There’s Noah way God would do something like that.
No way? Yahweh.
I don’t understand why people say “I trust God”. He had his own son nailed to a cross, FFS.
People in the middle ages got it right. “I do what God tells me because he scares the crap out of me.”
I’ve been reading through the old stories for the first time in my life, and in my view, you can only read them through the lens of a series of allegorical lessons intended to warn about consequences that do take place in the real world, and those consequences can be beyond lethal.
History will wipe your entire bloodline out if you make bad enough mistakes. Ask the Hitlers.
That’s the way they were taught to me, but I’m starting to think I was pretty lucky with my schools/parish. There was no sex ed though so not that lucky.
If I run into someone actually named Hitler, he’s probably not related to Adolf, but wishes he was…
I’m thinking they might not wish they were related to Adolf, but might have some similar ideas about what to do to their parents for giving them such a damned name.
I was thinking of a Neo Nazi calling himself that to be “cool”
I get sometimes folks are just being edgelords(hail Satan amirite?), but anyone looking at the cringefest of national socialism as anything but the most retarded ideology to come out of the human race needs to read more from non-austrian authors. :P
It literally did not even “make the trains run on time”
deleted by creator
Yeah, that’s one of many reasons why the term “Sky Daddy” makes me cringe if used unironically.
That’s because for someone who requires evidence before belief there’s rarely been major unexplained phenomena to convince them of the existance of said power from any source.
I can imagine even the most cognizant person running into problems with assigning things to a god without civilisations aggregated knowledge of concepts like atomic principal, meteorology, astrology, germ theory, social studies.
Imagine seeing tornados, or super cell storm structures, flooding, plague, tsunami’s, all without a hint of understanding of weather, or germs, or global tidal movements, knowledge that’s only been globally accessible to the common man in literally the last 30 years.
The normal person’s aptitude to reject god comes down to the ability to understand and explain anything that would prior be considered an unexplainable phenomena, which relies entirely on their grasp of the combined knowledge derived from all civilisations past.
Education resolves superstition.
deleted by creator
Wow you read all that and missed mine.
Yes they do, because they attribute the powers of nature to god where Athiests do not because they understand the causation and effect.
deleted by creator
No I’m not, I’m explaining the differential in information processing, if you think I was trying to flaunt some superiority you’re still just as ignorant about what I was saying.
I’m stating they see their gods as all powerful because they attribute the natural phenomena to being of a deities impact rather than something that is just naturally occurring.
My second point was that without the combined knowledge and technological advancement of all of the world’s societies there’d be significantly more religious people (as proven by historical record) because they wouldn’t have the tools and knowledge to come to any other conclusion.
So no, you didn’t get my point, and you only think it’s irrelevant because you’re too stupid to realise I was agreeing with you.
That’s the beauty of Christianity.
The Bible is so full of contradictions that you can get it to fit any worldview you want.
Only if simultaneously being willfully obtuse and ignorant.
For example, in Mark, Matthew, and Luke, Jesus forbids those going out to minister from brining a purse or money.
This necessarily prevents monetary collections.
So why is the church okay with taking your money today?
In part, rationalized by Paul’s arguments in 1 Cor 9 against the earlier Christian community there that don’t think it’s appropriate to profiteer off ministering.
But then even more, at the last supper in Luke, Jesus explicitly says “Hey guys, remember when I said not to carry purses? Let’s reverse that and now definitely carry purses.”
Except this addition to the last super in Luke-Acts is missing in Marcion’s version of that gospel, which is probably preserving the earliest extant version of it.
So while yes, you could in theory fit Jesus in the NT to agree with Paul that churches and those ministering have a right to profit from it and should definitely collect money from people (like they do in Acts 5 where an older couple who holds back money are both struck dead before Peter) - an even halfway critical eye should see that the historical Jesus was far more likely to have been against such practices given the widespread accounts of his ban, the earlier attitudes in Corinth, its embarrassing nature to be added in after already collecting money, and the late nature of the reversal.
And to see that much like biological evolution, ideas evolve over time too, and the version of Christianity we have today isn’t necessarily the one closest to the original form, but simply the form that was most adaptive through the fall of the Jerusalem temple, the endorsement of Rome, etc.
