Couple found guilty of murder after using Christian parenting book "To Train Up a Child" - Polidicks

[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;42921798]To be fair, not really a lot of peoples fault when they've been told that by their parents and probably their entire community since they were young, never given any other option or idea. So it's unfair to call them dumb/stupid. And even if they have been exposed to other ideas, if they want to be religious that's their thing.[/QUOTE] That doesn't make the belief any less stupid. Yes, I wouldn't call the people themselves "stupid," but if you put serious time and thought into religion and come out still holding on then I question your intelligence. [QUOTE=sgman91;42921804]Believe whatever you want, but every action on the part of Abraham shows that he believed he would be coming down with his son. The test was much deeper than a simple test of who Abraham thought was more important, God or his son. The test was whether Abraham truly trusted in the promise of God, which was that Isaac would continue the line. If Abraham believed that promise, then he knew this test couldn't end with the death of Isaac. This interpretation isn't new either. Any Jewish commentary will say the same.[/QUOTE] That revisionist interpretation neuters the powerful intent of the story. Also, you may get away with defending that story. You might be able to explain the "spare the rod" line. But you're not going to get very far by individually advocating "nice" interpretation of Biblical stories. There's simply too much shit in there that is completely vile and indefensible.

[QUOTE=Explosions;42921838]That revisionist interpretation neuters the powerful intent of the story. Also, you may get away with defending that story. You might be able to explain the "spare the rod" line. But you're not going to get very far by individually advocating "nice" interpretation of Biblical stories. There's simply too much shit in there that is completely vile and indefensible.[/QUOTE] Lol, you are the one giving a revisionist interpretation. Like I said, the classical, Jewish, interpretation is the one that I have given, not the one you are giving. It isn't my fault that most people, including most Christians, are ignorant of what has been believed for thousands of years. Yours isn't consistent. On one hand Abraham is so intent on following God that he is going to sacrifice his own son, but on the other hand he is all too willing to lie in order to get away from personal conflict, going directly against God. [editline]19th November 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Explosions;42921838]You might be able to explain the "spare the rod" line. But you're not going to get very far by individually advocating "nice" interpretation of Biblical stories. [/QUOTE] I've giving honest and true interpretations. There's nothing new about what I've said.

[QUOTE=Ganerumo;42921408]Bit late to the party here, everyone's already explained how pulling bible quotes out of context is not a good argument, etc.[/QUOTE] what's the context of that quote?

[QUOTE=sgman91;42921853]Lol, you are the one giving a revisionist interpretation. Like I said, the classical, Jewish, interpretation is the one that I have given, not the one you are giving. Yours isn't consistent. On one hand Abraham is so intent on following God that he is going to sacrifice his own son, but on the other hand he is all too willing to lie in order to get away from personal conflict, going directly against God.[/QUOTE] What about when Lot lied to the people of Gomorrah to protect the Angels? And that would hardly be the first time god has allowed for ridiculous contradictions to occur. Regardless, the commandments had not been issued yet. In genesis, god's values and morals were extremely vague and seemed to change each chapter.

[QUOTE=Explosions;42921884]What about when Lot lied to the people of Gomorrah to protect the Angels?[/QUOTE] Notice how I said, "Lying for personal gain." That is completely different than lying for the gain of others. There are plenty of examples where people lied righteously in order to help others. No one, but himself, would have been hurt had Abraham told the truth. [QUOTE]And that would hardly be the first time god has allowed for ridiculous contradictions to occur. Regardless, the commandments had not been issued yet and in genesis, god's values and morals were extremely vague and seemed to change each chapter.[/QUOTE] ... talk about vague...

[QUOTE=sgman91;42921898]... talk about vague...[/QUOTE] What is vague? I'd be happy to clarify.

[QUOTE=Explosions;42921916]What is vague? I'd be happy to clarify.[/QUOTE] Your vague attack is impossible to argue against. Also, let me state that I admit right off the bat that I won't have all the answers. In fact, it would be illogical if I completely understood the workings and intentions of God because he is, by definition, more complex than I am.

[QUOTE=sgman91;42921919]Your vague attack is impossible to argue against. Also, let me state that I admit right off the bat that I won't have all the answers. In fact, it would be illogical if I completely understood the workings and intentions of God because he is, by definition, more complex than I am.[/QUOTE] god isn't "complex". god is a bastard who contradicts himself at every turn. mostly because he was invented by a diverse group of people who all had a different idea of what a beneficial god was.

[QUOTE=sgman91;42921919]Your vague attack is impossible to argue against. Also, let me state that I admit right off the bat that I won't have all the answers. In fact, it would be illogical if I completely understood the workings and intentions of God because he is, by definition, more complex than I am.[/QUOTE] I don't understand. I said that lying couldn't have been against gods orders because god had no orders during the time of genesis. I also said that god holds contradictory standards that varied by chapter. For instance, in genesis 9:5, he calls for the blood of killers. Yet he forbids anyone from harming Cain, a murderer.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;42921964]god isn't "complex". god is a bastard who contradicts himself at every turn. mostly because he was invented by a diverse group of people who all had a different idea of what a beneficial god was.[/QUOTE] Let me quote myself: [QUOTE]Your vague attack is impossible to argue against.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=sgman91;42921972]Let me quote myself:[/QUOTE] and the old "god works in mysterious ways" cop-out isn't?

[QUOTE=Explosions;42921966]I don't understand. I said that lying couldn't have been against gods orders because god had no orders during the time of genesis.[/QUOTE] There were obvious moral expectations on the part of God that the people recognized. For example, when Abraham lied about his wife being his sister for personal gain he was rebuked. [QUOTE]I also said that god holds contradictory standards that varied by chapter. For instance, in genesis 9:5, he calls for the blood of killers. Yet he forbids anyone from harming Cain, a murderer[/QUOTE] There's a difference between knowing what is right and wrong and having a specific punishment for those actions. Cain is allowed to live before the injunction of capital punishment is given to Noah. Also, the commands given to humanity do not equally apply to God. For example, He tells people to not judge whether people are damned or not, but one of His foundational, self given, responsibilities is to do that very judging. [editline]19th November 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=yawmwen;42921978]and the old "god works in mysterious ways" cop-out isn't?[/QUOTE] Like I said, it would be illogical for me to understand the workings of God completely. If you have a problem with that point, please make it, but vague questions don't get you anywhere.

i miss shark bones

[QUOTE=sgman91;42921777]Just to be clear: the vast majority of the Old Testament law was very clearly given specifically to the Jews, for the Jews. It was never supposed to be followed by anyone else.[/QUOTE] This is complete bullshit by the way. “For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 5:18-19 RSV) This is Mr. Jesus FYI.

[QUOTE=sgman91;42922021] There's a difference between knowing what is right and wrong and having a specific punishment for those actions. Cain is allowed to live before the injunction of capital punishment is given to Noah. [/QUOTE] can you explain this? did god just change his mind one day or did it take him a while to think of the idea?

[QUOTE=sgman91;42922021]There were obvious moral expectations on the part of God that the people recognized. For example, when Abraham lied about his wife being his sister for personal gain he was rebuked.[/quote] Not very obvious. Or if they are obvious, I don't want any part of them. God brazenly turning on and off the baby maker for Jacob's wives and their servants with no particular rhyme or reason behind it doesn't seem to adhere to any particular set of moral standards. Add to that the fact that certain people get off scott free for heinous actions or trickery while others are punished severely for relatively take crimes and it becomes clear that there either are no moral standards or that god makes them up as he goes along. [quote]There's a difference between knowing what is right and wrong and having a specific punishment for those actions. Cain is allowed to live before the injunction of capital punishment is given to Noah. Also, the commands given to humanity do not equally apply to God. For example, He tells people to not judge whether people are damned or not, but one of His foundational, self given, responsibilities is to do that very judging.[/quote] So god can just make exceptions and change his mind on a whim? What's the point of having any rules then? Also, like I said, there were no "commands" at this time.

[QUOTE=Explosions;42922038]This is complete bullshit by the way. “For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 5:18-19 RSV) This is Mr. Jesus FYI.[/QUOTE] no the old testament binding covenant was specifically between abraham and sons (i.e. jews) and god [quote]I will set up my covenant with you and your descendants after you in every generation as an enduring covenant. I will be your God and your descendants’ God after you. 8 I will give you and your descendants the land in which you are immigrants, the whole land of Canaan, as an enduring possession. And I will be their God.” 9 God said to Abraham, “As for you, you must keep my covenant, you and your descendants in every generation.[/quote] gen 17...... somewhere which leads us to believe that the law that Jesus is talking about must be the revised law of the gospel, because otherwise he'd be guilty of relaxing quite a few of these commandments! [editline]20th November 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Explosions;42922080]So god can just make exceptions and change his mind on a whim? What's the point of having any rules then? Also, like I said, there were no "commands" at this time.[/QUOTE] well the common belief is that god has planned all of those revisions beforehand, so the perceived changes aren't actually changes at all, but rather a continuation of that plan

[QUOTE=Juniez;42922087] well the common belief is that god has planned all of those revisions beforehand, so the perceived changes aren't actually changes at all, but rather a continuation of that plan[/QUOTE] what plan? [editline]20th November 2013[/editline] the plan to watch a world turn to shit and sin then flood it? the plan to let people butcher animals as offerings to the god(s) until he comes down to kill a human for that purpose? [editline]20th November 2013[/editline] if god's all loving, he sure has a shitty way of showing it. if god is fair, he certainly uses a very loose definition of the word.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;42922149]what plan? [editline]20th November 2013[/editline] the plan to watch a world turn to shit and sin then flood it? the plan to let people butcher animals as offerings to the god(s) until he comes down to kill a human for that purpose? [editline]20th November 2013[/editline] if god's all loving, he sure has a shitty way of showing it. if god is fair, he certainly uses a very loose definition of the word.[/QUOTE] [img]http://i.somethingawful.com/forumsystem/emoticons/emot-iiam.gif[/img] although given how many times god has been described with personified qualities it wouldn't be too far off to assume that god is a being who just happens to have powers and insight that's higher than ours, instead of the objectively perfect being that's usually portrayed

[QUOTE=Juniez;42922210][img]http://i.somethingawful.com/forumsystem/emoticons/emot-iiam.gif[/img] although given how many times god has been described with personified qualities it wouldn't be too far off to assume that god is a being who just happens to have powers and insight that's higher than ours, instead of the objectively perfect being that's usually portrayed[/QUOTE] that's sorta a kick in the balls to christians, jews, and muslims isn't it?

[QUOTE=yawmwen;42922225]that's sorta a kick in the balls to christians, jews, and muslims isn't it?[/QUOTE] which.......ones?

You're wrong. Jesus says he comes to fulfill the prophets and the laws, not abolished them. Also, if your just going to say that whenever there's a logical contradiction that it's "beyond our understanding," then you're saying that the debate is over. You're left standing there with fanciful claims and zero evidence.

[QUOTE=Explosions;42922252]You're wrong. Jesus says he comes to fulfill the prophets and the laws, not abolished them. Also, if your just going to say that whenever there's a logical contradiction that it's "beyond our understanding," then you're saying that the debate is over. You're left standing there with fanciful claims and zero evidence.[/QUOTE] well if the source from both sides of the argument comes from a 2000+ year old book that's been revised, lost, and intentionally changed many times throughout its lifetime, not to mention its original basis was from a human record (granted, apparently through divine inspiration) then there was never much to go off of really but that doesn't mean the concept behind the book is completely moot though!

[QUOTE=valkery;42920164]There are three kinds of atheists. [B]Passive[/B] ones that coexist with religion because people are entitled to believe what they want. [B]Defensive[/B] ones that defend their points when pressed, but leave well enough alone most of the time. [B]Dickhead[/B] ones that needlessly bash religions in order to get attention. Which one do you think you are being right now?[/QUOTE] So atheists are okay only when they keep their mouth shut about religion, unless it is directly "pressing them to defend their points"? Yeah, no, fuck off

[QUOTE=Laserbeams;42922281]So atheists are okay only when they keep their mouth shut about religion, unless it is directly "pressing them to defend their points"? Yeah, no, fuck off[/QUOTE] uh yeah, i wouldn't want to constantly hear about anyone's religion in inappropriate contexts, so why on earth would it be different for a non-religion?

[QUOTE=Juniez;42922287]uh yeah, i wouldn't want to constantly hear about anyone's religion in inappropriate contexts, so why on earth would it be different for a non-religion?[/QUOTE] What do you mean by "inappropriate contexts"? Do you think it's inappropriate to criticize religion in this thread? Because religion is clearly involved

[QUOTE=Laserbeams;42922311]What do you mean by "inappropriate contexts"? Do you think it's inappropriate to criticize religion in this thread? Because religion is clearly involved[/QUOTE] well that's pretty clearly in the second category - inappropriate would be a mention without provocation or related content

[QUOTE=Juniez;42922235]which.......ones?[/QUOTE] "Then God said, "Let us make humankind in our image, according to our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the wild animals of the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth."" god supposedly is humanlike because humans are created in god's image.

[QUOTE=Juniez;42922313]well that's pretty clearly in the second category - inappropriate would be a mention without provocation or related content[/QUOTE] I have never seen anyone criticize religion in a thread unrelated to religion in any way

[QUOTE=Laserbeams;42922357]I have never seen anyone criticize religion in a thread unrelated to religion in any way[/QUOTE] well in this case the inappropriate part was shark bones' condescending and degrading attitude towards the discussion he was a total dick about it was what (and for entirely personal reasons too!)