"So believing in unconditional love and kindness is crazy?"
I'm sorry, I thought you were Christian? Here's the simple math: you absolutely cannot espouse unconditional love AND Hell in the same breath. They are incompatible. Now, I have some Christian friends that forego the Hell story, and many Jewish friends that de facto do the same, and I find their faith more pallitable and compatible.
"So maybe that scripture is being fulfilled before our eyes?"
Possible, but Occam's Razor suggests it's far more likely that this is happening BECAUSE people already know the prophecy and are seeking to fulfill it. That is demonstrably the case with a good portion of Christians and Jews concerning Israel, in that they are specifically attempting to bring on the apocalypse. You did know that, right?
"So Jesus made sure he was born in Nazareth? He made sure that he was born in the line of David? These are just a couple of the scriptures he fulfilled that he could not have "made sure" of."
Don't be daft. I'm saying that Jesus, either finding that he fulfilled those two requirements or else being prodded by others, then sought out to fulfill the rest. You do realize that others must have been born in Nazareth and of the line of David, right?
Give me a prediction the bible made that has come true in a verifiable way. I.E., if the bible predicted that on 9/11/2001, New York would be attacked, you'd have a point. I don't expect THAT prediction, but give me something in that ilk and I'll concede you have a point.
In other words, give me something verifiable. Recall that you are the one that used the word "proven" to describe biblical claims. Show me some proof.
"Would you say that slavery was ok since society held that it was ok at the time? I am looking forward to your answer here as you lose either way you answer."
Oooh, poor choice of tactic, my friend. Would YOU say slavery is okay? After all, it was your bible that was used to justify it and many church leaders, including the Papacy, were either in support of slavery or ambiguous on it.
All you've proven is that morality is currently in flux. Of course we don't limit our scope to America, nor do we export American morality onto other free peoples in other nations in general. However, we have agreed as a human population on some human rights and morals and we should enforce them. Other religions murdering people who are of another faith? That's wrong, as judged by the majority of humanity, as evidenced by several UN decisions. Try again.
"To say no implies you believe in a greater right and wrong that transcends time. "
Nonsense. Slavery is wrong and that judgement by me is in line with the majority of human beings. Perfectly in line with my philosophy.
"People, knowingly or not, believe there is a right and wrong that transcends themselves, society and time."
Sure, there are general societal rules of a human population the vast majority can agree on. You shouldn't murder people is one of those, for instance.
"There can be no such thing without God."
You've done nothing to demonstrate why that must be true. Why can murder not be wrong without a God to say so. Put another way, since you're of the faith, you're suggesting that if God was taken away from you, you would suddenly go out murdering people? Do you really think that little of yourself?
"The bible, and Christianity, is the only religion with prophecy that has come true."
I'd honestly like to hear some of these prophecies Christianity predicted that came true. Care to quote them?
"Jesus fulfilled several hundred prophecies, especially from the book of Isaiah which the earliest known copy was part of the Dead Sea scrolls which pre-date Jesus by 100 years."
Not the same thing. Jesus, should he have existed in the form described by the bible, would have known about the prophecies of the time and would have taken the actions required to fulfill them. That's no trick, unless you count miracles which aren't verfied.
"there is as much or more proof that the biblical story is true."
Please. Give me some elements of the bible that are "proven" true. I can certainly give you some that have been proven FALSE, such as the exodus....
"Just like any adherent of any other religion, an atheist has great faith that his beliefs are true, has no objective proof but tons of subjective proof, just like every adherent of every religion does."
This is a common misconception about atheism. An atheist does NOT say "there is no God", he/she says "there is no evidence that a God exists". The burden of proof is on the party making the claim, not on the party with no starting claim. There is no "faith" in atheism, only conclusion based on evidence and a refusal to conclude anything where no evidence exists.
"It just shifts like the sand in the wind. So complaining you have the right to send emails, surf the net and make phone calls without the NSA monitoring you is just pissing in the wind. The NSA and the ruling class have more "rights" than you do apparently."
And you apparently missed my point, maybe willfully? The judge of right and wrong is the population under the question. The NSA may have the ability to monitor my communications, but that doesn't make it "right". In fact, we know it is wrong, because of the majority backlash against it by the American people. In America, Orwellian oversight by the NSA is wrong. Interestingly, Orwellian oversight by a cellestial dictator is NOT wrong where Christianity is concerned.
"Morality does not pre-date religion."
Of course it does. Take the 10 commandments. One of them is "do not murder". The story (disproven by archeology) says that Moses handed that commandment down from God during the exodus. Do you REALLY think the Jewish people could have even made it to that sermon if they were under the impression that murder was okay? Morality is inate, not prescribed by a deity or religion.
"Much of what you are being told about history and evolution is conjecture and unproven theories."
Not sure what history you're referring to, but evolution is an established natural occurrence that is undisputed by the general scientific community. Please tell me you aren't one of those "the earth is 10k years old" people....
"Go read Christian science sites to see all the evidence that the bible is right."
I'm familiar with Christian science and why that is a misnomer....
"If there is no God, there is no right and wrong."
Where in the sweet hell did you get THAT idea? Evolution produces society, which creates rights and wrongs for that society. That's the entire point of Humanism: we have a collective interest in what we've determined to be right and wrong and we insist that our fellow human beings live within that general framework. Morality pre-dates, religion after all.
" In the no-God world view, you take what you can get away with."
Interesting. That must be why there are so many secular and/or atheist charities out there....
"It would be a man made concept that can change with the times, heck change with the person."
You mean like how it EXACTLY works in the world today? Or do you still not where clothing of mixed fabrics?
"Who says what you say is right/wrong is any more right/wrong than what anyone else says?"
Societal norms for the better of human kind says that, obviously.
"Funny how you never think about that when bashing Christians. Christians can't be in the wrong if there is no such thing now can they?"
Oh, but they can, and are. Not always, but sometimes. Just like Jews, Muslims, and atheists too. Everyone is wrong at different times. No biggie, except when you try to take your wrong concepts and force them on someone else.
"Fortunately, there is a God"
Maybe so....
"and a true right and wrong."
Hard to tell, since there's been so many rights and wrongs to choose from. Do we go with the old testament decrees? The new testament decrees? Which branch of Christianity? Mormon? Catholic? Maybe something new age like Scientology. Or hey, maybe the Jews, Muslims, or Hindus have it right, or more right than you. After all, they certainly aren't Godless and they make the same claim to authority you do. But, yeah, you're probably right and they're all wrong. That's way more likely than ALL of you are wrong, right?
At no point did I think you were replying to a comment. I replied directly to your points in your comment, so I'm not sure what you're talking about....
Richard, come on, are you REALLY arguing that Genesis paints men and women in an equal light? You can cherry pick a verse or two, but so can I and it only takes a little bit of unequal to make it unequal...
"This statement is the epitome of what I mean. What you are talking about here is Karma, which is a concept that doesn't carry over to Christianity."
I'm not commenting on actual Christianity, only Robertson's view of it. He's said in the past that terrorist acts and natural disasters are due to sinful actions. Seems like my line was perfectly on point.
"I certainly wouldn't say that Pat is "willfully ignorant" - at least on this topic. He has his beliefs on the subject, and that is not ignorance. He knows what he is talking about, whether or not you agree with it."
He's commenting on video games without having EVER played one by choice. How is that not willfully ignorant?
"I really enjoy this site, but Timothy is the worst writer here."
I really enjoy the comments section, but you're the worst commenter here....by, like, a lot....and I'm including the trolls in this assessment....
"Metaphorically speaking, Eve is formed of Adam's right rib....this symbolizes that women are to be by our sides...our right hand...which makes her the equal."
That is a horrific misrepresentation of what the Genesis story has to say about women. You can't gloss over the fact that Adam was first (in the Bible story, I mean, since that's obviously all it is) and that Eve led him astray. Neither are coincidence. But if you need the point driven home, Genesis 2:18 20 is quite clear that women ought be man's helper (subservient) and follow man's lead (subservient). Bible apologists will explain this away as being that God simply devised different roles for each to play, glossing over the fact that man's role is leader and woman's is follower. There is nothing equal in that.
