• Welcome to The Cave of Dragonflies forums, where the smallest bugs live alongside the strongest dragons.

    Guests are not able to post messages or even read certain areas of the forums. Now, that's boring, don't you think? Registration, on the other hand, is simple, completely free of charge, and does not require you to give out any personal information at all. As soon as you register, you can take part in some of the happy fun things at the forums such as posting messages, voting in polls, sending private messages to people and being told that this is where we drink tea and eat cod.

    Of course I'm not forcing you to do anything if you don't want to, but seriously, what have you got to lose? Five seconds of your life?

Theism, Religion and Lack thereof

Okay, Leviticus was spoken to Moses hundreds of years after the incident.

Nitpick much?
 
no, you're missing my point; how can you dismiss one part of the bible by saying that it's old, when the entire bible is hundreds of years old by modern standards? o.o
 
Well my point was that Leviticus came after Genesis, therefore it's completely incorrect to say Lot's daughters broke Levitican law.
 
This is why I love forging my own beliefs. I know damn well that to someone who isn't me, they're probably quite ridiculous, possibly even childish. I have no evidence aside from what I've dreamed and seen in life. To try and encourage another to share in my belief or even try to prove it as fact would be silly, which is why I don't try or really talk about what I believe often.

Still, I have flipped through the bible - I was given one as a very small child - and it just seems to be full of contradictions, written by many different authors over who knows how many years, who all had different opinions and views of the same god.

(( Off topic...and on topic? I dunno ))
 
Pwnemon said:
Well my point was that Leviticus came after Genesis, therefore it's completely incorrect to say Lot's daughters broke Levitican law.
Click to expand...

Do you think God thought incest was wrong only after he told someone to write in down in Leviticus?
 
no! of course not! Do you think the sisters knew incest was wrong? Maybe, maybe not. Either way, there /was/ a punishment for it.
 
Though I hate to induce Godwin's law, I'm gonna have to ask whether you agreed with the Holocaust? I'm not trying to say you're a neo-nazi or anything, gosh no, but, well...
It seems like genocide is one of God's favourite punishments, and, well, the Jews killed his son. I mean, the Romans did, too, but they got their's, you see.
So basically, do you think the Holocaust was caused by God?



PS The Bible was written in, like, the mid-200s AD. So yeah, it came hundreds of years after the event, too. And seeing as they messed up Jesus' birthday and birth date, you can't seriously consider the New Testament more accurate than the Old one based on age alone, can you?
 
Saith said:
Though I hate to induce Godwin's law, I'm gonna have to ask whether you agreed with the Holocaust? I'm not trying to say you're a neo-nazi or anything, gosh no, but, well...
It seems like genocide is one of God's favourite punishments, and, well, the Jews killed his son. I mean, the Romans did, too, but they got their's, you see.
So basically, do you think the Holocaust was caused by God?
Click to expand...

I don't know. It may have been caused by God. It may not have been. It may have been punishment for killing Jesus, may not have been. I don't know, but it doesn't make me support it.

PS The Bible was written in, like, the mid-200s AD. So yeah, it came hundreds of years after the event, too. And seeing as they messed up Jesus' birthday and birth date, you can't seriously consider the New Testament more accurate than the Old one based on age alone, can you?
Click to expand...

I explained my point and you're still miiiissssssssiiiiinnngggg it...

What I was saying is that Aobaru said Lot's daughters violated his earlier law from leviticus. In genesis. Leviticus is not earlier than Genesis. That was all I said! There was no, "New testament is more accurate because written later" clause in the statement, "Leviticus came after Genesis."

Futhermore, the reason they "Got Jesus's birthday wrong" is because christmas wasn't celebrated until hundreds of years later and there is no date in the Bible.
 
Pwnemon said:
I don't know. It may have been caused by God. It may not have been. It may have been punishment for killing Jesus, may not have been. I don't know, but it doesn't make me support it.

