We are created to the image Of God because we like God have spiritual life, conscience And free will.
Jesus wanted to die on the cross, because only in this way He was destined to save the world. He suffered, died And after three days He rose from the grave. He ascended into Heaven And now is Lord, as God and as Man, the supreme ruler Of the universe.
He will come back as a supreme Judge to complete human history at the end Of time.
If you want proof of God's existence look at the mirror! Do you think that such mysterious beings as we are may be the products of the blind chance! NEVER!
Human body and psyche are such marvels, such mystery! If you think that it happened without any previous design of God, then you must believe that a monkey pressing typewriter's keys blindly is able to write a scientific book or a poem.
@franciszek8D - "If you want proof of God's existence look at the mirror!" Oh really??? If I'm made in the image of God, then, is God fat and bald like me? Also, if Jesus is God, then, it must have taken 3 Roman soldiers to hoist him up, and nail him up on the cross! Yeah! Uh huh! I get it now! YEAH RIGHT!!!
We are only humans And we are in need Of faith. Science is not able to prove or explain everything.
We believe our teachers that what they teach is correct. We believe that our parents are really our parents. If we try to prove, it may show differently...
The fundamental questions are always the same: Who are we? What we came from? Where we are going? Is life beyond death? Same questions were asked thousand years ago And today same questions we ask.
@franciszek8D Who are we? A collection of atoms that fleetingly amass together and enable us to have for a few short moments a life. What we came from? Stars that were kind enough to live a little, die and release their contents into the cosmos. Where are we going? We will deteriorate and the atoms that make us will return to the cosmic cycle of things. Is life beyond death? There is no reason to believe that there is, at least not as conscious beings. Hope this helps.
@baldrad1 No. Faith in ANYTHING is NOT a necessary function of homo sapiens, and you are being incredibly dishonest to suggest that it is. I can't believe anyone would make such a ridiculous claim.
@TheJawsThemeSong Faith in SOMETHING is in that space---in other words, you BELIEVE in SOMETHING, or you have a belief system, in that space. If only a belief in total randomness or meaninglessness, it IS a belief system.
@baldrad1 That's not true, you do not to have something that relates to religious faith at all. Atheism is simply a lack of belief in gods, that's it. Why would you need to have something to fill a hole that isn't there? You seem to be equating belief and faith and they are NOT the same things. For instance if I were to say I believe that there is no true free will, I could easily back that up with the fact that physics shows us that everything works on a cause and effect principle.
@TheJawsThemeSong ....where did I say you have something that relates to RELIGIOUS faith? I contend that a Homo Sapiens level of intelligence and reasoning requires that IN THAT MENTAL AND CONSCIOUSNESS SPACE there will be a belief system (if only in existence for a day of part of a day, and perhaps as a result of what was learned the previous day) that carries a man/woman forward in daily problem solving on all levels.
@baldrad1 What carries a rational man forward is the sum of his experiences, his desires, and logical thought. There's no need to speak of the mind as if a vacuum is created when there is no faith and other parts of cognitive thought rushes in to fill the void. What does that add and where are you getting this idea from? The mind does not work like that. Faith in the way Sam is using it is a belief without evidence, I don't know if you're using a different definition or what.
@baldrad1 That's not true, you do not to have something that relates to religious faith at all. Atheism is simply a lack of belief in gods, that's it. Why would you need to have something to fill a hole that isn't there? You seem to be equating belief and faith and they are NOT the same things. For instance if I were to say I believe that there is no true free will, I could easily back that up with the fact that physics shows us that everything works on a cause and effect principle.
Finally.. I was starting to beleive i was the only one who thought this way.
This world needs a wake up call. How many more hundred years must we live in the dark ages?? We are only at the dawn Of the social revolution. The universe is ours if we choose to take it.
We should say not the end but the beginning of faith. It was easier to be atheist in the past time but not at the present time. Before people had no idea how mysteriously the universe operates. How wounderfully any living cell is buildt.
You must be naive to believe that it was done by blind chance. Creator very clearly revealed himself in the way he made the universe.
People wake up! Why you do not see his loving presence in His creation?
@franciszek8D no we don't see this precense you write about because we are rational. God only exists in the minds of those who refuse to let go of the darkest periods in human history
If you want to be free of religious dogma go to Britain as basically the only religious influence is a monthly visit to the school from the local minister and only about 5 people in each class actually believe in god and they are the sort that accept the theory of evolution and stuff like that
@somewhatd LOL you're close. He's actually a genetically engineered combination of Ben Stiller and Seth Green, with a large dose of Einstein's intellect.
I think it's funny if he thinks not believing in religion will stop people from hurting/killing each other. People will always find a reason to hate/hurt/kill each other regardless if it's rational or not. emotions aren't rational they just are.
@CardinalRaker He has never claimed religion is the only cause of violence and prejudice. Rather, his claim is that religion is probably the most powerful of the many emotion- and faith-based forces that threaten our worldwide society. Therefore, diminishing its power by helping people under its spell become more aware and better educated would likely reduce violence and prejudice, not eliminate it.
@warren52nz imho America has been a sinking ship for years. With a few exceptions on it (I think places like New York are safer from disturbingly deluded people), america is no longer a safe nor good place to live.
@johntkooz "America has been a sinking ship for years"
If you go through the American border control these days it feels like Nazi Germany (or at least how they portray Nazis in movies anyway). Cops don't carry guns here so after you've been away for awhile and you go into the States it has an added feeling of danger. I was at St Louis airport and they evacuated the terminal and I was taking pictures when a cop came up to me and told me to put it away or he'd confiscate it. Assholes!
just imagine how breathtakingly specific a work of prophecy would be, if it were actually the product of omniscience. If the Bible were such a book, it would make perfectly accurate predictions about human events.
i would marry this man, purely based on the fact that he is one of the most intelligent, well articulated, men of the 21st century. If only I met men like this, in my everyday life.
@sophside Meanwhile, please direct us to the female equivalent of Mr. Harris. Miladies are under represented in this area where we so desperately need all the intellectual firepower we can muster.
@fctchk true enough. the female representation is limited, but we are out there, thinking and agreeing with intelligent men like this, wishing there was more positive representation from either sex, informing and educating people of the world,
@sophside Yes you are out there, just not so much publicly and we so do love them madly whenever they do surface: Listen to Sara between 07:54 and 8:25 in this video: watch?v=F9CTwgfSULQ&NR=1 and behold the admiration for her expressed in the comments.
Ah being atheist doesn't mean you can't believe in supernatural powers or magical things. The concept means the lack of god or gods, I could well believe that the world was formed by events "out of this world" by the intervention of supernatural forces. It's me sick see idiots like you who use the thing of "I was an atheist" as a form of ego and acceptance.
You were never atheist-gnostic, you were an atheist-agnostic who just needed evidence; you were always religious.
@mmeasy123 life...you need evidence lol look in the mirror your right here! They have started looking into deep or low resonance they may or may not find some thing, im not sure the technology is ready presently but they will one day.
@mmeasy123 at what point did i say it was.i merelly stated that you cannot kill god. and then pointed out that there is an omnipitent being round i didnt say god is life...?
@mikevern69 I'm not trying to be funny but are you on mushrooms or something? I'm trying to have a serious conversation and you go off on rediculous tangents.
@mmeasy123 better, i agree but ther is an omnipotent being its the life force in all living critters, i know this because im a weirdo freak idiot fool stupid...it goes on, some see it most do not. I cant tell you from experience, i dont need you to believe me. that there is a pervading force that exists. some scientists are doing studies for low deep vibrations to try and see if there is any thing that can be found for science.They know its there but you can not see it but if you can feel it.
@mmeasy123 mary had a little lamb she thought it rather silly she through it up into the air and caught it by the....please dont im not interested in that nonsense. speak you own mind or not at all. thank you.
@mikevern69 Nonsense? lol....I present you with one of the most thought out and notorious arguments for god's nonexistence by one of humanities greatest thinkers, but to mikevern69 it's "nonsense." I repeatedly ask you questions but you dodge them with inane, inarticulate babble.
@mmeasy123 i always tell lies , thers another parodox for you.let me explain it. the sentence it self proclaims a lie but within it self it is also truth. happy now numb nuts..?
@mikevern69 You are obviously mad so I'll let you simmer down a little. If you feel at some point you are able to communicate effectivley and with some civility, then you may contact me. Until then, lick your wounds and rethink your position.
I used to be an atheist, but i became a baptist christian because evidence was presented to me. You see i can tell when people are lying. One time i watched a video of a guy who said he went to hell and he came back, and i saw that he was telling the truth. But when i first watched the video i couldn't tell when people are lying back then. But i knew he was telling the truth because i saw a bunch of other videos of people who went to hell and there stories were similar to each other.
I'm with you, IPAndrews, except for the notion that spirituality doesn't make you happier. Statistics show that it does. I could dedicate myself to the belief that I have a horse cock and a harem of 18 year olds who live to see me do the lambada in a g-string, and if I succeeded I would be a very happy man, indeed. Naturally, I'm speaking of delusional joy, but it registers nonetheless. It's not evidence of truth, it's more evidence of untruth, but it does technically lend happiness.
I'm not a materialist but I agree with this guy. I think there is more intelligence to the cosmos than we give credit, but I don't think it is a "Guy in the sky" who acts like a King and gives humans orders. But clearly in order to embrace a true spirituality that comes from direct mystical experience, we need to transcend the narrowness and ignorance of established religion and superstition.
