Do you believe in God?

[LeMansAid]

I've never watched Futurama. But I finally dug up Godfellas, S4 E8, and learned that "When you do things right, people won't know you've done anything at all."

Some atheists then might be paying the ultimate compliment to God.

 

[polysmut]

My issue is like this... do you ever see/experience something or think of something and just know it's going to be great, and once you get ahold of it you find out you were right? See certain things are just like that for me, some things I leave to my "gut feeling", if that makes sense.

Of course I see the issue in this. No evidence, or research to support it. But I wonder if any of you can relate to this?

A lot of evidence and research centre around confirmation bias which is what that sounds like.

 

[BrodieBoi94]

A lot of evidence and research centre around confirmation bias which is what that sounds like.

You, are right.

 

[DLR_Mysterion]

I do find it funny how fast this thread moves!

There are very limited circumstances in which that would be an incorrect call.

Thinking back on it, it is pretty much a 50/50 call.

Your God being horribly immoral really does kinda dampen Jesus's message... quite a bit. The message goes from "love your fellow man" to "I'm holding this guy back, you'd better worship him or else".

Does jealousy seem like a virtue becoming of a supreme being? Or does it seem more like a human emotion?

I don't think it dampens Jesus's message - can you explain why you think that?

As for jealousy, I wouldn't call it a virtue. After the NT it's something I don't associate with God, but I see it all the time in the OT. The reason for this we could debate for eternity.

So, the Ten Commandments are still valid and required for Christians to follow, but God can break that one just fine literally within the same passage. Not to mention adultery (knocking up Mary) or killing (see: Noah; the death of everyone on Earth).

That notwithstanding:

Which rules of the Old Testament remain? How do you know?

Is God above the Ten Commandments? Those were the rules for humans to follow after all.

As for which rules of the OT remain, I can't be sure. Maybe there are other Christians who know the faith better that can explain. I believe evolution plays a part, maybe memes?

While it is true the Bible mentions that you can be saved by admitting your sins and requesting Jesus be your savior and all that, the Bible ALSO says that if you sin again KNOWING that your action is a sin, you lose salvation permanently. (Hebrews 10:26)

Just thought I'd throw that out there.

Also, no where in the Bible does it say anyone is to toss out any portion of the Old Testament.

I think this explains it well:

https://www.quora.com/Does-Hebrews-10-26-27-mean-willful-sins-cant-be-forgiven

As for tossing out the OT, I think that was evident through Jesus's works. For instance, he worked on the Sabbath - something punishable by death in the OT.

I didn't know he was into that sort of thing, maybe somebody should point out that hating gays means hating Jesus.

I think hating Jesus's message would be more apt

Surely I can't be alone in finding it convenient that one can pick and choose which parts of their specific religious text is no longer valid, but does not offer that same level of fluidity to the texts of other religions.

Did I say convenient? I meant hypocritical.

But that's the nature of the Bible. If you're referring to my views on the Koran then I don't see how that can be similar since there was no Jesus figure in the Koran who abrogated the violent messages.

Jesus preached peace, and saved a woman from death from the prescription of stoning for adultery in the OT.

Mohammad instead let people be stoned, based on the Koran, his actions and the hadiths.

Can we just make clear that the entire bible is the word of God, and therefore the word of Jesus as Jesus is God?

So I can not find a valid reason for Christians to ignore parts of the OT. Well I can, since having a religion is pick and choose the parts you do like.

Edit.

It seems that I've been somewhat tree'd by 3 hours.

There is a valid reason in that Jesus is the Messiah and His word and actions are what we follow

 

[Famine]

Is God above the Ten Commandments?
Those were the rules for humans to follow after all.

Were they? I must have missed the species-dependent clause...

As for which rules of the OT remain, I can't be sure. Maybe there are other Christians who know the faith better that can explain.

Then... how do you know you're following the rules right?

 

[DLR_Mysterion]

Were they? I must have missed the species-dependent clause...Then... how do you know you're following the rules right?

They were given to Moses, and as such for the people of God to follow. I don't think it included a section for God

As for if I'm following the rules right, I can't be sure (hence why I'm hoping for someone else to clarify!). As I mentioned in my post Jesus broke the rules of the OT, so I think it's up to us as a collective to know which to follow and which to disregard.

