Oh, I needed a point? I thought we were here to pick at minor points. The original claim was that "turn the other check" was Christian. My example was that others have come up with this idea. Whether or not it's a bad idea is your guess.
Actually, Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi (a Hindu) suggested that the Jews meet the Nazis' violence with non-violence and suggested that this would change the Nazis' hearts. Of course he may have gotten this idea from the Jains or the nonconformist Christians he met in India and Britain: it may not be an actual Hindu belief.
I have no reason to ramble on. I will only claim what is true... that which is supported by some form of evidence or basic logic. You believe things are true ie: the existence of the christian God, without any justification in logic or proof. That is what separates me from you and I pity the situation you are in.
Isn't it interesting Christopher Hitchens used to be an openly professed communist? Isn't it interesting how Hitchens endorsed a historian who is a well known Nazi holocaust denier?
And isn't it interesting how he calls for the teaching of children religion to be identified as a form of child abuse (a page right out of Stalin).
Hitchens is a redneck atheist, incapable of defending his claims with logic, but preaching to victims of our public schools, and being well paid like any huckster.
And isn't it interresting that you endorse teaching children to love and praise Jesus Christ... the entity supposedly responsible for murdering... not only the entirety of humanity with the exception of one family... but also the murder of every other living thing on Earth with the exception of two from each species. How mercifull and all loving He is. The attrocities of the dictators you mention don't even compare in the slightest to the atrocities commited by your God within the Bible.
"The attrocities of the dictators you mention don't even compare in the slightest to the atrocities commited by your God within the Bible."
Wow, you just made the fallacy of analogy.
Comparing finite sinful dictators with the infinite holy God is the fallacy of analogy.
I'm afraid you will how demonstrate how God can violate any of His commands. You might want to demonstrate how you can speak of morality with an empirical epistemology--for you can't sense justice, morality...
''Comparing finite sinful dictators with the infinite holy God is the fallacy of analogy.''
YOu made the fallacy of not only assuming God exists but that it is the Christian God that exists... without any evidence for such an assumption. At least no more evidence then a Muslim has for the existence of Allah! You also fallaciously assume that your God is infinite without giving any evidence that infinities actually exist.
And how exactly am I incapable of sensing injustice and morality?
"And how exactly am I incapable of sensing injustice and morality?"
I'm afraid the empiricist must prove he can sense injustice and morality. Where is your demonstration? I don't see it. Did you misplace it? Surely a scientific minded individual like yourself isn't placing blind faith in terms like 'injustice' and 'morality.' Such an act might be considered rather religious by someone like Friedrich Nietzsche or Max Stirner--LOL!
Thats right... ignore any of my above arguement that you find to hard to confront and just concentrate on the moral aspect. Im sorry... but there are billions of non christian theists along with millions of atheists in this world who are kind, generous and loving people. If morality can only be shown to come from your Calvinist God... then you had better account for why there are so many good people of different beliefs, creeds and faiths in the world today? The existance of morality... cont...
in this world is a fact. Most people get on with each other and endeavour to help one another... weather christian or otherwise. However to say that that morality comes from a God; the Christian God is ridiculous considering you have absolutely no proof for that assertion. Please do me a favour and do some research on the subject outside of what your Holybook says. The secular world may not have all the answers for the existance of morality... but they are a damn site closer than your Holy book.
The secular world doesn't have the answers for the problems in the world, just like it hasn't gotten them for the mystery of morality.
While full of nice and charming promises, there are no clear cut answers to human borne problems like greed, lust, hate, powermongering, etc. that the secular world could have.
Even christians can get swept up in trying to answer these problems by themselves, but in the end it's clear to the faithful that only Jesus is the answer to these and other problems.
As a former atheist myself i i have found that human solutions, even those of christians, will not solve the world's problems.
Only the solutions given by Jesus Christ will forever get rid of the problems of human evil as well as the curses upon all creation.
