Guest Pastor Frank Posted February 21, 2007 Posted February 21, 2007 "Uncle Vic" <address@withheld.com> wrote in message news:Xns98DCE1DD1BC02vicman@66.250.146.128... > One fine day in alt.atheism, Padraic Brown <elemtilas@yahoo.com> bloodied > us up with this: >> >> There's a lot of good ethical and moral foundation in there, too, but >> you always leave that sort of thing out of your diatribes. The myths >> are generally inspiring, often teaching good behaviour traits and are >> usually engaging stories. > > As we've discovered through rational thought, however, the good teachings > of the bible simply parrot common sense. Then these teachings are > proclaimed available only to believers, demoralizing non-believers for no > reason other than non-belief. > Religious morality can easily be illustrated through one simple > experiment. > If you want to observe firsthand the morality of any given human being, > give him power over others. > We would rather first know what basis a person has for his moral convictions, for what you call "common sense" isn't "common" at all. Good and evil are opinions, and will always remain opinions rather than facts. It all depends on whose opinions you consider worthy to base your life on. Only atheists think, that their own opinion is the only valid one. -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Quote
Guest Otto Bahn Posted February 21, 2007 Posted February 21, 2007 "Pastor Frank" <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote > >>Also, you are once again falling into your usual trap of fixation on > >>the negative. One would think you're really a Moslem or something, > >>trying to prosletyse your own religion over others. Oh, that's right! > >>You're an Atheist trying to prosletyse your religion over others. > > > > And you are a deliberately nasty, bigoted liar who knows that atheism > > isn't a religion and doesn't proselytise. > > Shove your crucifix up your ass and bugger yourself with it. > > > Atheist rebuttals always end in violence, don't they? I love a crusade. --oTTo-- Quote
Guest Neil Kelsey Posted February 21, 2007 Posted February 21, 2007 On Feb 20, 11:55 pm, "Pastor Frank" <P...@christfirst.edu> wrote: > "Neil Kelsey" <neil_kel...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > > news:1171932846.054146.59080@j27g2000cwj.googlegroups.com... > > > > > On Feb 19, 3:46 pm, Padraic Brown <elemti...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> On Mon, 19 Feb 2007 15:26:16 -0500, "Bill M" <w...@bellsouth.net> > >> wrote: > > >> >The Bibles are nothing more than books of myths, fables, contradictions, > >> >human and animal sacrifices, genocide, slaveholding, misogyny, > >> >destruction, > >> >barbarisms, and impossible tales. They are not accurate history and > >> >certainly are not the words of any god unless he is an insane and > >> >totally > >> >untrustworthy monster. They are not even good fiction. > > >> There's a lot of good ethical and moral foundation in there, too, but > >> you always leave that sort of thing out of your diatribes. The myths > >> are generally inspiring, often teaching good behaviour traits and are > >> usually engaging stories. The Bible isn't intended to be "accurate > >> history". On the whole, it is actually pretty good fiction. There is a > >> fairly recent retelling of the Bible's subtext (Richard Elliott > >> Friedman's "The Hidden Book in the Bible"); once you get away from the > >> Bible as a Bible and look at it as literature, even a Bible-fixated > >> "atheist" such as yourself can enjoy what merits it offers. > > > As an atheist who loves literaure, I had to read the Bible in order to > > understand all the references. This is just my opinion, but if you're > > telling me the Bible is good fiction (I agree that it's fiction) then > > Celine DIon is a good singer. I realize it's ancient writing, and as > > such holds a certain historical interest, but I think the writing is > > generally strident, contradictory, repetitive, and boring when it's > > not psychedelically weird. I think there are many examples of earlier > > and better writing from other cultures than the Bible. Homer, > > Gilgamesh, Monkey (from China), just to name a few. > > How can you "love literature" and miss the extraordinary Philosophy of > life explained and demonstrated by Jesus Christ entirely? I didn't miss it, Frank, I just wan't impressed. Jesus seemed like a prissy prick to me. And read Bertrand Russell's "Why I Am Not A Christian" for some criticisms into the character of Jesus Christ, he said it far better than I ever could. Give me the philosophy of life explained and demonstrated by Shakespeare any day. And I do love literature. How can you bury your nose in the Bible and never experience the writings of Jane Austen, Laurence Sterne, Fielding, TS Eliot, Homer, Faulkner, and plenty of other brilliant authors far superior to the anally retentive goatherders with an agenda who conjured up the Bible? Quote