 

[polysmut]

As for if I'm following the rules right, I can't be sure (hence why I'm hoping for someone else to clarify!). As I mentioned in my post Jesus broke the rules of the OT, so I think it's up to us as a collective to know which to follow and which to disregard

Isn't it up to God which rules you should follow?

 

[DLR_Mysterion]

Isn't it up to God which rules you should follow?

I believe so, even if it isn't made clear in the Bible.

 

[Imari]

As I mentioned in my post Jesus broke the rules of the OT, so I think it's up to us as a collective to know which to follow and which to disregard.

So what you're saying is that the book that is God's word shouldn't be followed, and actually humans as a group should decide for themselves what is best to do?

What a staggeringly humanist thing to say.

 

[Famine]

They were given to Moses, and as such for the people of God to follow. I don't think it included a section for God

You don't think? Is it not clear?

You're making a lot of assumptions for something even as clear and unequivocal as the Ten Commandments.

As for if I'm following the rules right, I can't be sure (hence why I'm hoping for someone else to clarify!). As I mentioned in my post Jesus broke the rules of the OT, so I think it's up to us as a collective to know which to follow and which to disregard.

Huh? It's up to other people who aren't God to decide which of God's rules that God told you in the book purportedly God's word (you know, after people who aren't God decided which texts should go in it and then translated into other languages by other people who also aren't God)?

Why is it not up to you? You have the book. Why do you need other people to tell you which bits to ignore?

What do you do when other groups of people ignore different bits?

 

[mustafur]

Alot of people when talking about the big bang talk about how can there be nothing before it but that is just the limit of what is known scientific theory, the biggest guess to all of this is in fact before the Big bang it was a Star, the star exploded creating the big bang and absorbed the outer universe bringing it into this one.

Under this logic we are effectively inside a black hole, and each black hole in this universe is another universe inside of it, we will never know what is beyond the big bang as the blackhole will not allow light to escape beyond the barrier, for which we already know from other blackholes in our universe.

 

[mistersafeway]

Oh, so what you (@DLR_Mysterion) are saying about the Ten Commandments is that it's a case of do as I say not as I do, or in the words of Loki in Dogma 'do it... do it and I'll 🤬 spank you'. Do you not see a problem with that? It kind of sounds like your god is just a really bad parent who can't lead by example so has to threaten his children with violence. The worst part is a lot of his children have carried out the violence in his description*...

*You know, 'cause it's a sin to say his real name, so everyone calls him god (like calling you human). Wow, he really is like a horrible parent, huh? Use his real name or do things he does, get the belt.

 

[Yttrium99]

I think this explains it well:

https://www.quora.com/Does-Hebrews-10-26-27-mean-willful-sins-cant-be-forgiven

As for tossing out the OT, I think that was evident through Jesus's works. For instance, he worked on the Sabbath - something punishable by death in the OT.

Now, if the website's explanation is accurate (just making a presumption, I could be dead wrong.), and you wish to add your second statement of Jesus flipping the bird to the Old Testament, the Bible honestly starts to sound bi-polar, and because of the inconsistencies of itself, should probably get tossed out the window in terms of validity.

 

[TenEightyOne]

There is a valid reason in that Jesus is the Messiah and His word and actions are what we follow

Although (as you point out) the OT is fundamental. You also have to factor in that Jesus is God and brought his word in human form, at least according to the humans who wrote the bible.

For instance, he worked on the Sabbath - something punishable by death in the OT.

Sure?

Jesus preached peace, and saved a woman from death from the prescription of stoning for adultery in the OT.

We've been over that - he defended her against a mis-application of the law, he didn't preach against the law. That difference is, er, fundamental.

Remember that Jesus also allowed stoning and, appearing as God, definitively prescribes it as punishment in certain crimes.

As I mentioned in my post Jesus broke the rules of the OT, so I think it's up to us as a collective to know which to follow and which to disregard.

Do you think Muslims are able to make similar decisions as collectives?

 

[DLR_Mysterion]

So what you're saying is that the book that is God's word shouldn't be followed, and actually humans as a group should decide for themselves what is best to do?

What a staggeringly humanist thing to say.

Well by following the Book exactly Jesus should have died a lot earlier for going against God's writings. But He didn't, so I believe it is up to us how we translate it to our lives.

You don't think? Is it not clear?

