A question about religion and the earthquake.

LOL, most believers dont tune in to Robertson so they do not know what he says, and therefore do not comment. Only thing most believers know about him is what non-believers spout about him. Non-believers seem to tune in to him heavily for their religious information. It makes it easier to ignore the internal beacon when you convince yourself its calling you to be like Pat Robertson.

Wow Jason, thanks for that. Now we know believers don't read the newspaper.

Same 3 verses? Lol. There are plenty more. I just posted those three quickly from the plane for discussion. I'll get you some more if you like. Please explain what it is about the situation with the Midianites and Deuteronomy that make rape ok. Sounding an awful lot like cultural relativity!

Funny you guys mention Pat Robertson. Here's the latest I just read from that ass-clown in regards to the Haitian tragedy:
"...they got together and swore a pact to the devil. They said 'We will serve you if you will get us free from the prince.' True story. And so the devil said, 'Ok it’s a deal.' And they kicked the French out. The Haitians revolted and got something themselves free. But ever since they have been cursed by one thing after another,"

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2010/01/13/crimesider/entry6092717.shtml

There is something seriously wrong in the head of people who follow and respect that moron.

Whoa! A religious argument on Wakeworld..How rare.

God hates us all.....but mostly you.

Some more winners (that I'm sure can be explained away by context):

Deut 13:12-19: “When you begin living in the towns the Lord your God is giving you, you may hear 13 that scoundrels among you are leading their fellow citizens astray by saying, ‘Let us go worship other gods’—gods you have not known before. 14 In such cases, you must examine the facts carefully. If you find that the report is true and such a detestable act has been committed among you, 15 you must attack that town and completely destroy[a] all its inhabitants, as well as all the livestock. 16 Then you must pile all the plunder in the middle of the open square and burn it. Burn the entire town as a burnt offering to the Lord your God. That town must remain a ruin forever; it may never be rebuilt. 17 Keep none of the plunder that has been set apart for destruction. Then the Lord will turn from his fierce anger and be merciful to you. He will have compassion on you and make you a large nation, just as he swore to your ancestors.


Deut: 22:23-24 “Suppose a man meets a young woman, a virgin who is engaged to be married, and he has sexual intercourse with her. If this happens within a town, you must take both of them to the gates of that town and stone them to death. The woman is guilty because she did not scream for help. The man must die because he violated another man’s wife. In this way, you will purge this evil from among you.


Exodus 21:10-11 If a man who has married a slave wife takes another wife for himself, he must not neglect the rights of the first wife to food, clothing, and sexual intimacy. 11 If he fails in any of these three obligations, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment.

Talk about sanctity of marriage! Way to go Yahweh!

Zech 14:1-2 Watch, for the day of the Lord is coming when your possessions will be plundered right in front of you! I will gather all the nations to fight against Jerusalem. The city will be taken, the houses looted, and the women raped. Half the population will be taken into captivity, and the rest will be left among the ruins of the city.


Exodus 21:20-21 If a man beats his male or female slave with a club and the slave dies as a result, the owner must be punished. But if the slave recovers within a day or two, then the owner shall not be punished, since the slave is his property.

I appreciate that Yahweh explains exactly how badly I am allowed to beat my slaves. It really makes the day-to-day easier to have his absolute standards of morality spelled out so clearly for me like this.

Exodus 12:29-30 At midnight the LORD struck down all the firstborn in Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh, who sat on the throne, to the firstborn of the prisoner, who was in the dungeon, and the firstborn of all the livestock as well. 30 Pharaoh and all his officials and all the Egyptians got up during the night, and there was loud wailing in Egypt, for there was not a house without someone dead.

Now THAT is a just and moral god!

LOL John, we don't listen to 8-tracks or rent beta movies either. We must be dumb.

GOD wanted their pants on the ground!

^^^lol!

Man...what a lot of wasted hate.

Can't we all just hug and get along? Sure thing is we're all going to find out the real truth in the end!!

Jeremy, answer my questions about islam and tell me I am wrong? The difference is slavery and such was man's law during those times and things were man's laws during that time. God taught people how to live in that society. I don't know the full context of every story of the bible. The point is, what did Jesus say? That is what christianity is based on which is the new testament. Your right. The old testament is part of the christian religion. It is the early history of God and his people. Then he sent Jesus.

I can post yet again all the information regarding mohammed. He came to power through violence and murder. Tell me that is so about Jesus?