Guest Neil Kelsey Posted February 21, 2007 Posted February 21, 2007 On Feb 21, 3:22 am, "Pastor Frank" <P...@christfirst.edu> wrote: > "flightlessvacuum" <flightlessvacuums...@gmail.com> wrote in message > > news:1171933682.679541.40990@a75g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...> On Feb 20, 1:54 pm, "Neil Kelsey" <neil_kel...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > >> I think there are many examples of earlier > >> and better writing from other cultures than the Bible. Homer, > >> Gilgamesh, Monkey (from China), just to name a few. > > > I really enjoyed studying the works of Homer in my youth, far superior > > to any of the fiction and fables contained within the bible. > > Are you trying to compare a work of fiction with ancient Semitic social > and moral philosophy? Perhaps you can't even see the difference, can you? Follow the thread back, Frank. It was Padraic Brown (another theist) who was comparing the Bible to works of literature. Quote
Guest Neil Kelsey Posted February 21, 2007 Posted February 21, 2007 On Feb 21, 3:19 am, "Pastor Frank" <P...@christfirst.edu> wrote: > "Neil Kelsey" <neil_kel...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > > news:1171932846.054146.59080@j27g2000cwj.googlegroups.com... > > > So if the Bible isn't accurate why base your life on it? > > Tell us what "accuracy" you need to implement Christ's directives below. > > Pastor Frank > > Jesus in Jn:13:34: A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one > another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another. > Jesus in Jn:13:35: By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, > if ye have love one to another. > Jesus in Jn:15:12-13: This is my commandment: That ye love one another, > as I have loved you. Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down > his life for his friends. > Jesus in John 14:15 "If you love me, you will obey what I command..." I need evidence that god existed, and that Jesus was divine, and evidence that the stories in the Bible are fact, otherwise I'll just continue to try to get along with people without the threats from a suipernatural being. And if we all managed to do this, then there would be no need for anyone to lay down their lives. Why are you so obsessed about that? Quote
Guest Bill M Posted February 21, 2007 Posted February 21, 2007 "Padraic Brown" <elemtilas@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:67kkt255767b21pl9a9p2rgd76e0n3gfoa@4ax.com... > On 19 Feb 2007 16:35:32 -0800, "flightlessvacuum" > <flightlessvacuumster@gmail.com> wrote: > >>On Feb 20, 12:46 pm, Padraic Brown <elemti...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >>> Also, you are once again falling into your usual trap of fixation on >>> the negative. One would think you're really a Moslem or something, >>> trying to prosletyse your own religion over others. Oh, that's right! >>> You're an Atheist trying to prosletyse your religion over others. >> >>Calling Atheism a religion is like calling bald a hair color. > > Apples and oranges, really. A real atheist wouldn't even engage in the > above kind of nonsense. There would be no need for him to continually > press the point that there is no God nor would there be a need for him > to continually try to disparage the beliefs of others. For Bill M, his > "atheism" is faith of a curious kind. > > Padraic In your idiotic 'opinion' just like your religion! Quote
Guest Mettas Mother Posted February 21, 2007 Posted February 21, 2007 Simple ! Go to Iraq and fight the war! "Pastor Frank" <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote in message news:45dc69c2$0$16402$88260bb3@free.teranews.com... > "Neil Kelsey" <neil_kelsey@hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:1171932846.054146.59080@j27g2000cwj.googlegroups.com... > > On Feb 19, 3:46 pm, Padraic Brown <elemti...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> On Mon, 19 Feb 2007 15:26:16 -0500, "Bill M" <w...