Though there are temporary solutions that do work and are necessary, the second coming of Jesus Christ, which is near, will be the next and important step towards the eternal solution of earthly problems.
A solution of Jesus Christ: ''TURN THE OTHER CHEEK AND LOVE YOUR ENEMY''
If you believed that were a genuine way to achieve world peace and such a ridiculous teaching was actually practiced... we would most probably be writing comments in Geman and the Jews would be extinct.
Utter nonsense... it is the individuals that make up a Nation. And since it is the individuals who are supposed to be practicing these ridiculous moral tenents from a man who may or may not have existed, then they would have to turn the other cheek collectively as a Nation and be over run by evil tyrants! Nowhere in Jesus' sermon on the mount does he say you should strike out at your enemys in a matter of self defense or for the protection of others. You are making this up as you go along!
I would have to stop you right there and say that in fact... that is where your logic breaks down. Before you can make comment on the nature of God or what he can or cannot do... you must first prove that he exists. Also the very fact that you includesed the words ''God by definition cannot'', would contradict the idea that God is an allpowerfull being that can do whatever He wants.
Where did I get my morals? I have a pretty good secular and evolutionary explanation. But hang on a minute... could you please tell me where you got your morals and prove your case?
Let's see, i know that i got my morals from my family, friends, teachers, mass-media, the bible, from God through the Holy Spirit and my conscience and from all around.
Let me guess, you're going to bring forth the evolution of altruistic behaviour programmed in genetic code, which helps in primates surviving better than without it.
I reject that it come forth by evolution.
Now tell, was my guess on your secular and evolutionary explanation correct?
''Let's see, i know that i got my morals from my family, friends, teachers, mass-media, the bible, from God through the Holy Spirit and my conscience and from all around.''
I agree with that claim except the Bible and the God part and yes you are right about the fact that I would also use evolutionary altruism as another hugely important factor in morality. You might reject this but you could also reject that the fact that gravity keeps you on the Earth. Rejecting without reason is useless!
You assume i have to prove that God exists in order to say something about His nature.
You state that God does not exist, which you have to prove.
Yet you act as if He does exist and is condemnable for what you assert as atrocities.
Furthermore, using the biblical definition of God, i can safely showcase the biblically based nature of God hypothetically without having to prove that He exists or not.
I'm sorry but it is immpossible to prove a negitive. Just like i cannot prove that God does not exist, I also cannot prove that fairys or lephrauchans do not exist. It is up to the person that is making the positive claim that something does exist ie:God to actually prove that claim. Otherwise it is completely logical to disregard it. So are you now saying that you don't believ God exists? If so... then why are we arguing?
Additionally i use a hypothetical vantage point, as i know you do not accept God as existing but yet want to showcase the nature of God as i see it following from the bible and logic.
Thus it is justified for me to say that God by (bibilical) definition cannot commit atrocities, as God by definition has all say in what is and what is not atrocity.
God's reasoning, by definition, is transcendental, thus above ours, thus humans by definition, cannot judge God.
Thus it is justified for me to say that God by (bibilical) definition cannot commit atrocities, as God by definition has all say in what is and what is not atrocity
So what is the biblical definition for attrocity and where is it stated that God is incapable of commiting attrocities? (which again I must state is a fundemental rejection of the claim that he is all powerfull)
I condemned the mythical creature in the fairytale referred to as the Bible. Just like I condemn tghe actions of cruella Deville in 101 Dalmnations. If a child asked me my opinion on that womans actions... altough she is only a figment of the authors imagination I would still condemn her actions as with those of God.
In the case of 101 Dalmatians we know that the the story was a figment of the author's imagination.
In the case of the author's of the books of the bible we do not know for certain if what was written was a figment of their imagination or really God revealing Himself to them.
The books surely do read like their authors were convinced that God is real.
Either we accept this intent as true or as false.
In that sense both of us already made our choice.
'In the case of 101 Dalmatians we know that the the story was a figment of the author's imagination.'