Here read this:

http://bibleprobe.com/muhammad.htm

The difference is slavery and such was man's law during those times and things were man's laws during that time. God taught people how to live in that society.

What the heck does that mean? You're saying Yahweh tempered his absolute moral standards because that's the way people were living at the time? Ridiculous. Either slavery is wrong or it isn't. All Yahweh had to do was say "hey you gits, stop taking slaves!" (he actually talked directly to people back in the day). It could have been the 11th commandment. But instead he was too focused on the right ways to rape women and making sure people didn't eat shellfish. Maybe, just maybe these texts are not the word of god. Just sayin.



It is the early history of God and his people. Then he sent Jesus.

Interesting "plan" to withhold salvation from humanity for thousands of years. Maybe Yahweh should have sent Jesus to Adam & Eve. Putting aside the issue of chronology, the whole idea of atonement theology is kind of silly really. I mean it's quite obvious that the whole blood sacrifice thing was projected onto god by man, not the other way around. Unless you really and truly believe that the omniscient creator of the entire universe needed people to burn rabbits for him to be appeased. So the idea of Yahweh sacrificing himself, to himself, to appease himself, to change a rule that he made in the first place is pretty ridiculous.


Regarding Mohammed, Islam is dumb. That in and of itself doesn't make Christianity (or any other religion) not dumb.

deltahoosier, I tried to read through some of the website you posted, but it read too much like one of those little pamphlets you find in public restrooms. Clearly biased.

I'm not advocating Islam, I just don't agree with the prejudices that have become trendy to join.

Anyone wanna a bite?

Who said it was an apple?????

GD, you need to put an "O" in the middle of your name.

Jeremy, that pamphlet as you call can be backed up with other sources. I just found one that gave it to you in one nice package. It is pretty well documented that Muhammed was a murderer. He came to power through war. It is in the Quran that he used to preach favorably about Christians and Jews until they rejected his teachings. Then he slaughtered them and then started preach ill will toward them.

If you look at the Hajj. It is a ancient tribal ritual when Mecca contained all gods of the tribes. Muhammed's tribal god was alah the moon god. Ever notice the cresent moon above mosques? Mohommed allowed the city of Mecca to keep the pilgrimage because it was a financial cash cow for the city. So, muhammed kept it but just replaced all gods with alah. They still do the ritual animal sacrafice to this day in islam.

Look it up bud, it is there. The website is biased. It is biased because it is explaining the diffrences.

Also Jeremy, I know someone who took photo's, while working in London for half a year, of mulim's in England holding signs saying they are going to get the UK next. They are pretty militant about it. It is not trendy because people are looking to be biased. They are biased because of what it is. Is is a danger to the free world. Someone can post a list of all the crap done by muslims all over the world. Don't worry. If only 10% of the world is radical muslim, that is only around a 100 million people.

Rod's right. Islam is kooky and dangerous. At it's most elementary foundation, it's because it tells people what to think instead of encouraging them to think for themselves (just like all/most religions, including Christianity).

If people were taught to think for themselves instead of taught to unquestioningly accept ancient stories as truth based on faith, they most likely wouldn't fly planes into buildings or burn "witches" at the stake, etc.

I see god when I get an O in the middle! :>)

Rod, certain Christians handle venomous snakes and drink turpentine. What's the point?

Jeremy, that is not biblical and now I think you are just making stuff up. You can call yourself a christian all you want but if you do nothing that the bible asks, then you are not being a christian. Oddly enough people seem to think the bible tells everyone to do this or that. The bible does not tell people to do much. It is basically the ten commandments and many stories to help people get through situations, how to become closer to God. There is not a lot of you have to do this or do that in the bible. The crap MANY confuse as christianity is Roman Catholicism that old pagan customs rapped in christianized themes. Jesus actually preached against dogma. To a certain degree Jesus was the original hippie except with a work ethic.

Just to point out, christianity does not tell people what to think. It establishes a moral code and people tend to come to their own conclusions if actions come into that code. Matter of fact you can argue that because we are one of the few christian nations on earth that we have been able to break the bonds of kings and queens and pope's and form our own government of individuals. Christianity I would argue is the only major religion that requires you to be an individual and read the bible and come up with your own relationship.

I would argue is the only major religion that requires you to be an individual and read the bible and come up with your own relationship.

Now I see why you think Christians can cherry pick the Bible, but Muslims are bond to the literal word of the Koran.

