Dr Sneak on 19/9/2006 at 11:18
Quote:
Now that I've actually bothered to read your post in full, you deserve a nice, hale and hearty: FUCK YOU.
Seriously, you think it's "detestable" that members of the church don't antagonize members of other religions for not believing the same as you do, and further patronize them by calling them "lost?"
There's nothing wrong with Christians questioning the beliefs of others. Since we believe that we have the words of God, shouldnt we share that info with others? And if other faiths want to question us, by all means let them ask questions and do their research-they might end up learning something. If muslims werent into theats and blowing themselves to bits and just wanted to debate in a free forum instead-much of this antagonism wouldnt be around in the first place.
Quote:
Well, if that's the case, I have every right to antagonize you for being a poor misguided superstitious twat, don't I? In which case, I think it's "detestable" that more atheists don't tell you to go fuck yourself.
Often.
Preferably on the way to your house of worship.
Well that's friendly and intelligent:rolleyes: Welcome to my ignore list RBJ.:thumb:
Matthew on 19/9/2006 at 11:20
Oh dear. I'd almost managed to forget about Dr Sneak's ignore list. :weird:
Dr Sneak on 19/9/2006 at 11:23
Quote:
Oh dear. I'd almost managed to forget about Dr Sneak's ignore list.
I only use it for the real nutcases, helps to clear the air.:)
Dr Sneak on 19/9/2006 at 11:35
GBM has provided much food for thought, now lets see:
Quote:
Kind of in a similar vein, and maybe this is an Old Hat in religious debate, I dunno...
If Jesus was divine (in whole or in part), then wasn't his sacrifice meaningless or at least greatly diminished? Surely the magnitude of a sacrifice is proportional to the value place on that which is sacrificed by the person who sacrifices it.
And since, in other parts of the Bible, Jesus goes around saying things like "he who believes in me, though he die shall yet live" and the whole Afterlife idea, and also visibly demonstrating the fact that death is not irreversible thanks to God (Lazarus, I don't know if there were others), it's fair to postulate that the death and resurrection of Jesus was more of a demonstration than a sacrifice.
Well it really depends on how a sacrifice's value is defined. You say that Jesus being God 'had it easy' in the sense that he knew of his resurrection and only had to stick the whole process out. However you have to think in terms of Jesus, being a part of the eternal taking human form and living on earth like everyone else-which in and of itself is a big step in terms of relinquishing power and glory. Plus according to Christianity-Jesus was 100% God and man at the same time (a bit of a parodox I admit) so inspite of his knowledge of what was to come, he still would have the same emotions and dread of death and suffering that is common to all people on earth. We live suffer and die on this earth and it's all we know, he had so much more and had to give it up for a time to do the same thing-It's kind of like a CEO of a major corporation stepping down to become an insect that gets squashed underfoot in a dirty old house-when he sees the bottom of the shoe coming down to kill him-it would be far more awful to him than the rest of the bugs scurrying around that didnt know any better.
fett on 19/9/2006 at 12:23
Quote:
The ironic thing is that they have been hoisted by their own petard - the divinity of Jesus, which is something they, and only they, believe in.
Actually IIRC, Hindus also believe in the divinity of Jesus. The big thing that sets Christianity aside is that they believe in the dual nature of Jesus - 100% God, yet 100% man at the same time. The blood sacrifice had to be 'perfect' (divine), yet it had to be made by someone like us - a brother as it were - who was eligible to make the sacrifice on behalf of others. Correct observation therefore that if he was just God, the sacrifice was a trifling thing to him. The dual nature adds a whole other dimension.
For the record, I'm not trying to defend the Christian perspective, it's just that Judaic/Christian/Middle-eastern philopsophy falls within the area of my expertise so I feel somewhat qualified to add to the conversation.
GBM - The thing most fascinating to me about the cross is that the framework doesn't really come from post-NT theological constructs, but it rather based on OT Levitical law and temple procedures. When you further consider that it was carried out by the Romans who knew nothing about such things, it is (as you say) provocative.
I stopped carrying the Christian torch quite a while ago, but I maintain that there's more to the bible than meets the eye. Consider a text that speaks of Roman crucifixtion repeatedly - both directly and typologicaly - in the OT. There was no such thing at the time. That's where the Dead Sea Scrolls are actually good for something other than conspiracty theories (HELLO FUCKING DAN BROWN). These references are in the DSS (which includes much of the OT) which we know to have been written (some of them) thousands of years before the events of the crucifixtion (the Essenes hid them at least 500 years prior to the NT events - meaning the documents were older than that).
That's where you start striking out on the dangerous waters of prophecy. Some bibical prophecy is highly subjective, but the bits about crucifixtion, betrayal, the resurrection, etc. are highly detailed. WTF? You could claim the text was tampered with throughout the years, but we just found the DSS in the 1940's. I'm a bit of an outsider on this, but I've looked about roughly 200-300 things like this between OT and NT and it's overwhelmingly creepy at times.
Paz on 19/9/2006 at 13:10
It's kind of telling that (based on the article by "correspondents" - ie; press releases from other agencies) even IRAQ could only rustle up 500 protesters.
That's like "say no to the bypass!" or "don't privatise the tube!" levels.
fett on 19/9/2006 at 14:16
Quote:
The 500 protesters, followers of Ayatollah Mahmud al-Hassani, a mystical Shiite Muslim cleric, also burned German and American flags and called for the Pope to be tried in an international court.
:laff: :laff: :laff: :laff: :laff:
Rug Burn Junky on 19/9/2006 at 14:37
Quote Posted by Dr Sneak
Well that's friendly and intelligent:rolleyes: Welcome to my ignore list RBJ.:thumb:
Only cowards and hypocrites* need an ignore list. Oh dear, how will I ever manage to get through my day now that I know that a twat such as yourself doesn't want to speak with me. You sir, have cut me to the quick by your decisive action. Go ahead and pat yourself on the back there, big guy. You deserve it.
And, there is absolutely no need for me to be "friendly" to someone who is essentially himself advocating giving a big fucking middle finger to muslims outside of their own mosque. In case you didn't notice, that is exactly what Jenesis was encouraging by his own post, in which case, well, I'm sure you find his post just as reprehensible as mine, don't you? If you can't see that yourself, you have no business judging anybody else's intelligence.
*Since I know you're reading this anyway, you half-brained tard.
Stitch on 19/9/2006 at 14:39
Quote Posted by Rug Burn Junky
Only cowards and hypocrites* need an ignore list.
And, there is absolutely no need for me to be "friendly" to someone who is essentially himself advocating giving a big fucking middle finger to muslims outside of their own mosque. In case you didn't notice, that is exactly what Jenesis was encouraging by his own post, in which case, well, I'm sure you find his post just as reprehensible as mine, don't you? If you can't see that yourself, you have no business judging anybody else's intelligence.
*Since I know you're reading this anyway, you half-brained tard.
Well he is now.
