btw bible people if it makes you feel better the Qur'an is even worst when it comes to contradictions....there is 4 versions of how man was created,there are 4 versions on who is the 1st muslim..etc etc

theres parts in the Qur'an where it states that ya'lls homeboy moses was the first muslim

You? A martyr? Crucified?

Ab...YOU have spent your time away from "the cloth"
to put CHRIST to an open shame.
YOU crucify CHRIST afresh.

Hebrews 6:4-6

4, "For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,

5, And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,

6,If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame."


John 3:14-18

14, "And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:

15, That WHOSOEVER believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.

16, For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that WHOSOEVER believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

17, For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

18, He that believeth on him is not condemned:
but...

he that believeth NOT is condemned already,
because he hath not believed
in the name of the only begotten Son of God."

[This is the WORD of God, Ab.
Trust Him.
Your repentance and His acceptance
may be negotiable.
You can try.]

allah handed moses the torah,but i thought "I'am" gave him the commandments....which is it?

If you're speaking of Jesus this is absolutely untrue. I give Jesus the utmost respect. Far more than than the authors of the New Testament do.

You're just upset because I don't buy into their claims that Jesus was "the Christ".

There is no shame in the idea that Jesus was indeed a mortal man. There is no shame in the idea that he taught against the horrible moral values of the Torah. There is no shame in the idea that he was most likely educated in Mahayana Buddhism and was acting as a Bodhisattva. On the contrary to become a Bodhisattva is considered one of the most respectable and selfless things a person can do.

The picture that I paint of Jesus is highly respectable.

The pictured painted by the men who wrote the New Testament is not respectable at all, IMHO. After all, if Jesus truly was the "only begotten son" of God, then neither Jesus nor God are very bright.

So from my point of view, to recognize that Jesus was indeed a mortal man is really the only way to make him respectable.




That's where your mistake is. You just accept that these fables came from God and therefore you cannot question them without simultaneously questioning the wisdom of God. You have no choice but to assume that everything in them must be of the highest possible wisdom, even if it makes no sense to you. Surely God must know something that you don't know and that these stories aren't telling you, because you have already decided that these stories are necessarily the "Word of God". Therefore that cannot be wrong!

I see no reason to take view. No reason whatsoever.

In fact, if I took that view I would necessarily have to agree with everything in the Bible no matter how nonsensical it appears to me, because, like you, I would have already committed myself to accepting that it's the "Word of God" and therefore cannot be false.

If there's something that appears to be stupid to me, it can only be because I'm lacking the knowledge and wisdom to understand it.

That's the mentality that a lot of people accept with open arms. But I see no reason to behave in such a foolish way. And yes, I do indeed believe that such behavior is foolish.

After all, if you're going to just assume something to be true, why pick the Hebrew folklore? Why not pick one of the myriad of other religions throughout the world? You could just as easily have chosen Wicca, for example, and then you'd believe that the Moon Goddess is the true picture of our creator and all other religions are false myths.

Now you may argue, "But Jesus was a real person who actually lived!"

Well, maybe or maybe not. You can't even know that for sure. But even if he had lived (which I personally accept), that itself does not give credence to the rumors that the authors of the New Testament wrote.

The whole religion is extremely egotistical, like it or not.

The God of the Old Testament is an extremely egotistical God. Jesus is portrayed to be just as jealous and hateful toward anyone who refuses to worship him.

And finally, the whole theme is about personal salvation. Period. It's not a story about humanity in general or how to conduct great societies. It's all about getting your personal butt 'saved'.

It's a religion that is entirely about saving individual egos.

I've said many times, and I continue to hold this view:

Even if this biblical picture of God were true, I would reject his offer of "eternal life". I make no secret about it, I do not like the God that is portrayed in the Old Testament. He doesn't appear to be the slightest bit wise to me. I certainly have no desire to worship and serve and idiot for the rest of eternity.

Therefore, even if I knew that this religion was true, I would politely and without any emotion at all, simply decline this God's offer of eternal life. I'm simply not interested. I would ask that this God simple cause me to cease to exist. Or better yet, make it like I never had existed at all.

That would be my POLITE AND SINCERE request of this God.

If the God has any righteousness and wisdom at all he would understand and simply cause me to vanish painlessly from his silly games.

On the other hand, if he starts throwing temper tantrums and claiming that he's going to 'punish' me for now wanting to play his stupid games, then he would have just proven beyond any shadow of a doubt that he's not nearly as mature and wise as even I am.

That's the problem with this God. In order for this God to be as "threatening" as the bible would like it to be, this God would need to basically be a real jerk. A far less moral being than myself.

But that flies in the very face of what an all-righteous and all-wise God should be.

It simply cannot be true that an all-righteous and all-wise God would be mean to people or even reject them for not believing in such horrible violent, and often absurdly ridiculous stories as are in the Biblical Cannon.

The very idea of a God who would be mean to people for not believing that he sent his only begotten son to be crucified to pay for their sins is itself an unwise and unrealistic thing to ask of people, IMHO.

You, as a Christian surely believe that "With God all things are possible".

Well, if you believe that, then why would such a God need to solve all of his problems using utterly stupid and violent means, when clearly he can do anything he wants?

If he wanted to get rid of sinners all he would have had to do was make them all sterile and within the span of a single generation they'd all be dead and there would be no new-born babies to even worry about.