@bellsouth.net> > >> wrote: > >> > >> >The Bibles are nothing more than books of myths, fables, contradictions, > >> >human and animal sacrifices, genocide, slaveholding, misogyny, > >> >destruction, > >> >barbarisms, and impossible tales. They are not accurate history and > >> >certainly are not the words of any god unless he is an insane and > >> >totally > >> >untrustworthy monster. They are not even good fiction. > >> > >> There's a lot of good ethical and moral foundation in there, too, but > >> you always leave that sort of thing out of your diatribes. The myths > >> are generally inspiring, often teaching good behaviour traits and are > >> usually engaging stories. The Bible isn't intended to be "accurate > >> history". On the whole, it is actually pretty good fiction. There is a > >> fairly recent retelling of the Bible's subtext (Richard Elliott > >> Friedman's "The Hidden Book in the Bible"); once you get away from the > >> Bible as a Bible and look at it as literature, even a Bible-fixated > >> "atheist" such as yourself can enjoy what merits it offers. > > > > As an atheist who loves literaure, I had to read the Bible in order to > > understand all the references. This is just my opinion, but if you're > > telling me the Bible is good fiction (I agree that it's fiction) then > > Celine DIon is a good singer. I realize it's ancient writing, and as > > such holds a certain historical interest, but I think the writing is > > generally strident, contradictory, repetitive, and boring when it's > > not psychedelically weird. I think there are many examples of earlier > > and better writing from other cultures than the Bible. Homer, > > Gilgamesh, Monkey (from China), just to name a few. > > > How can you "love literature" and miss the extraordinary Philosophy of > life explained and demonstrated by Jesus Christ entirely? > > > > -- > Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > Quote
Guest Christopher A.Lee Posted February 21, 2007 Posted February 21, 2007 On Wed, 21 Feb 2007 14:29:04 -0500, "Bill M" <wmech@bellsouth.net> wrote: > >"Padraic Brown" <elemtilas@yahoo.com> wrote in message >news:67kkt255767b21pl9a9p2rgd76e0n3gfoa@4ax.com... >> On 19 Feb 2007 16:35:32 -0800, "flightlessvacuum" >> <flightlessvacuumster@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>On Feb 20, 12:46 pm, Padraic Brown <elemti...@yahoo.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Also, you are once again falling into your usual trap of fixation on >>>> the negative. One would think you're really a Moslem or something, >>>> trying to prosletyse your own religion over others. Oh, that's right! >>>> You're an Atheist trying to prosletyse your religion over others. >>> >>>Calling Atheism a religion is like calling bald a hair color. >> >> Apples and oranges, really. A real atheist wouldn't even engage in the >> above kind of nonsense. There would be no need for him to continually >> press the point that there is no God nor would there be a need for him >> to continually try to disparage the beliefs of others. For Bill M, his >> "atheism" is faith of a curious kind. >> >> Padraic > >In your idiotic 'opinion' just like your religion! He's paranoid. We don't "disparage the beliefs of others". Like most theists he has neither the common sense nor courtesy to keep his beliefs to himself. Quote
Guest Dubh Ghall Posted February 22, 2007 Posted February 22, 2007 On Wed, 21 Feb 2007 19:22:21 +0800, "Pastor Frank" <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote: >"flightlessvacuum" <flightlessvacuumster@gmail.com> wrote in message >news:1171933682.679541.40990@a75g2000cwd.googlegroups.com... >> On Feb 20, 1:54 pm, "Neil Kelsey" <neil_kel...@hotmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> I think there are many examples of earlier >>> and better writing from other cultures than the Bible. Homer, >>> Gilgamesh, Monkey (from China), just to name a few. >> >> I really enjoyed studying the works of Homer in my youth, far superior >> to any of the fiction and fables contained within the bible. >> > Are you trying to compare a work of fiction with ancient Semitic social >and moral philosophy? Yea; What's the difference? Are you saying that Homer's work contained no social and moral philosophy? >Perhaps you can't even see the difference, can you? In truth, no. Both are mythology, both make social and moral comment about the time and place. Both use real people and places, to make the story more realistic Homer is geographically more accurate, and contains no contradictions. Quote
Guest Dubh Ghall Posted February 22, 2007 Posted February 22, 2007 On Wed, 21 Feb 2007 15:51:54 +0800, "Pastor Frank" <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote: >"flightlessvacuum" <flightlessvacuumster@gmail.com> wrote in message >news:1171931732.535573.172060@t69g2000cwt.googlegroups.com... >> On Feb 20, 12:46 pm, Padraic Brown <elemti...@yahoo.com> wrote: >>> >>> Also, you are once again falling into your usual trap of fixation on >>> the negative. One would think you're really a Moslem or something, >>> trying to prosletyse your own religion over others. Oh, that's right! >>> You're an Atheist trying to prosletyse your religion over others. >> >> Calling Atheism a religion is like calling bald a hair color. >> > Are you trying to quote Existentialist Sartre? Only to the extent that stating, "I own a sword", is trying to quote from the bible. >This is what he said: To >say one does not believe in God is like saying one does not believe in >baldness. Cite? Quote