@graphx311 What does believing in something spiritual or mystical gain you? It doesn't make you happy, or a better person? Focus on what you can see. Which isn't necessarily a new house or a brand new car. Materialism gets a bad rap. People are material. This world, Earth, is material. Focus on them. Not having all the answers can be scary but accepting that you don't and may never have them is liberating. I can recommend it. There is nothing to fear except fear itself.
there is no argument against this man. He is right. Religion has no more place for public respect than astrology, or alchemy. If my neighbor told me he dictated his life by the alignment of the stars, I would think he was a nut. We all should. And we need to get biblical belief OUT of public office of importance.
Hate to report this sad news but I must. Mr. Harris has been lying awake nights for weeks now after reading sisker2's derisive and extremely taunting insults >>> ;-)
@sisker2, Please do not use insults to show your opposition of this man. He always tells people that he is not trying to insult anyone, so please be respectful of his views.
@sisker2 - The creator and ruler of the entire Universe just… so happens to be, an author of books. Wow, that’s pretty cool… not! Take whatever your specific religion may be, and throw it in the bin like you have with every other religion which you don’t believe in.
"We know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffs up, but love edifies. And if anyone thinks that he knows anything, he knows nothing yet as he ought to know."
If only you had the sense to think before you speak, you may have been able to convince me that you are not ignorant but alas, YOU ARE!
@sisker2 "If only you had the sense to think before you speak"...Isn't it ironic that most people who blatantly fail to use their own faculties of reason (possibly due to dogmatic brainwashing), so frequently accuse people of "speaking before thinking"? xD (btw, don't answer that sisker2. Purely rhetorical...and true, though!)
Religion is not belief in a god, Zen Buddhism do not follow their beliefs based on a powerful entity as known to Christians as "God."
Jainism is a religion totally atheistic, they believe the world is eternal and without beginning. Not believe there is a personal deity, or all possible gods are emanations or manifestations of any deity or any unit apophatic.
Christians only respect religions that seem to Christianity, and they monopolize the whole concept of religion.
Okay, then criminal cases involving circumstantial evidence should be thrown out due to lack of "physical" evidence. Until our "primative" sciences are able to see worlds inside our universe, then atheists will not be satisfied. One hundred years ago, there was no discussion of the mapping of human genes.
Then he said unto them, O fools, and SLOW of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken: Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory? And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself. (Lu 24:25-27)
Typically, scientists know the laughing is over on the deathbed. They want REAL answers..
They know they can't create 1 living cell of anything, and they surely can't stop death.
Thus, time to join the chosen..
"Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and [that] your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you." (Joh 15:16)
scientist has only had maybe 200-100 years for not being burned for reasearch also religion has had thousands of years with no evidence. But yet science within decades can explain more than religion can explain in thousands of years
I'm not an enabler of religious extremism, war, or terrorism just as you are not an enabler of atheistic Communism leading to Russian gulags. I think Sam Harris makes some irresponsible connections. Any ideology taken to an extreme and put above people such that it is forced upon people will inevitably lead to oppression or war. It's not just religious ideology. The big picture is not about eliminating religion but eliminating forcing ideas down people's throats.
Why must you specify atheistic Communism? Generalizations like that are the epitome of religious enabling.
Atheism didn't lead to the gulag. Yes Stalin was an atheist but he didn't torture his people because there was no god, he did it because he was sadistic and immoral despite his religious upbringing and study at seminary.
Atheism was no more at fault for the atrocities committed by Stalin and Hitler (arguments could fairly be made for for both sides in his case) than were their mustaches.
Communism is the liberation of the working class from capitalism. Liberation includes abolishing religious beliefs which Marx believed oppressed the common people; it may require violent uprising. Although Communism is not synonymous with Atheism, Atheism is a cornerstone beliefs of Communism. Atheism itself does not justify oppression and war, but an ideology that required Atheism justified these.
Generalizations are bad. Neither Atheism and Christianity shouldn't be associated with war.
Stalinism was at it's core a religious undertaking. Stalinism was believed by stalinists to be the penultimate system of government/morality (Judaism). Much like North Korea, all praise and glory is due the leader, Stalin (Christianity). Belief in his word is mandatory and the lack thereof is punishable by death (Islam).
While the denunciation of Abrahamic religion may be a tenet of communism, Stalinism was a religion in and of itself.
Sam, as a supposed chemical-onlyite, attempts to assess reality.
Sorry, no bubble-gum cigar.
He's only chemistry.
"Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear." (Heb 11:3)
Through faith you understand nothing but that which you've been spoon-fed and bribed into believing.
Through faith you take the illiterate word of bronze-age palestinian zealots that, if followed to the letter rather than cherry-picked, leads to the most immoral life possible.
Through faith you open your heart to god and shut your mind to reason and logic.
Through faith you justify your solipsism as a noble and worthwhile enterprise and you gain only the scorn of educated and rational people.
You're right, I spoke in passionate hyperbole, I admit, and apologize for my sniping.
But I won't back off of the sentiment. What did Jesus have to say about slavery? Only that we shouldn't beat them so badly as to damage their teeth or their eyes.
He also said that judaic law must be followed to the letter. The same law that mandates stoning gays, disobedient children, and nonbelievers, their families and the entire population of their town.
ok.. I was about to say perhaps Satanism may lead to the most immoral life possible.
Jesus didn't say anything about literal slavery in the gospels. You are talking about the Old Testament law which fines slave owners for mistreating their slaves.
Jesus didn't say that all the Old Testament law should be obeyed.. otherwise people wouldn't believe in Jesus. And the issue of stoning people, wars, etc. are not in the New Testament. So Christianity is cleared.
"And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes." Jesus' sermon recounted in the NT in Luke 12: 45-48
Look it up. He could have said slavery was bad. Instead he, ever so mercifully, proscribes fewer beatings for ignorant slaves than for willful ones. Prince of Peace eh? I say anti-abolitionist.
context, context. This is not about beating servants but being a wise servant to God.
Luke 12:41 Peter said, Lord, are you telling this parable for us or for all? 42 And the Lord said, Who then is the faithful and wise manager, whom his master will set over his household, to give them their portion of food at the proper time? 43 Blessed is that servant whom his master will find so doing when he comes. 44 Truly, I say to you, he will set him over all his possessions.
If the context argument makes you feel better, by all means stick with it.
Personally however, if a loving and (importantly) all-knowing god's most applicable metaphor for his relationship with me is best expressed in terms of slavery, I'll take a pass.
Not to mention that this isn't a refutation of my point at all, it's further proof of religion's acceptance of and even praise for forced human servitude.
Luke 12:45 But if that servant says to himself, My master is delayed in coming, and begins to beat the male and female servants, and to eat and drink and get drunk, 46 the master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he does not know, and will cut him in pieces and put him with the unfaithful. 47 And that servant who knew his masters will but did not get ready or act according to his will, will receive a severe beating.
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place." Jesus quoted in Matthew 5:17
Seriously, you've got to read the bible man. It's all in there. And now that I've shown you the factual information, I patiently await your indignant response.
You previously asserted that, "Jesus didn't say that all the Old Testament law should be obeyed." You fail to support that claim here and simultaneously fail - once again - to refute my claim that Jesus said exactly that.
Again, intoning "context" when you really mean "personal interpretation" may work for you but not for me or any other psychologically honest and rational person. Playing semantics with "sin/law" does not give you a pass for Jesus' obvious ringing endorsement of OT barbarism.
Where does Jesus say that *we* have to obey *all* the Old Testament? This is not my personal interpretation. If you can find where Jesus says this, I'll change my mind.
Jesus says:
Matt. 5:17 Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.
Jesus fulfilled the Law by obeying it. Jesus never sinned. But I have sinned. Obeying the Law is not about enforcing it. I'm on the side to be stoned, not the side that stones.
Well get ready to change your mind because Jesus says just that in the very next passage:
"For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." Mat 5:18
Jesus puts the seal of god on the validity of the law set forth in the OT. The law can never change. and in 5:19 he goes on to say the the most lawful will be regarded in heaven as "great."
Now you tell me which OT law he overturns or amends here, I beg you.
Okay, so he fulfilled them for 33 years. When did he say that after his death slavery should be abolished? When did he ever say that women were the equal of men? When did he ever say that children should be coddled and not stoned? When did he say gays were humans? Infidels too? Blacks equals? Electricity, true? Nuclear winter possible? Space undeniable? Math important? Plumbing necessary? Public education advantageous? Dental hygiene a priority? Germs real? Israel holy? Islam bad?
The point of the Bible is not to describe all of reality.. and all future reality as well. Even Britannica and Wikipedia do not contain all of reality.. and especially not all future reality.
Is it reasonable to demand that the Bible have 21st century knowledge of science, math, technology, warfare, medicine, etc?
If if is reasonable, what books today describe the future this comprehensively?
Aside from science, you mention morality. That's more relevant to the Bible...
Britannica and Wikipedia make no claims to be the holy word of god given to us by the creator of the universe. No one has ever said Britannica is the only book one could need for moral guidance.
I think it is reasonable that a book from god would contain more than only the knowledge available at the time it is written.
Is it reasonable to belief the faith claims of bronze age illiterate palestinians, many of which have been proven false by science centuries ago?
