# The trouble wiht Islam



## kmanick (Sep 2, 2007)

kudos to this guy for having the balls to say it like it is.
Enough already.

[liveleak]418_1176494781[/liveleak]


----------



## ShawnFjellstad (Sep 2, 2007)

wow. i like this guy. who is it?

"These guy are _so selfless_, they can always find somebody more deserving."


----------



## zimbloth (Sep 2, 2007)

Well said.


----------



## D-EJ915 (Sep 2, 2007)

blow up dolls  This guy is really easy to listen to.


----------



## noodles (Sep 3, 2007)

"Now I realize that in some parts of the world, women don't actually have a choice in this matter, governed, as they are, by primitive pigs whose only achievement in life is to be born with a penis in one hand and a Qua-ran in the other."


----------



## Clydefrog (Sep 3, 2007)

English people always sound so much smarter than everyone else when they're talking.


----------



## El Caco (Sep 3, 2007)

That was great.


----------



## Nerina (Sep 3, 2007)

First of all thankyou for putting this post, I've seen this 
guy before but cant remember his name, hes damn good tho.

Now my comments on his video...

I agree with him, and really admire him
for having the balls to put that video out.

However,the problem that he is talking about 'enough is enough' is one that
is many years old,and one of the main reasons that there are so many 
muslims/islamics in Great Britain today is because of the fact that England 
decided as a 'payback' to what they had done to those certain 
countries,ie India, etc, that they gave them Brittish passports,thus enabling 
them to move to,live and work in Britain,and of course, many many people took the 
opportunity.(As anyone who has looked at history would know,Britian
basically OWNED India and other countries,and it wasn't all that pretty
for the countries they owned...)

See any problems? I do, what do you think they're going to act like
once they arrive? The freedom to move there was given to them because the 
countries they came from were so devasted by GB, you think they're gonna be 
all conforming and 'peace loving' I dont, and If I had been Indian when that 
happened, I prolly wouldnt have either,considering the literal 'blood running
down the streets' incidents that happened in India.. think about it, even today, 
'minority groups' dont just have children and say "ok were in GB now,so we'll have 
a good life, have fun at school". No they dont! They teach their children their
'history' and all about what happened 'way back in the day' so to speak, and they 
breed in their children the hate that they have, for what the British did to their
grandfathers etc, so my point is this, it was Britain's fault in the first
place for A- Messing up the countries they did, and even WORSE B-Turning around 
and trying to 'make it better' by issuing them passports! WTF? Dude,what were 
they thinking? Of all people, they are the ones who are gonna go there, and 
take their silly tradidtions ie- Kill their daughters for exposing their faces,
and act like their 'traditions' are so damn above what GB traditions are,right?
I mean come on, what did GB expect? Excuse my ranting, but anyway, now, years 
later, this is the problem, that those people that were originally opressed, had 
children, and THE FUCKED UP THING IS that the children are the ones who are
acting like the world owes them a favour, they already live in GB, they have
houses,jobs, whatever,but they're never gonna be happy, they're always gonna
act like somethig is owed to them, and that their religeon and whatever is better
than anyone else's.Like the guys says in the video ' they have a chip on their
shoulder the size of a mosque".AND he also mentions 'their holy book urges islams
to conquer the world and subjugate everyone to the rule of god" .This brings my
point across tho : "if islams had their way we'd be living in the past" Amen, thats
my point, they dont want to foget whatever they had to go through in the past,
like I said, its the chidren of the first 'movers' that believe everything is
owed to them....However, what is he talking about them 'always delagating the honor
of dying to someone else?where was he on 9/11? And when the Brittish rail system 
and airports were bombed, by SUICIDE BOMBERS?But, I understand where he's 
comming from, his point is that even tho a few of them had to die, the 'horrible
Brittish or Americans' died in greater numbers than they did, so their missions
were accomplished,"they can always find someone more deserving".
Sick Mofo's.....Its patheitic whats going on right now, In GB and America.
Also, in their blessed 'sacred texts' anyone besides them
is considered evil and bastardly, so Jesus, what hope do we have? :|

I am so glad he brought up Germany, I was waiting for it, its the same shit,
history repeats itself, the Germans wanted Ayrians, and wanted to kill anythig
that didnt resemble their 'perfect people', see any similarity here? I do.

I love this man, god bless him for having the guts to speak out, I could go 
on forever, but I've prolly already bored you guys enough, so, yeah, to quote
him yet again.....

"Why dont they get an inflatable women and blow her up" 


ps- Extremists in ANY shape or form, is bad, we're supposed to love eachother, right? Well, maybe not love, but not BLOW THEIR HEADS OFF CAUSE THEY BELIEVE SOMETHNG DIFFERENT!!!!!!!!


LMAO 
PEACE MAN


----------



## Jason (Sep 3, 2007)

Hmm sounds like Black people and the USA


----------



## Nerina (Sep 3, 2007)

Jason said:


> Hmm sounds like Black people and the USA



exactly.
I have no prejudice against blacks,but I have seen this repeatedly, "Oh white men had slaves, blah blash blash," Dude, Its fuckcing 2007, and we're ALL FREE, whats the fucking problem?
Anyway, 'enough is enough'.......


----------



## 999dead666 (Sep 3, 2007)

i just dont understand. since almost every one got internet why this guy dont bother him self and take a short look over islam as religion, arabs as people ( some christian arabs exist and jews too beside muslims ) and the difference between arabs them selfs, like saudis and syrians jordanians and iraqies lebanese and algerian...etc, and then not to mix arabs with other people like persians ( iran ) and indians and pakistanies!! the west still look at the eastern side of the map and thinks its just one piece of land with one kind of people. women in my country are not controled with fanatics holding quraan in hand and penis in the other Noodles but they are in saudia and since over 80% of jordanians are muslims and 99% of saudis are muslims it means the problem is the mentality of the people not the religion. if saudi women are not ready to fight for their rights and teach their men to give them their rights no body will. every nation must understand that its right must be fought for not waiting to be given. so i hope to understand that islam is religion and muslim countries that have islamic backgrounds like Indonisia and malysia in the far east have their own traditions and history that is blended along with islamic religion to give an indonisian or what ever far east look of islam the same goes to each different arabic country on its own.sorry for the long lecture i just felt i needed to clear this point up.


----------



## JBroll (Sep 3, 2007)

Cruelty in the Quran

Jeff


----------



## 999dead666 (Sep 3, 2007)

JBroll said:


> Cruelty in the Quran
> 
> Jeff



look, im not even religious , i just dont like sucha arguments. quraan verses must be taken by the date and the reason of its comming, not taking 1 phrase and try to convince me of its crulety. after all from what i read in the link you posted. it shows that none of the muslims buisnes to act on the behalf of god. as you can read it says that the punishment will be given by god. so what to fight for?? you for example, you think he is going to hell and he think your going to hell, so both of you wait and see. mean while you both are living on this earth so try to respect each others until one of you go to hell by god no some ones else hand!!


----------



## Groff (Sep 3, 2007)

This has got to be the most awesome video i've ever seen (next to zeitgeist)


----------



## JBroll (Sep 3, 2007)

I'm not religious either, but I've studied it enough and a lot of the things people attribute to culture are either promoted by or consequences of that book. I don't like when people try to give some aspects of society a blank check and excuse their shortcomings - I think we should be holding people's gods to much higher standards than we tend to.

Jeff


----------



## 999dead666 (Sep 3, 2007)

and i do agree, and as i mentioned, we cant blame religion for our cultural mistakes. if jordan is muslim country and women have their rights, and saudia arabia is muslim country and woment dont have their rights so to what we relate the problem? to the culture. we both are arabs and both have the same religion and same quraan. is just people over there have fucked up mentality and fucked up way of life. doesnt mean that we say their culture is diffrent so they can do what ever they want. but i dont like the new trend after the fall of the soviets, which is attacking islam. it must be lets keep our religions at home and holy places and work by agreed on low between us, everyone will be happy then. but when everyone claims he has the ultimate truth then this conflict will never end.


----------



## kmanick (Sep 3, 2007)

well I'm of the opinion that any religion that touts "kill the non believers"
is a flawed religion. I belive that any religion that touts murder and harm onto others is just barbaric. It's the year 2007. Lets get past the Christian crusades etc. that is history. for people to believe in this rubbish in this day and age is just pathetic.
To me it shows how un educated and ass backwards this part of the world is.
Actually any religious arguements are beyond me in this day and age.


----------



## noodles (Sep 3, 2007)

999dead666 said:


> compelling argument



I agree with a lot of what you have to say, but I think you're misconstruing my view. My problem isn't with the Middle East region. I full well understand that while Africa is the birthplace of mankind, the Middle East is the birthplace of agriculture, domestication, and civilization. I also understand that nearly all of the western world's problems with that region have almost everything to do with their imperialistic tampering with nations and cultures they knew absolutely nothing about.

No, my problem is with Islam in particular, and organized religion in general. Islam is going through it's medieval period, where torture and death seem to be the suitable punishment to every discretion, and one book trumps any and all other schools of thought. No different from the dark ages, the rest of the world is sick and fucking tired of tolerating the backwards, misguided views of a bunch of fanatical twits.

I'm an atheist, so when they spew that bullshit, I just want to say, "Dude, you're wasting your life away as an uptight prick in the name of something that doesn't exist. Just head to the strip club for some beers and shut the fuck up, no one wants to listen to you anymore.

I just find it cruelly ironic that George W. Bush went and displaced the one secular government in the region, so it could be replaced with a "democracy" composed of three squabbling religious factions. Said God told him to do it.

This is why religion is stupid.


