Just got the feeling you're putting words in my mouth.
no
What do you think are the tales?
Just got the feeling you're putting words in my mouth.
no
What do you think are the tales?
Carpin's influence was his mom being the church slut.
This is discussion club. Not P&N.
No personal attacks. Be nice to each other in here or you can have access to DC removed.
esquared
Anandtech Forum Director
This is discussion club. Not P&N.
No personal attacks. Be nice to each other in here or you can have access to DC removed.
esquared
Anandtech Forum Director
Last edited by a moderator:
alzan
Diamond Member
- May 21, 2003
- 3,860
- 2
- 0
Oh let's see (in no particular order): Adam & Eve being thrown out of Paradise, Jonah and the whale, Noah's Ark, the Plagues of Egypt, Pillar of Fire, parting of the Red Sea, the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah and Lot's wife being turned to a pillar of salt, Daniel in the lions den, feeding thousands of people with a loaf of bread and two fishes, Jesus walking on the water, Jesus being G-d in human form, the entire book of Revelation, etc.
alzan
Diamond Member
- May 21, 2003
- 3,860
- 2
- 0
No..It's how he got the way he is.
His mother was single..very religious..
He probably knew she was having adulterous relations with the preacher and others..
all the while being a hypocrite..
So when Carpin became of age he rebelled and found Atheism,embracing it wholeheartedly.
Thus becoming the vitriolic,patronizing troll we all know and love today.
This is discussion club. Not P&N.
No personal attacks. Be nice to each other in here or you can have access to DC removed.
esquared
Anandtech Forum Director
His mother was single..very religious..
He probably knew she was having adulterous relations with the preacher and others..
all the while being a hypocrite..
So when Carpin became of age he rebelled and found Atheism,embracing it wholeheartedly.
Thus becoming the vitriolic,patronizing troll we all know and love today.
This is discussion club. Not P&N.
No personal attacks. Be nice to each other in here or you can have access to DC removed.
esquared
Anandtech Forum Director
Last edited by a moderator:
- Feb 23, 2005
- 11,940
- 542
- 126
Just marvelous. Christian morality exemplified. If this is a product of Christian religion then any decent person will want no part of it, and any person taking part in it cannot call himself a decent human being.
Last edited:
- Feb 23, 2005
- 11,940
- 542
- 126
We have egos because we feel inferior. Our ego is identification with what we believe to be wonderful things, like the best team, the best nation, the best religion, the best of anything, any kind of belief that gives us a feeling that we are better by believing it.
It is only natural then that atheists are won't leg go of their atheism or the religious of their religion, because it is there to protect them from feelings of inferiority. But because there is this motivation to believe, there is a lack of objectivity. We do not see our basic assumptions as only assumptions we feel rest on things that make us feel good. I believe that as long as we do not really know what we feel, what we think is motivated unconsciously. Without self knowledge, self understanding, and self confrontation, there can be no real objective knowledge. It's just one person's warm and fuzzy against another's. The perquisite for the understanding of the notion of God, no God, can't be had properly without ego death. There is no truth, there is only emptiness. Only is abject surrender and infinite pain does the ego burn away. And when that happens, the grace of love that is totally other can appear. Only the empty tea cup can be filled and it is grace and not the ego that fills it.
It is only natural then that atheists are won't leg go of their atheism or the religious of their religion, because it is there to protect them from feelings of inferiority. But because there is this motivation to believe, there is a lack of objectivity. We do not see our basic assumptions as only assumptions we feel rest on things that make us feel good. I believe that as long as we do not really know what we feel, what we think is motivated unconsciously. Without self knowledge, self understanding, and self confrontation, there can be no real objective knowledge. It's just one person's warm and fuzzy against another's. The perquisite for the understanding of the notion of God, no God, can't be had properly without ego death. There is no truth, there is only emptiness. Only is abject surrender and infinite pain does the ego burn away. And when that happens, the grace of love that is totally other can appear. Only the empty tea cup can be filled and it is grace and not the ego that fills it.
I understand why you'd say that about those, but Revelation is interesting.
Revelation 1:1 says that the contents of the book is presented "in signs", indicating that the book is symbolic in meaning -- it's the only book of the Bible which makes such an opening statement.
Most people don't read that verse, and hence, take it perfectly literally throughout.
The challenging aspect of Revelation is that it forces one to abandon orthodox contemporary thinking in exchange for rigorous cognitive exercise and abstract consideration to properly ascertain the not-so-obvious meaning laying deeply below the surface. Its an intellectually challenging exercise not easily embraced by those not equipped to handle such a tall order.
Personally, I love the book of Revelation...because the meaning isn't glaringly "obvious".
sandorski
No Lifer
- Oct 10, 1999
- 70,791
- 6,350
- 126
I understand why you'd say that about those, but Revelation is interesting.
Revelation 1:1 says that the contents of the book is presented "in signs", indicating that the book is symbolic in meaning -- it's the only book of the Bible which makes such an opening statement.
Most people don't read that verse, and hence, take it perfectly literally throughout.
The challenging aspect of Revelation is that it forces one to abandon orthodox contemporary thinking in exchange for rigorous cognitive exercise and abstract consideration to properly ascertain the not-so-obvious meaning laying deeply below the surface. Its an intellectually challenging exercise not easily embraced by those not equipped to handle such a tall order.