@LazyIrish829 about Britannica making no claim as God's revelation
True. The Bible does contain more knowledge than at the time it was written. There are prophecies in it. The most important ones have to do with Christ in the Old Testament.
Whether the Bible lacks any necessary detail depends on it's purpose. If the purpose of the Bible was to teach people hygiene, dentistry, etc, we should expect to find "dental hygiene" (your example) there.
So because it contained prophecies, that means it contains information unknowable to the people of the time in which it was created?
If you write a book and say a man will come from the east on a mule wearing a toque and high heeled shoes and I read it and do exactly that, does that mean you are prophetic or that I simply fulfilled your prophecy?
Prophecy proves only the humanness of the bible's authorship.
The bible contains mostly outdated bigotry, but those are just metaphors right?
Lev 19:18 You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against the sons of your own people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself: I am the LORD.
Jesus teaches this is the center of the Law:
Matt 22:36 Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law? [see next verses]
That is be a neighbor to anyone, love everyone:
Luke 10:29 But he, desiring to justify himself, said to Jesus, And who is my neighbor? [see next verses]
IT's too long to quote here but please refer to Paul's letter to the Romans 1:24-32
Paul speaks of homosexuals and ends the passage reminding us that god has decreed death is the only suitable punishment for homosexual behaviors.
Again, saying love your neighbor is all well and good but what if that neighbor happens to be homosexual? You might agree with Paul, I have no idea. If not, then you must agree that here the NT preaches intolerance and murder of fellow human beings.
Untrue. Homosexuals differ from you because they have turned away from god.
And if there is no difference in the eyes of god between the two of you, why would god proscribe death for the homosexual who acts according to his/her nature but not for you if you act according to yours?
I'm gonna say something shocking. It's alright to be a homosexual and be a Christian at the same time. To be saved all that is needed is a belief that God exists, God is God, that we have wronged God, and salvation is only through faith in Jesus' resurrection.
Sexuality is natural. But if God exists. He might not agree with us on the proper way of doing it. We can talk about this more if you like. This is where the Bible offends the most people.
@kickingtheutubehabit If a political law were to be passed that could be interpreted in a million ways and was placed in a society, that society would not flourish, it would be a society where criminals could commit violence and be justified by there interpretation, we never enact laws that have multiple interpretations, we only seem to do this with something that was enforced on uneducated peoples and kicked into our heads for the last 2000 years.
I'm glad you feel that way but it has no bearing on the issue. We're told that Paul & Co. taught what Jesus thought and he does not share your belief.
What purpose would a homosexual have to turn to Christ when he/she is considered an abomination?
Just for the record, I'm not upset about this because it applies to me personally. It doesn't. But it does apply to some of the most decent and pure-hearted people I know. Just imagine how much better gays lives would be without these passages.
@LazyIrish829 about the abomination of homosexuality
God does not ever consider people an abomination. But he does consider some actions to be an abomination. Even though we do things that upset God, it's not his first choice to judge us. He cares about us like good parents who are lovingly attached to their children and won't disown them.
If anyone turns to Christ, homosexual or heterosexual, it's because they believe God exists and reconciliation with him is possible.
Leviticus 18:22 "Homosexual acts are an abomination to God" and 20:13 If a man has sex with another man, kill them both."
Yes they say here "acts" and issue an "If-then" statement but would you be drawn to a religion that condemns acts that are in accordance with your very nature? That's not to mention the second of the two enjoining believers to kill that homosexual should they ever actually ACT according to that nature - which god gave them, btw.
There's also Deuteronomy 23:17-18; 1 Samuel 20:30-33; 1 Kings 22:43-46; 1 Corinthians 6:9-10; and 1 Timothy 1:10 just to name a few. And you've already conceded the downright immoral preachments extolled as virtue in Paul's letter to the Romans 1:24-32.
There is simply no way to rationally argue that a homosexual should feel right at home among christ's flock. They are made to feel excluded in every passage wherein the bible mentions them - even killed in a generous portion of these passages.
@LazyIrish829 about all the comments about homosexuality
hey.. is it possible to do things one comment at a time? it's just easier to follow each other's comments, we'll be able to focus on one topic at a time, and we won't be scattered. thanks.
I'm not saying that Christianity is a safe haven for homosexuality. But Christianity is a safe haven for people who believe God is there, God is good, and God offers all people (heterosexual, homosexual, etc.) reconciliation because he loves all people
I agree. Things were getting out of hand. I won't press you on the homosexuality point. I'll just say imagine the weight of your words as heard by a gay person fluent in biblical pronouncements.
The thing I find most difficult to streamline with christian teachings would be the following:
If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters, even his own life, he cannot be my disciple Luke 14:26
@LazyIrish829 about pressing homosexuality and hating our parents for Jesus (Luke 14:26), part 1
No problem. It's ok to press me about homosexuality.
I agree with you:
1. Homosexuals are likable people.
2. The Bible does not support homosexuality, in fact the Bible condemns it. In the Old Testament, punishment was mandated against it. (these are facts)
questions:
1. How can a loving God command bigotry?
2. Doesn't this make the Bible morally regressive?
I might have phrased the questions differently and added another but I think your answers are very well-reasoned and compassionate.
I'm not at all surprised by your honesty and humanity but I do want to note here that it's also important to me how much harm has been caused by these immoral beliefs.
Thousands of innocent human beings have been killed as a direct result of them - a friend of mine was permanently injured.
This is a hard question because sexuality touches the deepest parts of who we are.
Can those who disagree with our actions/lifestyle still care about us? I believe so. God does not accept all our actions. But he accepts us as we are if we accept him as he is.
If God disagrees with us, that does not make it impossible for him to exist.
I agree. IT is possible that He/She can exist and disagree with us simultaneously.
My question would not be how can god command bigotry, it would be is he more pleased with those of us who obey his commands? In other words, would god grant a higher reward to a devoutly christian gay-basher than he would a moderate like yourself?
Reading strictly from the biblical text, it would appear that he/she would.
According to the word of your god, you would be accepted but the bigot would be praised.
Of course it's harder to believe in a God who disagrees with us. But the 1st question should be, "Is God there?" not "Does God agree with me/my lifestyle?"
I like it when I see in the Bible a mirror of my own ideals. But some times we don't see it.
God gave the gift of sexuality to everyone, but he has parameters for everyone. In Deut, even heterosexuals could be stoned.
I forgot to tag my response to part 2. Sorry. It's just above this one I believe.
I also agree that IS God there? is the pertinent question. However, unless he/she chooses to answer, it's really a moot point to ask that specific question. Instead, I think we are forced to feel around the edges with more specific questions.
If he gave us sexuality, hasn't he cursed gays that he created gay?
Indeed it seems god is all for equal opportunity stoning. :)
So why was God that severe against other forms of sex? This is like trying to answer why alimony can be so high for marital infidelity. God's sexual morality is more particular than ours, there's more than mutual consent.
But God welcomes everyone. Here's Jesus:
Matt. 21:31 Truly, I say to you, the tax collectors and the prostitutes go into the kingdom of God before you.
Why should god care about what we do in the privacy of our homes? If he/she hates gay sex, can't he/she do something about it? Just stop making people gay (I hope you aren't one who would say that gays CHOOSE to subject themselves to a lifetime of scorn, forced-shame, and bigotry)?
Perhaps God does welcome everyone. But what does he/she gain from making their lives hell before admitting them into heaven? And what of the gay-bashers already there?
I really don't have much to add here other than another plea to common sense and humanism. How cruel is it to create a bird and forbid it from flying?
Now ask yourself, how cruel is it to create a human being and forbid it from expressing and experiencing love?
@LazyIrish829 about pressing homosexuality and hating our parents for Jesus (Luke 14:26), part 5
In context, Jesus was speaking to religious people.
You objected to homosexuality being condemned in Romans 1. But see where Paul goes with this:
Rom. 2:1 Therefore you have no excuse, O man, every one of you who judges. For in passing judgment on another you condemn yourself, because you, the judge, practice the very same things.
@LazyIrish829 about pressing homosexuality and hating our parents for Jesus (Luke 14:26), part 6
Sorry, there was no way to address homosexuality and Christianity in a 500 character text box. This is a loaded, sensitive topic.
But I want to leave 2 things with you. First, God loves all of us, God has standards, all of us have failed those standards, yet God offers us reconciliation because we are more important to him than our offenses.
I believe it would be nice if God loved all of us. But the actual evidence is quite to the contrary. I don't believe what is desirable I believe what is empirically true.
You could argue that no one can prove anything as a truth and I can't disagree there. But the theory of gravity seems pretty sound. As does that of Heliocentricity. And each of them are not just ignored but refuted in the bible.
What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
@LazyIrish829 - on whether things asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence
Can/Will all phenomena in the universe and everything in existence be observed and explained by human science?
If yes, where's the evidence? That's a faith statement as much as, "God exists."
I guess there are limits to human knowledge and the theist and the atheist would do well to acknowledge their limitations of knowledge. This leads to less contempt for one another.
But saying science can't prove or disprove god is not the point. As I said, God is possible but highly unlikely given the misery and injustices caused by and committed in his name.
regretfully there are a lot of injustices caused in God's name. but that's politics, not faith.. unless the faith itself teaches war (like the Qur'an teaches war) or oppression.
with politics, leaders use the prevailing ideas, beliefs, and values of the people to achieve an end. sometimes this is war. when people were religious, politicians used that. in the future when people are less religious, politicians will appeal to other motivations.
