Amen.That's because they are. The first chapter from the big book of piss should have everybody who reads it say. Well, that didn't fucking happen so it's all shit. Reading the rest just reinforces how utterly ridiculous the whole thing is. Kill people who eat shrimps. Wear a two fibre turtleneck kill your kids for being cheeky. Kill thousands of babies, but, let the families who sacrifice a lamb and smear it's blood on their door. Kill everybody who doesn't share your faith, including your family. Kill all the inhabitants of any city who don't believe. Send out your daughter's to be raped when angels are in a bit of bother and people want to shag them. Don't know what happened to their wings, but there you go. A guy survives inside a fish for days. God tells a **** to kill his son and he is going to do it. Jesus attracts crowds of thousands but the Romans don't notice or report it. How to buy and treat your slaves. Even Jeezy Peezy said, be kind to your master, even the bad ones. His dad who is him and the ghost **** who us also him in a human fit of rage kills the world. In a flood that never happened. Unicorns, dragons and other mythical creatures abound. No dinosaurs though. Flat earth, centre of the universe, stars will fall to the earth and so on. It's fucking unadulterated bollocks. From the first paragraph to the last.
Amen.
I remember being dragged occasionally to church as a nipper, and even as a 4 year old was thinking, What. Is. This. Shite.
Mind you I was probably influenced by Mr Benn at that time, lucky I didn't see the episode he goes on a crusade to Jerusalem to slaughter the residents there.
I think you missed the part in the bible that speaks of mankind's amazing ability to create something, and then magically transform oneself into its slave. Make an argument about a church and its book? Great. Might even make some good points - wonderful. But, if twenty years down the line, one finds oneself making the same argument in a way that make one miserable, then maybe its time to question whether I am the arguments master or its slave. Was it really the church and its book that brought unhappiness or the attachment to the argument? All those years of arguing about the church and its book and I could have been doing something enjoyable instead. Mental, huh?That's because they are. The first chapter from the big book of piss should have everybody who reads it say. Well, that didn't fucking happen so it's all shit. Reading the rest just reinforces how utterly ridiculous the whole thing is. Kill people who eat shrimps. Wear a two fibre turtleneck kill your kids for being cheeky. Kill thousands of babies, but, let the families who sacrifice a lamb and smear it's blood on their door. Kill everybody who doesn't share your faith, including your family. Kill all the inhabitants of any city who don't believe. Send out your daughter's to be raped when angels are in a bit of bother and people want to shag them. Don't know what happened to their wings, but there you go. A guy survives inside a fish for days. God tells a **** to kill his son and he is going to do it. Jesus attracts crowds of thousands but the Romans don't notice or report it. How to buy and treat your slaves. Even Jeezy Peezy said, be kind to your master, even the bad ones. His dad who is him and the ghost **** who us also him in a human fit of rage kills the world. In a flood that never happened. Unicorns, dragons and other mythical creatures abound. No dinosaurs though. Flat earth, centre of the universe, stars will fall to the earth and so on. It's fucking unadulterated bollocks. From the first paragraph to the last.
I think it's a simple question. Is it true? Should the guidance in it he observed? Should we allow the demonisation of human beings, women, gay people, because bronze age men thought they were inferior? If you don't, then arguing it's a false book. A book straight out of the minds of man and should be treated as such. And for me, as long as the proponents of this book and the other main two, keep pushing them as true, then I will challenge them to justify those claims.I think you missed the part in the bible that speaks of mankind's amazing ability to create something, and then magically transform oneself into its slave. Make an argument about a church and its book? Great. Might even make some good points - wonderful. But, if twenty years down the line, one finds oneself making the same argument in a way that make one miserable, then maybe its time to question whether I am the arguments master or its slave. Was it really the church and its book that brought unhappiness or the attachment to the argument? All those years of arguing about the church and its book and I could have been doing something enjoyable instead. Mental, huh?
Oh, Ye of little faith!I think it's a simple question. Is it true? Should the guidance in it he observed? Should we allow the demonisation of human beings, women, gay people, because bronze age men thought they were inferior? If you don't, then arguing it's a false book. A book straight out of the minds of man and should be treated as such. And for me, as long as the proponents of this book and the other main two, keep pushing them as true, then I will challenge them to justify those claims.
Oh, Ye of little faith!
;-)
All good points. There are also christian writers that would agree withs ome of what you have said. But I might also be looking at it another way.I think it's a simple question. Is it true? Should the guidance in it he observed? Should we allow the demonisation of human beings, women, gay people, because bronze age men thought they were inferior? If you don't, then arguing it's a false book. A book straight out of the minds of man and should be treated as such. And for me, as long as the proponents of this book and the other main two, keep pushing them as true, then I will challenge them to justify those claims.
I think you missed the part in the bible that speaks of mankind's amazing ability to create something, and then magically transform oneself into its slave. Make an argument about a church and its book? Great. Might even make some good points - wonderful. But, if twenty years down the line, one finds oneself making the same argument in a way that make one miserable, then maybe its time to question whether I am the arguments master or its slave. Was it really the church and its book that brought unhappiness or the attachment to the argument? All those years of arguing about the church and its book and I could have been doing something enjoyable instead. Mental, huh?
The bible is just a story book and possibly Jesus did exist but instead of performing miracles was probably the Dynamo of his time and people fell for it all and it all gets exaggerated like Chinese whispersThat's because they are. The first chapter from the big book of piss should have everybody who reads it say. Well, that didn't fucking happen so it's all shit. Reading the rest just reinforces how utterly ridiculous the whole thing is. Kill people who eat shrimps. Wear a two fibre turtleneck kill your kids for being cheeky. Kill thousands of babies, but, let the families who sacrifice a lamb and smear it's blood on their door. Kill everybody who doesn't share your faith, including your family. Kill all the inhabitants of any city who don't believe. Send out your daughter's to be raped when angels are in a bit of bother and people want to shag them. Don't know what happened to their wings, but there you go. A guy survives inside a fish for days. God tells a **** to kill his son and he is going to do it. Jesus attracts crowds of thousands but the Romans don't notice or report it. How to buy and treat your slaves. Even Jeezy Peezy said, be kind to your master, even the bad ones. His dad who is him and the ghost **** who us also him in a human fit of rage kills the world. In a flood that never happened. Unicorns, dragons and other mythical creatures abound. No dinosaurs though. Flat earth, centre of the universe, stars will fall to the earth and so on. It's fucking unadulterated bollocks. From the first paragraph to the last.
This is my belief also.The bible is just a story book and possibly Jesus did exist but instead of performing miracles was probably the Dynamo of his time and people fell for it all and it all gets exaggerated like Chinese whispers
Yep, there is indeed some crazy stuff. But you speak of prejudices, which a bit loopy. But here's a question. Some people say that religion has caused war, but is it possible that it is more case that war has used religion for its own purposes? In this way, not all religious people are into war? So, could it be that some folk have taken their own prejudices and used them to 'create' a God of morality - that doesn't actually exist - in order claim they are somehow superior. Might not mean that all who are into 'God' are prejudiced?I think it is. If you promote a book and say it's true, then add in that if you don't believe it's true you burn forever, that is immoral and then add in, it's probably most definitely the work of man, you then are responsible for behaviours and societal norms that are wrong to those humans who are castigated by men thousands of years ago.
Now the bible was directly responsible and still is, for prejudice against homisexual people. Society has ignored these books and recently agreed everyone should have the same rights. The same goes for women, who are chattels and the possession of men in all the books. All the books advocate and support slavery, yet, today that practise is looked upon as vile. So, these books inform certain people of what's right even when it is markedly wrong. Gay men in the UK went to jail for being who they are. In many countries they are killed even today.
These books are essentially the cause of much suffering and hate. If they were true and god was as psychotic, narccassitic, needy, jealous and murderously vengeful we would just have to out up with it. But, all of those conditions are remarkably human. So god creates people who he hates and tells us to hate them too. Tells us how to buy and keep slaves and be good to our masters even the bad ones? Don't eat shrimps? For fuck sake, the god figure is a combination of hippy and serial killing sociopath. The books are all insane. They make people insane who believe the shit that's in them. And worse, it gives them justification for that insanity.
Edit : ps some might read, eg, the bible as a literal truth, others might use it as a morality guide, others yet as something else. I wouldn't really call myself a religionist or scientist, or spiritualist. But, at times, I might explore these areas. Where I end up in this way, might even be 'blasphemous' to all three. Such is life
.