No kidding, Rod is the ultimate cherrypicker. He's got it down to a science - if you completely ignore and don't read huge chunks of the bible, you don't have to do the brain pretzel to get around it!

In Rod's world, telling people to "accept and love me or burn in hell for all eternity" is not telling people what to think.

just to stir the pot a bit....

Why are natural disasters referred to as "acts of God"?

Of course, if I was trying to worship a child-murderer I guess I'd probably do my best to avoid reading about the nasty stuff he did too.

(1 Sam 15:2-3 NIV) This is what the LORD Almighty says: 'I will punish the Amalekites for what they did to Israel when they waylaid them as they came up from Egypt. Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.'"

Mass murder and genocide - of innocent infants and children. Score another moral victory for Yahweh!

Again, Who is Christianity based on? Tell me and you will have your answer. There is no cherry picking needed. It is the history of the bible. So what. True or not? I don't really care. The difference to Wes, John and Paul is christians do not read those passages and then go out to destroy other people. If you think they do, then you are completely off your rocker. Paul. Some people define hell as a seperation from God and some simply try to define it as the grave or it really could be the firey abiss. God is not telling you what to believe. You have the CHOICE. At the end of the day just like with your parents, you can chose to do what you want but there are consequences. Why does it matter to you guys anyway?

If you want to know the difference between a christian nation and a islamic nation? Wes' head would be chopped off in a public square in about 10 minutes in one of those nations for the things he just said. Care to guess which nation?

The fact that Religion A is more silly, violent, dangerous, or whatever then Religion B does not mean that Religion B is not still silly, violent, dangerous, or whatever.

And Wes, you are just frustrated I don't fall into your easy to package hate fest of people of God. Seems to me you cherry pick on who to hate on. I thought liberal minded people were suppose to be "open minded". Seems pretty close minded to me.

I can't speak for others, but it matters to me because I think the world is a much more dangerous place because (through religion) people (especially children) are taught to do as their told rather then to think for themselves. Despite your weak protestations to the contrary, Rod, religion is pretty much all about doing as your told.

This isn't a Christian nation, dude. And there are plenty of Christian societies throughout history that would have chopped my head off, are you kidding? Just because Western nations have secularized and moved beyond the more ridiculous biblical commandments doesn't make those commandments any less ridiculous.

"True or not? I don't really care." So you base your religious beliefs on something you don't care about? What a weirdo.

John, muslims are held to the Quran as every word is true. The difference is this. Islam was made from murder and conquest. You can go to heaven in Islam through the scales of justice (life time of works) or martydom if a holy person issues a fatwa. The islamic world being so dogmatic keeps people down and from having independent thought. Notice nothing of value has come from the middle east pretty much since Islam came into being? The middle east used to be the center of advanced learning. Matter of fact you can pretty much point to any catholic nation as well as being repressed from individual freedom and invention. I digress. The point being, is this causes a large number of people to come under control of radical holy men and become so down that they fall for the martydom angle to get a free pass.

Also, Islam directly preaches they are allowed to lie to a infidel inorder to gain advantage.

Christianity is not dogma. There are no requirements. It is a gift. Simple as that. Take it or leave it.

John, muslims are held to the Quran as every word is true.

Same with Christians and the bible. Now, there are many many Christians who do not read the bible this way, just as there are many many Muslims who do not read the Quran this way.

There are no requirements.

Are you joking?

I tend to agree with you about religion Paul. I pretty much consider most religions to be man made and do consider them keeping people down. At the same time, it is no different than most political systems. Communism seeks (and did) remove peoples trust to the state instead of God. The first step in a communist regime is to remove religion so that people have to rely on the state.

Wes, your hate is making you get a little personnal bud. I thought the key to liberalism is to be not hateful. That is what Jesus taught. Are you moving to animal farm where not all pigs are created equal? Tell me Wes. Who is christianity bases on and what did he teach? Was he not the one who told Peter to put the sword down to defend Jesus knowing that gaurds were coming to take Jesus to beat, whip and nail him to a cross? Yet, you still want to contend that christianity is about violence and retrobution? I can't help that many have been confused what roman catholicism has done to jesus' words over time. That is why I agree that religion can be dangerous, but, many do not have the intellect or will to tell the difference.

Christianity is based on Paul. Who do you think it is based on? The religion Paul built is based on Christ - it has little to nothing to do with the historical man of Jesus. Jesus himself was born and died a devout Jew.