----------



## 999dead666 (Sep 3, 2007)

kmanick said:


> well I'm of the opinion that any religion that touts "kill the non believers"
> is a flawed religion. I belive that any religion that touts murder and harm onto others is just barbaric. It's the year 2007. Lets get past the Christian crusades etc. that is history. for people to believe in this rubbish in this day and age is just pathetic.
> To me it shows how un educated and ass backwards this part of the world is.
> Actually any religious arguements are beyond me in this day and age.



i agree, its 2007. the world is sick of this bullshit. leave your fucking religion at your home and talk to me as a human being. this is how it must be.



noodles said:


> I agree with a lot of what you have to say, but I think you're misconstruing my view. My problem isn't with the Middle East region. I full well understand that while Africa is the birthplace of mankind, the Middle East is the birthplace of agriculture, domestication, and civilization. I also understand that nearly all of the western world's problems with that region have almost everything to do with their imperialistic tampering with nations and cultures they knew absolutely nothing about.
> 
> No, my problem is with Islam in particular, and organized religion in general. Islam is going through it's medieval period, where torture and death seem to be the suitable punishment to every discretion, and one book trumps any and all other schools of thought. No different from the dark ages, the rest of the world is sick and fucking tired of tolerating the backwards, misguided views of a bunch of fanatical twits.
> 
> ...



man, you think muslims them selfs are not saying that?? i really wish you can understand arabic to watch one of the hot talk shows about this matter. and how the people there are calling the masses to wake up from the holly men following thing like the darkages times. the thing is , in islam there is no such as holly man.!! these things came after the british french ocupations of the region and with the need of leaders specially after the fall of palestine to the jews, the mentalities just kept going more and more extreme. but no body is arguing you that arabs and muslims are passing their dark ages. its just to the media some one like bin laden or zarqawee is more interesting than lets say open minded arab or mulsim. so the west is watching middle east and islam through bin laden hot speeches and how he proclaimed him self the defender of islam and so on. shit, i cant imagine bin laden and his gang taking my guitar and equipments because its american made, or tool of the devil or what ever. even im living in poland, and i know that mmy friends mean no bad for me, but i must hear jokes such as so where did you plant the bomb, lets go to the mole and start the jihad thing. its got stuck to us we like it or not. just hope both sides will clam down finally before another chapter of worlds history will be written in blood over and over again.


----------



## Carrion (Sep 3, 2007)

This is a big topic over at Youtube (some mature arguements, some not). What I get a kick out of, is how the majority of Middle Eastern Muslims speak as Islam is a religion of peace and all these translation us Westerners have been reading are all wrong and that _____ means ____. They just tippy toe all over verses like the above, mainly the violent and scientific ones.


----------



## thadood (Sep 3, 2007)

JBroll said:


> Cruelty in the Quran
> 
> Jeff





The thing is, a lot is taken out of context, I'm sure. From both the Quran and the Bible. Not that I know definitely, but I'd find it hard to believe that either book teaches these things outright. Even the cruelty in the Quran is based upon times of war. The whole "convert or kill" thing, that is. The religious fundamentalists take what they want to hear out of the book and think it's god's to make it happen.


----------



## Lucky Seven (Sep 3, 2007)

noodles said:


> This is why religion is stupid.



I'm not religious by any means, but there's nothing wrong with religion, as long as it's interpreted in the right way. I'm atheist, but I hate it when people treat atheism like a religion, where rather than just not being religious, they make it a life goal to spread and enforce atheist/secular views. People can be good or evil, religious or atheist (or agnostic), what really matters is how they handle their beliefs, which is why I believe your comment should be more like, "This is why the religious (those who handle religion in a negative way at least) are stupid". But I pretty much agree with you anyway.


----------



## Metal Ken (Sep 3, 2007)

thadood said:


> The thing is, a lot is taken out of context, I'm sure. From both the Quran and the Bible. Not that I know definitely, but I'd find it hard to believe that either book teaches these things outright. Even the cruelty in the Quran is based upon times of war. The whole "convert or kill" thing, that is. The religious fundamentalists take what they want to hear out of the book and think it's god's to make it happen.




The context thing seems to be religious people's biggest point on contesting the injustices mentioned in the bible and the Koran, whereas if you read them in context, its _still_ fucked up. 

And if you write off parts of the bible, then what are you supposed to write off? If the "old testament" is just supposed to be "Figurative" as so many Christians i meet nowadays seem to think, then why bother believing in jesus? If the old testament is just "moral stories", then that must mean that the original sin didn't happen, and if thats the case, there's no need for jesus. And if you DO take the whole thing word for word, you'd better not eat seafood that isnt straight up fish, cause its an abomination, same with having long hair. thats an abomination, too. Lots of preachers take things out of context to get the message _THEY_ want across, and no one complains about that, but any time you bring up a flaw in the bible... "Oh, you're reading it out of context!" Some famous dude who'se name i forget once said "When used properly, the bible is the strongest argument against christianity". 

Check this out -- leviticus 20 is just god saying to moses "Check these laws out".They're not just for jewish people but apply to anyone inside of Israel.
And we get such gems as:



> 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.



Glad to see they're so tolerant of homosexuality.



> 20:18 And if a man shall lie with a woman having her sickness, and shall uncover her nakedness; he hath discovered her fountain, and she hath uncovered the fountain of her blood: and both of them shall be cut off from among their people.



Hope you didnt see your wife on her period, cause if you did, you're both exiled now. 



> 20:9 For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him.



when a good spanking or grounding isnt enough.

Another one from a few chapters later (Still, in a giant list of laws):



> 24:16 And he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him: as well the stranger, as he that is born in the land, when he blasphemeth the name of the Lord, shall be put to death.



Glad they havent sent anyone after me yet.


----------



## Lucky Seven (Sep 3, 2007)

King Diamond on, well, just watch it...


----------



## Metal Ken (Sep 3, 2007)

The King


----------



## D-EJ915 (Sep 3, 2007)

I love it when people point out the old Jewish laws, makes me laugh at them


----------



## Metal Ken (Sep 3, 2007)

D-EJ915 said:


> I love it when people point out the old Jewish laws, makes me laugh at them



Eat thine not the beasts of the sea with no scales, as they are an abomination unto ye.


----------



## Nerina (Sep 3, 2007)

Lucky Seven said:


> King Diamond on, well, just watch it...




So, in my ignorance, I had never really listened to King Diamond, I've heard of him of course, my bro had some of his stuff, but I never even knew he was a satanist or anything like that, so that was interesting. 

Actually in these vids, he makes sense, 99% of people will do things based on pride, or instant gratification, etc, and if what he's saying is true, that REAL satanists dont like sacrifice animals etc, then cool.Anyway so thanks for the post, I'm gonna go read more into it now


----------



## Lucky Seven (Sep 3, 2007)

Nerina said:


> So, in my ignorance, I had never really listened to King Diamond, I've heard of him of course, my bro had some of his stuff, but I never even knew he was a satanist or anything like that, so that was interesting.
> 
> Actually in these vids, he makes sense, 99% of people will do things based on pride, or instant gratification, etc, and if what he's saying is true, that REAL satanists dont like sacrifice animals etc, then cool.Anyway so thanks for the post, I'm gonna go read more into it now



I know you're new here, so you can rep me if you want, lol. I'm hungry for a new bar.

I mean, come on. King Diamond videos AND relevance to topic, that's just plain win in my opinion.


I'm trying too hard aren't I?


----------



## Chris (Sep 3, 2007)

Yes.  Don't rep-troll in the P&CE forum.


----------



## Nerina (Sep 3, 2007)

point taken lol

new bar show up yet?


----------



## Lucky Seven (Sep 3, 2007)

I just gotta say, no forum has this great of mods!


----------



## garcia3441 (Sep 3, 2007)

The Religion of Islam - Home Page


----------



## distressed_romeo (Sep 4, 2007)

The issue of context when reading the Quoran is something that gets brought up a lot, and it's led quite a few people to speculate that Islam needs to undergo a reform, similar to the various ones Christianity has gone through, to bring it's interpretation of its sacred texts more in line with the 'real world' and less with the dogmatic and literalist thinking that fosters extremism.

Here's an article by Salman Rushdie on this subject...

The Right Time for An Islamic Reformation

Oh, and King Diamond still rules; that interview was close to what that ridiculous interview with Akercocke on Irish TV should have been.


----------



## Metal Ken (Sep 4, 2007)

Nerina said:


> and if what he's saying is true, that REAL satanists dont like sacrifice animals etc, then cool.Anyway so thanks for the post, I'm gonna go read more into it now



Order of the Nine Angels (A small Satanic cult) condones human sacrifice. ;p


----------



## noodles (Sep 4, 2007)

Lucky Seven said:


> I'm not religious by any means, but there's nothing wrong with religion, as long as it's interpreted in the right way. I'm atheist, but I hate it when people treat atheism like a religion, where rather than just not being religious, they make it a life goal to spread and enforce atheist/secular views. People can be good or evil, religious or atheist (or agnostic), what really matters is how they handle their beliefs, which is why I believe your comment should be more like, "This is why the religious (those who handle religion in a negative way at least) are stupid". But I pretty much agree with you anyway.



No, religion *is* stupid. I have no problem with "faith" (people believing what they want to believe), but see no good in "religion". When people start banding together to further their religious ideals, no good can come with it. Someone ALWAYS uses it as a tool of influence and control. Every single monotheistic religion on the planet glorifies the position of accepting things on faith, without out allowing your own corrupt thought processes to muddle the issues for you. The Christian religion goes so far as to compare the church to a Sheppard and the congregation to sheep.

I resent people who try to tell me that atheism is my religion. I'm not out to try and further atheism. I'm not meeting with other atheists once a week to further our goals. There is no reading from the book of atheism in my home, and we don't ask Stephen Hawkins to bless our food before we eat it. Were it not for the actions of religious institutions making life harder for me and my fellow man, religion would be something I gave no thought to at all.