I'm not anti-politics. Politics is a tool that can do good.
But people are imperfect and do bad things with the tools they have.
Likewise, people tend to justifying things. justification has to appeal to prevailing beliefs, attitudes, and values. when faith prevailed, justifications were religious. When religion declines, the justifications will be more secular.
So to show religious faith leads to evil, it must be shown from it's teachings.
I grant you that there are contradictory passages condemning such behavior, and a good thing too - imagine the license certain people would take against gays without them! But that just strengthens my point that the only time God chose to talk to us, he confused the hell out of us (pun intended)!
That he feels both ways about this does not console me in the least. He still promotes (and apparently rewards) bigotry and that's not something a loving god should do.
@LazyIrish829 -- Does the Bible support gay bashing?
I'm very sorry to hear about your injured friend. Gay bashing cannot be supported by the Bible at all. Could we work through one Bible passage at a time?
Rom 1:26-27 doesn't support gay bashing. It should be interpreted by Rom 2:1. Rom 1-3 is a sustained argument for grace..
I'm happy to try it your way. Our standards of evidence arent equal here so I don't think we'll find much consensus but here goes. I've already dealt with Romans 1 and gays so I'll examine it for other flaws as well.
3-5 Christ is admitted to have a human father, and therefore contradicts the Immaculate Conception. Only his resurrection implies divinity.
28 Admits that god caused them to be gay and therefore condemns his own will.
Yeah, because if we don't work through the details we'll end up talking at each other.
Rom 1:3-5 - You have objections to Jesus' Incarnation (100% man, 100% God). This is not on topic with homosexuality. Jesus fulfills the prophecy of a king sitting on David's throne forever (Isa 9:7).
Rom 1:28 - The verb is not "make". God does not make people disobey him. He "hands them over". He let's us do what we want if we persistently pull away from him.
As I said, I've said my piece on homosexuality in Romans so there was no point iterating the points I had already made. I examined it for other inconsistencies as well.
1:3-5 The passage says Jesus is of David's line. They didn't track maternal geneologies. Jesus must have had a human father contribute his genetic material; therefore, not immaculate.
1:28 Gays aren't choosing to go against god, they're acting according to their nature - which he gives them.
Rom 1:3-5 - Perhaps we can talk about immaculate conception after we reach an impasse or an understanding on Christianity and homosexuality? I think it's better to finish one thing before moving on. That ok?
Rom 1:28 - Yes most gays are not consciously choosing to go against God.. like "I'm going to act out to get God mad." But we have freewill. That's the nature God has given us. And we can make our own choices. God lets us do what we want.
To BigFatHeretic!
We are created to the image Of God because we like God have spiritual life, conscience And free will.
Jesus wanted to die on the cross, because only in this way He was destined to save the world. He suffered, died And after three days He rose from the grave. He ascended into Heaven And now is Lord, as God and as Man, the supreme ruler Of the universe.
He will come back as a supreme Judge to complete human history at the end Of time.
The good will be rewarded, evil people wil
franciszek8D 2 months ago
Jesus is NOT coming again, unless he's jacking off!!!
BigFatHeretic 2 months ago
If you want proof of God's existence look at the mirror! Do you think that such mysterious beings as we are may be the products of the blind chance! NEVER!
Human body and psyche are such marvels, such mystery! If you think that it happened without any previous design of God, then you must believe that a monkey pressing typewriter's keys blindly is able to write a scientific book or a poem.
franciszek8D 3 months ago
@franciszek8D - "If you want proof of God's existence look at the mirror!" Oh really??? If I'm made in the image of God, then, is God fat and bald like me? Also, if Jesus is God, then, it must have taken 3 Roman soldiers to hoist him up, and nail him up on the cross! Yeah! Uh huh! I get it now! YEAH RIGHT!!!
BigFatHeretic 2 months ago
Another Godless child of Satan........ real zionist news
bybronaaa17 3 months ago
We are only humans And we are in need Of faith. Science is not able to prove or explain everything.
We believe our teachers that what they teach is correct. We believe that our parents are really our parents. If we try to prove, it may show differently...
The fundamental questions are always the same: Who are we? What we came from? Where we are going? Is life beyond death? Same questions were asked thousand years ago And today same questions we ask.
Only God knows reality perfectly And therefor
franciszek8D 3 months ago
@franciszek8D Does every church hand out a pamphlet with the exact phrases you just stated?
Codfert970 3 months ago
@franciszek8D Who are we? A collection of atoms that fleetingly amass together and enable us to have for a few short moments a life. What we came from? Stars that were kind enough to live a little, die and release their contents into the cosmos. Where are we going? We will deteriorate and the atoms that make us will return to the cosmic cycle of things. Is life beyond death? There is no reason to believe that there is, at least not as conscious beings. Hope this helps.
SonOfNye 2 months ago
...Sam Harris would postulate that he has NO BELIEF SYSTEM, or no faith.
That is illogical. Faith in SOMETHING is in that space. It is a function of the higher intelligence of Homo Sapiens, evolved or not.
Atheists here make ridiculous leaps of faith in their effort to identify THE villain(s), the virus, etc.
Atheists would like to see ENFORCED thought policing.
baldrad1 4 months ago
@baldrad1 No. Faith in ANYTHING is NOT a necessary function of homo sapiens, and you are being incredibly dishonest to suggest that it is. I can't believe anyone would make such a ridiculous claim.
TheJawsThemeSong 4 months ago
@TheJawsThemeSong Faith in SOMETHING is in that space---in other words, you BELIEVE in SOMETHING, or you have a belief system, in that space. If only a belief in total randomness or meaninglessness, it IS a belief system.
baldrad1 4 months ago
@baldrad1 That's not true, you do not to have something that relates to religious faith at all. Atheism is simply a lack of belief in gods, that's it. Why would you need to have something to fill a hole that isn't there? You seem to be equating belief and faith and they are NOT the same things. For instance if I were to say I believe that there is no true free will, I could easily back that up with the fact that physics shows us that everything works on a cause and effect principle.
TheJawsThemeSong 4 months ago
@TheJawsThemeSong ....where did I say you have something that relates to RELIGIOUS faith? I contend that a Homo Sapiens level of intelligence and reasoning requires that IN THAT MENTAL AND CONSCIOUSNESS SPACE there will be a belief system (if only in existence for a day of part of a day, and perhaps as a result of what was learned the previous day) that carries a man/woman forward in daily problem solving on all levels.
baldrad1 4 months ago
@baldrad1 What carries a rational man forward is the sum of his experiences, his desires, and logical thought. There's no need to speak of the mind as if a vacuum is created when there is no faith and other parts of cognitive thought rushes in to fill the void. What does that add and where are you getting this idea from? The mind does not work like that. Faith in the way Sam is using it is a belief without evidence, I don't know if you're using a different definition or what.
TheJawsThemeSong 4 months ago
@baldrad1 That's not true, you do not to have something that relates to religious faith at all. Atheism is simply a lack of belief in gods, that's it. Why would you need to have something to fill a hole that isn't there? You seem to be equating belief and faith and they are NOT the same things. For instance if I were to say I believe that there is no true free will, I could easily back that up with the fact that physics shows us that everything works on a cause and effect principle.
TheJawsThemeSong 4 months ago
Sex is not made by God for enjoyment only.
First it is for human reproduction. Enjoyment or gratification is after abd in service Of reproduction.
franciszek8D 5 months ago
@franciszek8D
You're a dumbass, biblemaggot
sonykroket 3 months ago
Sam, Sam vatican is right . Faithfulness, integrity, selfcontrol is the solution for AIDS not condoms.
After all we humans are not animals. If people were faithful to their marriage commitment, AIDS would not be any problem.
Keep God's commandments And you will stay out Of problems. Morality, morality And morality is what we all need.
franciszek8D 5 months ago
@franciszek8D Wait..."Humans are NOT animals"? Well that's a relief. Now we can do away with sex altogether and end the use of condoms permanently.
D3maine 5 months ago
Finally.. I was starting to beleive i was the only one who thought this way.
This world needs a wake up call. How many more hundred years must we live in the dark ages?? We are only at the dawn Of the social revolution. The universe is ours if we choose to take it.
MrBoggles 6 months ago
thahk you for standing up to religion
alexdalyno1 6 months ago
We should say not the end but the beginning of faith. It was easier to be atheist in the past time but not at the present time. Before people had no idea how mysteriously the universe operates. How wounderfully any living cell is buildt.
You must be naive to believe that it was done by blind chance. Creator very clearly revealed himself in the way he made the universe.
People wake up! Why you do not see his loving presence in His creation?
franciszek8D 7 months ago
@franciszek8D no we don't see this precense you write about because we are rational. God only exists in the minds of those who refuse to let go of the darkest periods in human history
Emaniac69 5 months ago
sam @2:04
QuestionReadLearn 8 months ago
If you want to be free of religious dogma go to Britain as basically the only religious influence is a monthly visit to the school from the local minister and only about 5 people in each class actually believe in god and they are the sort that accept the theory of evolution and stuff like that
beef5162 9 months ago 3
@beef5162 i tought britain is religious because of the immigrants who believe in islam ? or am i wrong ? :)
LuckSkyStar 5 months ago
Didn't know Ben Stiller was so well spoken.
somewhatd 9 months ago 12
@somewhatd LOL you're close. He's actually a genetically engineered combination of Ben Stiller and Seth Green, with a large dose of Einstein's intellect.