Wait what? I, uh, don't know how to answer this. I guess the point I was trying to make is that, if you agree that God punished the sort of Jewish but not Israelits by making the Israelits kick heir ass, and you support this, then logically God must have orchastrated the Holocaust in order to make Hitler kick the Jews' ass. You say you don't support this, which is good, but it's also hypocritical.

I explained my point and you're still miiiissssssssiiiiinnngggg it...

What I was saying is that Aobaru said Lot's daughters violated his earlier law from leviticus. In genesis. Leviticus is not earlier than Genesis. That was all I said! There was no, "New testament is more accurate because written later" clause in the statement, "Leviticus came after Genesis."

Oh okay, my bad. Still, he punished them eventually, so uh...

Futhermore, the reason they "Got Jesus's birthday wrong" is because christmas wasn't celebrated until hundreds of years later and there is no date in the Bible.


I couldn't finish my maths AS level course due to snow, and so ended up getting the last question wrong.

I still got it wrong.

My point is that regardless of excuses, they were still incorrect, and if the Bible was inspired by God, well... He must be a dick not to remember His own son's birthday. Especially as he has omniscience.
Click to expand...
 
Wait what? I, uh, don't know how to answer this. I guess the point I was trying to make is that, if you agree that God punished the Moabites and Ammonites by making the Israelites kick heir ass, and you support this, then logically God must have orchastrated the Holocaust in order to make Hitler kick the Jews' ass. You say you don't support this, which is good, but it's also hypocritical.
Click to expand...

Well I don't see how that logically is necessary to follow. May it have been his choice of punishment? Sure. Does he HAVE to punish everything the same way? No. Unless I have fairly solid evidence that it was a punishment, I'm not going to condone anything of the sort.

EDIT: How did I just remember the passage with the blind man, where the disciples ask, "By what sin is he blind," and then Jesus says, "Not by a sin, but so the glory of the Lord may be shown."

I couldn't finish my maths AS level course due to snow, and so ended up getting the last question wrong.

I still got it wrong.

My point is that regardless of excuses, they were still incorrect, and if the Bible was inspired by God, well... He must be a dick not to remember His own son's birthday. Especially as he has omniscience.
Click to expand...

Except Christmas isn't some divinely inspired holiday like the Passover. All it is is a celebration of Jesus's birth invented by a handful of people hundreds of years later. God didn't set the date. Furthermore, when the date was chosen, it wasn't for being Jesus's birthday. They were jacking another holiday, the Roman party for the god Mithra. Source.
 
Pwnemon said:
Unless I have fairly solid evidence that it was a punishment, I'm not going to condone anything of the sort.
Click to expand...

So it follows: if there was evidence that the Holocaust was somehow divine retribution against the Jews, you would condone it? As someone of Jewish heritage, I find that last statement very offensive.

Pwnemon said:
no! of course not! Do you think the sisters knew incest was wrong? Maybe, maybe not. Either way, there /was/ a punishment for it.
Click to expand...

Teh Ebil Snorlax said:
Ah yes, punishing the children for the sins of the parent, a classic God move. Very moral of him.
Click to expand...
 
Aobaru said:
So it follows: if there was evidence that the Holocaust was somehow divine retribution against the Jews, you would condone it? As someone of Jewish heritage, I find that last statement very offensive.
Click to expand...

...If you found out that there was a divine and perfectly good god who never screwed up and he decided to take divine retribution against someone how could you not condone it?
 
Because your head would explode if you did?

That's practically the most paradoxical thing, ever.
The king of circular arguements.

God is good > God caused the holocaust > The holocaust is good > God is good

Seriously?
 
...Which is why I don't believe it was a punishment until I see the most ultimate of proof.
 
Because not all suffering

Pwnemon said:
Remember the passage with the blind man, where the disciples ask, "By what sin is he blind," and then Jesus says, "Not by a sin, but so the glory of the Lord may be shown."
Click to expand...

is punishment for sin.
 
I... Don't get that quote?

Is he saying that God made the man blind, just because he can? In the real world, blinding someone is pretty dickish.
 
You said you were raised a Christian and you don't remember what comes next? He unblinds him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom