I will say: Why atheists don't know the difference between the religion and spirituality? What is written in the ancient sacred text and what society want us to think is so different and so wrong! People like you (atheists) should blame the preachers, not the books! I know why you hate religion, because I hate it to, but the difference between religion and God is so different.  There is only one book in this world who is talking about the creation of the world like nature, animals and humans, creation of the nations and countries and creation of the relationships between you and your people around you... The Bible. The first and the oldest book that is ever written since the first humans first emerges. This book is not just verified bu our modern science, but also is the most researched book that ever exist. Every person who read, understand and start to practice the Bible will know the difference between good, bad and relativity. If you think that Islam or Hinduism are other religion that they should exist, then look up in the Bible and see what will happen with this two groups of ''religion''. The true christian will know the meaning of the word christian, the meaning of the name Christ and will deciphers the meaning of the Revelation (the last book of John in the New Testament).  And, yet, if there happened to be nothing wrong with a particular religion, would religion be needed to tell others about God, Jesus and salvation? Personally, I think that true and right religion would be needed to send out missionaries to preach the Word of God, the Bible. There are other non-Biblical books and scrolls that were written before the Bible was compiled. There are only a few places in the Bible that may have been taken from writings going back to the time of the Creation - the first two chapters in Genesis. The only complete book of the Bible that is possibly older that the writings of Moses (the first 5 books of the Bible) is Job. The writings of Moses may contain the oldest writings, even though the vast majority of his stuff was written over 40 years in the mid 1500s BC. In the spirit of providing a possible look, see http://www.bibleodyssey.org/tools/bible-basics/what-are-the-earliest-versions-and-translations-of-the-bible.aspx. The traditions of the Jews suggest that the best Old Testament (Tanakh) is the one we have today. |
|
|
|
no offense but not all Christians believe that.
Some people they even believe in men. Best regards. Atheists say that they believe in men. When do they say it? They say it by inferring it, when they take authority on themselves and say that there is no God. When they say that there is no God, they are making themselves out to be greater than God, because they do not factually know that there is no God. In fact, all of nature shouts that a God far greater than mankind exists. Because of this, atheists believe in man as God. So, they believe in mankind and men. |
|
|
|
I think in a lot of cases where hatred is a factor for atheists, it's not so much a hatred of "religion as a concept" as a hatred for people who use religion as an excuse to abuse people who believe differently from the doctrine they believe in. Remember, Catholics follow the religion that prosecuted Galileo for spreading his new theory of heliocentrism, which went against the prevailing doctrine of the time. They burned people who were accused of being witches. If you're an atheist in an overtly religious community and people generally know about it, you're going to get anything from people who harass you to convert and "save your soul" to outright death threats.
The point isn't how much or how little sinning people do. The point is whether or not they are saved or damned. God doesn't want sinning. But the people who believe in Jesus salvation will be saved, no matter how much sinning they do. And the people who do NOT believe in Jesus salvation will NOT be saved, no matter how innocent they are... because they are not perfect, and God requires perfection, and Jesus is perfection offered to all by faith. no offense but not all Christians believe that. No offense taken. You are right, at least in part. What or who is a Christian? The dictionaries give various meanings to the word "Christian." However, we probably wouldn't have such a word if there had been no Jesus Christ. But if the word existed without Jesus, it would probably pertain to the promised Messiah of the Jews, Who they have almost given up on because they don't believe in Jesus and they don't see anyone else who could be the Messiah. If by Christian one means a believer in Jesus of the New Testament, and at the same time this Christian does not understand salvation by faith in Jesus work on the cross and resurrection, he has a very weak understanding of the Christ. The point is, nobody can be saved without the salvation of Jesus, the Christ. Why not? Because God requires perfection, and even if a person never sinned, there would be genetic imperfection handed down from his parents. Thus, a real Christian (not one who only says he is) is one who believes in Jesus for salvation in the coming resurrection. Why? Because that is what the Christ is all about. To see it, all one need do is read the New Testament, the only place from which basic info about Jesus Christ is derived. Either you believe all of it, or you are not really believing any of it. |
|
|
|
Somebody (on the internet  ) said that the Bible contains a cryptographic key or code that can be used to verify it's authenticity. It's said that if the code is used to construct fake text you get nothing but gibberish i.e. it can't be used in reverse to produce text. Is there anything to this rumor, could the bible contain a some form of public cryptographic key? Don't know how well cryptographic codes could decode a "signature" with the re-translations of its text from the dawn of its inception causing drastic changes in the original wording. The bible is a tool for the elites to control populations, I mean what type of magnanimous, gentle, giving "god" would say "I shall smite you"... Neutral party here, and that's my two cents God made people for His own reasons and purposes. People turned away from Him and the purposes He made them for. What good are they to Him after that? Get rid of them and make some people that will do the thing they were intended for. But God didn't do that. God went to all kinds of trouble for them, gave up His Son's life for them to "fix" their ungodly ways. But that didn't phase them. They still rejected Him and His purposes for them, and on top of it, they insulted Him, and they will not stop doing this. What good are they? When it breaks, and it can't be fixed, and especially when it won't allow itself to be fixed, what good is it? Trash it. I don't know if you realize how fucked it is what you are saying. You are attributing human qualities to your deity. I personally have experienced life beyond what a book can show me and have arrived at a much different understanding. For you, it appears you are scared of going to hell if you are broken, or "not fixed" (of course I expect some denial from you and illogical counter points)For me, I've been to hell and survived. When you come to places such as this you gain a very different understanding of the forces that exist beyond our feeble human minds. I'm not here to argue with you about trivial human concepts, but rather to hope that it can be conveyed that there are fundamental flaws on both sides of the arguments here, and you have done quite well in demonstrating some of the incredible errors of religious logic, the same could be said for scientists that can't grasp a reality that exists beyond their "perspectives of observation". It takes scientist's technology to enhance their sensory perception to a point they can observe some of these forces, it takes you a book. The truth lies somewhere in the middle... The middle?! If God hadn't been pleased - for His own reasons - to place a piece, of His Spirit in each of us, we would be less than nothing. We would be like the animals that can't even reason. I'm not scared of going to Hell. I am scared for people like you going to Hell. It isn't going to hurt me in the least when you drop off the edge. But I empathize. Since God is the one who made everything, all the knowledge of science lies in Him. The whole fact of Jesus salvation hangs on the technical science of God. If we knew science in its entirety, we would understand how Jesus salvation is a scientific thing, working through many great dimensions, to save the technically constructed souls of human kind. |
|
|
|
IMO, people should be given the choice whether whey want to own a fire-arm or not. In places like Texas, where home invasions are very common, the possession of a fire-arm can save many lives. However, the government should make it impossible for people with a criminal record, and those with mental issues from obtaining fire-arms.
What happens to the guns people owned before they got the criminal record. Police cannot seize them because the people with the record could hide them and tell the police that the lost the gun. There are already laws to keep guns out of the hands of the "wrong people". It would be more effective for the government to focus on enforcing those laws rather than enacting new ones. Very good point! The problem with it is that then only the terrorist government would have the guns. And if they were the only ones with the guns, police brutality of today would seem like a picnic on the beach when compared with what would happen. If Government was honest, and they wanted to protect the people, they'd supply all the people with all the guns and ammo they wanted, and proper training for proper usage. Then we wouldn't even need police anymore, and terrorists and criminals would simply be gone... out of fear, or else killed off by the general populace. I mean, think about it. Cops are simply people, with training. And often the worst kinds of people and crooks are selected to be cops. Government and gun control is a farce to rape the people, and entirely make slaves of them if possible. |
|
|
|
I think in a lot of cases where hatred is a factor for atheists, it's not so much a hatred of "religion as a concept" as a hatred for people who use religion as an excuse to abuse people who believe differently from the doctrine they believe in. Remember, Catholics follow the religion that prosecuted Galileo for spreading his new theory of heliocentrism, which went against the prevailing doctrine of the time. They burned people who were accused of being witches. If you're an atheist in an overtly religious community and people generally know about it, you're going to get anything from people who harass you to convert and "save your soul" to outright death threats.
The point isn't how much or how little sinning people do. The point is whther or not they are saved or damned. God doesn't want sinning. But the people who believe in Jesus salvation will be saved, no matter how much sinning they do. And the people who do NOT believe in Jesus salvation will NOT be saved, no matter how innocent they are... because they are not perfect, and God requires perfection, and Jesus is perfection offered to all by faith. |
|
|
|
I dont hate religion but I only dislike some religion practices which are so unfair and ancient. How do you kill someone because he or she doesn't believe in what you believe in. There is a certain religion in my community whereby no one is allowed to go to hospital or take medicine. A woman watches her own son die in pain but cant take him to hospital because her religion doesn't allow that. a lot of people having polio just because their parents were against immunization and a lot more beliefs. Surely?? this is horrible and I dont think God himself would forgive them. I dont hate religion, I dislike it and their acts, Thanks
That was God giving the example. Ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_calfThe problem is with men not God. Best regards. Ditto ^^. |
|
|
|
I dont hate religion but I only dislike some religion practices which are so unfair and ancient. How do you kill someone because he or she doesn't believe in what you believe in. There is a certain religion in my community whereby no one is allowed to go to hospital or take medicine. A woman watches her own son die in pain but cant take him to hospital because her religion doesn't allow that. a lot of people having polio just because their parents were against immunization and a lot more beliefs. Surely?? this is horrible and I dont think God himself would forgive them. I dont hate religion, I dislike it and their acts, Thanks
That was God giving the example. Ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_calfThe problem is with men not God. Best regards. A quote for both of you. This is by Mahatma Gandhi and kind of amplifies your words a bit. “I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.” The thing Gandhi didn't understand is, Christians who are true believers in Christ, even though they commit a lot of crime and are slapped around by God for it, will ultimately be saved. Gandhi will be damned unless he had the belief in the salvation of Jesus, thereby being a true Christian. |
|
|
|
LOL, the state can rape, slaughter, torture and it's JUST FINE GUYS!!
Right! It is the people in or behind the governments that are the terrorists. If they were gone, there would be reasonable peace for the average citizens of the world. |
|
|
|
In America it's things like the Internet and other forms of communication that are only bringing to light the deaths from terrorists - cops and government - that have been going on for decades. There really isn't an increase in America. Americans believes this was the first grassroot event to openly engage in this kind of vital dialogue on most dangerous and important issue for our generation. If Iran get nuclear bomb It ll not need a large army to cause unimaginable destruction of death If it is confirmed that Iran has A-bomb capabilities, Iran will cease to exist before they get to use their A-bomb. The more stable nations of the world will put an end to them. |
|
|
|
BC: How long it lasts depends on whether the places out of which really big, effective terrorist groups are operating remain essentially stateless. The territories in Pakistan and the border area with Afghanistan are not part of a centralized state. Robert Kaplan has written tons of books about what’s going on in the modern world, and if you read The Ends of the Earth and these books that say we are de facto, no matter what the laws say, becoming nations of mega-city-states full of really poor, angry, uneducated, and highly vulnerable people, all over the world, we would have a lot of slumdog millionaires. If that’s right, then terror — meaning killing and robbery and coercion by people who do not have state authority and go beyond national borders — could be around for a very long time. On the other hand, terrorism needs both anxiety and opportunity to flourish. So one of the things that the United States and others ought to be doing is trying to help the nation-state adjust to the realities of the 21st century and then succeed. Bill Clinton’s World
The former president tells Foreign Policy what to read, who to watch, and why there really is a chance of Middle East peace in 2010.http://foreignpolicy.com/2009/11/30/bill-clintons-world/Average citizens trust their government. They are even admonished by various religions to trust their government. Terrorists know this. So, they get into government so they can terrorize the unsuspecting citizens. It is governments that basically are the terrorists. If we didn't have governments this way, we would have a reasonably peaceful world. |
|
|
|
""...A total of 32,658 people were killed by terrorists around the world in 2014..."". No mention of what part was done by muslim terrorists. Why not? Because telling us would show immediately that muslim terrorists murdered more people than all other terrorists in the world combined.
Why would their religion matter? A terrotist is still a terrorist. I do agree that a lot of terrorist have the religion of the islam but if they say it like you're saying it, it would aggravate a lot people mentioning the religion and it would intend that all muslims are terrorist, which is not true. Actually, ALL Muslims ARE terrorists... if they want to be faithful to their religion as it is written. The thing is that they don't KNOW that they are terrorists. When they find out that they are terrorists, they will either stop being Muslims, or they will enact the terrorist part. When they do the terrorist part, they will ultimately be destroyed, even though they make are painful for a little while. |
|
|
|
""...A total of 32,658 people were killed by terrorists around the world in 2014..."". No mention of what part was done by muslim terrorists. Why not? Because telling us would show immediately that muslim terrorists murdered more people than all other terrorists in the world combined.
But that number is way off. It doesn't include - can't include - all the citizens of the various countries killed off by their own terrorist governments. Like all the unreported murders done by terrorist cops in America. |
|
|
|
I hate isis.. Why not?
Everyone has a moment of hate now and again. At least there is a little animosity. Hate corrupts the life of the hater. It pushes him away from doing the logical things that it takes to remove the object(s) of his hate. ISIS is a rock in the road. Forget the hate and get down to moving the rock out of your road in whatever ways you can. |
|
|
|
From the simple standpoint, neither atheism, nor theism are religions. But consider this example of science. To the hard-working, professional scientist, one who delves into the depths of finding knowledge about the workings of nature, science is a simple thing. To him science amounts to, "What is there? and how do I find it out and the why's of it?" To the simple scientist or to the layman, Science includes all the engineering and the usage of things developed from the engineering. In the same way, theism is religion at the same time it is not religion, and so is atheism... and just about anything that people live in their lives, including the public understanding of science. Why? Because there is little knowledge, and much belief that people live by. The big difference is that while the science guy is trying to find the answer by looking at the evidence, religion say they have the answer in their book and tries to fit the evidence to it. If it doesn't fit, religion doesn't change it's view to fit the evidence like science do, they just say. " it doesn't fit what the book says, so it can't be true" Religions say that they have the answers to the things that they have the answers to. For example. The Bible tells about the creation of the universe. But it doesn't talk about every blade of grass, or mention every person by name who will ever exist. Science doesn't have much evidence about the creation (or whatever science tries to suggest takes creation's place). But they talk about it like they know what it is all about. For example, if the Big Bang ever happened, nobody knows, and any scientist could postulate a hundred other things that might take the place of the Big Bang. Yet, science can investigate many of the blades of grass that religion doesn't talk about individually. And, science can investigate many of the people, both living and dead, that religion only suggests might have existed. People in both religion and science exaggerate what they know and understand, at times. Yet there are few things in religious writings that express the facts that science finds out as clearly as science does. One of the things that science and the Christian religion agree on is the fact that God exists. Some of the people in both, science and the Christian religion, suggest that God doesn't exist. The point is this. Pure science mostly expresses little, tiny facts. Pure religion expresses believable doctrine. Because Christians should not marvel about these things, that is what I read in the bible. Bible is just a metaphorical guideline of history, morals lessons, and faith. You really need to go back and check out, in depth, the things of the Bible, its history, now it came into being, and the strength of it. The faith of the Bible is in Jesus Christ, for the salvation of mankind. What is salvation? We live for a hundred years, maybe, if we happen to be strong. Then we die. There will be a resurrection of both, the righteous and the unrighteous. The righteous will go to a wonderful, glorious, new life with God. The unrighteous will go to an everlasting death... everlasting because it takes a soul an eternity to die. What's the difference between the righteous and the unrighteous? Their faith in Jesus-God, the Christ, for salvation to eternal life rather than eternal death. The Bible is the only place you find written info about this. |
|
|
|
The solution lies not in defeating hate. We must contain hate, preferably in a little cage, so we can look at it so as not forget why we love. A bit like those stones, orbs?, in the Marvel movies: in the wrong hands it can destroy the universe.
As soon as hate disappears, whatever is left will become divided over time if we forget our past. Do not reinvent the wheel.
Do not try to defeat hate, it's not your equal. Only defend against hate.
Sometimes the best defense...
Mountain roads often have rocks on them. These rocks fall off higher places in the mountains and land on the roads. Often there are road signs that say something to the effect of, "WATCH FOR FALLING ROCKS." If you are driving on a mountain road, and you come around a bend in the road, and there is a rock in the road, and you don't have time to stop or swerve, you hit the rock. The rock gives you a flat tire. You get out of the car and go over to the rock. Do you hate the rock? No! You simply move it off the road, and go back and fix your flat. Same with ISIS. You don't hate them. You simply move them out of the way like you did with the rock. If some of them die in the process, it wasn't hate. It was simply fixing a problem. It was their own fault that they were a problem. No hate involved... at least not on your side. |
|
|
|
OK, thanks. I see so much that I need to check and then I forget it but this your post is in a word document now and glaring at me from the desktop so I´ll get to it.
Basically, the whole thing amounts to this. The foundational law in America has to do with someone harming another person or damaging his property. If a corporate body attacks a human being in some way, the corporate body loses. The basic law of America is man vs. man. That simple. |
|
|
|
I don't think they do. In fact many of the atheists i met are very open minded about religion. They actually respect religious people. So no, they don't hate religion. They just don't believe in it.
Open-minded to what? Regardless, the terms do not represent comparable things or concepts. Atheism simply means a disbelief in deities. It is not a belief system, religion, philosophy, or lifestyle. Other than not believing in God(s), Atheists have nothing else in common Except that when you Google or DuckDuckGo search on "atheism religion" you get all kinds of sites that show that atheism is essentially a religion. Of course, you get other sites that deny such. But when you do the comparison yourself, you'll see that there isn't much, if any, difference between what it takes to make a religion and the thing that atheism is. In other words, atheism is a religion that is different from most formal religions in two major ways: 1. They express that there is no god/God; 2. They often express that they are not a religion. Can you define what you mean by "religion"? I'd always thought it included -- by necessity -- a belief in a god, but you don't seem to think this is true? There are dictionaries all over the place. A couple of online dictionaries are found here http://dictionary.reference.com/ and here http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/. You might also try Wikipedia here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion. From Wikipedia then: "A religion is an organized collection of beliefs, cultural systems, and world views that relate humanity to an order of existence." This is not atheism. Atheism is not a belief, it's a lack of belief. It's not a belief in not-God, it's just a position that gods and god belief systems are irrlevant. I don't have to believe, I just have to ignore it like I ignore much in life that I find irrelevant. Analogously, I don't have any beliefs about flamingoes. They may or may not exist but I don't really mind either way, they're irrelevant to me -- just like the many gods that in which people claim to believe. I think it best to let atheists speak for themselves so here's a link for you straight from the horses mouth, so to speak: https://atheists.org/activism/resources/what-is-atheismFrom that link: "Atheism is not a belief system nor is it a religion. While there are some religions that are atheistic (certain sects of Buddhism, for example), that does not mean that atheism is a religion. Two commonly used retorts to the nonsense that atheism is a religion are: 1) If atheism is a religion then bald is a hair color, and 2) If atheism is a religion then health is a disease. A new one introduced in 2012 by Bill Maher is, "If atheism is a religion, then abstinence is a sexual position."
From the simple standpoint, neither atheism, nor theism are religions. But consider this example of science. To the hard-working, professional scientist, one who delves into the depths of finding knowledge about the workings of nature, science is a simple thing. To him science amounts to, "What is there? and how do I find it out and the why's of it?" To the simple scientist or to the layman, Science includes all the engineering and the usage of things developed from the engineering. In the same way, theism is religion at the same time it is not religion, and so is atheism... and just about anything that people live in their lives, including the public understanding of science. Why? Because there is little knowledge, and much belief that people live by. The big difference is that while the science guy is trying to find the answer by looking at the evidence, religion say they have the answer in their book and tries to fit the evidence to it. If it doesn't fit, religion doesn't change it's view to fit the evidence like science do, they just say. " it doesn't fit what the book says, so it can't be true" Religions say that they have the answers to the things that they have the answers to. For example. The Bible tells about the creation of the universe. But it doesn't talk about every blade of grass, or mention every person by name who will ever exist. Science doesn't have much evidence about the creation (or whatever science tries to suggest takes creation's place). But they talk about it like they know what it is all about. For example, if the Big Bang ever happened, nobody knows, and any scientist could postulate a hundred other things that might take the place of the Big Bang. Yet, science can investigate many of the blades of grass that religion doesn't talk about individually. And, science can investigate many of the people, both living and dead, that religion only suggests might have existed. People in both religion and science exaggerate what they know and understand, at times. Yet there are few things in religious writings that express the facts that science finds out as clearly as science does. One of the things that science and the Christian religion agree on is the fact that God exists. Some of the people in both, science and the Christian religion, suggest that God doesn't exist. The point is this. Pure science mostly expresses little, tiny facts. Pure religion expresses believable doctrine. |
|
|
|
But it´s the state that decides what´s legal or not. For example I don´t see what´s legal about sending drones here and there around the world wiping out weddings and funerals and more. Nor do I see anything legal about invading countries on totally false pretenses and then leaving them in ruins for terrorism to fester in.
The greatest thing that the American government has done to further its abilities to do anything that it wants is, they have made the people forget the difference between legal and lawful. All the people think that they are bound by legal, when according to the basic, foundational documents that keep the government in place, the people are not under legal, but only under lawful. If the people understood lawful, they could stop paying income tax, and the government would collapse, and they could file claims against government people rather than their governmental offices, and sue the pants off these crooks so that they would be out of office. Why don't I do something like this? Because I am only finding out, myself... it has been that well hidden by government and their lawyers. Well, that´s just a great point, BADecker. Legal and lawful. Form vs. substance. Feel free to post more on that by all means. I have posted this many times. Here it is again. It's a long learn. Start with these 10 Youtube videos, especially the last one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOkAHRzuiOA&list=PLHrkQxgz0mg6kUBciD-HIvTXByqjcIZ-D. Then look at the first two videos in the group on the right side of this page http://www.myprivateaudio.com/Karl-Lentz.html. Then listen to numbers 01 and 02 at the bottom of this page http://recordings.talkshoe.com/rss127469.xml. Next, DuckDuckGo and Youtube search on "Karl Lentz common law." Karl says, "It's so simple it's scary." And below are a load of links to get you started. Last, ask Mike Miller of Calminlaw, or Gus Breton of https://redress4dummies.wordpress.com/ to let you into the Skype Calminlaw group. |
|
|
|
But it´s the state that decides what´s legal or not. For example I don´t see what´s legal about sending drones here and there around the world wiping out weddings and funerals and more. Nor do I see anything legal about invading countries on totally false pretenses and then leaving them in ruins for terrorism to fester in.
The greatest thing that the American government has done to further its abilities to do anything that it wants is, they have made the people forget the difference between legal and lawful. All the people think that they are bound by legal, when according to the basic, foundational documents that keep the government in place, the people are not under legal, but only under lawful. If the people understood lawful, they could stop paying income tax, and the government would collapse, and they could file claims against government people rather than their governmental offices, and sue the pants off these crooks so that they would be out of office. Why don't I do something like this? Because I am only finding out, myself... it has been that well hidden by government and their lawyers. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