Wes, I base my belief in a person who was documented by Jewish and Roman witnesses to have been killed on the cross and then rose again. Our history books tell of use crossing a river and suprise attacking the british. Our history books talks about killing indians. Our history talks of many things but I don't see too many of use firing up the muskets and attacking the british from the woods. I don't see too many wagon trains down at the indian casino's. What is your point. Do you know want to be in this nation because it was what it was?

Right there Wes. You just fell for the Roman Catholic trap. Christianity is based on Jesus. Paul was said to be the rock the church was built on (meaning Paul is to spead the news for Jesus) not so a relilgion can be based on Paul. Right there tells me all your ranting is about Catholicism.

Rod, these are strange and pointless analogies. Our country has blood on its hands like any other, sure - but it is constantly striving to better itself.

Christianity posits an all-powerful and unchanging God that you are saying that unchanging God changes. Do you not see the contradiction?

You're more ignorant that I thought if you think Catholicism draws its authority from Paul. It's Peter dude.

And no, Christianity is not based on Jesus, it's based on Christ. Two different animals.

Can you tell me what the requirements for becoming a christian are? How does a christian believe you get to heaven?

That is true. My bad. Then how in the heck you do you come up with Paul then? Talking about being way out. You are constantly raving about a religious group when you don't even know who they believe in.

Jesus and Christ are two different animals? Interesting. Do tell....

That is true. My bad. Then how in the heck you do you come up with Paul then? Talking about being way out. You are constantly raving about a religious group when you don't even know who they believe in.

No dude, you're the one who is supposedly Christian and doesn't even know the difference between Peter and Paul, lol. You ignore the OT and obviously skim the NT lol.

Obviously God has either changed in our eyes or we don't know how he got from point a to point b. because sending Jesus seems to be a little different than the old testament don't you think? It does not matter to me. I have faith it was done that way in history for a reason. It is what it was. A history. Jesus also spoke in parables to relate stories to the masses in a way they could understand. So what. I don't seem to remember the passage Jesus spoke about martydom and works getting you anywhere. I would have to find the passage but Jesus even spoke directly about people not being about to get to heaven by works. That is in direct contridiction to Roman Catholicism and Islam.

If you're asking what most mainstream Christian theology thinks about getting to heaven, it varies from group to group but typically breaks down like this:

1) believe that Yahweh sacrificed himself, to himself, to appease himself, to change a rule that he himself made in the first place
2) repent of the wrong way one has lived and turning from lives of sin (this is negotiable)
3) by being baptized to have sins forgiven (also sometimes negotiable)

Some groups also encourage or require a verbal commitment.

Haha Rod you really are ignorant. You're attributing Paul's words to Jesus. A lot of things would be clearer if the biblical record actually had more Jesus in it, but it's pretty limited (and much of what was available was struck from the canon by the early church because much of it contradicted what they wanted to be known about Jesus).

I know the difference between the two. I read it wrong. So what. What next, you going to the all winning strategy of bagging on spelling? Tell me the difference between Jesus and Christ. I would love to hear this one. I am now supposedly a christian? Wow, the hate keeps coming huh. Let me get this. You go to a known liberal school and major in religious studies only to spend your free time bashing on christians and you don't even know what they believe. Then you go on to tell me (like others do) how I am supposed to believe based on what? Your liberal schools teaching of what religions are suppose to believe? Really?

What is this hate you speak of? Calling you a Christian is hateful? Haha! Not sure where you're getting the "don't even know what they believe" from.

If you're truly interested in the idea of the historical Jesus vs. the Christ of faith there are plenty of resources you can find on the idea. Here's a very basic primer from a believer: http://davnet.org/kevin/articles/hjesus.html

Wasn't Paul writing under God's hand?

Basically to paraphrase your hate:

1) Believe Jesus died on the cross for you and me.
2) Ask to be forgiven for your sins
3) Try and live a life that honors God

Wow, there is a lot of commitment there boy. Let me tell ya. That christianity. Just so much there to do. I don't know if I have enough time in the day for that.

Then to follow up, is try and have fellowship with the lord and pray for guidance. (not a requirement for heaven). The bible is about simple truths about how to live. Even at that most of christianity say for you to pray and have patients. Religions do not tell you to pray and have a personal relationship with God. They tell you to come to the church. BIG difference.