Beeza2996 9 months ago 2
@somewhatd I never noticed that they looked like one another until just now. What has been seen, cannot be unseen.
SonOfNye 2 months ago
@SonOfNye And what cannot be unseen, has been seen. =)
somewhatd 2 months ago
opening speech by Admiral Ackbar
Jerrez 11 months ago
@Jerrez It's a trap!!!!
rep300 9 months ago
I think it's funny if he thinks not believing in religion will stop people from hurting/killing each other. People will always find a reason to hate/hurt/kill each other regardless if it's rational or not. emotions aren't rational they just are.
CardinalRaker 11 months ago
@CardinalRaker He has never claimed religion is the only cause of violence and prejudice. Rather, his claim is that religion is probably the most powerful of the many emotion- and faith-based forces that threaten our worldwide society. Therefore, diminishing its power by helping people under its spell become more aware and better educated would likely reduce violence and prejudice, not eliminate it.
Beeza2996 9 months ago
Sam Harris loves his black blazer and blue shirt combo
gday1111111 1 year ago
Sam Harris = Bernie Madoff
TAXtheAtheist 1 year ago
@nethius Thanks for posting this.
M0US3P0T4TO 1 year ago
He articulates my thoughts so eloquently.
PoliticalLee 1 year ago 2
Naomi Wolf's end of america on youtube
StellarLove66 1 year ago
America is doomed. How did so many of them get so delusional?
Have the teachers all quit?
Have the intelligent people all left?
They're anchored in the iron age. So sad..... I guess I'd better learn to speak Mandarin and Cantonese. They didn't even have a recession.
warren52nz 1 year ago
@warren52nz imho America has been a sinking ship for years. With a few exceptions on it (I think places like New York are safer from disturbingly deluded people), america is no longer a safe nor good place to live.
johntkooz 1 year ago
@johntkooz "America has been a sinking ship for years"
If you go through the American border control these days it feels like Nazi Germany (or at least how they portray Nazis in movies anyway). Cops don't carry guns here so after you've been away for awhile and you go into the States it has an added feeling of danger. I was at St Louis airport and they evacuated the terminal and I was taking pictures when a cop came up to me and told me to put it away or he'd confiscate it. Assholes!
warren52nz 1 year ago
just imagine how breathtakingly specific a work of prophecy would be, if it were actually the product of omniscience. If the Bible were such a book, it would make perfectly accurate predictions about human events.
krzifngrs 1 year ago
This was a fantastic book!
welchda4 1 year ago
i would marry this man, purely based on the fact that he is one of the most intelligent, well articulated, men of the 21st century. If only I met men like this, in my everyday life.
sophside 1 year ago
@sophside Meanwhile, please direct us to the female equivalent of Mr. Harris. Miladies are under represented in this area where we so desperately need all the intellectual firepower we can muster.
fctchk 1 year ago
@fctchk true enough. the female representation is limited, but we are out there, thinking and agreeing with intelligent men like this, wishing there was more positive representation from either sex, informing and educating people of the world,
sophside 1 year ago
@sophside Yes you are out there, just not so much publicly and we so do love them madly whenever they do surface: Listen to Sara between 07:54 and 8:25 in this video: watch?v=F9CTwgfSULQ&NR=1 and behold the admiration for her expressed in the comments.
fctchk 1 year ago
@sophside If only I met more women like this.
He's already hitched, btw, sorry.
copyvio 1 year ago
@copyvio haha. It is a sad day, I guess I wont be getting him for christmas!
sophside 1 year ago
@copyvio Here’s one: watch?v=F9CTwgfSULQ&NR=1 at 7:54. For informational purposes only, otherwise I might have to challenge you to a duel ;-)
fctchk 1 year ago
@RobotNinjaDestroyer
Ah being atheist doesn't mean you can't believe in supernatural powers or magical things. The concept means the lack of god or gods, I could well believe that the world was formed by events "out of this world" by the intervention of supernatural forces. It's me sick see idiots like you who use the thing of "I was an atheist" as a form of ego and acceptance.
You were never atheist-gnostic, you were an atheist-agnostic who just needed evidence; you were always religious.
Mariet31 1 year ago
Comment removed
Mariet31 1 year ago
at 6:30, "... God promised Israel to the Jews." WTF? All this time I thought He promised that area to the juice.
SamonMarquis 1 year ago
@SamonMarquis yeah the juice suck
yuriythebest 1 year ago
you cant kill god, its obvious there is an omnipotent being around. but i feel some of the belief systems are a little old hat.
mikevern69 1 year ago
@mikevern69 how is it obvious?
mmeasy123 1 year ago
@mmeasy123 look at every thing thats alive its inside it.
mikevern69 1 year ago
@mikevern69 What's inside of it? Give me some actual evidence.
mmeasy123 1 year ago
@mmeasy123 life...you need evidence lol look in the mirror your right here! They have started looking into deep or low resonance they may or may not find some thing, im not sure the technology is ready presently but they will one day.
mikevern69 1 year ago
@mikevern69 and how exactly is "life" proof of a God?
mmeasy123 1 year ago
@mmeasy123 at what point did i say it was.i merelly stated that you cannot kill god. and then pointed out that there is an omnipitent being round i didnt say god is life...?
mikevern69 1 year ago
@mikevern69 I'm not trying to be funny but are you on mushrooms or something? I'm trying to have a serious conversation and you go off on rediculous tangents.
mmeasy123 1 year ago
@mmeasy123 i know its monday...bummer!
mikevern69 1 year ago
@mikevern69 hahahahha.....see? Let's just be forthright here...there is no god.
mmeasy123 1 year ago
@mmeasy123 better, i agree but ther is an omnipotent being its the life force in all living critters, i know this because im a weirdo freak idiot fool stupid...it goes on, some see it most do not. I cant tell you from experience, i dont need you to believe me. that there is a pervading force that exists. some scientists are doing studies for low deep vibrations to try and see if there is any thing that can be found for science.They know its there but you can not see it but if you can feel it.
mikevern69 1 year ago
@mikevern69 Can god create a rock so heavy he can not lift it?
mmeasy123 1 year ago
@mmeasy123 god is some thing i dont really accept. but there is some thing meta physical. Try not to use paradox. most robots cannot compute...
mikevern69 1 year ago
@mikevern69 “Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?”
Epicurus
mmeasy123 1 year ago
@mmeasy123 mary had a little lamb she thought it rather silly she through it up into the air and caught it by the....please dont im not interested in that nonsense. speak you own mind or not at all. thank you.
mikevern69 1 year ago
@mikevern69 Nonsense? lol....I present you with one of the most thought out and notorious arguments for god's nonexistence by one of humanities greatest thinkers, but to mikevern69 it's "nonsense." I repeatedly ask you questions but you dodge them with inane, inarticulate babble.
mmeasy123 1 year ago
@mmeasy123 i always tell lies , thers another parodox for you.let me explain it. the sentence it self proclaims a lie but within it self it is also truth. happy now numb nuts..?
mikevern69 1 year ago
@mikevern69 You are obviously mad so I'll let you simmer down a little. If you feel at some point you are able to communicate effectivley and with some civility, then you may contact me. Until then, lick your wounds and rethink your position.
mmeasy123 1 year ago
@mmeasy123 better but still not you.
mikevern69 1 year ago
I like Sam Harris, but I genuinely wish that he would limit his use of the word "literally".
friedlish 1 year ago
I used to be an atheist, but i became a baptist christian because evidence was presented to me. You see i can tell when people are lying. One time i watched a video of a guy who said he went to hell and he came back, and i saw that he was telling the truth. But when i first watched the video i couldn't tell when people are lying back then. But i knew he was telling the truth because i saw a bunch of other videos of people who went to hell and there stories were similar to each other.
RobotNinjaDestroyer 1 year ago
@RobotNinjaDestroyer
That was satire, right? Just checking. ^_^
friedlish 1 year ago
Comment removed
Mariet31 1 year ago
SUSAN. GET OFF THE STAGE. YOU'RE OLD, ANNOYING, AND HARD ON THE EYES. YOU MAKE MY ANUS BLEED.
ThePTB 1 year ago
I want to make a religion that says seatbelts are immoral, and see how far that gets me.
Fuck the Catholic church.
bersaba 1 year ago 5
Thank science for Sam Harris...a man who has the courage to publicly call organized religion what it really is. Bravo!
Hollywoodsteve 1 year ago 2
I'm with you, IPAndrews, except for the notion that spirituality doesn't make you happier. Statistics show that it does. I could dedicate myself to the belief that I have a horse cock and a harem of 18 year olds who live to see me do the lambada in a g-string, and if I succeeded I would be a very happy man, indeed. Naturally, I'm speaking of delusional joy, but it registers nonetheless. It's not evidence of truth, it's more evidence of untruth, but it does technically lend happiness.
JiangZiyaTabooDays 1 year ago
I'm not a materialist but I agree with this guy. I think there is more intelligence to the cosmos than we give credit, but I don't think it is a "Guy in the sky" who acts like a King and gives humans orders. But clearly in order to embrace a true spirituality that comes from direct mystical experience, we need to transcend the narrowness and ignorance of established religion and superstition.
graphx311 1 year ago 2
@graphx311 What does believing in something spiritual or mystical gain you? It doesn't make you happy, or a better person? Focus on what you can see. Which isn't necessarily a new house or a brand new car. Materialism gets a bad rap. People are material. This world, Earth, is material. Focus on them. Not having all the answers can be scary but accepting that you don't and may never have them is liberating. I can recommend it. There is nothing to fear except fear itself.