Guest Dubh Ghall Posted February 22, 2007 Posted February 22, 2007 On Wed, 21 Feb 2007 15:55:56 +0800, "Pastor Frank" <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote: > How can you "love literature" and miss the extraordinary Philosophy of >life explained and demonstrated by Jesus Christ entirely? Good literature is consistent, the bible is not. Besides; What kind of philosophy advocates killing everybody who doesn't like your philosophy? Quote
Guest Dubh Ghall Posted February 22, 2007 Posted February 22, 2007 On Wed, 21 Feb 2007 19:19:47 +0800, "Pastor Frank" <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote: >"Neil Kelsey" <neil_kelsey@hotmail.com> wrote in message >news:1171932846.054146.59080@j27g2000cwj.googlegroups.com... >> >> So if the Bible isn't accurate why base your life on it? >> > Tell us what "accuracy" you need to implement Christ's directives below. > Straw man. >Pastor Frank > > Jesus in Jn:13:34: A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one >another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another. > Jesus in Jn:13:35: By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, >if ye have love one to another. > Jesus in Jn:15:12-13: This is my commandment: That ye love one another, >as I have loved you. Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down >his life for his friends. > Jesus in John 14:15 "If you love me, you will obey what I command..." Quote
double helix Posted February 22, 2007 Posted February 22, 2007 I need evidence that god existed, and that Jesus was divine, and evidence that the stories in the Bible are fact, otherwise I'll just continue to try to get along with people without the threats from a suipernatural being. And if we all managed to do this, then there would be no need for anyone to lay down their lives. Why are you so obsessed about that? Because the alternative, no life after death and no forgivness for his sins which, probably in his eyes and to us if we knew about them, are great, is unthinkable. Some people need to be reasured they will live on. Quote
Guest Dubh Ghall Posted February 22, 2007 Posted February 22, 2007 On Thu, 22 Feb 2007 00:19:43 +0800, "Pastor Frank" <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote: ><thedeviliam@hotmail.com> wrote in message >news:1171945953.785065.293000@t69g2000cwt.googlegroups.com... >> On Feb 19, 6:38 pm, "Jeckyl" <n...@nowhere.com> wrote: >>> > >>> > Christians totally base their faith on the Bibles. >>> >>> There isn't much else to go on. What exactly is your point? >> >> Do Christians really totally based their beliefs on the Bible? Most of >> them haven't even read the damn thing, and the ones that have ignore >> whatever they don't like. You can't "totally" base your beliefs on >> something that contradicts itself. >> > Categorical in your condemnation, aren't you? No more than you are in yours. > Sorry to hear that >Christians don't live up to your exalted expectations, If our expectations of what xtians are, is over rated, it is only because people like you keep telling us about what wonderful people, xtianity makes you. > but then I bet nobody does. Far from correct. The only people who fail to measure up, are people who exalt themselves; people like you. >The Bible is ancient Hebrew social and moral philosophy, written >mostly in the poetic format. According to whom? >Contradictions are mostly the result of one's inability to interpret >constructively. Constructively? You mean, we fail to make it up as we go along, to make it say what you want it to say. >Some excel in that, for that is what they are looking for and what's >right escapes them completely. Are you that kind of person? A totally meaningless word salad. Quote
Guest Dubh Ghall Posted February 22, 2007 Posted February 22, 2007 On Thu, 22 Feb 2007 00:27:48 +0800, "Pastor Frank" <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote: >"Uncle Vic" <address@withheld.com> wrote in message >news:Xns98DCE1DD1BC02vicman@66.250.146.128... >> One fine day in alt.atheism, Padraic Brown <elemtilas@yahoo.com> bloodied >> us up with this: >>> >>> There's a lot of good ethical and moral foundation in there, too, but >>> you always leave that sort of thing out of your diatribes. The myths >>> are generally inspiring, often teaching good behaviour traits and are >>> usually engaging stories. >> >> As we've discovered through rational thought, however, the good teachings >> of the bible simply parrot common sense. Then these teachings are >> proclaimed available only to believers, demoralizing non-believers for no >> reason other than non-belief. >> Religious morality can easily be illustrated through one simple >> experiment. >> If you want to observe firsthand the morality of any given human being, >> give him power over others. >> > We would rather first know what basis a person has for his moral >convictions, for what you call "common sense" isn't "common" at all. No doubt. Then if it isn't your version of xtianity guides their morality, you can condemn it out of hand, without ever having to look at it. > Good and evil are opinions, and will always remain opinions rather than facts. Good and evil are subjectives, mere matters of opinion, and always will be. Good is what gets you what you want, and bad is what prevents you. > It all depends on whose opinions you consider worthy to base your life on. Close enough. >Only atheists think, that their own opinion is the only valid one. The truth is a totally alien to your morality; Aint it Frank? Quote
Guest Padraic Brown Posted February 22, 2007 Posted February 22, 2007 On 20 Feb 2007 23:23:02 -0600, bob young <alaspectrum@netvigator.com> wrote: > > >Padraic Brown wrote: > >> On 19 Feb 2007 16:35:32 -0800, "flightlessvacuum" >> <flightlessvacuumster@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >On Feb 20, 12:46 pm, Padraic Brown <elemti...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> > >> >> Also, you are once again falling into your usual trap of fixation on >> >> the negative. One would think you're really a Moslem or something, >> >> trying to prosletyse your own religion over others. Oh, that's right! >> >> You're an Atheist trying to prosletyse your religion over others. >> > >> >Calling Atheism a religion is like calling bald a hair color. >> >> Apples and oranges, really. A real atheist wouldn't even engage in the >> above kind of nonsense. There would be no need for him to continually >> press the point that there is no God nor would there be a need for him >> to continually try to disparage the beliefs of others. For Bill M, his >> "atheism" is faith of a curious kind. > >.......as long as religionists insist on killing each other together with >inoocent bystanders >in the process of 'protecting' their myths atheists will be around. Non sequitur. War and violence predate both atheism and theism. War is about power and very instinctual things like territorialism, not religions or gods. Padraic -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Quote
Guest Padraic Brown Posted February 22, 2007 Posted February 22, 2007 On 20 Feb 2007 23:20:03 -0600, bob young <alaspectrum@netvigator.com> wrote: > > >Padraic Brown wrote: > >> On Mon, 19 Feb 2007 15:26:16 -0500, "Bill M" <wmech@bellsouth.net> >> wrote: >> >> >The Bibles are nothing more than books of myths, fables, contradictions, >> >human and animal sacrifices, genocide, slaveholding, misogyny, destruction, >> >barbarisms, and impossible tales. They are not accurate history and >> >certainly are not the words of any god unless he is an insane and totally >> >untrustworthy monster. They are not even good fiction. >> >> There's a lot of good ethical and moral foundation in there, too, but >> you always leave that sort of thing out of your diatribes. The myths >> are generally inspiring, often teaching good behaviour traits and are >> usually engaging stories. The Bible isn't intended to be "accurate >> history". On the whole, it is actually pretty good fiction. There is a >> fairly recent retelling of the Bible's subtext (Richard Elliott >> Friedman's "The Hidden Book in the Bible"); once you get away from the >> Bible as a Bible and look at it as literature, even a Bible-fixated >> "atheist" such as yourself can enjoy what merits it offers. >> >> Also, you are once again falling into your usual trap of fixation on >> the negative. One would think you're really a Moslem or something, >> trying to prosletyse your own religion over others. Oh, that's right! >> You're an Atheist trying to prosletyse your religion over others. > >If you want to wax lyrical about verbiage, >read Emmett's final line - it speaks volumes > >"Atheism is the world of reality, it is reason, it is freedom. Atheism is >human concern, and intellectual honesty to a degree that the religious mind >cannot begin to understand. And yet it is more than this. Atheism is not an old >religion, it is not a new and coming religion, in fact it is not, and never has >been, a religion at all. The definition of Atheism is magnificent in its >simplicity: Atheism is merely the bed-rock of sanity in a world of madness." >[Atheism: An Affirmative View, by Emmett F. Fields] Sure, all warm and fuzzy. All atheism _really_ is is the lack of belief in God. Quite simple, really. Take an atheist and a theist -- they can be equally endowed with "human concern" and "intellectual honesty" and "sane in a world of madness". The above does show that people can take comfort in a wide variety of beliefs. It also shows us that atheists have _not_ learned to let go of egocentrism and sense of superiority that have, unhappily, attached to religion. How arrogant is the position that one person can claim a superior human concern, just because he does not believe in God! Padraic -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Quote
Guest Padraic Brown Posted February 22, 2007 Posted February 22, 2007 On Wed, 21 Feb 2007 15:18:07 -0500, Christopher A.Lee <calee@optonline.net> wrote: >On Wed, 21 Feb 2007 14:29:04 -0500, "Bill M" <wmech@bellsouth.net> >wrote: > >> >>"Padraic Brown" <elemtilas@yahoo.com> wrote in message >>news:67kkt255767b21pl9a9p2rgd76e0n3gfoa@4ax.com... >>> On 19 Feb 2007 16:35:32 -0800, "flightlessvacuum" >>> <flightlessvacuumster@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>>On Feb 20, 12:46 pm, Padraic Brown <elemti...@yahoo.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Also, you are once again falling into your usual trap of fixation on >>>>> the negative. One would think you're really a Moslem or something, >>>>> trying to prosletyse your own religion over others. Oh, that's right! >>>>> You're an Atheist trying to prosletyse your religion over others. >>>> >>>>Calling Atheism a religion is like calling bald a hair color. >>> >>> Apples and oranges, really. A real atheist wouldn't even engage in the >>> above kind of nonsense. There would be no need for him to continually >>> press the point that there is no God nor would there be a need for him >>> to continually try to disparage the beliefs of others. For Bill M, his >>> "atheism" is faith of a curious kind. >>> >>> Padraic >> >>In your idiotic 'opinion' just like your religion! > >He's paranoid. We don't "disparage the beliefs of others". Paranoid? THat's a laugh. Go study the definition of "paranoid" to learn what it really means. As a group, "atheists" _do_ disparage the beliefs of others. You yourself provide a good example of this. Review how many times the beliefs of others have been called "delusional" or "moronic" in the last couple weeks. > Like most >theists he has neither the common sense nor courtesy to keep his >beliefs to himself. You have absolutely no clue what my beliefs are, apart from the few that have been appropriate to the discussion. I really don't recall ever discussing them with you. If you don't like people discussing their beliefs, you don't have to read these kinds of threads. Padraic -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Quote
Guest the Cunt of Saint Mary of Nazar Posted February 22, 2007 Posted February 22, 2007 the fucking God loves St . Mary' s cunt . On Feb 22, 7:45 am, Dubh Ghall <p...@pooks.hill.fey> wrote: > On Wed, 21 Feb 2007 15:51:54 +0800, "Pastor Frank" > > <P...@christfirst.edu> wrote: > >"flightlessvacuum" <flightlessvacuums...@gmail.com> wrote in message > >news:1171931732.535573.172060@t69g2000cwt.googlegroups.com... > >> On Feb 20, 12:46 pm, Padraic Brown <elemti...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > >>> Also, you are once again falling into your usual trap of fixation on > >>> the negative. One would think you're really a Moslem or something, > >>> trying to prosletyse your own religion over others. Oh, that's right! > >>> You're an Atheist trying to prosletyse your religion over others. > > >> Calling Atheism a religion is like calling bald a hair color. > > > Are you trying to quote Existentialist Sartre? > > Only to the extent that stating, "I own a sword", is trying to quote > from the bible. > > >This is what he said: To > >say one does not believe in God is like saying one does not believe in > >baldness. > > Cite? Quote
Guest bob young Posted February 22, 2007 Posted February 22, 2007 Neil Kelsey wrote: > On Feb 20, 11:55 pm, "Pastor Frank" <P...@christfirst.edu> wrote: > > "Neil Kelsey" <neil_kel...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > > > > news:1171932846.054146.59080@j27g2000cwj.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > > > > On Feb 19, 3:46 pm, Padraic Brown <elemti...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > >> On Mon, 19 Feb 2007 15:26:16 -0500, "Bill M" <w...@bellsouth.net> > > >> wrote: > > > > >> >The Bibles are nothing more than books of myths, fables, contradictions, > > >> >human and animal sacrifices, genocide, slaveholding, misogyny, > > >> >destruction, > > >> >barbarisms, and impossible tales. They are not accurate history and > > >> >certainly are not the words of any god unless he is an insane and > > >> >totally > > >> >untrustworthy monster. They are not even good fiction. > > > > >> There's a lot of good ethical and moral foundation in there, too, but > > >> you always leave that sort of thing out of your diatribes. The myths > > >> are generally inspiring, often teaching good behaviour traits and are > > >> usually engaging stories. The Bible isn't intended to be "accurate > > >> history". On the whole, it is actually pretty good fiction. There is a > > >> fairly recent retelling of the Bible's subtext (Richard Elliott > > >> Friedman's "The Hidden Book in the Bible"); once you get away from the > > >> Bible as a Bible and look at it as literature, even a Bible-fixated > > >> "atheist" such as yourself can enjoy what merits it offers. > > > > > As an atheist who loves literaure, I had to read the Bible in order to > > > understand all the references. This is just my opinion, but if you're > > > telling me the Bible is good fiction (I agree that it's fiction) then > > > Celine DIon is a good singer. I realize it's ancient writing, and as > > > such holds a certain historical interest, but I think the writing is > > > generally strident, contradictory, repetitive, and boring when it's > > > not psychedelically weird. I think there are many examples of earlier > > > and better writing from other cultures than the Bible. Homer, > > > Gilgamesh, Monkey (from China), just to name a few. > > > > How can you "love literature" and miss the extraordinary Philosophy of > > life explained and demonstrated by Jesus Christ entirely? > > I didn't miss it, Frank, I just wan't impressed. Jesus seemed like a > prissy prick to me. And read Bertrand Russell's "Why I Am Not A > Christian" for some criticisms into the character of Jesus Christ, he > said it far better than I ever could. Give me the philosophy of life > explained and demonstrated by Shakespeare any day. The whole conception of God is a conception derived from the ancient Oriental despotisms. It is a conception quite unworthy of free men. When you hear people in church debasing themselves and saying that they are miserable sinners, and all the rest of it, it seems contemptible and not worthy of self-respecting human beings. We ought to stand up and look the world frankly in the face. We ought to make the best we can of the world, and if it is not so good as we wish, after all it will still be better than what these others have made of it in all these ages. A good world needs knowledge, kindliness, and courage; it does not need a regretful hankering after the past, or a fettering of the free intelligence by the words uttered long ago by ignorant men. Bertrand Russell (W.N.C.p23) > > > And I do love literature. How can you bury your nose in the Bible and > never experience the writings of Jane Austen, Laurence Sterne, > Fielding, TS Eliot, Homer, Faulkner, and plenty of other brilliant > authors far superior to the anally retentive goatherders with an > agenda who conjured up the Bible? Quote
Guest Scott Richter Posted February 22, 2007 Posted February 22, 2007 Pastor Frank <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote: > How can you "love literature" and miss the extraordinary Philosophy of > life explained and demonstrated by Jesus Christ entirely? Sorta like the "Peanuts" cartoons... Quote
Guest Scott Richter Posted February 22, 2007 Posted February 22, 2007 Pastor Frank <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote: > > And you are a deliberately nasty, bigoted liar who knows that atheism > > isn't a religion and doesn't proselytise. > > Shove your crucifix up your ass and bugger yourself with it. > > > Atheist rebuttals always end in violence, don't they? When you're involved in the discussion they do. Why do you suppose that is? Quote
Guest Chris Morris Posted February 22, 2007 Posted February 22, 2007 "Pastor Frank" <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote in message news:45dc69c2$0$16402$88260bb3@free.teranews.com... > "Neil Kelsey" <neil_kelsey@hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:1171932846.054146.59080@j27g2000cwj.googlegroups.com... >> On Feb 19, 3:46 pm, Padraic Brown <elemti...@yahoo.com> wrote: >>> On Mon, 19 Feb 2007 15:26:16 -0500, "Bill M" <w...