So yes, few people might know or see it this way, but that is largely because they don’t bother looking into their preconceptions and would rather believe a superficial picture that agrees with what they think they know (and I’m not only talking about Christians here either).
deleted by creator
I’m saying the opposite. That the ways in which contradictions are layered, coupled with the extensive degrees of academic study of the text, should reasonably reduce the scope of worldviews that it can be used to support dramatically.
Yeah a lot of people miss things like context, knowledge of the time period, and a proper understanding of theology when they talk shit about the Bible. I’m not Christian myself, but a close friend of mine is Catholic, and after hearing his clarifications on supposed Biblical Plotholes and how much more complicated the subject is… Well it definitely made me start squinting at oversimplifications concerning theology with a little more scrutiny.
Also there have been many problems with text being lost in translation or altered like several letters by Paul were merged at some point by a scribe and it was copied over as is.
The fact that anyone says “Ah, but if I word for word cite this part of the bible and ignore any allegorical or contextual meaning, it looks dumb! An entire 2000 year old faith DESTROYED FOREVER!” and they aren’t kidding cringes the heck out of me
“Tattoos are a sin.”
“Dad, you have a tattoo.”
“Yeah, but Jesus forgave me.”
I kind of want a “Leviticus 19:28” tattoo, but a bunch of idiot Christians will think I’m one of them.
Also, using Leviticus verses in the scope of Christianity. The OT is the Jewish bible. NT is all of Jesus’ stuff. Christians mix this up all the damn time.
I live in a neighborhood with lots of these Christian types. They don’t want “those gays” because Bible but Jesus forgave them for their divorce. They don’t want pride flags on people’s shirts but they wear clothing of different fabrics and different colors other than white because “those laws of God’s aren’t important because Jesus.”
It is just as cognitive trick to make people feel ok about their sins while still getting to point fingers at the rest of the world.
And really … how peaceful are people that think anyone not “with them” are going to suffer eternally ? What they mean is that they are going to torture you in this world while feeling fine about torturing you.
What really annoys me is that when you actually look at the Biblical arguments against supposed Homosexuality and the Historical Context…
The part God allegedly has a problem with are the hedonistic orgies and pederasty, he doesn’t really care about Paul and Bob just wanting to live in a cottage together, have a ceremony declaring them husband and husband, and raising a child together.
That “A man shall not lay with a man as he does a woman part” ? Originally said “Shall not lay with a child”, but thank King James for intentionally fucking that translation up.
That’s the thing about the Bible and the importance of Theology, it’s a really old book that’s been translated dozens of times.
Think about all the poems from the Middle Ages, originally written in English, that no longer make to people who don’t study the time period, or the various translation screw ups that we see in media from Japan that gets localized for America. Now multiply those by 20, and you understand why Bible Study is important for people of the faith, and why when you only have a surface level understanding you do really stupid things.
Any fellow Red Dwarf fans remember the Seventh Day Advent Hopists? This is the kind of shit that’s making fun of… and for those who don’t watch the show, the character Arnold Rimmer mentions his family having a really silly religion in which, due to his family taking the Bible literally yet having a misprint that had “hope” spelled “hop”, they believed Jesus wouldn’t love them if they didn’t spend every Sunday hopping around like morons. (Because they never thought to actually study the context and just took their own understanding of an ancient text at face value, in case you’re wondering how that’s relevant)
I can very easily make the argument that Jesus is completely cool with sucking dick (as long as you swallow instead of spit) simply because he once said that what goes into a man’s mouth isn’t as important as what comes out of it. If I both was a Christian and applied similar logic as the people I’m criticizing with this little rant, I could justify treating anyone who spat instead of swallowed when they gave head like absolute pond scum, even though that’s obviously not anything Jesus ever implied.
There’s actually an old joke making fun of this exact issue that I’m going to end this spiel on, because I’m just gonna go in circles if I keep letting myself prattle on.
“Did you know Jesus had a Honda, but he didn’t like to talk about it much? For it is written ‘I do not speak of my own Accord’”
tl;dr - The Bible isn’t as homophobic as The Far Right Xtians claim, they’re just Homophobes who refuse to learn anything about their own religion.
Except the one that actually makes the world a better place.
Not only hasn’t read the bible. Also hasn’t seen The Ten Commandments which definitely shows god creating a deadly plague. Charlton Heston would like a word.
Or Prince of Egypt which has one of the best soundtracks and great animation. I’m not a Christian but even I know about the damn plague that got those little Egyptian kids.