IPAndrews 1 year ago
@IPAndrews This more or less sums up my view: search for alan watts images of god and listen to part 1, then 2 + 3 if you like
graphx311 1 year ago
there is no argument against this man. He is right. Religion has no more place for public respect than astrology, or alchemy. If my neighbor told me he dictated his life by the alignment of the stars, I would think he was a nut. We all should. And we need to get biblical belief OUT of public office of importance.
wrinkledquarter 1 year ago
A very brave and a very smart guy. Thank you Sam - please carry on doing what you do so eloquently.
bigguitar22 1 year ago 3
Hate to report this sad news but I must. Mr. Harris has been lying awake nights for weeks now after reading sisker2's derisive and extremely taunting insults >>> ;-)
wonkothemagicelf 1 year ago 45
Comment removed
sisker2 1 year ago
@sisker2, Please do not use insults to show your opposition of this man. He always tells people that he is not trying to insult anyone, so please be respectful of his views.
Paulwhoisvegan 1 year ago 38
@Paulwhoisvegan They don't know how. haven't you been listening? :P
tripeboi 1 year ago
@sisker2 - The creator and ruler of the entire Universe just… so happens to be, an author of books. Wow, that’s pretty cool… not! Take whatever your specific religion may be, and throw it in the bin like you have with every other religion which you don’t believe in.
MarvelsofaLifetime 1 year ago
@MarvelsofaLifetime Ohhh but my friend...1 Corinthians 8:2
"We know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffs up, but love edifies. And if anyone thinks that he knows anything, he knows nothing yet as he ought to know."
If only you had the sense to think before you speak, you may have been able to convince me that you are not ignorant but alas, YOU ARE!
sisker2 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@sisker2 -- And what does that have to do with anything?
MarvelsofaLifetime 1 year ago
@sisker2 "If only you had the sense to think before you speak"...Isn't it ironic that most people who blatantly fail to use their own faculties of reason (possibly due to dogmatic brainwashing), so frequently accuse people of "speaking before thinking"? xD (btw, don't answer that sisker2. Purely rhetorical...and true, though!)
johntkooz 1 year ago
@MarvelsofaLifetime
Religion is not belief in a god, Zen Buddhism do not follow their beliefs based on a powerful entity as known to Christians as "God."
Jainism is a religion totally atheistic, they believe the world is eternal and without beginning. Not believe there is a personal deity, or all possible gods are emanations or manifestations of any deity or any unit apophatic.
Christians only respect religions that seem to Christianity, and they monopolize the whole concept of religion.
Mariet31 1 year ago
Okay, then criminal cases involving circumstantial evidence should be thrown out due to lack of "physical" evidence. Until our "primative" sciences are able to see worlds inside our universe, then atheists will not be satisfied. One hundred years ago, there was no discussion of the mapping of human genes.
hdtvwatcher 2 years ago
Sam Harris invited to New York City....What a surprise!....visiting the pit of Hell.
hdtvwatcher 2 years ago
Sam Harris takes the most objectionable teachings of each religion and says they are representative of all people who believe in something spiritual.
The shortcoming of his argument is poor methodology. In one word that poor methodology is generalization.
kickingtheutubehabit 2 years ago
@funknotik
Then he said unto them, O fools, and SLOW of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken: Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory? And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself. (Lu 24:25-27)
Hope that helps.
:-)
trac4yt 2 years ago
corn,
Typically, scientists know the laughing is over on the deathbed. They want REAL answers..
They know they can't create 1 living cell of anything, and they surely can't stop death.
Thus, time to join the chosen..
"Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and [that] your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you." (Joh 15:16)
:-)
trac4yt 2 years ago
scientist has only had maybe 200-100 years for not being burned for reasearch also religion has had thousands of years with no evidence. But yet science within decades can explain more than religion can explain in thousands of years
jileel 2 years ago
I can't understand why religion is still a true rampant problem. It should have been laughed at and thrown out so long ago.
cornwallace 2 years ago 2
hi cornwallace,
I'm not an enabler of religious extremism, war, or terrorism just as you are not an enabler of atheistic Communism leading to Russian gulags. I think Sam Harris makes some irresponsible connections. Any ideology taken to an extreme and put above people such that it is forced upon people will inevitably lead to oppression or war. It's not just religious ideology. The big picture is not about eliminating religion but eliminating forcing ideas down people's throats.
kickingtheutubehabit 2 years ago
Why must you specify atheistic Communism? Generalizations like that are the epitome of religious enabling.
Atheism didn't lead to the gulag. Yes Stalin was an atheist but he didn't torture his people because there was no god, he did it because he was sadistic and immoral despite his religious upbringing and study at seminary.
Atheism was no more at fault for the atrocities committed by Stalin and Hitler (arguments could fairly be made for for both sides in his case) than were their mustaches.
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
Communism is the liberation of the working class from capitalism. Liberation includes abolishing religious beliefs which Marx believed oppressed the common people; it may require violent uprising. Although Communism is not synonymous with Atheism, Atheism is a cornerstone beliefs of Communism. Atheism itself does not justify oppression and war, but an ideology that required Atheism justified these.
Generalizations are bad. Neither Atheism and Christianity shouldn't be associated with war.
kickingtheutubehabit 2 years ago
Stalinism was at it's core a religious undertaking. Stalinism was believed by stalinists to be the penultimate system of government/morality (Judaism). Much like North Korea, all praise and glory is due the leader, Stalin (Christianity). Belief in his word is mandatory and the lack thereof is punishable by death (Islam).
While the denunciation of Abrahamic religion may be a tenet of communism, Stalinism was a religion in and of itself.
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
Sam, as a supposed chemical-onlyite, attempts to assess reality.
Sorry, no bubble-gum cigar.
He's only chemistry.
"Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear." (Heb 11:3)
:-)
trac4yt 2 years ago
@trac4yt Slow children at play.
funknotik 2 years ago
Through faith you understand nothing but that which you've been spoon-fed and bribed into believing.
Through faith you take the illiterate word of bronze-age palestinian zealots that, if followed to the letter rather than cherry-picked, leads to the most immoral life possible.
Through faith you open your heart to god and shut your mind to reason and logic.
Through faith you justify your solipsism as a noble and worthwhile enterprise and you gain only the scorn of educated and rational people.
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
How does faith lead to "the most immoral life possible"?
I thought Atheists weren't into absolutes. And from your last comment to me, I thought you disliked generalizations.
kickingtheutubehabit 2 years ago
You're right, I spoke in passionate hyperbole, I admit, and apologize for my sniping.
But I won't back off of the sentiment. What did Jesus have to say about slavery? Only that we shouldn't beat them so badly as to damage their teeth or their eyes.
He also said that judaic law must be followed to the letter. The same law that mandates stoning gays, disobedient children, and nonbelievers, their families and the entire population of their town.
Would you consider these moral actions?
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
ok.. I was about to say perhaps Satanism may lead to the most immoral life possible.
Jesus didn't say anything about literal slavery in the gospels. You are talking about the Old Testament law which fines slave owners for mistreating their slaves.
Jesus didn't say that all the Old Testament law should be obeyed.. otherwise people wouldn't believe in Jesus. And the issue of stoning people, wars, etc. are not in the New Testament. So Christianity is cleared.
Want to discuss the Old Testament?
kickingtheutubehabit 2 years ago
"And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes." Jesus' sermon recounted in the NT in Luke 12: 45-48
Look it up. He could have said slavery was bad. Instead he, ever so mercifully, proscribes fewer beatings for ignorant slaves than for willful ones. Prince of Peace eh? I say anti-abolitionist.
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
context, context. This is not about beating servants but being a wise servant to God.
Luke 12:41 Peter said, Lord, are you telling this parable for us or for all? 42 And the Lord said, Who then is the faithful and wise manager, whom his master will set over his household, to give them their portion of food at the proper time? 43 Blessed is that servant whom his master will find so doing when he comes. 44 Truly, I say to you, he will set him over all his possessions.
kickingtheutubehabit 2 years ago
If the context argument makes you feel better, by all means stick with it.
Personally however, if a loving and (importantly) all-knowing god's most applicable metaphor for his relationship with me is best expressed in terms of slavery, I'll take a pass.
Not to mention that this isn't a refutation of my point at all, it's further proof of religion's acceptance of and even praise for forced human servitude.
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
God protects the weak:
Luke 12:45 But if that servant says to himself, My master is delayed in coming, and begins to beat the male and female servants, and to eat and drink and get drunk, 46 the master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he does not know, and will cut him in pieces and put him with the unfaithful. 47 And that servant who knew his masters will but did not get ready or act according to his will, will receive a severe beating.
kickingtheutubehabit 2 years ago
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place." Jesus quoted in Matthew 5:17
Seriously, you've got to read the bible man. It's all in there. And now that I've shown you the factual information, I patiently await your indignant response.
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
context: If we want to get into heaven by our moral excellence, then we don't know that the law's purpose is to reveal sin.
Mat 5:20 For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.
Mat:48 You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.