----------



## distressed_romeo (Sep 4, 2007)

Metal Ken said:


> Order of the Nine Angels (A small Satanic cult) condones human sacrifice. ;p



They're a very very small, fringe organisation though, and their beliefs are (from what I've read) based far more on the occult/supernatural aspects of Satanism than the pragmatic LaVey-an philosophy.

EDIT: I have a book at my parents' house with a pretty detailed interview with one of their leading members. I'll have to try and dig it out at some point. If I remember correctly, he kinda skirts round the human sacrifice thing when it gets brought up...


----------



## noodles (Sep 4, 2007)

Metal Ken said:


> Some famous dude who'se name i forget once said "When used properly, the bible is the strongest argument against christianity".



I really want to say Thomas Jefferson, but I don't think that one is him. He DOES have some of my favorite quotes about religion in general and Christianity in particular:



Thomas Jefferson said:


> Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity.
> 
> Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because if there be one he must approve of the homage of reason more than that of blindfolded fear.
> 
> ...


----------



## ZeroSignal (Sep 4, 2007)

I have to say that the guy in the original post just makes me sick. Really. He makes me reconsider my stance on euthanasia. The sheer ignorance displayed is spectacular.

I agree with noodles that RELIGION in general is pointless. But most religons (Islam, Hinduism, Christianity, Buddhism, etc.) have a very peaceful basis. But each one has been corrupted beyond all reason by a few (as alluded by Hyde in That 70's Show ).

Another thing I noticed was that almost every religion has an afterlife or cyclical system. This means that the Americans or British or whoever can nuke everyone and the good people will STILL go to heaven and all the bad people will STILL go to hell. The Indians can Nuke everyone and the world will STILL be reformed again in the end! (Beginning? :scratch)

I find this VERY unsettling.

(Yes I am 18)


----------



## garcia3441 (Sep 4, 2007)

'Religion is the opium of the people.'


----------



## Metal Ken (Sep 4, 2007)

ZeroSignal said:


> I have to say that the guy in the original post just makes me sick. Really. He makes me reconsider my stance on euthanasia. The sheer ignorance displayed is spectacular.
> 
> I agree with noodles that RELIGION in general is pointless. But most religons (Islam, Hinduism, Christianity, Buddhism, etc.) have a very peaceful basis. But each one has been corrupted beyond all reason by a few (as alluded by Hyde in That 70's Show )



No, he's right. Have you ever _read_ the bible? 

DR- I know, but since satanism came up, i figured i'd mention that there's a lot of Satanists who dont exactly follow what Anton LaVey said.


----------



## Kakaka (Sep 4, 2007)

I am christian. Which means I am son of God, the God who appears in the Holy Bible. I've been made his son through the volunteer sacrifice of Jesus Christ, the first son of God that wasn't created, but just like God the Father is eternal, without beggining or end.

I'd like to contribute to this discussion.

I believe no one could define it's creation than the creator of it himself. And christianity is in no way, a 'religious' system. So there's no point in pointing at God or Jesus Christ and blaming Him for the crusades or the inquisition. 

Though atrocities have been perpetuated in God's name, even to anyone's instinct that's not the thing to expect from a God whom is said to be love.

Because God is a person not a human instituition, christianity is the life of communion with Him one is able to have because of the price Christ has paid for it to be possible.

When someone accuses another of anything, we believe that it would be unfair not to check it out with the accused person.
So before hammering some judgements on the christian God, one should go check it with Him, if justice is meant in one's conclusion.


----------



## 7slinger (Sep 4, 2007)

a quote I enjoy:

"I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen Roberts

...and in the same vein of thinking, I submit that all people are about 99% atheist, some people just take it one god further.


----------



## Ojinomoto (Sep 4, 2007)

Lucky Seven said:


> King Diamond on, well, just watch it...




I like how even though it's Satanism and Christianity being discussed, everyone acts cool and does get stupid by yelling over each other. I couldn't have this conversation with anyone without being worried about my jaw being broken.


----------



## Lucky Seven (Sep 4, 2007)

Noodles, I was never calling you one of those "Religious Atheists", but I hope you know what I'm talking about. The way Christianity is taught these days (at least to those I know personally) really doesn't bother me. The religious do a lot of selfless acts for the unfortunate.

But overall, I don't give a fuck about religion. There's still a lot of it I hate, but as long as it doesn't outwardly judge or inhibit me I'm okay with it.

Btw, has anyone ever read any of Søren Kierkegaard's stuff?


----------



## Metal Ken (Sep 4, 2007)

Kakaka said:


> So before hammering some judgements on the christian God, one should go check it with Him, if justice is meant in one's conclusion.



If the Bible is the word of God, and all that is contained within it is true, god himself has perpetuated enough atrocities by his own hand to really make me question if he is indeed a god of love as he says. I used to be a christian, then i read the bible.


----------



## Lucky Seven (Sep 4, 2007)

Metal Ken said:


> I used to be a christian, then i read the bible.



That's going to be in my signature


----------



## Metal Ken (Sep 4, 2007)

Well, its the truth, man. Even when i was a christian, i was always a skeptical one. I used to envy the people that such an unwaivering faith. Then i realized it wasn't _me_ that was the problem.


----------



## Ancestor (Sep 5, 2007)

Sometimes religion can give people hope. I don't think many people would disagree that it's not cool to sleep with your friend's wife. There are a lot of ethically sound concepts that one can see echoed in many different religions. But religion is also used as a means to control people through fear.


----------



## El Caco (Sep 5, 2007)

Metal Ken said:


> I used to be a christian, then i read the bible.



+1

The problem is most people on both sides of the argument are ignorant. That video of the Bible being repulsive for example.

Some history.

The old Testament is a collection of scriptures for the Jews, the commandments and Laws are for the Jews only.

The new Testament is a collection of books, some written to the Jews and some written to a movement that was started by Paul, the word Christian is only used twice in the Bible and it is used in the negative. This movement was labelled as Christians by others in an offensive way.

The collection of books that are now called the bible was determined by Eusibius as commissioned by Constantine. The purpose of this was to control the people and bring order to an unstable nation.

The original followers of Christ were called Nazarites, they were Jews and they were anti-Paul.

A forgery (2 Peter) was included in the collection of books that make up the new Testament to bring unity to the collection.

Today in Christianity there are the Catholics and the churches that separated from the Catholics. The funny thing is that those that separated believe that the Church of Rome has corrupted or left Gods word and they claim to be restoring the original church of Jesus, yet they trust that the book that the Church of Rome gave to them is the complete, absolute and infallible word of God.

The Jews of the Bible and the original followers of Christ do not exist today.

The Judaism of the Bible is a peaceful religion/nation as long as you are a Jew and do not "sin". It accepts non Jewish nations as long as they are governed by the Jews and do not "sin" according to their law.

Christianity today claims to be Bible based but it is not a Bible based religion it is a man made religion, it is a religion that continually needs to evolve as it is based on a flawed collection of scriptures that are not in harmony.

Individual Christians need to interpret these scriptures and they do so as they please.

Here is a controversial example. 

All Christians believe that they have to keep away from Idols, they interpret this to mean that they are not to worship anything other than the God of the Bible and are to keep away from images for worship of false gods.

The greek word that is used is eidolon and today that word means images for worship, however when those books were written that word had a different meaning, it meant any image or representation of anything. If you look at archaeological findings they support this, Roman and pagan dwellings of the time were filled with statues and paintings while Christian and Jewish dwellings of the time still had beautiful artwork but not in the image of anything (typically artistic patterns). This is the main reason Greek orthodox Christians were spared by Muslims as they did not worship idols.

If Christians were going to follow the literal word they could not keep photos, watch TV etc.

I know I could have used a better example but I like that one, as every Christian will debate it and it illustrates the method Christians use to interpret things in order to make Christianity easier to follow.

O.K I have gone on to long, I leave the rest for later.


----------



## Pauly (Sep 5, 2007)

I like Eckhart Tolle.


----------



## Metal Ken (Sep 5, 2007)

Firedragon said:


> The old Testament is a collection of scriptures for the Jews, the commandments and Laws are for the Jews only.



Well, jesus said he came not to destroy the law but to uphold it. I gather from this that he means, with a few things he personally changed, to follow the law of the old testament. 

Even as a monotheistic religion, the god of the Jews is _still_ the god of the Christians, and if we are to believe the same god is the same in both the Jewish scripture and Christian, he definitely did an about face on his attitudes, gone are his days of smiting the smiters who smote, who in turn need to be smitten. Nowadays, it seems he's pretty pacifistic, but i dunno what his problem was back in the day


----------



## El Caco (Sep 6, 2007)

Yes that is the modern Christian position but as you pointed out, the God of the O.T. seems very different from the God of the N.T. and so we have Gnostics.

The Torah teaches that the laws and commandments were a covenant between God and his people (the descendants of Abraham), Christians do not believe that they are under the law of the O.T. but they note that nine of the ten commandments are repeated in the N.T.

According to the Bible Jesus kept the law and taught others to keep the law, his disciples kept the law and continued to after the crucifixion, they continued to practice the Jewish customs and were referred to as Nazarites.

It was in Antioch that the term Christians first appeared and this new message was spread by Paul a self proclaimed 13th apostle. Paul was not accepted by the twelve and the writings of the twelve are not addressed to the church, they are addressed to the 12 tribes of Israel.

Another thing to note is that Christianity relies on the integrity of the O.T. and there are recent arguments that question this integrity based on archaeological discoveries that do not support the O.T. claims about Israel. If these claims can be proven true and the O.T. can be proven to be a fictional work then Christianity, Judaism and Islam would all be discredited at the same time.

However I doubt that these three religions would allow this research to continue considering how much they have to lose.


----------



## oompa (Sep 6, 2007)

i like the way he puts things, but he kinda fails to see that islam isnt the problem, development or/and fanatiscism is. when 70% of the people start their morning in bhagdad by checking bbc.com while having a latte, they wont stone witches (or anything equally stupid) any more.

he also says its stupid that they cover their faces, back up a 100 years and see what happened to a woman showing her shoulders or legs over here. its her friggin shoulders and legs, surely if god wanted her to hide them he would provide them with a flap of skin. also, its ok to wear nothing but a thong at the beach, but you cant walk around in a thong in the city.

as a sidenote, people today dont walk down the street showing their crotch either, and last time i checked it wasnt covered by a slap of skin, and i dont see him showing nipples even though the room temperature probably is comfy.
on this part he is abit off but in general he puts things in words in a good way.

fanatiscism be the main problem, people kill in the name of many things, god is one, love is another, liverpool FC is a third.

god is just more popular cus he gives the best rewards.


----------



## ZeroSignal (Sep 6, 2007)

oompa said:


> i like the way he puts things, but he kinda fails to see that islam isnt the problem, development or/and fanatiscism is. when 70% of the people start their morning in bhagdad by checking bbc.com while having a latte, they wont stone witches (or anything equally stupid) any more.
> 
> he also says its stupid that they cover their faces, back up a 100 years and see what happened to a woman showing her shoulders or legs over here. its her friggin shoulders and legs, surely if god wanted her to hide them he would provide them with a flap of skin. also, its ok to wear nothing but a thong at the beach, but you cant walk around in a thong in the city.
> 
> ...





I'm not Ilsamic and even _*I*_ find the tags offensive.


----------



## Metal Ken (Sep 6, 2007)

Firedragon said:


> Another thing to note is that Christianity relies on the integrity of the O.T. and there are recent arguments that question this integrity based on archaeological discoveries that do not support the O.T. claims about Israel. If these claims can be proven true and the O.T. can be proven to be a fictional work then Christianity, Judaism and Islam would all be discredited at the same time.



Well, the integrity of the old testament and new testament as a historical book is really slim. For example, there were 4 major historians who were around the time of Jesus, and not one of them even mentioned anything about him. The part with Herod killing all the babies, never mentioned in history. Don't you think genocide on that level would be recorded? Not to mention, many scholars believe Herod was dead by the supposed birth of Jesus. 

Prior to that, in the old testament, some of the stories are just entirely unfeasible. Take the Ark example. Two of every species? On a wood boat built in a 120 years? And that said boat landed on Ararat? Firstly, a boat that would be able to hold 2 of every creature would be much larger than the mountains. Second, no one's been able to rebuild an ark to scale from materials of the time that hasn't fallen apart. thirdly, if the entire earth up to the peak of the mountains were covered with water (not to mention there isn't that much water on the planet), the atmosphere would become too dense to breath, killing off everything on board said ship. 
Granted, the myth itself is based in fact, there's evidence of a localized flood in the middle east a long time ago that was particularly devastating, but not nearly on the level of the flood of the bible. Not to mention, MANY of the stories are copied from other religions with just names and dates changed.

Besides, even IF new discoveries further invalidated the old testament, do you really think people will buy them? People still deny basic things like Evolution based on the bible.


----------



## Metal Ken (Sep 6, 2007)

oompa said:


> he also says its stupid that they cover their faces, back up a 100 years and see what happened to a woman showing her shoulders or legs over here. its her friggin shoulders and legs, surely if god wanted her to hide them he would provide them with a flap of skin.


How is that related to faces though? I dont recall a time period in any western society where women were forebode from showing their faces. 



oompa said:


> fanatiscism be the main problem, people kill in the name of many things, god is one, love is another, liverpool FC is a third.



I dunno about fanaticism.. i dont recall any fanatical Buddhists going on killing sprees or fanatical jainists harming anyone. 

Zerosignal - dont know who put the tags there, but i deleted them.


----------



## 7 Strings of Hate (Sep 6, 2007)

that video is the shit, its mostly true, organized religion is a ridiculous answer for weak minded fools. religion has done nothing but swindled people out of money, caused hate and caused war. its a business


----------



## ZeroSignal (Sep 6, 2007)

7 Strings of Hate said:


> that video is the shit, its mostly true, organized religion is a ridiculous answer for weak minded fools. religion has done nothing but swindled people out of money, caused hate and caused war. its a business



Hang on! Which video are we talking about now?

The original pig or the godisimaginary guy?


----------



## oompa (Sep 6, 2007)

Metal Ken said:


> How is that related to faces though? I dont recall a time period in any western society where women were forebode from showing their faces.



ofcourse not  thats putting christianity as the base point of comparison and i just meant that in covering parts of bodies, they do it more than us, we did it more a hundred years ago. in a hundred years people will probably think that even we were kinda covered up, and the moral behind it is kinda weird, with the example a bikini-chick at the beach vs in the city. i believe its more about progression. religious morality rather than climate made us put on clothes (i dont think people 10k or so years ago cared much if their sausage showed from under their fur or not), to prevent desire wich is due to restraint that is practiced in various ways in pretty much every religion. today a dude like me over here can think that a good christian is well allowed to wear a bikini 



Metal Ken said:


> I dunno about fanaticism.. i dont recall any fanatical Buddhists going on killing sprees or fanatical jainists harming anyone.



well i didnt say everyone, just many - i meant to say that a violent person can pick any field he likes to direct his anger, be it football religion or love. this of course does not mean that any fanatic is violent but if she/he resorts to violence, then i believe he is a fanatic from my pacifist viewpoint, since i believe pretty much nothing is worth hurting people for.


----------



## noodles (Sep 6, 2007)

Metal Ken said:


> Besides, even IF new discoveries further invalidated the old testament, do you really think people will buy them? People still deny basic things like Evolution based on the bible.





Flat Earth Society - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Flat Earth Society

People can, have, and will continue to deny some of the most simple and logically accepted things, in the face of mountains of scientific evidence to the contrary, specifically because their faith _disallows_ them from believing it. To do otherwise is to question one's own beliefs, causing everything one holds to be "true" to slowly unravel. It is almost like a survival mechanism, the extent people will go to avoid the truth.

From the very first chapter of the very first book--"do not eat from the tree of knowledge"--to the very last book--Revelation, which is just another example of apocalyptic literature, which is a revolutionary writer's way of hiding the dangerous ideas from the powerful ruling forces that he seeks to overthrow--the Bible is designed to keep the common man from thinking for himself. It even promises fantastical rewards in heaven if one but blindly follows and obeys the rules. Free thinking is labeled as succumbing to the temptation of the devil.

I have no problem with people believing what they want to believe. I would even encourage one to look beyond themselves for answers to the big questions that have plagued humanity since the beginning of time. If you find spiritual enlightenment, and that makes you happy and content, then I am happy for you. It is when weak minded fools are herded together by the powerful and influential, and then used as a tool to forward a specific agenda that strips others of their freedoms, that I really start getting upset. If so many people are so damn sure that they've got all the answers from their one book, then why can't they ever seem to understand the one line that says "judge not, lest ye be judged yourself"? Why can't they let people live their own lives as they see fit?

You should have the freedom to believe you came from two people that a greater power made out of clay. I should have the freedom to see that my children get a proper education, founded in scientific principals and not silly little myths from a bygone era. The middle east remains at the center of things, because so many people the world over take their cues from people that lived their thousands of years ago.


----------



## D-EJ915 (Sep 6, 2007)

Metal Ken said:


> Well, the integrity of the old testament and new testament as a historical book is really slim. For example, there were 4 major historians who were around the time of Jesus, and not one of them even mentioned anything about him. The part with Herod killing all the babies, never mentioned in history. Don't you think genocide on that level would be recorded? Not to mention, many scholars believe Herod was dead by the supposed birth of Jesus.



Just based on what's going on right now, I find it laughable that you make this statement.


----------



## ZeroSignal (Sep 6, 2007)

D-EJ915 said:


> Just based on what's going on right now, I find it laughable that you make this statement.



Explain.


----------



## Metal Ken (Sep 6, 2007)

D-EJ915 said:


> Just based on what's going on right now, I find it laughable that you make this statement.



For every state inspired historian who denies atrocities, there's always a legion of evidence to the contrary.


----------



## stuz719 (Sep 6, 2007)

Metal Ken said:


> For every state inspired historian who denies atrocities, there's always a legion of evidence to the contrary.



But there remains a distinct lack of evidence for:

1) The supposed tax census carried out by the Romans at the time of the alleged birth of Jesus
2) The slaughter of children by Herod
3) The birth of Jesus
4) The life of Jesus
5) The death of Jesus
6) The alleged resurrection of Jesus

And before anyone points me at the 4 gospels, can I ask them to please make coherent timeline of who did what, and when and where using the 4 gospels as their "eye witness" evidence.


----------



## Metal Ken (Sep 6, 2007)

stuz719 said:


> But there remains a distinct lack of evidence for:
> 
> 1) The supposed tax census carried out by the Romans at the time of the alleged birth of Jesus
> 2) The slaughter of children by Herod
> ...



I was talking about how jeff somehow accused me of misconstruing news. I agree with all 6 of your points, btw. There's clear accounts of things that happened in that time frame from several prominent historians, and all 6 of those events are un-accounted for.


----------



## Stitch (Sep 6, 2007)

I find it rather amusing I have got a more balanced, well reasoned argument on a board full of midgets/drunkards/americans/english/gin lovers and metal guitarists than I have in a debating society, chuch or youth mission.


----------



## noodles (Sep 6, 2007)

stitch216 said:


> I find it rather amusing I have got a more balanced, well reasoned argument on a board full of midgets/drunkards/americans/english/gin lovers and metal guitarists than I have in a debating society, chuch or youth mission.



Funny that you say that, because it is something I have come to accept as normal.


----------



## Regor (Sep 7, 2007)

All I gotta say is... wow... That guy is probably on someone's shitlist now. Although I love his comment about looking back on things, like how Germany does with the Nazi's. Great analogy!!

And since we're talking about Islam. I've always wondered, is it wrong that I greet my muslim friends at school with "as sala'amu alaikum"? Even/especially in front of other muslims who aren't my friends?


----------



## Kakaka (Sep 7, 2007)

Metal Ken said:


> If the Bible is the word of God, and all that is contained within it is true, god himself has perpetuated enough atrocities by his own hand to really make me question if he is indeed a god of love as he says. I used to be a christian, then i read the bible.



I'm sincerely sad to read that, pal. I'm truly sorry there was no one to show you enough of the life of Christ, so you could know Him.

And yes, God is love. But that's not the base of His throne (of His government over all things):
"Righteousness and justice are the foundation of Your throne; mercy and loving-kindness and truth go before Your face."[Ps 89:14]

You see? God's not commited to people's ideas on what a nice god should be. As the almighty sovereign it would be strange if He did.

I think that first of all it is correct to think about it this way:
The universe is ruled by the arbitrary will of an almighty being. So, it is not a democracy. Believing differently can please the mind and soul of many, but it will not change the truth, the reality.

That's not far from reality, though the eyes of men have been blinded by the prince of this world. Just think of how many things you can't control, upon which your will has absolutely no effect.

Just consider the possibility: if there is such God, wouldn't it be better not to stand against Him?


----------



## Metal Ken (Sep 7, 2007)

Well, thats the thing, man. I had to go to church a _whole_ bunch growing up, and even went to a Christian school for a few years. Look what happened 
Back when i was still a skeptical Christian, i simply as you stated, figured it'd be "better not to stand against such a god if he did exist", IE Pascal's wager,but after a while, i didn't really see the point in doing that. The idea that God kills his own son to save us from himself is a disturbing one to me, to say the least. Equally disturbing to me as the idea of a personal god.

The god of the bible still appears as cruel to me, irregardless. I appreciate your concern though.


----------



## Kakaka (Sep 7, 2007)

erased post


----------



## garcia3441 (Sep 7, 2007)

MITHRAS = CHRISTIANITY

This page is a very interesting read.


----------



## Metal Ken (Sep 7, 2007)

garcia3441 said:


> MITHRAS = CHRISTIANITY
> 
> This page is a very interesting read.



There's also a lot between the egyptian religion (Osiris) and Jesus as well.


----------



## garcia3441 (Sep 7, 2007)

Some believe that the name 'Jesus' is a corruption of the name 'Zeus'.


----------



## Kakaka (Sep 7, 2007)

> The idea that God kills his own son to save us from himself is a disturbing one to me, to say the least. Equally disturbing to me as the idea of a personal god.
> 
> The god of the bible still appears as cruel to me, irregardless.



It is disturbing indeed. It was the price that we had to pay for our sinful nature and sinful acts. His love for us compelled Him to do it.

Don't think that's any news, though:



> 21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.
> 
> 22 For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:
> 
> ...



The death of Christ on the cross was cruel. That was God's judgement for me and you and everyone else, from the first to the last born man. Now isn't He love, He who has not denied us the precious life of His only Son so that we shall no longer perish?

Executing homossexuals? Rapers? Assassins? Foreigners so that Israel could conquer these people's lands?

What if the Lord of the universe says He doesn't like something you like to do? God has given the people of Israel some laws and commandments. Some you like, some you don't. The whole universe couldn't care less.

That does not mean it is up to us to execute this punishment over anyone who commits those sins.
Because we no longer live under the slavery of the law. But the death of Christ gives us a new life, a new nature, by which we are able to live according to His standards. And we should show the same love and mercy He showed toward us.

And I think I reached the point with this last one: God always wanted to live among His people. It was the people's choice to have the law instead.
Showing mercy toward others, humbly searching for knowing God and obeying Him in love is His will for us now.


----------



## garcia3441 (Sep 7, 2007)

How Islam views Jesus:

Islamic view of Jesus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Metal Ken (Sep 7, 2007)

Kakaka said:


> It is disturbing indeed. It was the price that we had to pay for our sinful nature and sinful acts. His love for us compelled Him to do it.


I dont see why some jewish guy had to die for _my_ sins though. Call it reading a lot of crowley and whatnot, but i love who i am and i don't want to be forgiven for living my life as i like. I mean think about it -- god gives you a choice between him and fiery pits of unpleasantness in the middle of the earth. Its not much of a choice if you ask me. God says "Sure you don't have to like me. but if you don't, you'll be tormented and violated in every conceivable way for all time." And god is supposed to be the most loving thing, yet, what father could honestly damn their child to be crucified and turn his back on him in his hour of need? And moreso, what kind of father would sentence his children to burn for simply not believing a few things he said? I don't live exactly how _my_ father wants me to, but you know what? we're on really good terms cause he knows my life is my life. I might not do things how he wants me to, but I'm a good person and we see eye to eye on lots of things as it is. 




Kakaka said:


> Executing homossexuals? Rapers? Assassins? Foreigners so that Israel could conquer these people's lands?
> 
> What if the Lord of the universe says He doesn't like something you like to do? God has given the people of Israel some laws and commandments. Some you like, some you don't. The whole universe couldn't care less.
> 
> That does not mean it is up to us to execute this punishment over anyone who commits those sins.



Well, as i mentioned earlier, Christ said he didn't come to overturn the laws of the prophets of Israel. I take that to mean that all the laws of the old testament are to be upheld. 
The lord of the universe says he doesn't like a lot of the things i do. But as I said before, I embrace myself for who I am, sin and all. Technically, I'm unforgivable, but thats neither here nor there


----------



## El Caco (Sep 7, 2007)

noodles said:


> Flat Earth Society - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> The Flat Earth Society
> 
> People can, have, and will continue to deny some of the most simple and logically accepted things, in the face of mountains of scientific evidence to the contrary, specifically because their faith _disallows_ them from believing it. To do otherwise is to question one's own beliefs, causing everything one holds to be "true" to slowly unravel. It is almost like a survival mechanism, the extent people will go to avoid the truth.
> ...


 

I just wish that Christians were sincere about their faith.

There are leaders and followers in Christianity, and there are leaders that are actually followers. The true leaders use religion as a tool for their own gain and the followers believe whatever they are told.

I wish that Christians would study the Bible with an intent to know the truth. I wish that those that proclaim the Bible to be Gods word would sincerely live by it's principles. Why are they so intent on removing the speck out of others eyes when they still have a log in their own.

What Christians don't understand is that conversion in the Bible is painted as a powerful life changing experience. It is not like this days watered down version where a Christian goes on exactly the same as he was trying not to sin but he's saved even if he does because he believes. The Christians in the Bible are easily identifiable as unique having left their life of sin, those that continue to sin are to be first chastised and then excommunicated.

I also really hate how Christians believe what they want to believe and not what the Bible says.

Like Metal Ken said, I believe that if Christians studied the Bible with a desire to know the truth they would not be Christians. Most Christians study what they are told to study and believe what they are told. Instead of studying to understand difficult Bible concepts they trust others to tell them what that means or why it's not a contradiction. Hell many Christians think that the Bible says that there were three wise men and that Adam ate an apple.

I have not met a Christian that can explain the contradiction in the accounts of the cock crowing in the gospels, most are not even aware of the difference in the accounts, but they claim the Bible is infallible.

Most Christians are not aware that Pauls quote in 2 Timothy 3:16 was a response to a debate that was raging in both the Churches and among the Jews of the time about what sciptures they should use, remember when Paul said this they did not have a Bible. Paul said all scriptures but instead of listening to Paul Christians use the scriptures that were given to them by a man who never lived the life of a Christian but instead killed in the name of Christ and recalls his own conversion as Jesus appearing to him and instructing him to conquer in his name.

Most Christians will say that the Bible is Gods complete word and that you need nothing else but are unaware that many new testament figures quote from and teach from scriptures not contained in the Bible such as Judes references to the book of Enoch. But why would a Christian need a book that an Apostle studied from?

Most Christians would point out that the Bible tells us that the first miracle Jesus performed was turning the water into wine but if they studied Bible geography and Jesus travels against the Bible timeline they would realise that he had already performed a miracle.

I could go on and on the point is Christians don't study the Book that they want everyone to follow, most have no idea what it says.

Here's a bit of trivia, what was mans first sin, that is what was the first sin that God punished Adam for?

Genesis 3:17 (Today's New International Version)

17 To Adam he said, "Because you listened to your wife 

I love that quote I use it on my wife daily.


----------



## Pauly (Sep 7, 2007)

A few words from Eckhart Tolle, from his book The Power of Now, I think everyone should read this book! I don't agree with all of it, but it certainly makes you think about the world you live in and how you perceive reality.



> When I occasionally quote the words of Jesus or the Buddha, from A Course in Miracles or from other teachings, I do so not in order to compare, but to draw your attention to the fact that in essence there is and always has been only one spiritual teaching, although it comes in many forms. Some of these forms, such as the ancient religions, have become so overlaid with extraneous matter that their spiritual essence has become almost completely obscured by it. To a large extent, therefore, their deeper meaning is no longer recognized and their transformative power lost. When I quote from the ancient religions or other teachings, it is to reveal their deeper meaning and thereby restore their transformative power - particularly for those readers who are followers of these religions or teachings. I say to them: there is no need to go elsewhere for the truth. Let me show you how to go more deeply into what you already have.
> 
> Mostly, however, I have endeavoured to use terminology that is as neutral as possible in order to reach a wide range of people. This book can be seen as a restatement for our time of that one timeless spiritual teaching, the essence of all religions.





> The word God has become empty of meaning through thousands of years of misuse. I use it sometimes, but I do so sparingly. By misuse, I mean that people who have never even glimpsed the realm of the sacred, the infinite vastness behind that word, use it with great conviction, as if they knew what they are talking about. Or they argue against it, as if they knew what it is that they are denying. This misuse gives rise to absurd beliefs, assertions, and egoic delusions, such as "My or our God is the only true God, and your God is false," or Nietzsche's famous statement "God is dead."
> 
> The word God has become a closed concept. The moment the word is uttered, a mental image is created, no longer, perhaps, of an old man with a white beard, but still a mental representation of someone or something outside you, and, yes, almost inevitably a male someone or something.
> 
> Neither God nor Being nor any other word can define or explain the ineffable reality behind the word, so the only important question is whether the word is a help or a hindrance in enabling you to experience That toward which it points. Does it point beyond itself to that transcendental reality, or does it lend itself too easily to becoming no more than an idea in your head that you believe in, a mental idol?


----------



## Nick (Sep 7, 2007)

Kakaka said:


> Just consider the possibility: if there is such God, wouldn't it be better not to stand against Him?




Thats something iv heard before and always love to hear.

Probably the weakest and most hypocritical argument for the belief in god ever.


----------



## noodles (Sep 7, 2007)

Kakaka said:


> And yes, God is love. But that's not the base of His throne (of His government over all things):
> "Righteousness and justice are the foundation of Your throne; mercy and loving-kindness and truth go before Your face."[Ps 89:14]
> 
> You see? God's not commited to people's ideas on what a nice god should be. As the almighty sovereign it would be strange if He did.



Why do Christians always quote the bible as their primary supporting evidence in a debate? Who are you trying to convince? If you don't think abortion should be legal, then I'm not going to take you out back to the biological waste dumpster and show you the contents. A large part of this discussion has been about the unproven events and glaring contradictions in the bible. Using that as the basis of your argument isn't exactly the best place to start.



> I think that first of all it is correct to think about it this way:
> The universe is ruled by the arbitrary will of an almighty being. So, it is not a democracy. Believing differently can please the mind and soul of many, but it will not change the truth, the reality.
> 
> That's not far from reality, though the eyes of men have been blinded by the prince of this world. Just think of how many things you can't control, upon which your will has absolutely no effect.



But what proof do you have that yours is the truth?



> Just consider the possibility: if there is such God, wouldn't it be better not to stand against Him?



If there is such a god, why would he give us a brain that he doesn't want us to use? Why would he hide himself from our presence and only dispense his laws through corrupt, hateful, greedy, and violent men? Why would he give us absolutely no proof of his existence, and then punish us for our skepticism? In short, why would he want us to do all the things that are against the very nature that he built into us? Why is god setting us up to fail?

If god really does exist, and really is omnipotent, then I never want to meet him. Omnipotence means he knows everything that is going to happen, which means he created souls for the express purpose of damning them to an eternity of suffering and torment. Knowing all this, he still sent his son down to die in the cruelest and most painful way possible, just to show us how much he loves those of us he's predestined to burn in a lake of fire forever.

Sorry, I'll stick with believing that decomposition is the only thing that happens after I die. Besides, if I'm wrong, then obviously I'm one of the ones predestined to attend the never ending BBQ. At least Satan and I share something in common--we both think god is pretty fucked up--so maybe we can reach some common ground. It's better than living an eternity of fearful subservience.


----------



## El Caco (Sep 7, 2007)

I think the word you were looking for is omniscience.

Omnipotence means all powerful.

Omniscient means all knowing.


----------



## BigM555 (Sep 7, 2007)

Noodles, one of these days we really must meet up for a beer! 

or 10 or 12.


----------



## stuz719 (Sep 7, 2007)

Kakaka said:


> But the death of Christ gives us a new life, a new nature, by which we are able to live according to His standards. And we should show the same love and mercy He showed toward us.





II Kings 2:23-24 said:


> And he [Elisha] went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head. And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the Lord. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.



If those are the standards of love and mercy that your god shows you can keep him (or her), thanks.


----------



## Nick (Sep 7, 2007)

i also like how christians now say god is who created the 'universe'. Interesting how when the 'universe' didnt exist but christianity did there was no mention of it and god was actually up in the sky and the devil was down below.

now that we know whats up there and whats down there its funny how they have vanished and that way of thinking has been replaced by one that can apply to modern knowledge of our place in the universe.


----------



## ZeroSignal (Sep 7, 2007)

Regor said:


> All I gotta say is... wow... That guy is probably on someone's shitlist now. Although I love his comment about looking back on things, like how Germany does with the Nazi's. Great analogy!!
> 
> And since we're talking about Islam. I've always wondered, is it wrong that I greet my muslim friends at school with "as sala'amu alaikum"? Even/especially in front of other muslims who aren't my friends?



He's on my shitlist now anyway...

Fuck no! I salaam ALL my muslim friends. The same way you should Namaste Hindu's to show respect!

Go for it!


----------



## Metal Ken (Sep 7, 2007)

noodles said:


> If god really does exist, and really is omnipotent, then I never want to meet him. Omnipotence means he knows everything that is going to happen, which means he created souls for the express purpose of damning them to an eternity of suffering and torment. Knowing all this, he still sent his son down to die in the cruelest and most painful way possible, just to show us how much he loves those of us he's predestined to burn in a lake of fire forever.



Exactly. If he created me with predestination, he knew after about 18 years of "serving" him, i would turn my back on him forever, become damned and writhe in pain for the rest of eternity. Nice guy, huh?


----------



## telecaster90 (Sep 7, 2007)

Kakaka said:


> Just consider the possibility: if there is such God, wouldn't it be better not to stand against Him?



Pascal's Wager! 

This is actually what kept me hanging onto Christianity for a few years until I realized it was a pretty bad arguement for faith.


----------



## Carrion (Sep 7, 2007)

In theory, wouldn't Hitler, a practicing Roman Catholic, go to Heaven, assuming he repented his sins, and all the Jews who died gone to Hell for not believing in the Christian faith?


----------



## Nick (Sep 7, 2007)

telecaster90 said:


> Pascal's Wager!
> 
> This is actually what kept me hanging onto Christianity for a few years until I realized it was a pretty bad arguement for faith.




fact



Carrion said:


> In theory, wouldn't Hitler, a practicing Roman Catholic, go to Heaven, assuming he repented his sins, and all the Jews who died gone to Hell for not believing in the Christian faith?




and the most controversial post award in this thread goes to......


lol well done


----------



## Metal Ken (Sep 7, 2007)

Carrion said:


> In theory, wouldn't Hitler, a practicing Roman Catholic, go to Heaven, assuming he repented his sins, and all the Jews who died gone to Hell for not believing in the Christian faith?



Ive brought this up while debating a christian before, they just say that Hitler wasn't a christian. Then you point out on several occasions he said he was. They still persist in saying he wasn't. 

But then who are we to say someone was a christian or not?


----------



## Lucky Seven (Sep 7, 2007)

noodles said:


> Why do Christians always quote the bible as their primary supporting evidence in a debate?



^^ See VV



> The context thing seems to be religious people's biggest point on contesting the injustices mentioned in the bible and the Koran, whereas if you read them in context, its still fucked up.
> 
> And if you write off parts of the bible, then what are you supposed to write off? If the "old testament" is just supposed to be "Figurative" as so many Christians i meet nowadays seem to think, then why bother believing in jesus? If the old testament is just "moral stories", then that must mean that the original sin didn't happen, and if thats the case, there's no need for jesus. And if you DO take the whole thing word for word, you'd better not eat seafood that isnt straight up fish, cause its an abomination, same with having long hair. thats an abomination, too. Lots of preachers take things out of context to get the message THEY want across, and no one complains about that, but any time you bring up a flaw in the bible... "Oh, you're reading it out of context!" Some famous dude who'se name i forget once said "When used properly, the bible is the strongest argument against christianity".
> 
> ...





Metal Ken said:


> Eat thine not the beasts of the sea with no scales, as they are an abomination unto ye.



I don't know noodles, why? Anyone?

300th post btw! 

"This is madness!"

"THIS IS RELIGION!!!!!!"

"Same thing, dude"

"Oh, yeah"


----------



## bostjan (Sep 7, 2007)

"Where do we come from? Why are we here? Where do we go when we die? ..."

I love how one of the ten commandments is about not having idols before you, yet the bible itself, as we know through historical translation, IS one of these "idols." And a crucifix, is an idol even by today's definition.


----------



## D-EJ915 (Sep 7, 2007)

Metal Ken said:


> Ive brought this up while debating a christian before, they just say that Hitler wasn't a christian. Then you point out on several occasions he said he was. They still persist in saying he wasn't.
> 
> But then who are we to say someone was a christian or not?


from what I've heard Hitler practiced an extremely perverted form of "christianity" but I haven't studied on it so I can't comment further than that.



> I love how one of the ten commandments is about not having idols before you, yet the bible itself, as we know through historical translation, IS one of these "idols." And a crucifix, is an idol even by today's definition.


An idol is what someone makes of something, it has nothing to do with what it's supposed to be. A guitar could be an idol for somebody, it's simply something they put too much thought/effort/belief into. I think you can get what I'm saying from that.


----------



## Metal Ken (Sep 7, 2007)

D-EJ915 said:


> from what I've heard Hitler practiced an extremely perverted form of "christianity" but I haven't studied on it so I can't comment further than that.



You could say the same thing about the catholics (note: I'm not saying the current catholic church is extreme. They used to be back in the Inquisition witch burning days, but no longer). Hell, a lot of protestant preachers that come on to UF campus DO say the same thing of the catholics -- calling them a cult of the devil,etc.


----------



## bostjan (Sep 7, 2007)

D-EJ915 said:


> An idol is what someone makes of something, it has nothing to do with what it's supposed to be. A guitar could be an idol for somebody, it's simply something they put too much thought/effort/belief into. I think you can get what I'm saying from that.



Precisely.


----------



## JBroll (Sep 8, 2007)

Kakaka said:


> Just consider the possibility: if there is such God, wouldn't it be better not to stand against Him?



If there is actually an entirely different god, and it hates the one you try not to stand against, you're even more fucked. Yours doesn't seem any more likely.

Somehow I have to doubt anyone who thinks they know what happens after they die, and laugh at anyone who tries to build belief systems around such - the baker down the street has as good an idea as the holiest man who ever lived.

Jeff


----------



## distressed_romeo (Sep 8, 2007)

JBroll said:


> If there is actually an entirely different god, and it hates the one you try not to stand against, you're even more fucked. Yours doesn't seem any more likely.



Actually, there're some Gnostic Christian sects who believe just that...


----------



## Brett89 (Sep 8, 2007)

Well, I don't have problem with them , not all of them think that those who don't belive in Islam should be killed. 

You can find fanatics every where, that's sad, but those kids and civilis aren't terrorist or those who doesn't like that their country has been invaded get slayed by Izrael or by others. No one should think that religion and Islam is about hatered and such. The other side does the same things everday . Offcourse the media doesn't speak about that.The problem is not with Islam, the problem is with the fanatics, and you can find fanatics at Izrael's side too.

Hope you understand with I mean, sorry for the english.


----------



## Lucky Seven (Sep 8, 2007)

Brett89 said:


> Well, I don't have problem with them , not all of them think that those who don't belive in Islam should be killed.
> 
> You can find fanatics every where, that's sad, but those kids and civilis aren't terrorist or those who doesn't like that their country has been invadedget slayed by Izrael or by others. No one should think that religion and Islam is about hatered and such. The other side does the same things everday . Offcourse the media doesn't speak about that.The problem is not with Islam, the problem is with the fanatics, and you can find fanatics at Izrael's side too.
> 
> Hope you understand with I mean, sorry for the english.



I know what you mean, I have a few Muslim friends.


----------



## Korbain (Sep 9, 2007)

ohh i avoided this thread for no reason, thought it'd be just a huge bashing of islam lol. Which isn't bad  But, i opened out of curiousty to see a very intelligently spoken video. What a legend. Its good to see people speak out like that, i for one have nothing wrong with islam and its believers, i have problems with some of their shit and bitching like that guy mentioned. But don't we all. Truer words have never been spoken


----------



## noodles (Sep 10, 2007)

Brett89 said:


> Well, I don't have problem with them , not all of them think that those who don't belive in Islam should be killed.
> 
> You can find fanatics every where, that's sad, but those kids and civilis aren't terrorist or those who doesn't like that their country has been invaded get slayed by Izrael or by others. No one should think that religion and Islam is about hatered and such. The other side does the same things everday . Offcourse the media doesn't speak about that.The problem is not with Islam, the problem is with the fanatics, and you can find fanatics at Izrael's side too.



Good points, but you're missing the root of the problem: the Qua-ran itself. The justification for all sorts of horrible acts are right there in its pages. The more tolerant Muslims have to put up with the fanatics giving them a bad name, because there isn't a logical way to argue that some things in the book are valid while others are not.

At least the Christian faith has evolved beyond this point. When the Pope--or one of the cardinals directly under him--says that American fundamentalists are taking the bible too literally and need to calm down a bit, you know that the ways of the past have lost credibility. Sure, the words are still there to be misused, but at least our nut cases sit outside of abortion clinics instead of blowing up cars.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: if peaceful Muslims want credibility for their religion, then they need to stop tolerating the actions of their more violent brethren. Why aren't top Muslim clerics from other parts of the world condemning the actions of the few in the middle east? How can they sit silently by and watch this stuff unfold?


----------



## Metal Ken (Sep 10, 2007)

noodles said:


> Why aren't top Muslim clerics from other parts of the world condemning the actions of the few in the middle east? How can they sit silently by and watch this stuff unfold?




Because the Koran forbids them to speak out against other muslims in front of non-muslims.


----------



## noodles (Sep 10, 2007)

Metal Ken said:


> Because the Koran forbids them to speak out against other muslims in front of non-muslims.



That is simply more support for the argument that Islam is a violent religion. How can a Muslim tell me that I've got it all wrong and the religion advocates peace, when they won't condemn the very actions they claim to stand against?


----------



## Metal Ken (Sep 10, 2007)

I know. i was listening to the radio last year, and they had a guy on who got kicked out of his mosque for that exact reason. He wanted everyone to examine what people were doing in the name of islam to give it a bad name. He ended up getting death threats and shit.

Thats what i think is so hilarious. what was it that happened last year? Some TV station said that Islam was a violent religion, and in return, the radical muslims said "Take that back or we'll blow up the station!"


----------



## Naren (Sep 11, 2007)

Metal Ken said:


> I know. i was listening to the radio last year, and they had a guy on who got kicked out of his mosque for that exact reason. He wanted everyone to examine what people were doing in the name of islam to give it a bad name. He ended up getting death threats and shit.
> 
> Thats what i think is so hilarious. what was it that happened last year? Some TV station said that Islam was a violent religion, and in return, the radical muslims said "Take that back or we'll blow up the station!"



"You're so violent." "I AM NOT! TAKE THAT BACK OR I'LL BEAT THE SHIT OUT OF YOU!" 

I happen to agree with noodles and Ken here as well.


----------



## Jachop (Sep 11, 2007)

^  So true

Kudos to the guy in the video. I like him.


----------



## jim777 (Sep 11, 2007)

garcia3441 said:


> The Religion of Islam - Home Page



The Religion Of Peace


----------



## 999dead666 (Sep 11, 2007)

noodles said:


> Good points, but you're missing the root of the problem: the Qua-ran itself. The justification for all sorts of horrible acts are right there in its pages. The more tolerant Muslims have to put up with the fanatics giving them a bad name, because there isn't a logical way to argue that some things in the book are valid while others are not.
> 
> At least the Christian faith has evolved beyond this point. When the Pope--or one of the cardinals directly under him--says that American fundamentalists are taking the bible too literally and need to calm down a bit, you know that the ways of the past have lost credibility. Sure, the words are still there to be misused, but at least our nut cases sit outside of abortion clinics instead of blowing up cars.
> 
> I've said it before and I'll say it again: if peaceful Muslims want credibility for their religion, then they need to stop tolerating the actions of their more violent brethren. Why aren't top Muslim clerics from other parts of the world condemning the actions of the few in the middle east? How can they sit silently by and watch this stuff unfold?



but most of muslims are against terrorism or violence in the name of islam. i remember there were protests in Amman where i lived , really big ones. and no sec of news were seen of the protests in any of the major/minor news in America or the UK. but the min one of the " evil ones " do or say something, its on the headlines everywhere. 2nd. quraan written in classical arabic. it has the thing that you need to understand old arabic really good to understand the meaning of the words. because for you who dont know arabic, you can have many meanings related to 1 phrase. so you should read what between the lines, or read the obvious low in previouse/later pages of the book. for example who kills none muslims because they are not muslims, its true it was written in one of the pages, but you cant take it out of the historical event that it came for. and if you check later or earlier sentences in quraan it says clearly who dont want to believe in god or believed then disbelieved its his will, and god will judge people later according to the faith in their hearts. so you can directly face those fanatics with that proof. now what they are using to back up their aggression is politics, more than quraan, ex. you tell him innocents died in 9/11 he will tell you, since 200 years the west is killing us. since 70 years israelians killing palestinians and the west is supporting it. so you see its not right to kill westerns because the actions of their goverments , but you understand the reason of his/her rage. its really complicated subject. but the real problem is really deeper and more complicated than this book or that book. its 200 years of occupation and political conspiracies.



Metal Ken said:


> Because the Koran forbids them to speak out against other muslims in front of non-muslims.



im afraid to tell you its not true. in islam its even says you can ask for the help of none muslims to help you against evil " muslims " who are spreading evil but you cant stop them. as i said earlier, in islam there is no such islamic leader, or clerics. the idea of islam is the direct connection between you and your god with no one to control or to be the hotline . the cleric muslim thing appeared in the end of the othman emipre rule. like 17th-18th century. but there is no cleric in islam as its in christianity like pop or what ever.


----------



## Groff (Sep 11, 2007)

I would just like to point out something I learned last year in my history classes, just because it's being used as an excuse too much nowadays.

The word "Jihad" doesn't mean "Kill those who oppose you" as people interpret it nowadays (Muslims or otherwise).

Rather

The "holy war" that it is associated with is an inner one. 

What does that mean exactly?
It means that if someone offends you, or something happens that brings doubt to your beliefs... You're supposed to ignore them, walk away, and then pray/study or whatever you want to do. To reassure yourself that it's YOUR religion, and that noone can take that away from you.

It would be like... If a christian felt doubts about the existence of god, he/she would go to church, to reaffirm his/her beliefs.

...That's all a Jihad is.

Why it's used as an excuse to kill is beyond me.

...Carry on.


----------



## noodles (Sep 11, 2007)

999dead666 and TheMissing, you need to go read a couple of articles on the link Jim posted, tell me how to refute every single one of the author's points, and then maybe I'll listen to you.