"When you lust after a woman, it basically objectifies her."
All sex includes an element of lust, or extreme want. Otherwise it wouldn't be so much fun. You damn all sex with talk like that.
This is correct. Religious faith is ABSOLUTELY NOT a mental health "condition" or disease. Faith is willful, whereas mental diseases are not. That really should be the end of that discussion....
"All he said that violent entertainment (like videogames, television, books) makes one less sensitive to god (I interpret "god" as "nature")."
That is certainly NOT what he said. His quote of Jesus makes his point plain: the thought of the crime is as bad as the crime itself. It's a "virtual" crime in the same way video game crimes are "virtual" crimes, or sins.
"Are you saying that God cannot judge our thoughts? Do you think lusting after a woman is not a sin, and the 9th/10th commandments (depending on how you count them) don't apply?"
I've talked about my views on religion in the comments before, but I don't want to derail this thread early on. I'm more than happy to have an exchange based on this question, but why don't we let the thread mature a bit first, if that's okay?
"So really, what's the problem? Is it his bad behaviour? That's the answer. If he tells fans he's *the* official mascot (misrepresents status), or harasses them, then he can be given the boot, same as you or I if we were to do so. If he does not, what right do the Cubs have to stop an enthusiastic fan?"
Hey, I'm usually all about smacking down aggressive trademark protection, but this guy is in a Bear suit (a cub, in other words), with a jersey and hat and "Billy Cub" splayed across the back. The racist behavior and pressuring people for "tips" when they take a picture would likely be enough to warrant a trademark claim for the team, but the fact that most of the complaints come with the question of why the Cubs would allow an OFFICIAL team mascot to do this kind of thing cement the customer confusion.
This isn't an enthusiastic fan. He's out there for the money. Case in point, he's currently campaigning to be become the team's official mascot on radio stations...as Billy Cub.
On the post: Pat Robertson: Murder Committed In Video Games Is No Different Than Real Life Murder
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "sins" Schooled in Style...
I'm sorry, I thought you were Christian? Here's the simple math: you absolutely cannot espouse unconditional love AND Hell in the same breath. They are incompatible. Now, I have some Christian friends that forego the Hell story, and many Jewish friends that de facto do the same, and I find their faith more pallitable and compatible.
On the post: Pat Robertson: Murder Committed In Video Games Is No Different Than Real Life Murder
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Well...
Possible, but Occam's Razor suggests it's far more likely that this is happening BECAUSE people already know the prophecy and are seeking to fulfill it. That is demonstrably the case with a good portion of Christians and Jews concerning Israel, in that they are specifically attempting to bring on the apocalypse. You did know that, right?
On the post: Pat Robertson: Murder Committed In Video Games Is No Different Than Real Life Murder
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
http://www.project-reason.org/gallery3/image/102/
On the post: Pat Robertson: Murder Committed In Video Games Is No Different Than Real Life Murder
Re: Re: Re: Re: Well...
Don't be daft. I'm saying that Jesus, either finding that he fulfilled those two requirements or else being prodded by others, then sought out to fulfill the rest. You do realize that others must have been born in Nazareth and of the line of David, right?
Give me a prediction the bible made that has come true in a verifiable way. I.E., if the bible predicted that on 9/11/2001, New York would be attacked, you'd have a point. I don't expect THAT prediction, but give me something in that ilk and I'll concede you have a point.
In other words, give me something verifiable. Recall that you are the one that used the word "proven" to describe biblical claims. Show me some proof.
On the post: Pat Robertson: Murder Committed In Video Games Is No Different Than Real Life Murder
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The Godless amaze me
Oooh, poor choice of tactic, my friend. Would YOU say slavery is okay? After all, it was your bible that was used to justify it and many church leaders, including the Papacy, were either in support of slavery or ambiguous on it.
All you've proven is that morality is currently in flux. Of course we don't limit our scope to America, nor do we export American morality onto other free peoples in other nations in general. However, we have agreed as a human population on some human rights and morals and we should enforce them. Other religions murdering people who are of another faith? That's wrong, as judged by the majority of humanity, as evidenced by several UN decisions. Try again.
"To say no implies you believe in a greater right and wrong that transcends time. "
Nonsense. Slavery is wrong and that judgement by me is in line with the majority of human beings. Perfectly in line with my philosophy.
"People, knowingly or not, believe there is a right and wrong that transcends themselves, society and time."
Sure, there are general societal rules of a human population the vast majority can agree on. You shouldn't murder people is one of those, for instance.
"There can be no such thing without God."
You've done nothing to demonstrate why that must be true. Why can murder not be wrong without a God to say so. Put another way, since you're of the faith, you're suggesting that if God was taken away from you, you would suddenly go out murdering people? Do you really think that little of yourself?
On the post: Pat Robertson: Murder Committed In Video Games Is No Different Than Real Life Murder
Re: Re: Well...
I'd honestly like to hear some of these prophecies Christianity predicted that came true. Care to quote them?
"Jesus fulfilled several hundred prophecies, especially from the book of Isaiah which the earliest known copy was part of the Dead Sea scrolls which pre-date Jesus by 100 years."
Not the same thing. Jesus, should he have existed in the form described by the bible, would have known about the prophecies of the time and would have taken the actions required to fulfill them. That's no trick, unless you count miracles which aren't verfied.
"there is as much or more proof that the biblical story is true."
Please. Give me some elements of the bible that are "proven" true. I can certainly give you some that have been proven FALSE, such as the exodus....
On the post: Pat Robertson: Murder Committed In Video Games Is No Different Than Real Life Murder
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "sins"
This is a common misconception about atheism. An atheist does NOT say "there is no God", he/she says "there is no evidence that a God exists". The burden of proof is on the party making the claim, not on the party with no starting claim. There is no "faith" in atheism, only conclusion based on evidence and a refusal to conclude anything where no evidence exists.
On the post: Pat Robertson: Murder Committed In Video Games Is No Different Than Real Life Murder
Re: Re: Re: The Godless amaze me
And you apparently missed my point, maybe willfully? The judge of right and wrong is the population under the question. The NSA may have the ability to monitor my communications, but that doesn't make it "right". In fact, we know it is wrong, because of the majority backlash against it by the American people. In America, Orwellian oversight by the NSA is wrong. Interestingly, Orwellian oversight by a cellestial dictator is NOT wrong where Christianity is concerned.
"Morality does not pre-date religion."
Of course it does. Take the 10 commandments. One of them is "do not murder". The story (disproven by archeology) says that Moses handed that commandment down from God during the exodus. Do you REALLY think the Jewish people could have even made it to that sermon if they were under the impression that murder was okay? Morality is inate, not prescribed by a deity or religion.
"Much of what you are being told about history and evolution is conjecture and unproven theories."
Not sure what history you're referring to, but evolution is an established natural occurrence that is undisputed by the general scientific community. Please tell me you aren't one of those "the earth is 10k years old" people....
"Go read Christian science sites to see all the evidence that the bible is right."
I'm familiar with Christian science and why that is a misnomer....
On the post: Pat Robertson: Murder Committed In Video Games Is No Different Than Real Life Murder
Re: The Godless amaze me
Where in the sweet hell did you get THAT idea? Evolution produces society, which creates rights and wrongs for that society. That's the entire point of Humanism: we have a collective interest in what we've determined to be right and wrong and we insist that our fellow human beings live within that general framework. Morality pre-dates, religion after all.
" In the no-God world view, you take what you can get away with."
Interesting. That must be why there are so many secular and/or atheist charities out there....
"It would be a man made concept that can change with the times, heck change with the person."
You mean like how it EXACTLY works in the world today? Or do you still not where clothing of mixed fabrics?
"Who says what you say is right/wrong is any more right/wrong than what anyone else says?"
Societal norms for the better of human kind says that, obviously.
"Funny how you never think about that when bashing Christians. Christians can't be in the wrong if there is no such thing now can they?"
Oh, but they can, and are. Not always, but sometimes. Just like Jews, Muslims, and atheists too. Everyone is wrong at different times. No biggie, except when you try to take your wrong concepts and force them on someone else.