Gal 3:22 But the Scripture imprisoned everything under sin, so that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe.
kickingtheutubehabit 2 years ago
@kickingtheutubehabit What the bible calls righteousness is completely arbitrary in nature.
Whyisthat101 2 years ago
it's not that arbitrary.. from the same discourse on the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus sums up ethical treatment of other human beings very well:
Matt. 7:12 So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.
Intuitively, even at the youngest age, we know there is a right and a wrong especially when others wrong us.
kickingtheutubehabit 2 years ago
You previously asserted that, "Jesus didn't say that all the Old Testament law should be obeyed." You fail to support that claim here and simultaneously fail - once again - to refute my claim that Jesus said exactly that.
Again, intoning "context" when you really mean "personal interpretation" may work for you but not for me or any other psychologically honest and rational person. Playing semantics with "sin/law" does not give you a pass for Jesus' obvious ringing endorsement of OT barbarism.
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
Where does Jesus say that *we* have to obey *all* the Old Testament? This is not my personal interpretation. If you can find where Jesus says this, I'll change my mind.
Jesus says:
Matt. 5:17 Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.
Jesus fulfilled the Law by obeying it. Jesus never sinned. But I have sinned. Obeying the Law is not about enforcing it. I'm on the side to be stoned, not the side that stones.
kickingtheutubehabit 2 years ago
Well get ready to change your mind because Jesus says just that in the very next passage:
"For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." Mat 5:18
Jesus puts the seal of god on the validity of the law set forth in the OT. The law can never change. and in 5:19 he goes on to say the the most lawful will be regarded in heaven as "great."
Now you tell me which OT law he overturns or amends here, I beg you.
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
so every jot and tittle of the law shall be "fullfilled" means Jesus is commanding all his listeners/readers/believers to "obey" all the law?
without a doubt Jesus is talking about all the law. but the question is who is the one who actually "fulfills" it?
before Mat 5:18 is Mat 5:17 which I already posted:
Matt. 5:17 Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.
kickingtheutubehabit 2 years ago
Okay, so he fulfilled them for 33 years. When did he say that after his death slavery should be abolished? When did he ever say that women were the equal of men? When did he ever say that children should be coddled and not stoned? When did he say gays were humans? Infidels too? Blacks equals? Electricity, true? Nuclear winter possible? Space undeniable? Math important? Plumbing necessary? Public education advantageous? Dental hygiene a priority? Germs real? Israel holy? Islam bad?
ANSWER!
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
[to LazyIrish, 1]
The point of the Bible is not to describe all of reality.. and all future reality as well. Even Britannica and Wikipedia do not contain all of reality.. and especially not all future reality.
Is it reasonable to demand that the Bible have 21st century knowledge of science, math, technology, warfare, medicine, etc?
If if is reasonable, what books today describe the future this comprehensively?
Aside from science, you mention morality. That's more relevant to the Bible...
kickingtheutubehabit 2 years ago
Britannica and Wikipedia make no claims to be the holy word of god given to us by the creator of the universe. No one has ever said Britannica is the only book one could need for moral guidance.
I think it is reasonable that a book from god would contain more than only the knowledge available at the time it is written.
Is it reasonable to belief the faith claims of bronze age illiterate palestinians, many of which have been proven false by science centuries ago?
No books today claim divinity.
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
@LazyIrish829 about Britannica making no claim as God's revelation
True. The Bible does contain more knowledge than at the time it was written. There are prophecies in it. The most important ones have to do with Christ in the Old Testament.
Whether the Bible lacks any necessary detail depends on it's purpose. If the purpose of the Bible was to teach people hygiene, dentistry, etc, we should expect to find "dental hygiene" (your example) there.
The Bible's purpose is to offer eternal life.
kickingtheutubehabit 2 years ago
So because it contained prophecies, that means it contains information unknowable to the people of the time in which it was created?
If you write a book and say a man will come from the east on a mule wearing a toque and high heeled shoes and I read it and do exactly that, does that mean you are prophetic or that I simply fulfilled your prophecy?
Prophecy proves only the humanness of the bible's authorship.
The bible contains mostly outdated bigotry, but those are just metaphors right?
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
[to Lazy, 2]
The Law teaches loving our neighbor:
Lev 19:18 You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against the sons of your own people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself: I am the LORD.
Jesus teaches this is the center of the Law:
Matt 22:36 Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law? [see next verses]
That is be a neighbor to anyone, love everyone:
Luke 10:29 But he, desiring to justify himself, said to Jesus, And who is my neighbor? [see next verses]
kickingtheutubehabit 2 years ago
IT's too long to quote here but please refer to Paul's letter to the Romans 1:24-32
Paul speaks of homosexuals and ends the passage reminding us that god has decreed death is the only suitable punishment for homosexual behaviors.
Again, saying love your neighbor is all well and good but what if that neighbor happens to be homosexual? You might agree with Paul, I have no idea. If not, then you must agree that here the NT preaches intolerance and murder of fellow human beings.
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
@LazyIrish829 about condemning homosexuals
Yeah. I can see how that is a very offensive passage. But the larger context of Romans 1-3 leads to
Rom. 3:22 ...For there is no distinction: 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,
According to the Bible, I'm no different from a homosexual and a homosexual is no different from me. We both need God's grace. God loves sinners.
Rom. 5:8 but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.
kickingtheutubehabit 2 years ago
Homosexual condemnation cont.
Untrue. Homosexuals differ from you because they have turned away from god.
And if there is no difference in the eyes of god between the two of you, why would god proscribe death for the homosexual who acts according to his/her nature but not for you if you act according to yours?
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
@LazyIrish829 about homosexuality and the Bible
I'm gonna say something shocking. It's alright to be a homosexual and be a Christian at the same time. To be saved all that is needed is a belief that God exists, God is God, that we have wronged God, and salvation is only through faith in Jesus' resurrection.
Sexuality is natural. But if God exists. He might not agree with us on the proper way of doing it. We can talk about this more if you like. This is where the Bible offends the most people.
kickingtheutubehabit 2 years ago
@kickingtheutubehabit If a political law were to be passed that could be interpreted in a million ways and was placed in a society, that society would not flourish, it would be a society where criminals could commit violence and be justified by there interpretation, we never enact laws that have multiple interpretations, we only seem to do this with something that was enforced on uneducated peoples and kicked into our heads for the last 2000 years.
Whyisthat101 2 years ago
Well said.
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
I'm glad you feel that way but it has no bearing on the issue. We're told that Paul & Co. taught what Jesus thought and he does not share your belief.
What purpose would a homosexual have to turn to Christ when he/she is considered an abomination?
Just for the record, I'm not upset about this because it applies to me personally. It doesn't. But it does apply to some of the most decent and pure-hearted people I know. Just imagine how much better gays lives would be without these passages.
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
@LazyIrish829 about the abomination of homosexuality
God does not ever consider people an abomination. But he does consider some actions to be an abomination. Even though we do things that upset God, it's not his first choice to judge us. He cares about us like good parents who are lovingly attached to their children and won't disown them.
If anyone turns to Christ, homosexual or heterosexual, it's because they believe God exists and reconciliation with him is possible.
kickingtheutubehabit 2 years ago
Leviticus 18:22 "Homosexual acts are an abomination to God" and 20:13 If a man has sex with another man, kill them both."
Yes they say here "acts" and issue an "If-then" statement but would you be drawn to a religion that condemns acts that are in accordance with your very nature? That's not to mention the second of the two enjoining believers to kill that homosexual should they ever actually ACT according to that nature - which god gave them, btw.
And again, Matt 5:18-19 endorses these ideas
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
There's also Deuteronomy 23:17-18; 1 Samuel 20:30-33; 1 Kings 22:43-46; 1 Corinthians 6:9-10; and 1 Timothy 1:10 just to name a few. And you've already conceded the downright immoral preachments extolled as virtue in Paul's letter to the Romans 1:24-32.
There is simply no way to rationally argue that a homosexual should feel right at home among christ's flock. They are made to feel excluded in every passage wherein the bible mentions them - even killed in a generous portion of these passages.
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
@LazyIrish829 about all the comments about homosexuality
hey.. is it possible to do things one comment at a time? it's just easier to follow each other's comments, we'll be able to focus on one topic at a time, and we won't be scattered. thanks.
I'm not saying that Christianity is a safe haven for homosexuality. But Christianity is a safe haven for people who believe God is there, God is good, and God offers all people (heterosexual, homosexual, etc.) reconciliation because he loves all people
kickingtheutubehabit 2 years ago
@LazyIrish829 about homosexuality and other things.
So among all the things you mentioned, what do you want me to attempt to answer the most?
kickingtheutubehabit 2 years ago
I agree. Things were getting out of hand. I won't press you on the homosexuality point. I'll just say imagine the weight of your words as heard by a gay person fluent in biblical pronouncements.
The thing I find most difficult to streamline with christian teachings would be the following:
If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters, even his own life, he cannot be my disciple Luke 14:26
(Ask me any questions you like as well)
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
@LazyIrish829 about pressing homosexuality and hating our parents for Jesus (Luke 14:26), part 1
No problem. It's ok to press me about homosexuality.