I was raised Christian, and i was considered a superstar in Sunday school because I knew the Bible stories better than most of the ‘teachers’
It’s honestly a good book to be fairly well versed in. You can cut through so much right wing bullshit with that knowledge. And it’s fun to call them out on it.
Oh I know, it’s more or less how I decided there was no god
Hell, not only does YHWH kill many innocent children, a big part of the story is how he literally brainwashes the pharaoh to have an excuse to do so. YHWH explicitly “hardened his heart, and the heart of his servants, that I might shew these my signs before him”
TFW god could’ve just softened his heart and avoided the whole thing altogether.
Or seen The Prince of Egypt. “The Plagues” is one of the best tracks on a hell of a soundtrack.
I send a pestilence, a plague
The ten plagues of Egypt:
Wait til she hears about cancer
This coming from the politician having orgies and cheating on her husband with her CrossFit gym owner.
I could give a shit, but the hypocrisy is real.
Exodus 20:17
You shall not covet your neighbor’s house. You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or his male or female servant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor.
MTG a cheater? No way, I always thought she was a woman of faith. SMH … /s
If god created humans, then anything that humans do is technically god’s fault… isn’t it?
no no don’t you see that’s a facile argument? sky daddy gave us free will to do evil so we had to choose him because… that is… because there… uhm
So as someone who read the bible quite a lot when he was still Catholic - Humanity gets knowledge of Good an Evil by eating from the Tree of Knowledge. Before then, there were no evil acts - that’s why it is called the Original Sin.
Like I get what you’re going for but if you’re going to try to parody actual religious claims you should know the basics.
Nah, they have that covered with the free will clause.
So God is not omniscient?
Now you’re getting into Calvinist territory lol
deleted by creator
I was raised Catholic, went to a Catholic high school (was voted most likely to become a priest), and now I’m firmly an atheist. I read the bible multiple times and had a few bible study classes.
It’s consistently amazing to me how little most christians know about what’s in the bible. It’s always entertaining to see their reactions when I correct them during an argument, or even when they say things like “The Bible says God won’t give you more than you can handle” or “God helps those who help themselves.” Those things, and lots of others that people attribute to the bible aren’t in there anywhere. A lot of times it feels like I’m discussing a movie with someone who only read a review of it.
I was raised catholic. Nursery, primary, high school and sixth form. Church every week. Extra lessons at the church in preparation for the sacraments. I was even an altar server for a time. I think I must have pretty lucky with the parish priest/my teachers though because I the most important thing that was drilled into us was the “golden rule” - treat others as you wish to be treated. Even as a child I knew the Old Testament stories were just that - stories. We were never ever taught that god hated anyone no matter what. We were also taught about other religions and not in “these idiots got it wrong” way. Judaism and Islam were taught as basically the same as Christianity but with a different idea of who Jesus was. I took Christian theology and philosophy A level and had a fantastic teacher. We spent hours debating the existence of god and we were never told we were wrong if we no longer believed by then. There’s a name for it I’ve forgotten now, but we compared the gospels to look for inconsistencies and examined what that meant for their validity. You were never expected just to believe for beliefs sake. I’m not catholic anymore, I have too many issues with the Church. But it’s shocking how unchristian the current brand of American fundamental/evangelical Christians are. It’s just so far from anything I was ever taught.
Most, if not all, monotheistic religions can be very loving or very hateful, depending on what the people make of it. At least that is my personal experience in Catholic Christianity and Islam.
Yeah I grew up in the South and it didn’t give me a very positive impression of the faith, and well I still adamantly claim that I’m not a Christian.
However, I do have some respect for the faith and a large part of that was meeting someone who is now a close friend of mine. One of the kindest, most patient, and sincere individuals I’ve ever met, a Catholic man whom I will not mention by name. I told him about my own experiences with the faith, and how his being a good person made no sense to me, that’s when he started explaining how he understood the faith, how he practiced it, and how it was meant to be practiced. That kind of thing definitely takes some of the “Edgy Anti-Theist” out of you.
Religiously speaking nowadays, I consider myself Agnostic leaning Buddhist if anything.
deleted by creator
I have a couple of friends who are of the faith, many express similar distastefulness for the hateful ones. They tend to refer to them as “Xtians”, a term they use to mean “Christians, without Christ” hence “Xtian”