You mention that much of the word was stricken by the early church then why did roman catholicism add their own books to the bible? Couldn't they simply rewrite how they chose?

(Message edited by deltahoosier on January 15, 2010)

I take offense your word "supposedly" in my reference.

Ah, I didn't mean it to offend - you always seem to be avoiding calling yourself a believer so I was confused. Let's be clear, ROD is a Christian and considers himself such.

As far as Paul writing "under God's hand" - I don't know, is that what you believe? If so, can you explain what that really means? Was Paul the only writer in the biblical canon to do so? Or are all books in it written by God? Please do explain because this seems a pretty critical point wrt the authority of Christian teaching.

So let's get this straight - pointing out tenets of Christianity is "hate" - but rounding up American citizens whose grandparents were born in this country and forcing them to live in concentration camps is loving care done for their own protection.

No, your tone is hateful. When have I avoided being called a believer? I can say it is sometimes fun to take a side for the sake of the intellectual challenge, I don't think I would constantly post rebutles over the years if I did not believe.

I don't know if inspired by God or actually guided by God. One can argue that inspiration by God is being guided by God. Don't really know absolute. That is why christians are to try and have a personal relationship with God which you have to admit is completely different than the other major religions.

I did not round anyone up and put them into camps. During a time of war things have to be done. That was a action of the state. Doesn't the bible say to followers to obey the laws of the land? Which is different than other major religions. Christianity was not sent to abolish the laws of man. Didn't you argue we were not a christian nation? Maybe the non christians ordered that? Again you refuse to believe that just because they were born here does not mean they were assimulated into the society. If I go to most major cities which kind of "town" do you find there? I'll give you a guess. They are a very close cousin of Japanese I would suspect. Point is, you want to use very simple labels for complex actions. That is something that I feel is devoid in the liberal mindset in general. Putting them into camps very well could have been for their safety as well as stop a people who had strong cultural ties to a emperor who's country just bombed us. Also, It may not have mattered back then if they were assimulated better than the we thought. You know how things are. The further you get from washington the less they know what is reality. What makes you think it would be better then than it is now. It was way worse back then. Decisions can be made from any number of generalized reasons.

I bet if the pope order a bombing of Washington DC and 100,000 catholics showed up and did it, I bet I would be rounded up just like the catholics because to all you people we are the same. Am I right?

(Message edited by deltahoosier on January 15, 2010)

OK, so regardless of it being "inspired by God" or "guided by God" - your implication is that you know the bible is true because God wrote it or had it written. Yet you say other books of the bible do not get this status?

You seem to be in stark disagreement with your peers here on wakeworld who hold that the OT is every bit as true and important as the NT, and also that living as a Christian is incredibly difficult and challenging, not the simple quick process you make it out to be above. Are you just a lot holier than they are, or do you see things differently than them?

I don't know what to think absolutely about the bible. I am not much of a follower type person to be honest. If I had to view it from a legalistic point of view I would have no way to prove every bit of the bible is absolutely devoid of human influenece. The life of Jesus and his dying and rising again is in historical record with witnesses from two differnt cultures that had everything to lose with it being true. I see all the time more and more things proven correct about the bible. I see facts that ultimately back my faith.

On you contridiction to other christians. What contridiction? In full context it is important to know the history and the stories. We require kids to learn US and world history to get out of school. What is the difference? Only person who says I am contridicting is you.

Becoming a christian is very easy. It is a simple gift. Nothing more, nothing less. Living the christian life is very hard in society when you have sex, drugs, corruption, lust, envy haters such as yourself at every corner. Yes, it is hard to live a life according to Jesus' teaching. The bible even says you will be challenged. I figure if I am never challenged I must be doing the wrong things. For instance, you can blow like the wind all you want how I am not this or that based on your biased view. The reality is, the blowing wind makes a tree stronger. If everything were easy, you would not develop character. You see, every time you go on one of your attacks on christians, I actually get challenged to go look things up which actually solidifies my beliefs. So thank you for that.

The life of Jesus and his dying and rising again is in historical record with witnesses from two differnt cultures that had everything to lose with it being true.

Bzzzt.

Speaking of looking things up, why don't you check out the gospels attributed to Matthew and Luke. These are the only two that mention anything about Jesus before the age of 30ish. Unfortunately their stories regarding the birth of Jesus contradict each other. Glad you invoked historical sources outside the biblical record, this is important to keep in mind.

