The slavery that happened in biblical times was not the same as the slavery the west inflicted on places like Africa. Its like a Buddhist with a swastika and the ignorant instantly thinking Hitler. Slavery is not a good thing or situation but the way it happened back then in that circle is not the same as what the west inflicted on Africa, it was not used against any one group of people either. The bible says many things on that subject, you would also find that some of the slaves back then were quite wealthy, wealthier than freemen. Some were doctors or musicians etc, not working on plantations while the women get raped but were more equal to today’s servants. Treating them badly was not allowed. You may also find that Moses wife was an Ethiopian and one of the very early church fathers included a black guy and don’t forget when one of the prophets explained the gospel to an African fellow who he then sent on his way, if you read it you’ll find it was quite a multi-cultural place. Remember, Christianity comes from the Middle East, not the western world, the job of the Apostles was to spread the gospel and they did it very well. I would go as far as to say that ALL people today who are Christian, are Christian because they want to be Christian, not because they have ancestors who were forced to be Christian. And don’t forget the massive Christian groups in Africa (who have never faced slavery from the west). You also have super massive groups in China, wonder why? So maybe.. just maybe.. those black Christians today know what they are doing and why they are doing it.. Or you can ask one of those black Christians why they choose to be Christian when they reached an age where they were able to decide for themselves.. is it because of their ancestors who may have been in slavery... sounds interesting. Gotta ask though, do you ever give a crap about blacks who were in slavery and the rest of your argument? i ask because i get many people saying similar things like "Why dont you donate to the starving kids in africa?". But in reality they dont care about starving kids in Africa, they are just using them for their argument. As for 1 Samuel 18:25-27 ESV He more than likely did count it, after all, Saul was trying to get David killed, wouldn’t surprise me if he tried to find reason to renege. It wasn’t so much a present, more like the fulfilling of a request. I'm not sure how it was stored and sent, never thought about that, but different things for different people I suppose. I don’t approve of people who pick and choose passages, I rep it all.
Lol so you're arguing old slavery was better than new slavery? Being a slave was ok because they were more wealthy? That's not even an argument. Besides, you're wrong on several accounts. "When a slave owner strikes a male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies immediately, the owner shall be punished. But if the slave survives a day or two, there is no punishment; for the slave is the owner's property." -- Exodus 21:20-21. Exodus clearly states that it's ok to beat the shit out of your slaves as long as you don't kill them. "When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT) This passage endorses the sexual abuse of female slaves, but with the caveat that the master must provide her with food, clothing and fuck her as often as his other wife. Also I wasn't saying that the Bible specifically spoke about black slaves. The Bible takes place in lands primarily occupied by Hebrews, Moors and Arabs. Of course it doesn't take place in a "Western World" the only people who think that are those who live in the deep southern US states who have created their own warped version of Christianity, where Jesus is a fat, rich white guy who hates gay marriage and endorses the ownership of firearms. Personally, I would go as far as to say that ALL people today who are Christian are so because their parents, and the culture they are born into, subscribe to the religion. Were you born spouting the word of God and believing in Christ as your undying savior? No. You were born without any preconceptions of the world. If no one mentioned God or Christ or Satan... (or hell lets also include, Buddha, Vishnu-Krishna, Zeus, Ra etc. etc.) or any of the main deities of the monotheistic religion of your choice, would you believe in them? No. You believe in God (specifically your version of God) for the same reason I believe in Science. I used to attend the Chinese Catholic church when I was little, and I used to spend every sunday learning gospel. Except I developed a sense of skepticism over time about what I was learning. Ultimately I decided that what was being taught was fucking retarded for a multitude of reasons and replaced dogma with rational and logical reasoning. I will not argue that there is no God, because shit, no one can prove or disprove that. But I can argue that Christianity and Catholocism in general are fucking retarded. You know why? Because the evidence for it is in the bible. Albert Einstein said it far better than I ever could: "It seems to me that the idea of a personal God is an anthropological concept which I cannot take seriously. I also cannot imagine some will or goal outside the human sphere. … Science has been charged with undermining morality, but the charge is unjust. A man’s ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death." - Seacrest out
^ You read the Bible for fun? I had a tough time just reading through one short excerpt never mind hundreds of those pages lol
lol i loled at the comparison of slavery to a symbol. slavery was not the same back then? lol did slaves have free will back then? how was it different at all except the setting and probably race....so slavery against ONE group is worst than slavery of MANY groups? Man your logic fails soo hard its just You cant just say they weren't discriminating if they enslaved many races versus just one, that just means they discriminated against multiple groups rofl.
Let's revive this discussion. Here's my TL;DR claim: It's not God who is evil or just an ass. All of us, all of humanity is the evil and the assholes. The biggest problem in this world is humanity itself. Human nature leads us to do some of the most fucked up shit ever. The Bible introduces the idea of "the atonement theory", in which a scapegoat bears the sin of an entire population, and is exiled, outcasted and sacrificed. (disclaimer: I am a buddhist, not a christian, but I am still using a Bible concept. Shows you closed-minded religious fanatics that you can still be open-minded, but that's a different topic for another day) This scapegoat bears all the negative that humanity has, despite being an innocent scapegoat. In the Bible, Jesus was the scapegoat. In the Red Sox's losing streak, Bill Buckner was the scapegoat. In the Chicago Cubs loss in 2003, Steve Bartman was the scapegoat. <- and still is. On the Leafs, Wilson, Burke, Lupul, Kessel and Phaneuf are the scapegoat. In World War 2, Hitler was the scapegoat <- remember, it doesn't matter if a scapegoat is innocent or guilty In Vancouver's Stanley Cup run, the city became the scapegoat. In history, innocents labelled as witches were burned at the stake. Joanne of Arc was innocently burned at the stake. There were innocents were hung, drawn and quartered. The point I want to address is that humanity has a knack to quickly lay blame on one who may be innocent, and justify excuses out of their asses of the guiltiness of an innocent scapegoat. Humanity is riddled with the disgusting nature and instincts that we claim we are against. Humanity has a need to lay blame to someone/something, for the disgusting actions that WE ourselves commit, and this has been going on throughout history. All of the problems that occur in the world, you can trace it to human error, human stupidity, human nature. So By calling God evil or just an ass, you've just used God as a scapegoat, for your own sins. I'm not defending God, I am specifically claiming that we, the human race, are fucked up. And there is a need for the idea of a God, because humanity is too fucking stupid to be self-accountable for their own stupidity. However that does not mean that atheists are off the hook, because human stupidity is deeply rooted in everyone, regardless of religious belief. It's fucking saddening; it's amazing how humanity managed to survive this long. inb4 shitstorm.
Not only will it be an awful death, you fucking go to hell for eternity too! Shit, pray your asses off!
This is how I feel!!! Bulla - you are so brain washed, this is what happens when you have been indoctrinated......sorry bro! “Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones.” ― Marcus Aurelius
I appreciate you telling me how you feel, I like it when people can let their feelings out, there are no hard feelings whatsoever. No need to be sorry for your opinion of me, i assure you, you'll never offend me. But I accept your apology anyway.
Glad you accepted my apology, but what do think about Marcus' quote? Doesn't he have a point? “Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones.” ― Marcus Aurelius
Great, all i can say about Marcus is he is dead, now he knows the truth or maybe he knows nothing at all going by what some believe. Our turn will come soon enough. I'll leave it at that. cya 0/
My only question is this: You and I are both alive, so that implies that we do not know the truth yet. If we do not know the truth, then what gives people the right to claim that the word of God (as written in the Bible, or whatever religious literature of a religion), is in fact the truth? I don't care whether people believe God exists or not, what I find ignorant is the fact that people act all holier-than-thou and assume their beliefs are true and that non-believers will be punished, when the truth hasn't been confirmed yet. (Literature is not considered proof). I am open to the idea of a God. I am not against the existence of God. What I am against, is humanity's nature, instinct, ignorance and most of all, stupidity. Which brings me back to my original point: Humanity is a fucked up species, and we're all fucking idiots. Except some are more idiotic than others. Edit: Oh, and why don't you actually answer that guy's quote on Marcus Aurelius? This is not about whether he is dead or not, he was asking you what YOU think of the meaning behind the quote. Your response to him was irrelevant to the meaning behind the quote. People like to convince others to believe in their point-of-view, but they are close-minded to the opinion of others. This is another fallacy which makes me lose faith in humanity. People are just fucking idiots.
These images on Reddit are oddly relevant: And not to offend Christians, but this is honestly how I feel. It's not your beliefs, it's you, the individual, and the way you think. Because I am all for the teachings offered by Christianity, being a non-believer myself. It's the people who make it retarded to debate with. And this goes to Atheists too. A lot of atheists are so idiotic, they are blinded by their bias in disproving God. Open up your damn mind, and realize that religion is not bad. Religion helps an individual become a better person, through moral teachings and virtues. Yes there are passages in religious literature that are malicious, but use your damn mind to understand what passages are good to apply in life, and what passages are bad. But for that, every single human being on this earth, whether religious or atheist or agnostic, need to open their fucking mind a little.
now now..not all atheists are like how you described. Majority of atheist are open minded, rational and have respect for others believe. We're just against them trying to implement their ways of life into our society, I just want them out of our schools, out of our politics, out of our personal lifes and stop telling woman what they can and can not do with their bodies. I have nothing against Jesus, it's his fan club I'm having a hard time coping with. I grew up as a Catholic and have been a catholic for 20+ years, so I do know what you mean by examining their moral teachings and vitues. I have no problem with that but I also know you don't need god to be good. Just because I don't believe in god, doesn't mean I have no morals. I don't need a book to tell me stealing, lying, killing is not good.
I didn't say "all", I said "a lot" . But the same argument can be said too: "Not all Christians try to implement their ways of life into our society". It is true that you don't need God to be good, the proof being that in Buddhism, there isn't a belief in a God-tier entity (Buddha was a human, not a God as many may mistakenly believe). But my point is, just because God doesn't exist, does not mean all of the teachings that were derived from the belief of God is not true or is immoral. In other words, say you're at war with an enemy. Just because he's your enemy does not mean you cannot learn from him. And that's what I mean by open-mindedness. I'm not talking about being open-minded to the belief of a God, I'm talking about being open-minded about teachings that can make you a better person, whether or not God exists, and whether or not you believe in a religion. The argument of "I don't need a book to tell me stealing, lying, killing is not good" is a fallacy, and I'll tell you why. Your moral beliefs stemmed from society's moral beliefs. Society's moral beliefs stemmed from history of progress in developing morality. And back in history, they were religious. Our current laws is based on religion, if you believe it or not. The Magna Carta, the Charter of Rights, The American Bill of Rights, they were stemmed from precedence, from laws that relied on religion. So, the morals you believe in right now, can be traced back to religion. You may not need a book to tell you that stealing is bad, because history has shaped your society morals, and history is based on religion. In the end, I find that religious people and atheists have more in common than they care to admit. They all have a belief (a belief in God, or a belief in no God). And many of them are against learning new things from the other side to become a better person. And the root for that flaw lies deep in the nature of man himself, not God/no God. We are our own problem.
I disagree that Atheist are against learning new things. In my deconversion process I learned about all religions. From Buddhism, Hinduism, xtians to Mormonism and islam. I literally spent a couple of years comparing each believe while trying to find myself and see which religion I should be following. I read the Quran and the Bible (I wouldn't do that again). In turn I learned more about science and rationality of life. As with most atheist, we all know more about your religion than the religious themselves. There are plenty of good religious people out there but there are just as many good atheist if not more. Name one good thing a religious person can do that an atheist can't......
I'm not saying that's something that only plagues Atheists, I'm saying that's a human nature flaw that plagues everyone, both religious and non-religious. The idea of "naming one good thing a religious person can do that an atheist can't" is flawed, because just because one or a few person can do it, does not mean the entire population of religious or atheist can do it. Example, you yourself learned about multiple religious, however your experiences are unique to you. You cannot speak for the next atheist that he or she has experienced the same thing as you. Same goes with a religious person, one person who has reached enlightenment (For example, the Dalai Lama), does not mean the entire Buddhist population has reached enlightenment. I will tell you one thing that religion HELPS a person to achieve. And I repeat, HELPS. This does not mean that every religious person has achieved this. And this thing is called compassion. Unfortunately, some branches of religion has overshadowed the understanding of compassion, thus, compassion is thoroughly lacking in this world, in both religious and non-religious populations. No one can say they have (or understand) compassion. If you say you have compassion, then you're lying, because it's in our own human nature to be against compassion. Humanity has the delusion of understanding things they do not understand, religion, spirituality, compassion. I will post one quote by Albert Einstein: Having said this, the one aspect that religion has over non-religion (when not blown up to irrealistic proportions) is the understanding of spirituality. Religion helps us understand spirituality, how to guide our lives in a spiritual, calm, enlightened manner. Science cannot do that, because science is quantitative. You cannot measure calmness. You cannot measure compassion. I am a scientist myself, but there are things I accept that cannot (currently) be solved by science. And that is what Einstein and many other great scientists have done. However, one need not be religious to find compassion. Example: Bill Gates. He is an Atheist, however he is of the few atheists that understands compassion. Not all atheists are like him, and that's equivalent to saying not all religious people are fanatics. The problem remains that humanity is plagued with delusions of grandeur. We think we're better than other people. Religious people think they're better than you, you atheists think you're better than religious people. Everyone is displaying this delusion of grandeur. Which goes back to my point. If you had compassion, you would have dropped this concept of grandeur, and attempted to understand why the other side believes what they believe.
That is precisely why I quoted him. I wanted to show that though I am spiritual myself, I am open-minded enough to accept concepts that would help me become a better person. So if a religious can take concepts from non-religion, why can the converse not happen? Religion offers insights as to how to achieve compassion that an atheist stated, for example, the Dalai Lama is the most compassionate individual on Earth. So if religious people can learn from atheists, why can't atheist learn from religious people like the Dalai Lama? Once you learn compassion, that's when you'll be able to let go of the atheist ego. And until you let go of the labels of "religious" and "atheist", you still haven't learned compassion. I haven't learned compassion yet anyways, so don't worry, the entire world is like this, which is why I say, humanity is fucking stupid.
