Who has read the bible from beginning to end?

[One more round]

Originally Posted by squealpiggy

I tink it's pretty disgusting the lack of respect shown by religious people towards those of different faiths or of no faith at all. I also think it's pretty disgusting that people would use the pretence of being "offended" to attempt to limit free speech and fair criticism of their completely unsupported bronze aged myths. I think that a huge leap towards superstition is the removal of religion from its pedelstal to permit it to be challenged and dissected along with all the other ideas and philosophies that people have. Why is it OK to challenge communism or capitalism but speaking up about christian fundamentalism or islam is forbidden?

No, I do show other peoples religions/non belief respect. Some friends of mine are Muslims, Hindus, Athiests etc and they are all good people. We are not all insane redneck Evangelists who try and lynch gays or paintball Abortion clinics. I thin people should be able to believe in what ever they want, but respect should be shown to people's beliefs, even if you disagree.

And I agree to an extent that religion can be challenged. I'm a Catholic for example, and even though I have lots of respect for the Pope, not everything he preaches is correct, because he is a man and has his own opinions. However I don't agree with challenging something that came directly from Jesus, other people can do that if they want, but as a Catholic I just think that's wrong. It can be analyzed etc, but directly challenging it is blasphemy.

Like people in here just blatantly putting **** on the Bible, I just don't think that is the right thing to do. You can disagree but show it respect. I don't agree with homosexuality personally, but I don't go around abusing gays or putting **** on them.

I don't mind your opinions for example, because you think them out and make a case, and don't just mindlessly disrespect it.

[Rudyo]

Originally Posted by squealpiggy

I tink it's pretty disgusting the lack of respect shown by religious people towards those of different faiths or of no faith at all. I also think it's pretty disgusting that people would use the pretence of being "offended" to attempt to limit free speech and fair criticism of their completely unsupported bronze aged myths. I think that a huge leap towards superstition is the removal of religion from its pedelstal to permit it to be challenged and dissected along with all the other ideas and philosophies that people have. Why is it OK to challenge communism or capitalism but speaking up about christian fundamentalism or islam is forbidden?

I agree with this but it works both ways, people without a faith have to respect those who do. Some of the douchiest/most condescending posts I've seen have been people flaunting their atheism while talking about how religous people force their beliefs on others.

[aristotlemoses]

Originally Posted by Rudyo

I agree with this but it works both ways, people without a faith have to respect those who do. Some of the douchiest/most condescending posts I've seen have been people flaunting their atheism while talking about how religous people force their beliefs on others.

I agree with that wholeheartidly . I have no faith. But I am not one to sit here and bash people for believing. Because I cannot prove anything myself. I just choose not to believe or follow any faith...btw the way Peter Tosh is one of the greats was listening to him all day. About to put on live version of 400 years!

[Rudyo]

Originally Posted by aristotlemoses

I agree with that wholeheartidly . I have no faith. But I am not one to sit here and bash people for believing. Because I cannot prove anything myself. I just choose not to believe or follow any faith...btw the way Peter Tosh is one of the greats was listening to him all day. About to put on live version of 400 years!

Peter is one of the most under-rated musicians of all time.

[squealpiggy]

I thin people should be able to believe in what ever they want, but respect should be shown to people's beliefs, even if you disagree.

You have to respect somebody's beliefs no matter how insane they are? Like if somebody believes that by drinking strychnine laced kool-aid while Halley's Comet passes over will beam them aboard a spaceship (this actually happened) then we should respect that? Or if they believe that having sex with a virgin will cure them of AIDS (this happens too) we should respect that? Or what about someone who thinks that god and the devil are telling them to do things? An extremely common delusion. Or what about people who think that bby saying a few magic words you turn a wafer and some wine into actual human flesh and blood? I think you know where I'm headed.

We both have a line across which we think that somebody's personal beliefs become bizarre, irrational and not worthy of respect. It's just that we draw the line in different places.

And I agree to an extent that religion can be challenged.

To every extent it can be challenged. If your religion is as sublime and unassailable as you as a believer thinks it is then it should be afraid of no challenge. Religious people are claiming to know the ultimate truth. If that were so then you could be confident that no amount of insults or attacks og logic could possibly shake the basis of your faith. So why do religions invest so much energy into trying to prevent such insults and logical attacks by hiding behind blasphemy laws and the PC defense of being offended?

However I don't agree with challenging something that came directly from Jesus

You are making a lot of assumptions here. The biggest assumption is that Jesus ever lived. Most people think he did. I think he did. But there's very little evidence outside religious texts to support it. Secondly you are assuming that he said what the gospels said he did. The first gospel was written at least 20 years after Jesus died, and was based on oral accounts of people who never met the man. Many of the aspects of his life share details with some of his contemporaries (most notably Appolonius of Tyana http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollonius_of_Tyana ) and the Gospels themselves are inconsistent with each other.

Read the gospels and ask yourself - is Jesus descended from David via Joseph as is claimed in Matthew and Luke. This was an attempt to knit Jesus into the prophecies of Daniel and Isiah. Which is also the reason for the story of the Virgin Birth - it was required in order to fulfill a different prophecy. So the gospel writers invented the story in order to fulfill prophecies resulting in an internally inconsistent story. IT'S A MIRACLE!

Like people in here just blatantly putting **** on the Bible, I just don't think that is the right thing to do.

Spoken like a christian who has never read it all the way through...

People wouldn't **** on the bible if there wasn't so much **** in it. Do you think that it's right to stone unruly children to death? What about working on the Sabbath? Should it be a capital offence? Do you think that christianity is all about turning your back on your family, leaving your home and possessions and following Jesus? Do you think that christianity is about turning brother against brother and making your family hate you? Do you think that the best course of action if you ogle women is to tear out your own eeye? Oh and don't have a wank because you have to cut your hand off too!

These are all things from the bible, some of them were said by Jesus according to the bible.

There's a small piece of memetic genius in New Testament in regards to the old. There are a few passages in the New Testament which allow free license to eat ceremoniously unclean animals, and to transgress against sundry Levitical laws (such as working on the Sabbath or not stoning adulteresses). But Jesus also said that he wasnt coming to replace the law, he ws coming to fulfill it. This combination allows christians and christian leaders to pick and choose freely what rules they want to and don't want to keep!

Don't like gays but doo like shrimp? They're both "an abomination" according to that ghastly book Leviticus... but using ambiguous New Testament texts you can safely continue hating the gays and eating seafood with impunity! Stoning your disobedient child to death something of an inconvenience but you want to beat up wiccans? Hey, no prblem! Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live, but Jesus said those without sin cast the first stone, so I can do what the hell I please and still pretend I live a moral life!

This is a huge issue and one that you need to contend with. Either the whole thing is true or the whole thing isn't and if it isn't then the edifice falls. Read the whole thing and get back to me, don't just ask clergy for advice because if the laymen cherry pick those fuckers went to cherry-picking school!

I agree with this but it works both ways, people without a faith have to respect those who do.

I tend to respect more individuals than not. Most people have really great qualities, or strength of character, or intelligence or talent that I do not possess and are worthy of respect because of that. Respecting people is exactly what I expect and desire.

But it's possible to respect somebody without respecting their political standpoint, or their taste in movies, or the way they dress or the car they drive of the bizarre superstitions they hold. I can respect the individual but if their ideas are half baked I will treat them accordingly.