You're making a lot of assumptions for something even as clear and unequivocal as the Ten Commandments.

I would say it's not for God to follow yeah.

Huh? It's up to other people who aren't God to decide which of God's rules that God told you in the book purportedly God's word (you know, after people who aren't God decided which texts should go in it and then translated into other languages by other people who also aren't God)?

Why is it not up to you? You have the book. Why do you need other people to tell you which bits to ignore?

What do you do when other groups of people ignore different bits?

I think we follow what is in our hearts. That can go against Christian beliefs at the time. But I believe it can be a force for good (e.g. how Christian nations abolished slavery while others continued)

Oh, so what you (@DLR_Mysterion) are saying about the Ten Commandments is that it's a case of do as I say not as I do, or in the words of Loki in Dogma 'do it... do it and I'll 🤬 spank you'. Do you not see a problem with that? It kind of sounds like your god is just a really bad parent who can't lead by example so has to threaten his children with violence. The worst part is a lot of his children have carried out the violence in his description*...

*You know, 'cause it's a sin to say his real name, so everyone calls him god (like calling you human). Wow, he really is like a horrible parent, huh? Use his real name or do things he does, get the belt.

Haaa a fellow Dogma fan

I wouldn't say He's like a bad parent. We can't judge God on His actions based on the laws given to us

Although (as you point out) the OT is fundamental. You also have to factor in that Jesus is God and brought his word in human form, at least according to the humans who wrote the bible.

It's fundamental to our understanding of how Jesus came about, yes.

Sure?

Yes?

We've been over that - he defended her against a mis-application of the law, he didn't preach against the law. That difference is, er, fundamental.

Remember that Jesus also allowed stoning and, appearing as God, definitively prescribes it as punishment in certain crimes.

Hmmmm you came to that conclusion, and I don't recall it being accepted. I seriously doubt Jesus's forgiveness of the woman was because of a technicality!

Do you think Muslims are able to make similar decisions as collectives?

Yes, but it's different in that we don't really see it in the world today. As Mohammad is the "best human that ever lived" and the Koran is unchangeable I doubt we'll ever see it

 

[TenEightyOne]

Well by following the Book exactly Jesus should have died a lot earlier for going against God's writings. But He didn't, so I believe it is up to us how we translate it to our lives.

He passed the commandments to Moses (or so we're led to believe) but, interestingly, wasn't killed for "going against God's writings". Ever.

He never worked on shabbat.

He told believers to stone adulterers - the only record of him saving a woman from stoning was on a technicality (the absence of the other stonee).

We can't judge God on His actions based on the laws given to us

Then all you're left with is humanity's own interpretation which, if I may be so bold, has all the value of a YouTube comments section.

As Mohammad is the "best human that ever lived" and the Koran is unchangeable I doubt we'll ever see it

That leads one to ask several things. Is Jesus venerated in human form or not? Why are there different versions of the Koran? Why are there opposing Hadiths?

I personally feel that the more you try to explain your understanding of christian and muslim histories the less you appear to know. You still seem to be saying that christians are enlightened and knowledgeable enough to re-interpret the bible to suit the altruistic humanist needs of modern society while muslim savages remain dumb slaves to the text... and you still can't seem to accept that ultimately much of it is the same text.

 

[Famine]

I would say it's not for God to follow yeah.

Why would you say that? Is it not clear in the rule book?

I think we follow what is in our hearts. That can go against Christian beliefs at the time. But I believe it can be a force for good (e.g. how Christian nations abolished slavery while others continued)

Yet Christians were happy to go along with slavery for nearly two millennia after the guy who apparently said "Yeah, just don't be dicks to each other" and they named their religion after. Was it not in their hearts all that time? Perhaps they were just following the rules set out in Leviticus that specifically deal with how one should buy, keep and look after slaves, because if you're going to pick and choose which bits of that you don't have to bother with, why shouldn't they?

For the undiluted word of a deity, it sure is a vague old set of hand-picked, twice/thrice-translated, contradictory writings, isn't it?

And, yes, you still haven't answered why you get to disregard bits of the Old Testament, how you choose which bits to disregard, and what do you do when you meet other people who've disregarded different bits than you.

 

[BobK]

@DLR_Mysterion, I would really appreciate it if you took a stab at @Famine's questions:

And, yes, you still haven't answered why you get to disregard bits of the Old Testament, how you choose which bits to disregard, and what do you do when you meet other people who've disregarded different bits than you.