Personally, I love the book of Revelation...because the meaning isn't glaringly "obvious".
Sounds like something a fan of Nostradamus would say.
alzan
Diamond Member
- May 21, 2003
- 3,860
- 2
- 0
I understand why you'd say that about those, but Revelation is interesting.
Revelation 1:1 says that the contents of the book is presented "in signs", indicating that the book is symbolic in meaning -- it's the only book of the Bible which makes such an opening statement.
Most people don't read that verse, and hence, take it perfectly literally throughout.
The challenging aspect of Revelation is that it forces one to abandon orthodox contemporary thinking in exchange for rigorous cognitive exercise and abstract consideration to properly ascertain the not-so-obvious meaning laying deeply below the surface. Its an intellectually challenging exercise not easily embraced by those not equipped to handle such a tall order.
Personally, I love the book of Revelation...because the meaning isn't glaringly "obvious".
It has an interesting narrative; I like to think of it as the oldest fantasy fiction novella, dragons, four horseman, massive death and destruction, all meted out by a deity who's ticked off at humanity because of the way he created them.
Well, you did acknowledge that he could "strike them down at any moment", so sure.
But I would say the biggest challenge for me is actually understanding the meaning of the "signs".
It takes some actual consideration of all the Bible to get a grasp of it.
Which, in part, is why the Bible has credibility with me -- it doesn't remotely attempt to hide the faults of either its writers nor those whom it speaks about.
I like the candor, and it makes the Bible more humanizing because we can actually relate to many of the people mentioned in various ways.
Honestly, if the Bible presented all its characters and writers as completely pious and supremely faithful men and women without blemish, then I'd find it much harder to believe...no one's perfect.
alzan
Diamond Member
- May 21, 2003
- 3,860
- 2
- 0
I was using that as an example of fictional writing, not as any kind of tie-back to the alleged power of the Christian deity. As a tie-back though it would seem to put G-d at odds with his creation; after all they didn't ask to be created.
I mean, if a given person were to be introduced to Christianity by being told of the first man and woman being thrown out of Paradise, the Great Flood, the destruction of peoples and nations who didn't believe as G-d wanted them to believe, Revelations, etc., even within the context of what lessons G-d/Jesus was trying to teach; then I think that person would say "What's the point of worshipping a deity who would judge me, one of his creations, so harshly?" In other words, you attract more flies with honey than you do with vinegar.
What's the better and more effective lesson; the example given above or the alleged teachings of Christ, "Love yourself, love your neighbor" and "Treat others as you wish to be treated."?
I knew what you were doing, and I responded the way I did to expose the disingenuousness of your entire presence here.
Makes me wonder though, if this is how you really feel, then why engage in a discussion of scripture with someone like myself?
You just seem to be wasting your own time.
Last edited:
alzan
Diamond Member
- May 21, 2003
- 3,860
- 2
- 0
Says the pot to the kettle.
It's the disingenuousness of the writers, editors and promulgators of the Bible with which you should be more concerned.
Like I said before the various tales of the Bible are just that, tales, and no different then the tales of other "holy" writings. Sure there's good morals and tips for living a less stressful life but the entirety of those lessons could be condensed to a one page document that's a lot easier to memorize and follow. Wrapping them up in mysticism, death, destruction and pain is an exercise of power and control, and more then a little ghoulish or macabre.
Last edited:
I'm only going to use one example to show how uneducated the author of that material is:
This is probably one of the most ignorant -- God didn't forbid "sister" marriage until AFTER the Mosaic Law was instituted.
In other words, there was no law against Abraham doing that unit AFTER Moses lead Israel out of Egypt, which was a few hundred years after Abraham died -- there is NO contradiction.
Do your own research, instead of listening to idiots, slowspider.
EDIT: If you think I'm going to address each and every one of those points, then you're kidding yourself. I just chose one to encourage those who are sincerely interested to DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH!
Last edited:
I agree, some of them in that list are pretty flimsy. But some aren't. Just because you can argue against that one, that doesn't invalidate any of other contradictions listed.
*edit - No, I didn't expect you would address each of the many biblical contradictions listed. That'd take a long time as there are so many. I asked if you thought those were a matter of perspective. You seem rather defensive, kinda hard to hold a position in a discussion when logic, critical thinking, and evidence aren't on your side, I guess.
*edit - No, I didn't expect you would address each of the many biblical contradictions listed. That'd take a long time as there are so many. I asked if you thought those were a matter of perspective. You seem rather defensive, kinda hard to hold a position in a discussion when logic, critical thinking, and evidence aren't on your side, I guess.
Last edited:
alzan
Diamond Member
- May 21, 2003
- 3,860
- 2
- 0
What else would you expect from a sociopathic and psychopathic deity and those who "penned" his words?
It doesn't automatically invalidate the rest, no, but it calls into question the education of the author and whether or not he's just "looking" for something remotely contradictory.
*edit - No, I didn't expect you would address each of the many biblical contradictions listed. That'd take a long time as there are so many. I asked if you thought those were a matter of perspective. You seem rather defensive, kinda hard to hold a position in a discussion when logic, critical thinking, and evidence aren't on your side, I guess.
Not defensive at all. Just advising people to do their own research and not wholly listen to obvious anti-Biblical sites.
I would never take a site called "evil Bible" seriously anyway.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter