows". Only a fool believes things to be true simply because they are written in a book.

 

[Alceste]

If there was a law that said being promiscuous was wrong and the penalty is stoning. Then yes I would approve. The woman chose to break the law, she didn't have too. In breaking it she was accepting the consequences.

Again, you have an incomplete understanding of that verse. It says that IF a man claims or believes that his wife is not a virgin on her wedding night, he must tell the bride's family. At that point, the bride's family must produce a "token" that proves her virginity (IOW, a blood stained sheet). If they can produce it, he pays them in silver for the insult and keeps the wife. If they can not produce it, the wife is stoned to death.

It has nothing to do with promiscuity. It has only to do with whether or not a bloody sheet can be produced when a man accuses his wife of impurity. If so, the bride lives. If not, the bride dies, horribly, slowly and painfully, in a grotesque, bloody public spectacle on the steps of her parents' house.

It's absolutely, unambiguously barbaric and COMPLETELY wrong and immoral in every conceivable sense of the words. It amazes me that anyone could believe this process to be "moral".

 

[Father Heathen]

I think he was arrested and executed, just like it says in the Bible. I don't see any reason to believe he did that on purpose. Being arrested and executed is a passive act. IOW, somebody else does the arresting and executing. You don't do it to yourself.

They erected the crucifix sans Christ with the points of the nails outward. Jesus came running up Golgotha, leaped up off the ground, repositioned himself midair, and stuck him upon the cross.

Kinda like this:

[youtube]BRboNlm1iyE[/youtube]
Acme Partyworks - Velcro Wall - Flipping - YouTube

 

[fantome profane]

If there was a law that said being promiscuous was wrong and the penalty is stoning. Then yes I would approve. The woman chose to break the law, she didn't have too. In breaking it she was accepting the consequences.

I think there is a little bit of avoidence here when you say "if there was a law". Do you think there should be such a law? If it was placed on the ballot (it could happen in North Carolina) that under these circumstances that promiscuous women would be stoned to death, would you vote for it. If you happened to get yourself elected to the legislature would you bring forth such a bill? And if such a law were passed, and you had a daughter who committed just this specific sin would you yourself be throwing the stones?

If your answer is still "yes I would approve" then I just don't know what else to say. If that is the case then your idea of morality is so completely alien to mine that I don't think I can understand. So then let me ask if you can understand why many people find this kind of "moral code" disgusting? Can you understand that?

 

[Falvlun]

I think there is a little bit of avoidence here when you say "if there was a law". Do you think there should be such a law? If it was placed on the ballot (it could happen in North Carolina) that under these circumstances that promiscuous women would be stoned to death, would you vote for it. If you happened to get yourself elected to the legislature would you bring forth such a bill? And if such a law were passed, and you had a daughter who committed just this specific sin would you yourself be throwing the stones?

If your answer is still "yes I would approve" then I just don't know what else to say. If that is the case then your idea of morality is so completely alien to mine that I don't think I can understand. So then let me ask if you can understand why many people find this kind of "moral code" disgusting? Can you understand that?

And some people think that the morality of atheists is questionable!

 

[mycorrhiza]

Women did have authority. They just weren't in charge of churches and they're to submit to their husbands in marriage. Again do your eally not think a woman was in charge of her servant?

Still makes women less than men.

I've already said that he wants marriage to be between a man and a woman. not two men or two women. Who says there's no harm?

Yes, you've said that he wants it, but you have yet to explain why. Why would there be any harm? Sweden hasn't imploded since we legalized gay marriage.

You were once a christain right? Are you teling me that deep down you still really do believe all the christain principles, but were just indoctrinated to suddenly not beleive them? Did you not make a choice to no longer believe in christianity?

Nope, I don't still believe in those. I read the Bible and it didn't make sense to me. It was not an active decision, just like I never made an active decision that I would dislike raw onions.

It will be more difficult for them, but why's that unfair?

It's the very definition of unfair. They're at a disadvantage, and that's unfair.

(Without God)I wouldn't die for people who would end up hating me, nor woudl I forgive the people who tortured me in the first place.

I would forgive them. Why should I be more forgiving than God?

Read Psa. 9:17 and eternal life is like heaven. Hell is thought of as eternal death from God. The Bible doesn't claim that non-believers will go to heaven. And why woudl they want to go anyway?

Psa 9:17 uses the word sheol, so it simply says that the dead will go back to being dead, not to be tortured for all eternity. I've never said that it claims that non-believers go to heaven, just that it never claims that they're tortured for all eternity.

So it wouldn't bother you at all if some 4billion hated your son and claimed your son's death didn't do anything or if some of the people rejected the fact that your son died? You'd still care about those people?

Of course it would bother me, but I wouldn't punish them for it. It's like torturing and murdering people because they don't share your opinion, and that's just cruel.

Yes he could've done it another way, but withthe way he did it he showed how much he loved us.

I can figure out several ways that show boundless love that doesn't involve torturing my children..

Yes, why do you not believe stealing is a good enough sin?

I don't believe that eternal torture for not 100, not 1000, not 100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 years, but all of eternity, is a reasonable punishment for stealing a stick of gum.

I already said Psa. 9:17. I can look up some others if you'd like

Do look them up, because Psa 9:17 has nothing to do with eternal torture.