This is one of the things that really puzzles me about Christianity in general, and also its various sects and cults.

 

[UKMikey]

This is one of the things that really puzzles me about Christianity in general, and also its various sects and cults.

 

[Scaff]

Yes, but it's different in that we don't really see it in the world today. As Mohammad is the "best human that ever lived" and the Koran is unchangeable I doubt we'll ever see it

You will have no problem, citing the part of the Koran that say that then.

Not Hadith, but Koran.

Which you're not going to be able to do, as the Koran states no such thing (the Koran sets man above the other creatures - you know just like the Bible does). A hadith does, but as they are not believed to be the word of God they are not in the same category. Your argument (and I use that generously) is a common trope of the propaganda you so love to use, problem is that it bears less validity that saying all Christian believe Jesus went sightseeing in the US because the Mormons say so.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Insān_al-Kāmil#The_origin_of_al-ins.C4.81n_al-k.C4.81mil

Then again Christian's use Jesus as an example and he was far from flawless; killing a herd of pigs and leaving a community destitute in the process (as that's how you cure mental illness), cursing an fig tree to die because it didn't give him fruit out of season (about as petty as you can get) and taking the whip to people based on his version of what should happen in his/dad's house (well actually to be accurate in the not-as-holy-by-any-means area around the temple that had always been used for trade, camping and to get rid of the oppressive Roman currency to ensure its use in the Temple wasn't considered idolatry). Of course lets not forget his promise to come back for a world war and to see anyone that doesn't follow the utterly contradictory faith of him/dad to the letter (but no one can tell us what that letter is) to an eternity of pain and suffering (no matter how good you actually have been - you've got to follow ever changing, contradictory rules).

That's your role model!

They are both the remains of a bloody and violent bronze age tribe that were stolen from earlier faiths to ensure that people could be controlled and ruled over, they have almost zero basis in historical reality (actually on that one at least Mo has a leg up on Jebus), and have been used by and abused by zealots to persecute, blame, main and murder over the course of the last 3,000 years.

On all three sides of the Abrahamic faith (and I could not give a monkeys butt that you don't want to believe you share a common god - every bit of evidence in all three faiths says you do - and your counter arguments are simple bias dressed up) have been used over the entire course of history to either do good or bad.

That you have chosen to see only the majority 'good' for your chosen faith, and only the majority 'bad' in your self-identified enemy highlights little more than your own desire for confirmation bias, the 'backfire' effect in full swing and the dangers (for all faiths) of religious extremism.

Now feel free to cry foul, but why not step back and take a look at your posting history and the location and topics of your contribution to GT Planet. If it were a heat map it would be dominated with a few simple words: Islam (bad), Christians (good), Immigration (bad), Mulsim (bad). Now any member is of course free to post any way they wish, as long as it follows the AUP, but in terms of trends you use GT Planet as what seems to be little more than a platform to try and promote your chosen faith and denigrate the faith you see as the enemy.

I'm going to be blunt, its not a healthy posting pattern.

 

[Imari]

We can't judge God on His actions based on the laws given to us.

Sure we can. You just don't like the conclusions that would come if you did.

 

[Dotini]

We can stand in judgment against the rain, the lightning, the moon and the Sun. King Canute stood in judgment against
the rising of the tide. But as he was about to be drowned, his abashed subjects were obliged to rescue him from his and their own folly.

 

[BobK]

Uhhm, sure, @Dotini. Whatever you say.

 

[DLR_Mysterion]

He passed the commandments to Moses (or so we're led to believe) but, interestingly, wasn't killed for "going against God's writings". Ever.

He never worked on shabbat.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+6

He told believers to stone adulterers - the only record of him saving a woman from stoning was on a technicality (the absence of the other stonee).

I really don't think that was the point of the story. But you are free to believe it

Then all you're left with is humanity's own interpretation which, if I may be so bold, has all the value of a YouTube comments section.

Jesus was the Son of Man, and His interpretations went against OT laws. If the Son of Man could do this, why not humanity as a whole?

That leads one to ask several things. Is Jesus venerated in human form or not? Why are there different versions of the Koran? Why are there opposing Hadiths?

I personally feel that the more you try to explain your understanding of christian and muslim histories the less you appear to know. You still seem to be saying that christians are enlightened and knowledgeable enough to re-interpret the bible to suit the altruistic humanist needs of modern society while muslim savages remain dumb slaves to the text... and you still can't seem to accept that ultimately much of it is the same text.

Of course He is venerated in human form. As for the different versions of Koran and Hadith I don't understand your point?

Why would you say that? Is it not clear in the rule book?

It's clear in that those were rules for man, and not God. For instance, look at what God was willing to do once He found out about the golden calf (Moses talked Him out of wiping out and starting again)

Yet Christians were happy to go along with slavery for nearly two millennia after the guy who apparently said "Yeah, just don't be dicks to each other" and they named their religion after. Was it not in their hearts all that time? Perhaps they were just following the rules set out in Leviticus that specifically deal with how one should buy, keep and look after slaves, because if you're going to pick and choose which bits of that you don't have to bother with, why shouldn't they?

For the undiluted word of a deity, it sure is a vague old set of hand-picked, twice/thrice-translated, contradictory writings, isn't it?

I wouldn't call it vague. The rules were very specific for the time, and the NT endures because of its message. While it was regrettable slavery lasted so long in Christian nations (and continues today) I think it goes to show how our faith evolves.

And, yes, you still haven't answered why you get to disregard bits of the Old Testament, how you choose which bits to disregard, and what do you do when you meet other people who've disregarded different bits than you.

@DLR_Mysterion, I would really appreciate it if you took a stab at @Famine's questions:

This is one of the things that really puzzles me about Christianity in general, and also its various sects and cults.

We get to disregard certain things either by our own volition or by consensus. How this comes about is by our individual or collective conscious, and can arise through meticulous study of the Bible or not. Why we "get" to do this is because our faith is on a continuum - nowadays you can even have lesbian ministers in certain Churches. Would this be agreeable to all Christians? I don't think so. But as a collective we can come to conclusions about certain passages, and this would be agreeable to God.

You will have no problem, citing the part of the Koran that say that then.

Not Hadith, but Koran.

Which you're not going to be able to do, as the Koran states no such thing (the Koran sets man above the other creatures - you know just like the Bible does). A hadith does, but as they are not believed to be the word of God they are not in the same category. Your argument (and I use that generously) is a common trope of the propaganda you so love to use, problem is that it bears less validity that saying all Christian believe Jesus went sightseeing in the US because the Mormons say so.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Insān_al-Kāmil#The_origin_of_al-ins.C4.81n_al-k.C4.81mil

I'm so confused. Your source states:

Muhammad's wisdom is uniqueness (fardiya) because he is the most perfect existent creature of this human species.

Then again Christian's use Jesus as an example and he was far from flawless; killing a herd of pigs and leaving a community destitute in the process (as that's how you cure mental illness), cursing an fig tree to die because it didn't give him fruit out of season (about as petty as you can get) and taking the whip to people based on his version of what should happen in his/dad's house (well actually to be accurate in the not-as-holy-by-any-means area around the temple that had always been used for trade, camping and to get rid of the oppressive Roman currency to ensure its use in the Temple wasn't considered idolatry). Of course lets not forget his promise to come back for a world war and to see anyone that doesn't follow the utterly contradictory faith of him/dad to the letter (but no one can tell us what that letter is) to an eternity of pain and suffering (no matter how good you actually have been - you've got to follow ever changing, contradictory rules).

That's your role model!

How did he leave a community destitute? And I presume you're talking about Revelations when you speak of a world war. As for the eternity of pain suffering can you provide the verses (I'm interested)

They are both the remains of a bloody and violent bronze age tribe that were stolen from earlier faiths to ensure that people could be controlled and ruled over, they have almost zero basis in historical reality (actually on that one at least Mo has a leg up on Jebus), and have been used by and abused by zealots to persecute, blame, main and murder over the course of the last 3,000 years.

On all three sides of the Abrahamic faith (and I could not give a monkeys butt that you don't want to believe you share a common god - every bit of evidence in all three faiths says you do - and your counter arguments are simple bias dressed up) have been used over the entire course of history to either do good or bad.

That you have chosen to see only the majority 'good' for your chosen faith, and only the majority 'bad' in your self-identified enemy highlights little more than your own desire for confirmation bias, the 'backfire' effect in full swing and the dangers (for all faiths) of religious extremism.

I guess you can believe that. You are in England after all and won't be punished for blasphemy

Now feel free to cry foul, but why not step back and take a look at your posting history and the location and topics of your contribution to GT Planet. If it were a heat map it would be dominated with a few simple words: Islam (bad), Christians (good), Immigration (bad), Mulsim (bad). Now any member is of course free to post any way they wish, as long as it follows the AUP, but in terms of trends you use GT Planet as what seems to be little more than a platform to try and promote your chosen faith and denigrate the faith you see as the enemy.

I'm going to be blunt, its not a healthy posting pattern.

What's wrong with having an opinion such as mine? Or do we have to subscribe to this weird world order where every religion is equal and every culture will seamlessly integrate if forced together by the powers that be?

GTP is a great place to post because it allows opinions such as mine. The AUP can be seen as a forum equivalent of the US Constitution, and allows freedom of expression within agreeable limits. Would I say these beliefs to my Muslim friends - I doubt it, so I'm glad such a place exists where we can argue to our hearts content.

Sure we can. You just don't like the conclusions that would come if you did.

The point was that He is above the laws given to us, and so cannot be judged by the Ten Commandments.

We can stand in judgment against the rain, the lightning, the moon and the Sun. King Canute stood in judgment against
the rising of the tide. But as he was about to be drowned, his abashed subjects were obliged to rescue him from his and their own folly.

I wish I knew what this meant

 

[Famine]

It's clear in that those were rules for man, and not God.

Where is it clear? Where does it say that the rules only apply to one particular species of vocal ape?

For instance, look at what God was willing to do once He found out about the golden calf (Moses talked Him out of wiping out and starting again)

Yeah, I think it's well-established that OT God was absolutely psychotic - which begs several questions about why he's not, at present, the same insane deity, what happens when he loses it again and why the hell anyone would put any stock at all in the rules he made when he was demonstrably a complete mental.

I wouldn't call it vague.

The fact that you can't even tell me where it says the Ten Commandments only apply to humans - which is what you claim it says - and think that some of the OT rules still apply but not the other ones and can't tell me why the ones you think still apply still apply says everything about how vague it is...

The rules were very specific for the time, and the NT endures because of its message. While it was regrettable slavery lasted so long in Christian nations (and continues today) I think it goes to show how our faith evolves.

The message of the NT can pretty much be summed up as "stop being dicks to each other". While it took nearly half a millennium to get that message assembled into one book and then an entire extra millennium to get that into enough languages for everyone to read, the fact that it took Christianity nearly 2,000 years from that message being uttered to the point where it recognised the basic human rights of all humans not to be bound in service to others is not something to be proud of.

We get to disregard certain things either by our own volition or by consensus. How this comes about is by our individual or collective conscious, and can arise through meticulous study of the Bible or not. Why we "get" to do this is because our faith is on a continuum - nowadays you can even have lesbian ministers in certain Churches. Would this be agreeable to all Christians? I don't think so. But as a collective we can come to conclusions about certain passages, and this would be agreeable to God.

We've already established that your particular sect, as a group, believes that you know God's mind and think that your particular way of ignoring his old rules is the one he'd pick. The question is how you deal with people who belong to different sects who, as a group, believe that they know God's mind and think that their particular way of ignoring his old rules is the one he'd pick and yours is wrong.

You know that wars have been fought over this, right?


As for 'even' having lesbian ministers, what does that have to do with Christianity? Did Jesus say "Do unto others as you would have them done unto you, except for the lady-gays who are just filth"?

It's central to Christianity that your man Joe Saviour got nailed to a tree for saying "Hey guys, wouldn't it be nice if we were all, like, nice to each other?". Nobody recorded him saying "Although if you fancy keeping blacks locked up to do all your crap jobs, I'm cool with that" or "Gays? Really? Not on my watch, sonny jim."

I mean, his dad once said "If a dude likes it in the ass, he needs to be showered in rocks until he's only good for organ donation", but then if you're going to ignore that his dad also once said "If you eat prawns you can literally 🤬 off", "Nice ink, loser.", "You're wearing those trousers with that shirt? You're a monster.", and "Look, the dude clearly fancies your daughter, so just take the 50 pieces of silver. The hell is 'consent' anyway?" you should probably be ignoring the bit about the gays too.

 

[Imari]

But as a collective we can come to conclusions about certain passages, and this would be agreeable to God.

Not as a collective we can't, no. As individuals we can, and some individuals choose to come to the same or similar conclusions. But the fact that "Christianity" is an endless sea of fragmented sects would seem to be evidence that no collective agreement is possible.

The point was that He is above the laws given to us, and so cannot be judged by the Ten Commandments.

Why? If His laws are good and just, why should they not apply to all?

What's wrong with having an opinion such as mine? Or do we have to subscribe to this weird world order where every religion is equal and every culture will seamlessly integrate if forced together by the powers that be?

GTP is a great place to post because it allows opinions such as mine. The AUP can be seen as a forum equivalent of the US Constitution, and allows freedom of expression within agreeable limits. Would I say these beliefs to my Muslim friends - I doubt it, so I'm glad such a place exists where we can argue to our hearts content.

I think it's more to do with you being remarkably two faced in terms of your treatment of your own religion and that of others. You go a long way to point out the motes in the eyes of other religions, specifically Islam, whilst making tremendous excuses for the beam in your own religion's eye.

Fundamentally, people who try to uphold that sort of hypocrisy long term soon find themselves on the wrong side of the AUP, as they find that they need to either lie to justify their beliefs or they simply turn into trolls. At the moment you are neither, but you're certainly at the start of a bad path if you can't come to some sort of consistent worldview that doesn't give Christianity a free pass for being largely identical to Islam.

I wish I knew what this meant

It means nothing. Dotini talks a lot of rubbish.

 

[TenEightyOne]

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+6

Which doesn't show that Jesus worked on the Sabbath. He makes the law remember, read his words.

I really don't think that was the point of the story. But you are free to believe it

Then you're applying a point/principle that isn't written down by the humans who set that particular story to paper. All we can go on is what's written there, and that's what's written there.

Jesus was the Son of Man, and His interpretations went against OT laws. If the Son of Man could do this, why not humanity as a whole?

So what's the point?

Of course He is venerated in human form. As for the different versions of Koran and Hadith I don't understand your point?

You said that only the Koran has a "greatest human who ever lived" Teen Awards Section and that there couldn't be different versions of the Koran. I take your answer to show that you've changed your mind.

The rules were very specific for the time, and the NT endures because of its message. While it was regrettable slavery lasted so long in Christian nations (and continues today) I think it goes to show how our faith evolves.

Which makes it time to re-phrase a question that you seemed unable to answer previously; why is it that christers represent such a good example of modern religious evolution while you continue to imply, state and post links to support your argument that muslims can only take a literalist, 6th-century view of the text into modern life?

 

[DLR_Mysterion]

To Famine:

I had to give that a like because it made me laugh! I will reply to the points soon

 

[Dotini]

Uhhm, sure, @Dotini. Whatever you say.

Every educated person should know the parable of King Canute versus the tide.

 

[Scaff]

I'm so confused. Your source states:

Muhammad's wisdom is uniqueness (fardiya) because he is the most perfect existent creature of this human species.

Your confusion is quite easy to understand, its the result of you not bothering to either read or understand my post and the source information.

Now once again for the cheap seats, the verse in the Koran please.

How did he leave a community destitute?

What do you think happens if you kill all of a communities livestock and then sod off?

And I presume you're talking about Revelations when you speak of a world war.

And what of it (awaits suitably odd excuse) ?

As for the eternity of pain suffering can you provide the verses (I'm interested)

"Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels.”
Matthew 25:41

Seriously how can you not know this stuff? Are you a JW?

I guess you can believe that. You are in England after all and won't be punished for blasphemy

Belief has nothing to do with it, and quite frankly your crew would quite like a return to those laws, or did you forget your nonsense around Easter Eggs (as I recall you failed to answer quite a few basic questions about that).

What's wrong with having an opinion such as mine? Or do we have to subscribe to this weird world order where every religion is equal and every culture will seamlessly integrate if forced together by the powers that be?

GTP is a great place to post because it allows opinions such as mine. The AUP can be seen as a forum equivalent of the US Constitution, and allows freedom of expression within agreeable limits. Would I say these beliefs to my Muslim friends - I doubt it, so I'm glad such a place exists where we can argue to our hearts content.

Once again you clearly didn't read what I posted, not that I expected you to address your double standard.