To have some guy build a boat to save the animal species and then flood the entire planet just to get rid of a bunch of sinners is neither wise, nor powerful. That's a method you'd expect mortal men to dream up.

I mean, come on. Evidently you're afraid to even question whether these absurd stories are true. You've decided that they are indeed the "Word of God" and therefore to question them is to question God himself.

That's precisely what the authors of these tales were hoping you'd do! Don't question them, just believe them!

Well, I'm not going there. That's silly. I prefer to question them, and when I do question them I see precisely how utterly stupid they truly are.

which explains why Adam had no "Free Will" when he took from the fruit

word of God my fuzzy brown button

Trust who?

God never told me any such thing.

Seem to me that you're asking me to trust YOU.

It's my conclusion that this is not the WORD of God.

Trust ME.

Sheesh!

Look A$$wipe, I can spell and type just like you. I tend to use internet language, you jerkoff. So why don't you take Jethro and ram him up your rear, since he's apparently on your mind a lot!

You're just pissed because your arguments don't have a leg to stand on. And if you were so "literate" as you call it, you would have read and understand the Bible. No big deal to me though, hey, at least I won't have to worry about you spreading your lies and bullcrap around Heaven. You'll be comfortably warm elsewhere!

Oh, and by the way Mr. "Literate Atheist" if you were as literate as you claim, wouldn't you know that "a lot" is spelled "a lot" and not alot as you typed it? Hmmmm put that in your oh so smart thinking cap! You see, I have a degree! Perhaps you do as well. If so, I would say you majored in a$$holism, right? You seem to be really good at that!

Ah....a perfect example of christian behavior.
Thank you ever so much for once again showing me how wonderful christians truly are.

No it's not a perfect example of Christian behaver. It's a perfect example of a true fact, sometimes people let the anger get the best of them and say things they either didn't mean or weren't suppose to say in the first place. Jesus teaches us to turn the other cheek, this can be used literal as it's ment or metaphorically as in someone saying bad things about you and you just not reply and or reply with a gentle response.

I have read and understood the bible. I just think it's childish and silly. Kinda like you.
I'm not pissed. I'm kinda sad, actually. Sad that adults still cling to childish fantasies. But hey, you've moved up in my opinion from completely stupid to completely stupid and funny. Good for you.

And hey, thanks again for showing me some more christian kindness. Jesus must be so proud of you.

yes...it's reminiscent of how Jesus turned the other cheek in the temple with the money changers

Actually, either "a lot" or "alot" is acceptable in English. Oh yes, I'm sure you have a degree. Probably 98 of them.

And if you wanna trade insults, you'll just end up being schooled--again. Better quit while you're behind, kiddo.

Cowboy, as I've said before, you seem like a good guy.
However, you are most definatly the exception to the rule.

He did not harm no one physically, he did not use foul words, it is said specifically not to barter in the house of the lord. Therefore Jesus did nothing immoral or anything against what he has told us.

Sometimes Cowboy seems like a good guy too, but at other times he basically scares me. The idea that anyone would condone chopping someone's hands off to teach them a lesson is just plain scary. I don't care what the person did, I don't condone mutilation or dismemberment as a righteous or wise method of education. IMHO there are simply wiser and far more constructive options available.

However, from my point of view it doesn't truly matter what a supposed 'follower' or 'believer' in these myths thinks or preaches. The bottom line for me is that I have read these stories and I disagree with the stories. So the behavior of other people who have read these stories is totally irrelevant for me. I reject the actual stories as having emanated from a divine source. IMHO, they just don't represent what I would consider to be 'divine wisdom'.

Moreover, it's crystal clear that these stories have caused people to do horrible things. The witch burnings of Europe were caused because people believed in a biblical Satan. They believed that "witches" were people who sold their souls to the devil and were aligned with this demon force against "God".

In fact, the Malleus Maleficarum was written by Christian clergy using the Bible as a GUIDE.

Now people may argue, "So you can't blame the Bible for that!"

Well, sure you can! It's the book that inspired these idiots to write this gruesome horrible stuff in the name of God. A person can argue until they're blue in the face that the Bible can't be used to condone the Malleus Maleficarum, but any such argument would be utterly futile because historically that's precisely what happened!

And here's the KEY ISSUE!

Cowboy will argue his interpretations and try to claim that his interpretations hold "Higher Moral Values", than say the interpretations of Heinrich Kramer and James Sprenger, the bishops that wrote the Malleus Maleficarum. But any such claim automatically devalues the Bible into a totally meaningless and useless book!

I mean, if the "Moral Values" that come to a person from having read this book are entirely dependent on the moral values of the reader, then what good is the Book?

If that's the case, then people will good morals will take good morals from the book and people with bad morals will take bad morals from the book and this leaves the book in a state of being completely devoid of having any 'moral value' of its own.

If the Book itself does not instill great moral values in everyone who reads it, and the moral values a person takes away from the book is entirely dependent upon the moral values they bring to it in their heart when they come to read the book. Then what good is the book to begin with?

Hell's bells, when I read the Bible I feel like already have far superior moral values. I'd have to lower my sense of morality to accept what the Bible claims about "God's Morals".

Instead of being inspired to write something like the Malleus Maleficarum, I'd just be inspired to toss the original Bible into a bon fire and be on my merry way.

Jesus did violence in the father's temple..so he did do something immoral ...but immorality has nothing to do with it...if is the fact that he didn't turn the other cheek and not committ an act of violence