@bellsouth.net> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >The Bibles are nothing more than books of myths, fables, >>> >contradictions, >>> >human and animal sacrifices, genocide, slaveholding, misogyny, >>> >destruction, >>> >barbarisms, and impossible tales. They are not accurate history and >>> >certainly are not the words of any god unless he is an insane and >>> >totally >>> >untrustworthy monster. They are not even good fiction. >>> >>> There's a lot of good ethical and moral foundation in there, too, but >>> you always leave that sort of thing out of your diatribes. The myths >>> are generally inspiring, often teaching good behaviour traits and are >>> usually engaging stories. The Bible isn't intended to be "accurate >>> history". On the whole, it is actually pretty good fiction. There is a >>> fairly recent retelling of the Bible's subtext (Richard Elliott >>> Friedman's "The Hidden Book in the Bible"); once you get away from the >>> Bible as a Bible and look at it as literature, even a Bible-fixated >>> "atheist" such as yourself can enjoy what merits it offers. >> >> As an atheist who loves literaure, I had to read the Bible in order to >> understand all the references. This is just my opinion, but if you're >> telling me the Bible is good fiction (I agree that it's fiction) then >> Celine DIon is a good singer. I realize it's ancient writing, and as >> such holds a certain historical interest, but I think the writing is >> generally strident, contradictory, repetitive, and boring when it's >> not psychedelically weird. I think there are many examples of earlier >> and better writing from other cultures than the Bible. Homer, >> Gilgamesh, Monkey (from China), just to name a few. >> > How can you "love literature" and miss the extraordinary Philosophy of > life explained and demonstrated by Jesus Christ entirely? > > > -- > Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com There is Great Wisdom in the Teachings of Jesus but they are far from being original nor even new, but are statements of Universal Wisdom. All the faiths of the World contain a portion of the Divine Truth and none has all of it. Quote
Guest Chris Morris Posted February 22, 2007 Posted February 22, 2007 "Pastor Frank" <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote in message news:45dc69ce$0$16402$88260bb3@free.teranews.com... > "flightlessvacuum" <flightlessvacuumster@gmail.com> wrote in message > news:1171933682.679541.40990@a75g2000cwd.googlegroups.com... >> On Feb 20, 1:54 pm, "Neil Kelsey" <neil_kel...@hotmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> I think there are many examples of earlier >>> and better writing from other cultures than the Bible. Homer, >>> Gilgamesh, Monkey (from China), just to name a few. >> >> I really enjoyed studying the works of Homer in my youth, far superior >> to any of the fiction and fables contained within the bible. >> > Are you trying to compare a work of fiction with ancient Semitic social > and moral philosophy? Perhaps you can't even see the difference, can you? > > > -- > Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Being as the Bible is mostly a series of Books of Fiction the comparison is correct. Myth is the religious fiction of the People who write it. Quote
Guest Chris Morris Posted February 22, 2007 Posted February 22, 2007 "Pastor Frank" <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote in message news:45dc69dc$0$16402$88260bb3@free.teranews.com... > <thedeviliam@hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:1171945953.785065.293000@t69g2000cwt.googlegroups.com... >> On Feb 19, 6:38 pm, "Jeckyl" <n...@nowhere.com> wrote: >>> > >>> > Christians totally base their faith on the Bibles. >>> >>> There isn't much else to go on. What exactly is your point? >> >> Do Christians really totally based their beliefs on the Bible? Most of >> them haven't even read the damn thing, and the ones that have ignore >> whatever they don't like. You can't "totally" base your beliefs on >> something that contradicts itself. >> > Categorical in your condemnation, aren't you? Sorry to hear that > Christians don't live up to your exalted expectations, but then I bet > nobody does. The Bible is ancient Hebrew social and moral philosophy, > written mostly in the poetic format. Contradictions are mostly the result > of one's inability to interpret constructively. Some excel in that, for > that is what they are looking for and what's right escapes them > completely. Are you that kind of person? > Frank first off only the so called Old Testament was written in Hebrew and it is never meant to be read literally. With Ancient Hebrew there is no precise meaning to the words and in fact there is an old saying that Torah speaks to each Generation anew and it is up to those who read it to discover the meaning within. Now the New Testament was written in Greek a language that is not really suited to transmitting Divine Wisdom and is thus more precisely translated, but even here people have managed to get it wrong because of the changes made to the texts over the Centuries by both the Scribes and the Church Fathers that did not like what was written when it did not go with what they believed. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.