How do you know? How do you know that the author really did not know of a woman intent on murdering dogs in order to get their fur? But that is neither here nor there. Her actions weather actual or not are still immoral by the standards set by both secular society and that of your God. Just as the actions of your God weather real or imaginary are exceptionally immoral by the same standards.
And even though God is all powerful, it does not mean that God cannot limit Himself.
If God is all powerful, He's supposed to be able to do anything He wants.
But if He can't be limited, He can't limit Himself either, meaning that He's limited in not being able to limit Himself, ergo contradictio in terminis.
The correct and logical answer is that God can do anything He wants, including limiting Himself.
If you weren't so bent on disproving my faith, you'd have seen the logical answer earlier.
If you weren't so bent on Dogmatic belief you would see that trying to prove the illogicalal absudities of an illogical Diety instead of using reason to condemn such claims I might not hold you with so much contempt and disregard!
Dogmatism: An irrational belief held in contradiction to and defiance of logical or empirical evidence. Evolution is 99.9999 percent proven as fact. The theory only describes how biologists believe it occurs. The evidence is overwhelming and so believing that evolution is true is not in any sense dogmatic. However, believing that man was puffed out of clay and woman from his rid is exceptionally dogmatic. No evidence whatsoever exists for this rational and yet you still believe it.. Ridiculous!
@Barachem So God has the power to stop evil, but chooses not to. If God created everything, he must have created evil. And God sinned every man woman and child over an apple in which Adam and Eve could not have been able to fathom or comprehend the meaning of evil, pain, suffering, and sin. It's like telling a baby not to crawl, and getting mad at it for doing so anyway. /thread, gtfo Barachem!
Oh, I needed a point? I thought we were here to pick at minor points. The original claim was that "turn the other check" was Christian. My example was that others have come up with this idea. Whether or not it's a bad idea is your guess.
NixonisLord 6 months ago
Actually, Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi (a Hindu) suggested that the Jews meet the Nazis' violence with non-violence and suggested that this would change the Nazis' hearts. Of course he may have gotten this idea from the Jains or the nonconformist Christians he met in India and Britain: it may not be an actual Hindu belief.
NixonisLord 6 months ago
@NixonisLord ...your point being?
ndjm00 6 months ago
religion is pathetic
3vegemite 1 year ago 2
yep
felix7562 1 year ago
@felix7562 ???
ndjm00 1 year ago
Jesus may save, but only Eris gives you a 23% percent return on your investment
‘From the Apocrypha Discordia’
“Hail Eris, all hail Discordia” )|(
Zefvan 1 year ago
May Jesus save you or kill you.
felix7562 1 year ago
@felix7562 Kill me? :)
ndjm00 1 year ago
jesus lives in all of us whether we wanna believe it or not
obamasanidiot1 1 year ago
@obamasanidiot1 ... and you think that is a valid arguement? No wonder you are religious!
ndjm00 1 year ago
@obamasanidiot1
Do not know about Obama..
But you sir, are an idiot..
S00rabh 1 year ago
@S00rabh What about Obama?
ndjm00 1 year ago
@ndjm00
Reply was for: obamasanidiot1
S00rabh 1 year ago
@S00rabh Oh I realised that... I was just reading the thread and wondered what you were getting at was all!...
ndjm00 1 year ago
@ndjm00
Thats cool..
:)
S00rabh 1 year ago
@obamasanidiot1
He doesn't live in me.
JerryConlon 11 months ago
I'll cut this developing senseless debate short, as i wanted to only quickly respond to you.
Frankly said, we both have different paradigms we assume are true.
Both of us claim that we know some things to be true and other to be wrong and much of our claims contradict many claims of the other.
You will want to keep on rambling how right you are, how stupid and idiotic and stubborn i am and you go boy.
But i'll decline the debate, not because i lost it, but as it's stupefyingly senseless.
Barachem 2 years ago
I have no reason to ramble on. I will only claim what is true... that which is supported by some form of evidence or basic logic. You believe things are true ie: the existence of the christian God, without any justification in logic or proof. That is what separates me from you and I pity the situation you are in.
ndjm00 2 years ago
Isn't it interesting Christopher Hitchens used to be an openly professed communist? Isn't it interesting how Hitchens endorsed a historian who is a well known Nazi holocaust denier?
And isn't it interesting how he calls for the teaching of children religion to be identified as a form of child abuse (a page right out of Stalin).
Hitchens is a redneck atheist, incapable of defending his claims with logic, but preaching to victims of our public schools, and being well paid like any huckster.
CalvinistChurch 2 years ago
And isn't it interresting that you endorse teaching children to love and praise Jesus Christ... the entity supposedly responsible for murdering... not only the entirety of humanity with the exception of one family... but also the murder of every other living thing on Earth with the exception of two from each species. How mercifull and all loving He is. The attrocities of the dictators you mention don't even compare in the slightest to the atrocities commited by your God within the Bible.
ndjm00 2 years ago
ndjm errs:
"The attrocities of the dictators you mention don't even compare in the slightest to the atrocities commited by your God within the Bible."
Wow, you just made the fallacy of analogy.
Comparing finite sinful dictators with the infinite holy God is the fallacy of analogy.
I'm afraid you will how demonstrate how God can violate any of His commands. You might want to demonstrate how you can speak of morality with an empirical epistemology--for you can't sense justice, morality...
CalvinistChurch 2 years ago
''Comparing finite sinful dictators with the infinite holy God is the fallacy of analogy.''
YOu made the fallacy of not only assuming God exists but that it is the Christian God that exists... without any evidence for such an assumption. At least no more evidence then a Muslim has for the existence of Allah! You also fallaciously assume that your God is infinite without giving any evidence that infinities actually exist.
And how exactly am I incapable of sensing injustice and morality?
ndjm00 2 years ago
ndjm:
"And how exactly am I incapable of sensing injustice and morality?"
I'm afraid the empiricist must prove he can sense injustice and morality. Where is your demonstration? I don't see it. Did you misplace it? Surely a scientific minded individual like yourself isn't placing blind faith in terms like 'injustice' and 'morality.' Such an act might be considered rather religious by someone like Friedrich Nietzsche or Max Stirner--LOL!
You better get busy, for you have work to do.
CalvinistChurch 2 years ago
Thats right... ignore any of my above arguement that you find to hard to confront and just concentrate on the moral aspect. Im sorry... but there are billions of non christian theists along with millions of atheists in this world who are kind, generous and loving people. If morality can only be shown to come from your Calvinist God... then you had better account for why there are so many good people of different beliefs, creeds and faiths in the world today? The existance of morality... cont...
ndjm00 2 years ago
in this world is a fact. Most people get on with each other and endeavour to help one another... weather christian or otherwise. However to say that that morality comes from a God; the Christian God is ridiculous considering you have absolutely no proof for that assertion. Please do me a favour and do some research on the subject outside of what your Holybook says. The secular world may not have all the answers for the existance of morality... but they are a damn site closer than your Holy book.
ndjm00 2 years ago
The secular world doesn't have the answers for the problems in the world, just like it hasn't gotten them for the mystery of morality.
While full of nice and charming promises, there are no clear cut answers to human borne problems like greed, lust, hate, powermongering, etc. that the secular world could have.
Even christians can get swept up in trying to answer these problems by themselves, but in the end it's clear to the faithful that only Jesus is the answer to these and other problems.
Barachem 2 years ago
So to put it simply... You are saying ''God did it''. Pathetic and childish as that is... I feel sorry for you!
ndjm00 2 years ago
I feel sorry for you for being so narrow-minded.
Barachem 2 years ago
As a former atheist myself i i have found that human solutions, even those of christians, will not solve the world's problems.
Only the solutions given by Jesus Christ will forever get rid of the problems of human evil as well as the curses upon all creation.
Though there are temporary solutions that do work and are necessary, the second coming of Jesus Christ, which is near, will be the next and important step towards the eternal solution of earthly problems.
Barachem 2 years ago
A solution of Jesus Christ: ''TURN THE OTHER CHEEK AND LOVE YOUR ENEMY''
If you believed that were a genuine way to achieve world peace and such a ridiculous teaching was actually practiced... we would most probably be writing comments in Geman and the Jews would be extinct.
JESUS WAS RETARDED!
ndjm00 2 years ago 7
Comparing commandments to individual christians to conduct of nations, my oh my.
I think you're the one who's showing mental deficiency here.
Jesus was talking about disciples of him here, not whole nations.
Furthermore, it's only good to save the innocent from destruction by evil.
So it's good to let one's enemy have a go at one, but if that enemy attacks a bystander, it's one's duty to protect that bystander from the enemy.
Barachem 2 years ago
Utter nonsense... it is the individuals that make up a Nation. And since it is the individuals who are supposed to be practicing these ridiculous moral tenents from a man who may or may not have existed, then they would have to turn the other cheek collectively as a Nation and be over run by evil tyrants! Nowhere in Jesus' sermon on the mount does he say you should strike out at your enemys in a matter of self defense or for the protection of others. You are making this up as you go along!
ndjm00 2 years ago
God by definition cannot commit atrocities.
Otherwise God wouldn't be God.
That's where your logic and thought pattern break down.
That you find what God does atrocities, is because you judge God as if you were a god and God just a mere human.
Yes, from that vantage point, even i could judge God.
But another thing, where do you get your morals as an atheist?
Where does Hitchens get his morals as an atheist?
Atheism does not endorse any morals, it's by definition amoral.
Barachem 2 years ago
''God by definition cannot commit atrocities.
Otherwise God wouldn't be God.''
I would have to stop you right there and say that in fact... that is where your logic breaks down. Before you can make comment on the nature of God or what he can or cannot do... you must first prove that he exists. Also the very fact that you includesed the words ''God by definition cannot'', would contradict the idea that God is an allpowerfull being that can do whatever He wants.
ndjm00 2 years ago
Where did I get my morals? I have a pretty good secular and evolutionary explanation. But hang on a minute... could you please tell me where you got your morals and prove your case?
ndjm00 2 years ago
Let's see, i know that i got my morals from my family, friends, teachers, mass-media, the bible, from God through the Holy Spirit and my conscience and from all around.
Let me guess, you're going to bring forth the evolution of altruistic behaviour programmed in genetic code, which helps in primates surviving better than without it.
I reject that it come forth by evolution.
Now tell, was my guess on your secular and evolutionary explanation correct?
Barachem 2 years ago
''Let's see, i know that i got my morals from my family, friends, teachers, mass-media, the bible, from God through the Holy Spirit and my conscience and from all around.''
I agree with that claim except the Bible and the God part and yes you are right about the fact that I would also use evolutionary altruism as another hugely important factor in morality. You might reject this but you could also reject that the fact that gravity keeps you on the Earth. Rejecting without reason is useless!
ndjm00 2 years ago
And that's where your logic breaks down.
You assume i have to prove that God exists in order to say something about His nature.
You state that God does not exist, which you have to prove.
Yet you act as if He does exist and is condemnable for what you assert as atrocities.
Furthermore, using the biblical definition of God, i can safely showcase the biblically based nature of God hypothetically without having to prove that He exists or not.
Barachem 2 years ago
I'm sorry but it is immpossible to prove a negitive. Just like i cannot prove that God does not exist, I also cannot prove that fairys or lephrauchans do not exist. It is up to the person that is making the positive claim that something does exist ie:God to actually prove that claim. Otherwise it is completely logical to disregard it. So are you now saying that you don't believ God exists? If so... then why are we arguing?
ndjm00 2 years ago
Additionally i use a hypothetical vantage point, as i know you do not accept God as existing but yet want to showcase the nature of God as i see it following from the bible and logic.
Thus it is justified for me to say that God by (bibilical) definition cannot commit atrocities, as God by definition has all say in what is and what is not atrocity.
God's reasoning, by definition, is transcendental, thus above ours, thus humans by definition, cannot judge God.
Barachem 2 years ago
Thus it is justified for me to say that God by (bibilical) definition cannot commit atrocities, as God by definition has all say in what is and what is not atrocity
So what is the biblical definition for attrocity and where is it stated that God is incapable of commiting attrocities? (which again I must state is a fundemental rejection of the claim that he is all powerfull)
ndjm00 2 years ago
Again, this is what follows logically when following biblical principles logically through concerning the biblical God.
And another thing: You were talking just about that God and condemning Him, even though you believe that He does not exist.
How does one condemn the One that one doesn't believe in and asks proof of existence for?
As long as it is insisted that God doesn't exist, it's logically foolish to talk about the nature of that which is assumed to not exist.
Barachem 2 years ago
I condemned the mythical creature in the fairytale referred to as the Bible. Just like I condemn tghe actions of cruella Deville in 101 Dalmnations. If a child asked me my opinion on that womans actions... altough she is only a figment of the authors imagination I would still condemn her actions as with those of God.
ndjm00 2 years ago
In the case of 101 Dalmatians we know that the the story was a figment of the author's imagination.
In the case of the author's of the books of the bible we do not know for certain if what was written was a figment of their imagination or really God revealing Himself to them.
The books surely do read like their authors were convinced that God is real.
Either we accept this intent as true or as false.
In that sense both of us already made our choice.
Barachem 2 years ago
'In the case of 101 Dalmatians we know that the the story was a figment of the author's imagination.'
How do you know? How do you know that the author really did not know of a woman intent on murdering dogs in order to get their fur? But that is neither here nor there. Her actions weather actual or not are still immoral by the standards set by both secular society and that of your God. Just as the actions of your God weather real or imaginary are exceptionally immoral by the same standards.
ndjm00 2 years ago
And even though God is all powerful, it does not mean that God cannot limit Himself.
If God is all powerful, He's supposed to be able to do anything He wants.
But if He can't be limited, He can't limit Himself either, meaning that He's limited in not being able to limit Himself, ergo contradictio in terminis.
The correct and logical answer is that God can do anything He wants, including limiting Himself.
If you weren't so bent on disproving my faith, you'd have seen the logical answer earlier.
Barachem 2 years ago
If you weren't so bent on Dogmatic belief you would see that trying to prove the illogicalal absudities of an illogical Diety instead of using reason to condemn such claims I might not hold you with so much contempt and disregard!
ndjm00 2 years ago
My dogmatism stems from comparing dogma to what i perceive.
And for that matter, you're awfully dogmatic in your secular and evolutionary stance as well.
Seeing things through one interpretation only and demanding others see it that way as well.
I understand you train of thought, but i totally disagree with it though being comfortable with you having a different dogma than me.
No need to convince those who only God can change from the inside.
Barachem 2 years ago
Dogmatism: An irrational belief held in contradiction to and defiance of logical or empirical evidence. Evolution is 99.9999 percent proven as fact. The theory only describes how biologists believe it occurs. The evidence is overwhelming and so believing that evolution is true is not in any sense dogmatic. However, believing that man was puffed out of clay and woman from his rid is exceptionally dogmatic. No evidence whatsoever exists for this rational and yet you still believe it.. Ridiculous!
ndjm00 2 years ago
@Barachem So God has the power to stop evil, but chooses not to. If God created everything, he must have created evil. And God sinned every man woman and child over an apple in which Adam and Eve could not have been able to fathom or comprehend the meaning of evil, pain, suffering, and sin. It's like telling a baby not to crawl, and getting mad at it for doing so anyway. /thread, gtfo Barachem!
apena89 2 years ago
Comment removed
dmrto3 2 years ago
as simple as that
azaquihel 2 years ago 5