I agree with you:
1. Homosexuals are likable people.
2. The Bible does not support homosexuality, in fact the Bible condemns it. In the Old Testament, punishment was mandated against it. (these are facts)
questions:
1. How can a loving God command bigotry?
2. Doesn't this make the Bible morally regressive?
These are hard questions. I'll try.
kickingtheutubehabit 2 years ago
RE: @LazyIrish829 about pressing homosexuality and Luke 14:26, part 1
I might have phrased the questions differently and added another but I think your answers are very well-reasoned and compassionate.
I'm not at all surprised by your honesty and humanity but I do want to note here that it's also important to me how much harm has been caused by these immoral beliefs.
Thousands of innocent human beings have been killed as a direct result of them - a friend of mine was permanently injured.
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
@LazyIrish829 @LazyIrish829 about pressing homosexuality and hating our parents for Jesus (Luke 14:26), part 2
1. How can a loving God command bigotry?
This is a hard question because sexuality touches the deepest parts of who we are.
Can those who disagree with our actions/lifestyle still care about us? I believe so. God does not accept all our actions. But he accepts us as we are if we accept him as he is.
If God disagrees with us, that does not make it impossible for him to exist.
kickingtheutubehabit 2 years ago
I agree. IT is possible that He/She can exist and disagree with us simultaneously.
My question would not be how can god command bigotry, it would be is he more pleased with those of us who obey his commands? In other words, would god grant a higher reward to a devoutly christian gay-basher than he would a moderate like yourself?
Reading strictly from the biblical text, it would appear that he/she would.
According to the word of your god, you would be accepted but the bigot would be praised.
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
@LazyIrish829 @LazyIrish829 about pressing homosexuality and hating our parents for Jesus (Luke 14:26), part 3
Of course it's harder to believe in a God who disagrees with us. But the 1st question should be, "Is God there?" not "Does God agree with me/my lifestyle?"
I like it when I see in the Bible a mirror of my own ideals. But some times we don't see it.
God gave the gift of sexuality to everyone, but he has parameters for everyone. In Deut, even heterosexuals could be stoned.
kickingtheutubehabit 2 years ago
RE: homosexuality and Luke 14:26, part 3
I forgot to tag my response to part 2. Sorry. It's just above this one I believe.
I also agree that IS God there? is the pertinent question. However, unless he/she chooses to answer, it's really a moot point to ask that specific question. Instead, I think we are forced to feel around the edges with more specific questions.
If he gave us sexuality, hasn't he cursed gays that he created gay?
Indeed it seems god is all for equal opportunity stoning. :)
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
@LazyIrish829 @LazyIrish829 about pressing homosexuality and hating our parents for Jesus (Luke 14:26), part 4
So why was God that severe against other forms of sex? This is like trying to answer why alimony can be so high for marital infidelity. God's sexual morality is more particular than ours, there's more than mutual consent.
But God welcomes everyone. Here's Jesus:
Matt. 21:31 Truly, I say to you, the tax collectors and the prostitutes go into the kingdom of God before you.
kickingtheutubehabit 2 years ago
RE: homosexuality Luke 14:26, part 4
Why should god care about what we do in the privacy of our homes? If he/she hates gay sex, can't he/she do something about it? Just stop making people gay (I hope you aren't one who would say that gays CHOOSE to subject themselves to a lifetime of scorn, forced-shame, and bigotry)?
Perhaps God does welcome everyone. But what does he/she gain from making their lives hell before admitting them into heaven? And what of the gay-bashers already there?
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
Re: part 4
I really don't have much to add here other than another plea to common sense and humanism. How cruel is it to create a bird and forbid it from flying?
Now ask yourself, how cruel is it to create a human being and forbid it from expressing and experiencing love?
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
@LazyIrish829 about pressing homosexuality and hating our parents for Jesus (Luke 14:26), part 5
In context, Jesus was speaking to religious people.
You objected to homosexuality being condemned in Romans 1. But see where Paul goes with this:
Rom. 2:1 Therefore you have no excuse, O man, every one of you who judges. For in passing judgment on another you condemn yourself, because you, the judge, practice the very same things.
Heterosexuals also do sexually immoral actions.
kickingtheutubehabit 2 years ago
@LazyIrish829 about pressing homosexuality and hating our parents for Jesus (Luke 14:26), part 6
Sorry, there was no way to address homosexuality and Christianity in a 500 character text box. This is a loaded, sensitive topic.
But I want to leave 2 things with you. First, God loves all of us, God has standards, all of us have failed those standards, yet God offers us reconciliation because we are more important to him than our offenses.
Second, this is not my spin on the Bible.
kickingtheutubehabit 2 years ago
re: part 6
I believe it would be nice if God loved all of us. But the actual evidence is quite to the contrary. I don't believe what is desirable I believe what is empirically true.
You could argue that no one can prove anything as a truth and I can't disagree there. But the theory of gravity seems pretty sound. As does that of Heliocentricity. And each of them are not just ignored but refuted in the bible.
What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
@LazyIrish829 - on whether things asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence
Can/Will all phenomena in the universe and everything in existence be observed and explained by human science?
If yes, where's the evidence? That's a faith statement as much as, "God exists."
I guess there are limits to human knowledge and the theist and the atheist would do well to acknowledge their limitations of knowledge. This leads to less contempt for one another.
kickingtheutubehabit 2 years ago
Re: evidence
Can/will everything be explained by science? No.
But saying science can't prove or disprove god is not the point. As I said, God is possible but highly unlikely given the misery and injustices caused by and committed in his name.
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
@LazyIrish829 - on religious evils (1)
regretfully there are a lot of injustices caused in God's name. but that's politics, not faith.. unless the faith itself teaches war (like the Qur'an teaches war) or oppression.
with politics, leaders use the prevailing ideas, beliefs, and values of the people to achieve an end. sometimes this is war. when people were religious, politicians used that. in the future when people are less religious, politicians will appeal to other motivations.
kickingtheutubehabit 2 years ago
@LazyIrish829 - on religious evils (2)
I'm not anti-politics. Politics is a tool that can do good.
But people are imperfect and do bad things with the tools they have.
Likewise, people tend to justifying things. justification has to appeal to prevailing beliefs, attitudes, and values. when faith prevailed, justifications were religious. When religion declines, the justifications will be more secular.
So to show religious faith leads to evil, it must be shown from it's teachings.
kickingtheutubehabit 2 years ago
RE: gays and Luke part 5
I grant you that there are contradictory passages condemning such behavior, and a good thing too - imagine the license certain people would take against gays without them! But that just strengthens my point that the only time God chose to talk to us, he confused the hell out of us (pun intended)!
That he feels both ways about this does not console me in the least. He still promotes (and apparently rewards) bigotry and that's not something a loving god should do.
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
@LazyIrish829 -- Does the Bible support gay bashing?
I'm very sorry to hear about your injured friend. Gay bashing cannot be supported by the Bible at all. Could we work through one Bible passage at a time?
Rom 1:26-27 doesn't support gay bashing. It should be interpreted by Rom 2:1. Rom 1-3 is a sustained argument for grace..
Rom 1:16-32 - non-Jews (the non-religious) sin
Rom 2:1-29 - Jews (the religious) sin, hypocrisy is worse
Rom 3:1-31 - everyone sins and need God's grace to be saved
kickingtheutubehabit 2 years ago
RE: Romans 1
Lev 20:31 supports more than just bashing.
I'm happy to try it your way. Our standards of evidence arent equal here so I don't think we'll find much consensus but here goes. I've already dealt with Romans 1 and gays so I'll examine it for other flaws as well.
3-5 Christ is admitted to have a human father, and therefore contradicts the Immaculate Conception. Only his resurrection implies divinity.
28 Admits that god caused them to be gay and therefore condemns his own will.
cont.
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
@LazyIrish829 -- Rom 1
Yeah, because if we don't work through the details we'll end up talking at each other.
Rom 1:3-5 - You have objections to Jesus' Incarnation (100% man, 100% God). This is not on topic with homosexuality. Jesus fulfills the prophecy of a king sitting on David's throne forever (Isa 9:7).
Rom 1:28 - The verb is not "make". God does not make people disobey him. He "hands them over". He let's us do what we want if we persistently pull away from him.
kickingtheutubehabit 2 years ago
RE: @LazyIrish829 -- Rom 1
As I said, I've said my piece on homosexuality in Romans so there was no point iterating the points I had already made. I examined it for other inconsistencies as well.
1:3-5 The passage says Jesus is of David's line. They didn't track maternal geneologies. Jesus must have had a human father contribute his genetic material; therefore, not immaculate.
1:28 Gays aren't choosing to go against god, they're acting according to their nature - which he gives them.
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
@LazyIrish829 -- Rom 1, round 2
Rom 1:3-5 - Perhaps we can talk about immaculate conception after we reach an impasse or an understanding on Christianity and homosexuality? I think it's better to finish one thing before moving on. That ok?
Rom 1:28 - Yes most gays are not consciously choosing to go against God.. like "I'm going to act out to get God mad." But we have freewill. That's the nature God has given us. And we can make our own choices. God lets us do what we want.
kickingtheutubehabit 2 years ago
RE Rom 1 Rd 2
"But we have freewill. that's the nature god has given us."
These statements are contradictory. We cannot be given freewill. It's not free then. It's ascribed and therefore, by definition, not free.
But assuming that we are GIVEN freewill, are we free to ignore hunger? Are we free to never sleep? To choose which emotions we feel?
Acting on homosexual feelings is no more of a choice than pursuing happiness or smiling when something is funny.
LazyIrish829 2 years ago