"Fortunately, there is a God"
Maybe so....
"and a true right and wrong."
Hard to tell, since there's been so many rights and wrongs to choose from. Do we go with the old testament decrees? The new testament decrees? Which branch of Christianity? Mormon? Catholic? Maybe something new age like Scientology. Or hey, maybe the Jews, Muslims, or Hindus have it right, or more right than you. After all, they certainly aren't Godless and they make the same claim to authority you do. But, yeah, you're probably right and they're all wrong. That's way more likely than ALL of you are wrong, right?
On the post: Pat Robertson: Murder Committed In Video Games Is No Different Than Real Life Murder
Re:
On the post: Even When Trademark Is Done Right, It's Hilarious
Re: Re: Re: Billy Cub should go away...???
On the post: Pat Robertson: Murder Committed In Video Games Is No Different Than Real Life Murder
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Pat Robertson: Murder Committed In Video Games Is No Different Than Real Life Murder
Re:
I'm not commenting on actual Christianity, only Robertson's view of it. He's said in the past that terrorist acts and natural disasters are due to sinful actions. Seems like my line was perfectly on point.
"I certainly wouldn't say that Pat is "willfully ignorant" - at least on this topic. He has his beliefs on the subject, and that is not ignorance. He knows what he is talking about, whether or not you agree with it."
He's commenting on video games without having EVER played one by choice. How is that not willfully ignorant?
"I really enjoy this site, but Timothy is the worst writer here."
I really enjoy the comments section, but you're the worst commenter here....by, like, a lot....and I'm including the trolls in this assessment....
On the post: Pat Robertson: Murder Committed In Video Games Is No Different Than Real Life Murder
Re: Re:
Boom, you just dismantled any authority enjoyed by religion with that very astute, very true comment....
On the post: Pat Robertson: Murder Committed In Video Games Is No Different Than Real Life Murder
Re: Re: Re:
That is a horrific misrepresentation of what the Genesis story has to say about women. You can't gloss over the fact that Adam was first (in the Bible story, I mean, since that's obviously all it is) and that Eve led him astray. Neither are coincidence. But if you need the point driven home, Genesis 2:18 20 is quite clear that women ought be man's helper (subservient) and follow man's lead (subservient). Bible apologists will explain this away as being that God simply devised different roles for each to play, glossing over the fact that man's role is leader and woman's is follower. There is nothing equal in that.
"When you lust after a woman, it basically objectifies her."
All sex includes an element of lust, or extreme want. Otherwise it wouldn't be so much fun. You damn all sex with talk like that.
On the post: Pat Robertson: Murder Committed In Video Games Is No Different Than Real Life Murder
Re: Re: Re: Re: "sins"
On the post: Pat Robertson: Murder Committed In Video Games Is No Different Than Real Life Murder
Re: Simple solution to all of this...
On the post: Pat Robertson: Murder Committed In Video Games Is No Different Than Real Life Murder
Re:
That is certainly NOT what he said. His quote of Jesus makes his point plain: the thought of the crime is as bad as the crime itself. It's a "virtual" crime in the same way video game crimes are "virtual" crimes, or sins.
I'm not quite sure how you missed that part....
On the post: Pat Robertson: Murder Committed In Video Games Is No Different Than Real Life Murder
Re:
I've talked about my views on religion in the comments before, but I don't want to derail this thread early on. I'm more than happy to have an exchange based on this question, but why don't we let the thread mature a bit first, if that's okay?
On the post: Even When Trademark Is Done Right, It's Hilarious
Re: Billy Cub should go away...???
Hey, I'm usually all about smacking down aggressive trademark protection, but this guy is in a Bear suit (a cub, in other words), with a jersey and hat and "Billy Cub" splayed across the back. The racist behavior and pressuring people for "tips" when they take a picture would likely be enough to warrant a trademark claim for the team, but the fact that most of the complaints come with the question of why the Cubs would allow an OFFICIAL team mascot to do this kind of thing cement the customer confusion.
This isn't an enthusiastic fan. He's out there for the money. Case in point, he's currently campaigning to be become the team's official mascot on radio stations...as Billy Cub.
Next >>