you are not presenting the example accurately because not all Germans were in the Nazi party but those that was a member of that particular group were most likely racist



not all southern caucasians was in the klan but those in the Klan was most likely in it because they were racist

Proof is a matter of belief.

A fact is something that has proof to back it up, but since proof is a matter of belief, if there are no reasonable or intelligent observers who believe your proof they will not allow you to declare it a fact.

No one can be 100% certain of anything.
Truth is an agreed upon condition. If you declare something to be truth, and everyone else disagrees, they will not allow you to declare it to be truth.

Therefore everything is opinion.

JB

A German who hates Jews cannot be a racist because they are both the same Caucasian race. (White)

Also you hear it time and time again that to be Jewish is a religion, not a race.

How can you be a racist against your own race unless you just hate yourself?

The races of the earth are about skin color: White, black, yellow, brown. These are the root races. Both Jews and Germans are of the white race.

JB

This is why I become a "non-Christian" Miguel.

It's truly not possible to reject the Old Testament and embrace the story of Jesus.

In short, I came to the realization that in order to support the New Testament, I would seriously have no choice but to also support the Old Testament.

And since I couldn't do that, I had non choice but to reject the religion as a whole. (become a non-Christian as you say)

I wasn't about to become a make-pretend Jesus Freak and delude myself (and others) into believing that you can accept Jesus and toss out the Old Testament.

It can't work that way. It's all or nothing.

That's the problem with the religion.

Beside, if all you're truly interested in is moral values then why not teach the moral values of Buddha? They're the same moral values that Jesus taught, but then you don't need to be dragging the dark cloud of the Old Testament around with you everywhere you go.

some of the lost tribes of Israel were black ..would that be considered as being a race

short answer:
I don't see the Old Testament in the fundamentalistic view you were taught.

I like budhism. Yet, I don't feel the whole truth is in it.

Michael, ... the whole truth is not "in" anything.

The truth just is.

JB

I have to agree with you, ergo what is true for you is not true for me, and what is true for me in not true for you.

So if for me the truth is christianity as the Catholic Church shows it. That does not imply at all that the same has to be true for you.

Thus, I respect your views, yet I don't agree with them.
Except in the sentence that you just posted, and that I'm quoting.

Thank you. I don't claim that I know or have the "whole truth." Are you claiming that you do?

JB

not myself. I'm very ignorant.

Even when you present the bible as a book of intolerance, the normal christian response is that the Old testament cannot be applied to modern living.

Yes, there are two halves of the bible, and 90% of it is the Old Testament. Christians sure are quick to disown 90% of their perfect, inerrant book.

If we were released from the laws of the Old Testament by the blood of Jesus Christ when He died on the cross, as many Christians assert, then why do so many Christians still use Old Testament laws on the rest of us?

Consider Leviticus 20:13, where we are told that homosexuality is an abomination, and that they "shall surely be put to death". How come we hear about that, and other Old Testament laws so much? They are sure quick to whip out Old Testament laws when it is convenient for them to do so.

Christians say "Well, it was different in those days..." Alright then-- how? How was it different, so that cruel wars of extermination and the slaughter of innocent children were perfectly acceptable to Christians?

I can understand why you, and other Christians, would want to divorce the New Testament from the bloody Old Testament.

You would HAVE TO, to be able to maintain any kind of moral rectitude. But honestly, it cannot be done.

The very first chapter of the very first book of the New Testament lists the geneaology of Jesus back to Abraham.

In Matthew Chapter 17, Jesus speaks to Old Testament figures Moses and Elijah, whose figures appeared before him.

Matthew 24:37 is an undeniable link to the brutality of the Old Testament, where Jesus compares his second coming to the destruction of the Great Flood that killed the world's population.

So using the bible proves that god is not pure, he is a vindictive, hate-filled, spiteful, vengeful being.

But that's ok, that was then, this is now.

Now he is a reformed character, who doesnt do anything about the central african famine (even though its allegedly the cradle of civilization) for example.

But thats lies too. Obviously

Well now I have to ask this question... Do you think self defense is an appropriate RESPONSE?

I'm not trying to be sarcastic or insulting with this post.

It's very difficult to have a conversation with you when you don't read my responses. If you are willing to give me the respect of reading a response to this post, I will write one. I will show you exactly why I believe that the Old Testament is a story of God's mercy and love, it's the buildup to Jesus. But I don't feel that I should use my time to write a detailed response if you aren't willing to read the response and/or you are simply going to dismiss my post and repeat your assertions. If you aren't willing to participate in a discussion, say so now and I won't waste my time or effort.

EDIT:
In all honesty, I have a great deal of love for the Old Testament. I don't shy away from the Old Testament and I don't reject it in any way. I constantly see non-Christians insisting that Christians ignore the Old Testament. While this is true to a degree, it is an unfair generalization.

.. and you have achieved neither. thank you.



Ok .. I will read, and take time to try and understand.

Please write your response and I will give you my efforts in return.



... also no sarcasm intended

DITTO

no other options? an all powerful god an all omniscient being had no other options? or are you saying you have no other options but to believe it? i hope this is the case otherwise you just made your god fallible.You then have a god that is unable to do anything and everything in an unviolent way, one not capable of only loving more than hating.

It is probably because Christians look at their god as more like a human than an infalliable all powerful being. They give him flaws like jealousy, anger, etc. He runs out of options now and is forced to invade Canaan.

You truly call the being behind all of that god? If god is all powerful and all knowing then that person instructing Joshua was definitely NOT GOD. There is, however, another possibility.

Joshua lied about talking to god. Yep. He lied. He, like George W. Bush, lied about god telling him to invade Canaan just like Bush claimed god told him to invade Iraq.

Politicians! They are all alike. Joshua is just another lying politician.

Instead of claiming "The devil made me do it!" He proclaims, "GOD TOLD ME TO DO IT."

There is a sucker born every moment if you believe that.

JB

hmmm??? - lets leave Mr. W.C. fields comments out please!! Reverend Fields had his own beliefs but they can not apply here, and besides you did not begin his quote with the ever familiar " thus Sayeth" The original quote was in the original text - Feildia - and said " thus sayeth the Feilds, know ye that there be a foolish idiot brought forth from the womb with every blink of the eye" - so it be said, so it be written.

source: the life and times of W.C. Fields sloppyright 1900bc