TheReligionofPeace - Myths of Islam

TheReligionofPeace - Games Muslims Play

Until then, you're just making excuses for the violent and misogynistic teachings of a power hungry tyrant--teachings that continue to resonate to this day. I am so sick of hearing "you have to take it in context" when it comes to religious texts (be they Christian, Jewish, or Muslim) touted as "the word of god". Well, maybe god should have made his words straight forward and simple to understand. If so many people are "getting it wrong", then who is really at fault: all the people that get it wrong, or the author?

I'll tell you what I _still_ see: religion is the tool the powerful wield to get the masses to do what they want. It's all contradictory, inflammatory, and confusing rubbish.


----------



## 999dead666 (Sep 11, 2007)

noodles said:


> 999dead666 and TheMissing, you need to go read a couple of articles on the link Jim posted, tell me how to refute every single one of the author's points, and then maybe I'll listen to you.
> 
> TheReligionofPeace - Myths of Islam
> 
> ...



man, im not muslim cleric, im not even religious , im more to the theory of religions and mythologies were given/taken from higher civilisation in ancient times. what ever. im just trying to get the far points closer to each others. since im from middle east and i learned islam, and was born as muslim. its not the context. its the structure of arabic language, which is the language quraan was written with. the structure allows you to multiple usage of the meanings. something else. you are missing the point of, faith or religion in all its forms and origins supposed to be holly and pure. politics is built on lies and interests. your friend today can turn to be your enemy tomorow and so on. but when people mixed the two together we got the crusaders. israelian occupation, bin laden...etc this is why i said in the first pages i think, leave your religion at home and lets treat each others as human with equal civil laws. and themissing, jihad means struggle in arabic. it can be jihad with studying, with helping, with teaching, or with dying in war defending your land and people. the fighting jihad ( struggle ) in battle fields which is the most famous, bin laden and his followers started it upon the western occupation of afghanistan, iraq,palestine.... etc. so the word jihad means struggle not killing


----------



## Nick (Sep 11, 2007)

the last paragraph of noodles' post could legit be lyrics from a slayer song


----------



## noodles (Sep 11, 2007)

I understand what you're saying, but the Qua-ran wasn't written all in one shot. It was written over the course of Mohammed's life, and it's teaching are very much those of convenience. We need money to support the new religion? Suddenly, Allah says it's ok to raid Meccan caravans. How do you explain that away with language structure and multiple word meanings? If the origin of religion is supposed to be holy and pure, why is the Qua-ran the tale of a massive power grab? Sounds like lies, politics, and special interests to me.

Why did the crusades being nearly five hundred years after Muslim armies began sacking cities in Italy and Spain? Because Islam means "submit", and that what Muslims wanted to make the rest of the world do: submit to their new religion.

Mohammed was pissed he got kicked out of Mecca, so his teaching became progressively more convoluted, confusing, and violent. Opposing views were explained away with new revelations from Gabriel. When the Medinan Jews started taking exceptions to his teaching, he delt with them just as harshly. His teachings laid the foundation for centuries of bloody war and oppression.

How can you argue with history? Intent is a very flimsy argument. You could prove to me beyond a shadow of a doubt that I'm completely wrong about Mohamed, that his intent was that of peace and tolerance, but it would do nothing to change my opinion of Islam. He's not exactly around right now to yank his followers back into line, is he?

If Islam is so misunderstood, then why are you no longer a Muslim?


----------



## 999dead666 (Sep 11, 2007)

noodles said:


> I understand what you're saying, but the Qua-ran wasn't written all in one shot. It was written over the course of Mohammed's life, and it's teaching are very much those of convenience. We need money to support the new religion? Suddenly, Allah says it's ok to raid Meccan caravans. How do you explain that away with language structure and multiple word meanings? If the origin of religion is supposed to be holy and pure, why is the Qua-ran the tale of a massive power grab? Sounds like lies, politics, and special interests to me.
> 
> Why did the crusades being nearly five hundred years after Muslim armies began sacking cities in Italy and Spain? Because Islam means "submit", and that what Muslims wanted to make the rest of the world do: submit to their new religion.
> 
> ...



man, lets not mix and simplify events. raiding caravans were decided after the pagans kicked muslims out and took their belongings so it was like eye for an eye, plus you cant compare laws of ancient times where people were harsh and more brutal to our times where we have police profisional armies and so on. muslims reached rome because rome was the capital of the roman empire, which occupied 90% of the arabic lands and the rest were under the persians, so when the muslim power rose up, the arabic armies took back their lands and freed them from roman/persian occupations, now im not trying to say the whole history of arabs and muslims was pure and with no mistakes, ofcourse when your growing army reaches borders of rome you wont stop. its war, politics and religion. plus, when muslims ruled spain for 800 years they built the biggest civilisation in that time, and christians and jews were equall, even there were jewish ministers that time. the first model of what now guitar was built by arabic musician under the name kithara- gitara- guitar, by adding the 5th and 6th string to similar acoustic equipment called oud. chemistry algerba are arabic sciences, but what people knows is arabs are known of bombing and killing, because no one is interested in the 2nd part of the story.when spains took its land back, they burnt non catholics alive if they didnt converet to christianity. ofcourse you will hear of similar acts in arabic or muslim countries. im trying to say its meaningless to compare our times to 1000-2000 years back, when the only law back then was the sword. and i know this subject will never end. it will keep going around and around. so i think the best is people with ancient bloody history must sit together and build up new standards of respect and equal shares and new begining and forget the history, its soo bloody and filthy there is no soloution to keep digging in it and try to clean it. we need to write new one.
ps: i didnt convert im just more into believing or i think its is very possible that a higher and more devoloped civilisation existed or from another planet passed some of its known now as ancient knowledge or the birth of civilisation. but untill its a 100% fact and proven i wont take it as new believe


----------



## noodles (Sep 11, 2007)

You have yet to make one point that sways me from my view that religion is inherently a wretched concept used to control people for political means. Using the atrocities of Christians as an argument for Islam will not convince me you are right, because I'm an atheist. Which actually places me far lower in the social standings of Islam, possibly even death. At least Christians don't kill atheists.

I'll say it again: if Islam isn't so bad, why are you no longer a Muslim? What led me away from Christianity was the oppression and hypocricy of their teachings, most of which are found right there in the bible. All three monotheistic religion base the core of their beliefs on the same handful of books (the Old Testament for Christians), which taught barbaric practices that I was unable to reconcile. Everyone is proud to be a "Son of Abraham", but everyone forgets that he was ready to kill his own son because god told him to. The very core of the belief is rooted in blood. The very words I was implored to read is what drove me away from religion.


----------



## Groff (Sep 11, 2007)

noodles said:


> 999dead666 and TheMissing, you need to go read a couple of articles on the link Jim posted, tell me how to refute every single one of the author's points, and then maybe I'll listen to you.
> 
> TheReligionofPeace - Myths of Islam
> 
> ...



I was not making excuses for their actions.

I was just stating an interesting fact relevent to the topic that came to mind when I saw the thread.  

My only goal was for someone to read it and say "Wow... Interesting, i didn't know that" and nothing more.

didn't mean to rub you the wrong way.

Edit: I agree with your views on christianity.

Edit edit: Those two links you provided are great reads!


----------



## 999dead666 (Sep 11, 2007)

noodles said:


> You have yet to make one point that sways me from my view that religion is inherently a wretched concept used to control people for political means. Using the atrocities of Christians as an argument for Islam will not convince me you are right, because I'm an atheist. Which actually places me far lower in the social standings of Islam, possibly even death. At least Christians don't kill atheists.
> 
> I'll say it again: if Islam isn't so bad, why are you no longer a Muslim? What led me away from Christianity was the oppression and hypocricy of their teachings, most of which are found right there in the bible. All three monotheistic religion base the core of their beliefs on the same handful of books (the Old Testament for Christians), which taught barbaric practices that I was unable to reconcile. Everyone is proud to be a "Son of Abraham", but everyone forgets that he was ready to kill his own son because god told him to. The very core of the belief is rooted in blood. The very words I was implored to read is what drove me away from religion.



again, i know your an atheist, and in islam there you shouldnt get killed because your not believer. i wrote you earlier the scentence that its up to god to judge people each to his deed. again im saying im not cleric and i dont want to be here the only one taking the blame for muslims behaviors and missunderstanding, im trying to explain to you people some points i find missunderstood. maybe im not 100% muslim, but i didnt cut it completly with islam, simply because as i mentioned earlier, untill the theories i think make sense about the dawn of religions and civilisations are proved 100% are right. i wasnt trying to convince you by pointing to the atrocities of christians, i was just trying to bring examples so every one will understand my point. yes the 3 abrahamic religions have brutal teachings and history, but lets remember the times they were taught times of brutal un mercyfull minds were there. maybe the understanding of the religious texts by those minds conversed religions from mercyfull to brutal and bloody. i dont know, all theories and options are " can be " maybe " for me. and i agree with you, mind controlling preaching sucks dogs nuts. and i feel sorry for people walking like zombies to praying places and leave like mad dogs after the weekly teachings.

ps: i was reading the 2 links you posted before, man i really feel sorry if your taking the informations there as facts. its soo ashaming that they are issued there. any one any one can go to library and read history of islam or that region in general and point out the huge mistakes that are mentioned by mistake or inpurpose!! for example, battle of badr was by 300 of the pagans only??? the whole mecca army went to meddina to kill muhammed before his power overgrow them, 300 soldiers ?? wtf


----------



## Metal Ken (Sep 11, 2007)

999dead666 said:


> for example, battle of badr was by 300 of the pagans only??? the whole mecca army went to meddina to kill muhammed before his power overgrow them, 300 soldiers ?? wtf



In the article it says mohammed's army was 300, consistent with Wikipedia.


----------



## T_money419 (Sep 15, 2007)

great video


----------