In addition to Matthew and Luke disagreeing about the geneologies of Jesus, a miraculous star in the east guides the wise men to Jesus - Luke evidently knows nothing of it - not a mention. What else did Luke know nothing of? Herod's great slaughter - the indiscriminate killing of every Male baby in Judea. It's not surprising that Luke doesn't mention it though, because neither does any other historical source, not even Josephus (to whom you refer) who hated Herod and would have gone out of his way to record such an atrocity had it actually occurred. Of course, it hadn't.

Matthew states that Mary and Joseph lived in Bethlehem, they flee to Egypt to avoid the slaughter (again none of this mentioned in Luke) then return years later and only then do they decide to leave their home in Bethlehem and move way out to Nazareth, because they fear Herod's son.

Luke of course is completely different, with the couple living in Nazareth all along (more likely to be historically accurate). Of course, this is problematic because the author of Luke has to get the couple to Bethlehem for the birth somehow - so he invents the census that supposedly forces Joseph to go there. This is silly for many reasons, not the least of which is that a census was taken where you live, not where your ancestors were from. And even if we go with it, no one would schlep their bursting pregnant wife on one of the most treacherous and long journeys possible. As usual, there is no record of such a census anywhere outside Luke (not surprising, since such a thing didn't happen).

These two gospels cannot be harmonized with regard to detail or chronology. Are these disparities surprising? Not really. The texts later attributed to Matthew and Luke grew up out of different traditions that likely did not have access to the other (there were countless early christian groups, most have texts that were not included in the canon). Since no one really knew anything about Jesus (because he did not appear in public life until 30 or so) communities eventually filled in the background based on what little was known (he was from galilee for instance, and there were questionable circumstances surrounding his paterntity).

Its ok Wes.

Jesus loves you.

Even though you dont understand the bible.

I was refering to the death and rising of Jesus. Thanks for the lesson. Always good food for study.

Rod, I'm not following - you're trying to say there is historical evidence outside the biblical record that records Jesus as having risen from the dead? Please present it!

Regarding the gospels, was Yahweh a little drunk when he was guiding the authors of Matthew and Luke? What accounts for their contradiction?

You sure are dancing around from subject to subject. What you hoping to try and find something to try and get me into some sort of moral delima? Good luck with that.

I did find this for what it is worth;

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08375a.htm

I am not going to try and reconcile Matthew and Luke. Why should I? Though it could be a good exercise.

since you are asking questions. Why do you believe Christians look to Paul? I have never heard of such a rational considering you are suppose to have a personal relationship with God.

I haven't read through this whole thread because I don't have the time, and it looks like it has just turned into the Wes & Rod show. Rod, arguing with Wes is just going to leave you agitated and frustrated. Wes is probably a decent guy, he is obviously educated and probably a very likeable guy.

That being said, until Wes has a personal experience with God for himself, nobody is going to change his views on what he believes and why he believes it. One of you is right and one of you is wrong. Unfortunately, if Wes is wrong, he will have an eternity to remember these debates. One thing I know to be true, you will become whom you choose to believe. Truth is a funny thing, it will eventually find it's way to the surface. I have heard all the same arguments that Wes talks about many times. In the end, it's up to us to study for ourselves. After all, God says study to show yourself approved. He also says my people Parrish for lack of knowledge. If God's word was not correct, the last thing he would want is for us to study it. I am only responding to this thread because when I see the same arguments that have been debunked time and time again still being raised by people like Wes, the masses who are sitting back just reading this debate between you and Wes may take what he is saying at face value. Study for yourself, and be careful where you get your information.

Kinda why I avoided the whole conversation. Trying to convince an obvious atheist, and trying to convince an obvious religious believer of opposing positions is impossible. Just agree to disagree. Proof is not necessarily a requirement of the faithful.....but proof is absolutely necessary for the atheist. Providing tangible occurrence of either is an impossibility. There are some fine people who are atheists, and similarly fine people who are devout believers. The hatred and vitriol displayed by both parties is a shame. Thanks for the profound analogy Flight, always good to see a rational perspective.

"Unfortunately, if Wes is wrong, he will have an eternity to remember these debates"

What kind of God would punish sometime eternally because they didn't believe in a God? That'd have to be one hateful s.o.b. for sure.

Funny response from "Satan" to Pat Robertson:

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2010/01/the_devil_writes_pat_robertson.html

Brett, how is God punishing people? Who in their right mind would want to spend eternity in the presence of a God whom they despise?
All He is doing is saying right "you choose not to believe in me and what I have to offer, and have offered (we all have that choice)so the solution is you can go dwell in a place that I do NOT inhabit". Seems pretty fair. And if and when people do get there, their abiding memory will be that they chose their destination.

And the upside is that they will not be anywhere near the god they spent their whole lives flipping off. Win,win,no?

Matt, that's classic! It's pretty sad how the Christian leaders in this country are the ones who always seem to be the hypocrites (a la Haggard) as they purport to speak for a number of good and fine people throughout the country and then in turn make them look bad.

Brett, it's pretty clear from the Hebrew texts that Yahweh is one of the most hateful SOBs man could ever conjure up, so no real surprise there. The sad part is that Flight is once again appealing to Pascal's Wager - typical for the insecure believer who is compelled towards bad behavoir and needs the jealous, watchful father figure god to help keep them in line. As stated in the First Blog thread, it's a good thing for those of us in society who actually feel compelled to do the right thing without being forced to by the threat of hell that a decent number of those who DON'T feel that way have this type of belief to keep them from stealing/cheating/killing/etc.

>"What kind of God would punish sometime eternally because they didn't believe in a God?"

>> "Who in their right mind would want to spend eternity in the presence of a God whom they despise?"

How does "not believe" turn into "despise"? LOONEY!

"And the upside is that they will not be anywhere near the god they spent their whole lives flipping off. Win,win,no?"

Nobody is flipping off a god. They simply don't believe in one. And if a god is omnipotent, it should be able to easily understand the logic and why someone wouldn't believe in that god and forgive and get over it - unless that god is a mean, spiteful s.o.b., of course.

Well that kind of cuts to the point of it. I mean seriously, if one starts from a clean slate rather than an assumption that Yahweh exists, like I pointed out before he has some SERIOUSLY poor communication skills. In the Hewbrew days Yahweh was pretty direct, he would come down and walk among people as a man, and talk to people directly quite often. Strangely enough he stopped doing that long before even Jesus came on the scene (wonder why hmm - definitely didn't have anything to do with people becoming less and less superstitious and more knowledgeable).

Then we are supposed to believe that this omniscient omnipotent being is somehow tied to our limited linear experience of time and after thousands of years of people dying and burning in hell due to their ancestors' (and/or their own) sin, Yahweh finally decides it's time to send himself to be sacrificed to himself to himself to change a rule he created himself. Approximately 60 years after this, some books are written about it and strands of a church are gradually formed that slowly make these (contradictory) books available to a decent chunk of the western world, ignoring much of the rest of the world for another couple thousand years.

The best part is the believer's response such as Chris' that hey it's such a simple choice! As if Yahweh isn't playing some cosmic scavenger hunt with people's eternity on the line, lol.

"If you'd come today you could have reached a whole nation; Israel in 4 BC had no mass communication; Dontcha get me wrong, only wanna know!"

GD you think Wes likes God??Does he not believe or does he despise him. I would gues the latter. Lot of bitterness and hate there. Wes lives for forums like these. He shows off all his terrific bible knowledge and impresses all the people who do not believe in a bible that have never actually even bothered to read.
And now he has found an ally in Brett that he can really impress.
I always say I am not going to get into thse debates because it just fuels them. Nobody ever wins. Party on Wes, I'm sure somebody else will get involved. Maybe Rod will come back?
And Brett when you do get to the "other side" and if you do find yourself living outside God's presence He will have "gotten over it".He will not have a problem with you.

Why would any one of you want to live in the presence of somebody you do not believe in anyway?? I don't get it?

Wes,
it appears there's a fundamental misunderstanding based on your last post.
Followers of Christ do not 'behave' for the purpose of being excused from, or due to the threat of hell.
At the risk of providing ammunition for you.. ;) Believers obey out of love and respect for the sacrifice made on our behalf.

People here have a strange definition of hate lol. Chris, what makes you think I hate or despise Yahweh, a fictional being that I don't think even exists? Yahweh does not equal god btw.

Barry, no misunderstanding - probably just poor communication on my part. In that post I am specifically referring to the admission on the part of some on the First Blog thread that, were it not for their belief, they would be living their lives cheating/stealing/etc. It was not meant to refer in any way to all believers or to imply that all believers feel this way.