unarmedman wrote: I have yet to find any Christians that feel the Crusades were justified.

I can, my friend, remember several instances in various Christian Churches in my youth where I had conversations with preachers, ministers, and "elders" where I was told quite plainly that the Crusades brought the teachings of Christ to the heathens and unlearned.

I was told these things because it was safe for them to tell me. I was a young, white boy from a small town in texas. I was there to be converted, to know the truth of Jesus.

In their minds, all actions in the name of their Jesus Christ, regardless of the reality of them, are justified in bringing the light of the son of God to the unbelievers.

Needless to say, I was just at these youth groups meetings to meet girls.

cursedby11 wrote:Now what's your reason for researching the bible? to find flaws? to trash Christians? You can trash anyone for something if you look hard enough. It all depends on your intent of studying the Bible old and new....if you are reading it to become more moral you will, in other words you can either focus on the negatives or the positives. If you look for positves, the bible will ebenfit you more than harm you, bottom line.

If I hear from enough people that the Bible is the moral compass for man, then I am obliged to familiarize myself with it. If I hear from these same people that the Bible is their source for political and social positions, then I am obliged to take it seriously, as they do. If these moral, political and social positions have an impact on me and my friends, then I am obliged to hold them accountable for them, and the Bible, if it is a part of the argument.

I would happily ignore it (except for the good parts about loving the least of us, all of us being brothers, greed being wrong, punishment being reserved away from fickle mankind, etc.), but I am not allowed to because Christians keep throwing it up on the table for discussion. I am not afraid of them, and I am willing to look at their Bible for myself, rather than take their word for it that it means something.

If they would let us, we would stop picking on it. They won't.

cursedby11 wrote: If you look for positves, the bible will ebenfit you more than harm you, bottom line. .

well yeah, unless you're pushing for gay rights in the current political climate.


sorry, couldn't resist.

So we're supposed to accentuate the positive in the Bible and overlook the negative. Huh. Out of deference to a political entity that refuses to apply the same principle to anyone or anything that doesn't fit the image in which they want the rest of the world made over.

Sorry, if the religion-is-politics crowd wants to wave the Bible around like a flag to justify the beliefs they want to impose on the rest of society, then I think it's pretty fair game.

Yes, it's easy to read the Bible and find reasons to criticize it. As easy as it is for these holier-than-thou fuckers to sit around and find reasons to criticize everyone in the world who doesn't look, think, and act exactly like they do.

I'm not sure how to weigh in on this - I'm an atheist who's very sympathetic to the whole moral teachings of Jesus thing, and pretty bitter at how religious folk have messed everything up... anyway, until I figure out what to say, here's this, which is brilliant:

Mark Twain wrote:I will tell you a pleasant tale which has in it a touch of pathos. A man got religion, and asked the priest what he must do to be worthy of his new estate. The priest said, "Imitate our Father in Heaven, learn to be like him." The man studied his Bible diligently and thoroughly and understandingly, and then with prayers for heavenly guidance instituted his imitations. He tricked his wife into falling downstairs, and she broke her back and became a paralytic for life; he betrayed his brother into the hands of a sharper, who robbed him of his all and landed him in the almshouse; he inoculated one son with hookworms, another with the sleeping sickness, another with gonorrhea; he furnished one daughter with scarlet fever and ushered her into her teens deaf, dumb, and blind for life; and after helping a rascal seduce the remaining one, he closed his doors against her and she died in a brothel cursing him. Then he reported to the priest, who said that that was no way to imitate his Father in Heaven. The convert asked wherein he had failed, but the priest changed the subject and inquired what kind of weather he was having, up his way.

(edit: added link to this quote and a bunch of other great Twain - please to check out!)

unarmedman wrote:A woman can make a decision before she gets pregnant. A child never gets to make the choice.

What choice is that? To have sex? Because accidents do happen. Birth control does fail. I guess no woman should ever have sex until she is ready willing to give birth to a child. Egads.

the title of this thread reminds me that the ku klux klan have a website.

Steve- If I hear from enough people that the Bible is the moral compass for man, then I am obliged to familiarize myself with it. If I hear from these same people that the Bible is their source for political and social positions, then I am obliged to take it seriously, as they do. If these moral, political and social positions have an impact on me and my friends, then I am obliged to hold them accountable for them, and the Bible, if it is a part of the argument.

I would happily ignore it (except for the good parts about loving the least of us, all of us being brothers, greed being wrong, punishment being reserved away from fickle mankind, etc.), but I am not allowed to because Christians keep throwing it up on the table for discussion. I am not afraid of them, and I am willing to look at their Bible for myself, rather than take their word for it that it means something.

If they would let us, we would stop picking on it. They won't.

You'd be retarded if you accepted all the bible boy's information at face value. Since you don't, I wouldn't hold these guys wholey accountable for relaying interpretations on stories and teachings. However, this is why the church has a hierarchal system; people are too stupid to figure out these metaphorical meanings. When church and state merged under Constantine, they thought intelligence would lead to rebellion so the church wanted the public to be like "sheep." The church needs that higher sense of power over us, to inject information into us and keep us under their wing. We're all responsible for our own lives with all the repricussions that accompany it so who really needs to hear discussions from someone else about something no one is 100% sure about. It's silly and just like the kkk, when you get too involved in a unified organization, you lose sight of reality.

So go read your religious texts with an open mind and make your own decisions. Who cares about about people who think they have all the answers. There's too much conflicting information out there.

steve wrote:This Bible, this sick self-serving book of land deeds and rape and vendettas and misogyny, you want us to run our world based on its lessons? I think that's a very simple approach to solving complex problems.

I couldn't agree with you more. The appeal of religion is that it provides a cover of order to an environment of disorder. It illogically and incosistently provides labels of good and evil for many of the decisions its members would be forced to think about and decide for on their own without its predetermination.

It is important to make the distinction between followers of the Old Testament and followers of the New Testament among those labeled Christians. I believe a majority of Christians are folowers of the OT and exploit its teachings for power and wealth. Among these would be Oral Roberts, Jerry Falwell, the Catholic and Protestant Churches Inc, and most importantly George W Bush. These are the people to have a problem with. There is a small sect among Christians who believe in the teachings of Christ contained in the New Testament. These are the liberal Christians. It is much easier to sympathize with their aims than the OT Christians, and usually they are well-educated enough to make some sense when you ask them about their religion.

The problem with "debates" like the one in this thread is that the actions of the OT Christians are being blamed on the NT Christians.

you say religion is a simple approach of solving complex problems..... How is religion a simple approach? The bible isn't exactly paperback thin nor is it straightforward and easy to digest. Try joining a major religion and see if it is a simple solution. There's much pain in growth of these.

You also mention

It (appeal of religion) illogically and incosistently provides labels of good and evil for many of the decisions its members would be forced to think about and decide for on their own without this predetermination.

Illogically.... of course its illogical,.... faith is illogical as its supposed to be. Magick is illogical are you familiar with the concepts of magickal practice? Just because it is illogical doesn't make it groundless. Having hope is illogical. Practicing charity is illogical. Why should we help anyone but ourselves right? We live in a chaotic earthly state yet we are given the power to believe in something greater than ourselves. It's remarkable and, if illogical, so be it.