But even then, even if he was just a famous inspirational blagger, not one contemporary source ever mentioned him. None of the Romans who were living there ever recorded his existence at the supposed time he was alive, none of the censuses picked him up, none of the Hebrews who were there at the time ever recorded his existence, not even any of his supposed followers recorded his existence.The bible is just a story book and possibly Jesus did exist but instead of performing miracles was probably the Dynamo of his time and people fell for it all and it all gets exaggerated like Chinese whispers
But even then, even if he was just a famous inspirational blagger, not one contemporary source ever mentioned him. None of the Romans who were living there ever recorded his existence at the supposed time he was alive, none of the censuses picked him up, none of the Hebrews who were there at the time ever recorded his existence, not even any of his supposed followers recorded his existence.
All sources of Jesus are after his supposed death, most of the earliest sources are long after his supposed death, most by hundreds of years, most not even in Arabia.
His supposed existence holds about as much credibility as King Arthur, Beowulf, Robin Hood, all Greek Mythology and all Norse Mythology.
Multimillionaire Televangelist Kenneth Copeland
Judgement Is Executed On COVID-19
Who comes up with this sh*t?
I wondered why property was so cheap down there compared to the south east.@arfurclue you said in your last post …….
Some people say that religion has caused war, but is it possible that it is more case that war has used religion for its own purposes?
The Cathars were peaceful people living in what is now South West France, North East Spain, they were a peaceful bunch who did not trouble anyone. They did not accept the catholic church and it's teachings, preferring instead to believe in equality between man and woman and a dual god. The Pope sat on his Roman throne told the King of France living in Paris on his French throne that it was disgraceful that he should allow these people to act this way.
The King of France felt he had to do something to appease the pope so he sent his army to slaughter the Cathars. They did a pretty good job of it to. I don't think war used religion, just a religious nut in control of Europe.
There are many other examples where religion has been the cause of bloodshed and killings but fortunately people are beginning to see and think for themselves. In time...…… well we can only hope.
Exactly. I think.God's Will or Bat munchers? I dunno. Maybe mankind makes things good or bad, the essence of love creates that creates that which reflects wholeness - integrity, if you like. Which of these briefs does the coronavirus best fulfil? Debatable. Might be two kinds of switches - an on/off of black and white or a dimer switch which offers differing shades of brightness - or dullness, depending on how you look at it. If mankind's response to the coronavirus might then be seen as less than wholly perfect. Some may debate as to the shades of good and bad. But fighting
over toilet rolls seems less than bright, and some of decisions made in political spheres appear to be fighting each other as to which least lacks integrity, rather than proving to be truly effective.
That seems a fair assessment. What I was looking at maybe was more that I have known warlike people who have nothing to do with religion and also religious people who would rather choose peace. In that way to say that religion is definitively the cause of war - or vice versa - might be a flawed and/or limited argument. But there sure may be correlations. Either way, it strikes me that if humanity could find away to look at war with a genuine cost benefit - what is gained or lost - including the the likes of emotional cost of experience, not just theories on a bit of paper, the they might find the wool has been pulled over there eyes and be at least a little slower in choosing to go to war. Might create more space for freedom of thought to enter, or even allow a natural wisdom to blossom once more. Perhaps this might involve a re-sensitisation to war for a short while, not just for the battlefield but also for a warlike mentality in everyday life.@arfurclue you said in your last post …….
Some people say that religion has caused war, but is it possible that it is more case that war has used religion for its own purposes?
The Cathars were peaceful people living in what is now South West France, North East Spain, they were a peaceful bunch who did not trouble anyone. They did not accept the catholic church and it's teachings, preferring instead to believe in equality between man and woman and a dual god. The Pope sat on his Roman throne told the King of France living in Paris on his French throne that it was disgraceful that he should allow these people to act this way.
The King of France felt he had to do something to appease the pope so he sent his army to slaughter the Cathars. They did a pretty good job of it to. I don't think war used religion, just a religious nut in control of Europe.
There are many other examples where religion has been the cause of bloodshed and killings but fortunately people are beginning to see and think for themselves. In time...…… well we can only hope.
Exactly. I think.
The only Evangelist I listen to;