I guess I could be, but I have no reason to believe I am. What makes you think I'm misinterpreting it?

Because you're reading everything literally, when many things are understood from the scriptural context and the historical context to be metaphorical or allegorical in nature. And you believe in eternal torture as hell, which has no scriptural basis.

 

[Astravalon]

If there was a law that said being promiscuous was wrong and the penalty is stoning. Then yes I would approve. The woman chose to break the law, she didn't have too. In breaking it she was accepting the consequences.

Just speaking for myself, I'm way too pro-life to accept even the termination of adult life, let alone through something as painful as stoning, for something as relatively harmless as being... um.... uber-proactive in expressing physical affection.

If something were legal, it wouldn't automatically make it right, imo.

-

 

[Vadergirl123]

it isn't wrong to make a judgement call if the judgment is accurate.
just because i do not agree doesn't mean i don't like what i hear.

I agree, so you liked what I said?

just because your criteria for being convinced is based on faith doesn't mean that it's mine too.

Actually my criteria is based on the Bible, and yours is based on what you think is right, right?

what do you mean?

I wouldn't want to spend eternity in heaven if God wasn't there. You said something's not as enjoyable if you're not spending it with the one you love.

you actually enjoy places on your own while not thinking you like to share it with someone you care about/other than god of course.

Spending eternity with God is what I want, and I'd rather spend it with him then anyone else( for me of course most of my family and friends are christains. However even if they weren't I'd rather spend eternity with God then with them in hell)

this eternity thing drives me crazy btw, can you even fathom what that means, really?

Not really, I can sort of imagine it though.

that is absolutely circular to me. for this to not go in circles, support your claim that the bible is the word of god.

I've already given an example(Sandy's letters), which shows why I think there's no reason to believe the Bible isn't true.

 

[Vadergirl123]

Stem cell research

I'll assume the main issue is when does life begin? And according to the Bible life begins at conception. So if the embryonic cells are life then harvesting them, which will kill them, is murder, and the Bible is also against murder.

 

[Vadergirl123]

Your problem (stealing) is very basic.

I thought youjust wanted a problem. I decided not to go to deep haha

The Bible simply does not address a reality in which homosexuality is becoming an accepted social norm.

According to the Bible homosexuality is wrong.

In other words, what does the Bible tell us about ecological concerns beyond ideals that man is a care taker of the earth?

It tells us about the flood, creation, and some other things

Or what does the Bible has to tell us about future colonization of Mars?

Haha well it doesn't specifically say anything about colonizing Mars, but there's nothing in the Bible that seems to say it's wrong in itself.

What does it have to tell us about cloning biological life forms?

According to the Bible there's nothing wrong with cloning plant or animal life since we have dominion over those things. However God doesn't give us the command to manipulate other humans.

What does the Bible has to say about the Human Genome Project? about the LHC? or drones attacks in Northern Pakistan?

I don't know enough about the drone attacks or LHC but you could just google what does the Bible say about... and find an answer.

 

[Vadergirl123]

right here: http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2956912-post309.html

It didn't go anywhere.

Are you sure that's it? That one isn't even a reply to my earlier question. My question was how did God let you down?

I know your not quoting me, but here's once: suicide. The Christian Bible is silent on the matter, and the only time suicide is spoken of is in two instances:

So all that stuff you posted about the satanist religion was interesting. Who came up with it?
No it's not, suicide is murder, which God condemns.

 

[Father Heathen]

According to the Bible homosexuality is wrong.

According to the bible eating shrimp and pork, wearing mixed fabrics, working on the sabbath, rotating crops and talking to menstruating women is wrong. While owning and beating slaves and even selling ones own daughter into sexual slavery was acceptable.

Do you agree with all of this? Or did homosexuality somehow become the only "sin" (alongside abortion which isn't even mentioned by the bible) that christians screech and bellow about? If the later, what makes you think god abides your two-faced, hypocritical cherry picking?

 

[Vadergirl123]

Then how can it be "male"?

Something doesn't have to be a human being to have a gender.

 

[Vadergirl123]

They don't "show me" any such thing. Bible stories tell, they don't "show". Science "shows". Only a fool believes things to be true simply because they are written in a book.

Geez, there's alot of truths in books. It's not fair for you to say it's foolish to believe what a book says. And I don't just believe the Bible because the words are in a book. I believe it becasue it's God's inspired words.

 

[Father Heathen]

I'll assume the main issue is when does life begin? And according to the Bible life begins at conception. So if the embryonic cells are life then harvesting them, which will kill them, is murder, and the Bible is also against murder.

Actually, the bible advocates murder as a form of punishment for petty, trivial and arbitrary offenses.

 

[Vadergirl123]

Again, you have an incomplete understanding of that verse. It says that IF a man claims or believes that his wife is not a virgin on her wedding night, he must tell the bride's family. At that point, the bride's family must produce a "token" that proves her virginity (IOW, a blood stained sheet). If they can produce it, he pays them in silver for the insult and keeps the wife. If they can not produce it, the wife is stoned to death.

Right they have to prove that she's a virgin, in otherwords, prove she hasn't had sex with other men. If she's not one then she's stoned(because she's been promiscous). God views sex outside of marriage as very bad.