Deuteronomy chapter 13.

God directs his people to kill all of the inhabitants of any city where the people are teaching people to serve other Gods.

Religious intolerance to the hilt.

And this could certainly be used by a King to justify things like Crusades or any other kind of religious intolerance.

~~~~

By the way, I've met every challenge that you guys have ever thrown at me without fail for several years now. Face it, the Bible is indefensible.

And look at me!

Who am I?

Do I reject the moral values of Jesus himself?

No. On the contrary I point out that they are the exact same values taught by Buddhism, Confucianism, Taoism, and so forth. I show that these moral values have been around long before Jesus and most certainly did not originate with him.

Do I teach atheism or support it?

No. Not at all. On the contrary, I totally support a spiritual view of life.

Do I condone all that is good and righteous?

Yes, absolutely.

What I reject is religious bigotry being shoved down people's throats in the name of Jesus. I personally think it's disgusting.

So I stand for all that is wholesome and good, yet the Christians will renounce me because I refuse to support their religious bigotry.

That's a real shame.

If they truly value brotherly love they should embrace me with open arms and recognize that this is precisely what I stand for, and why I fight against religious bigotry which defies brotherly love and instead creates an atmosphere of brotherly hate in the name of Jesus no less.

You Christians have demonstrated to me that there is no love to be found in your religion. All that exists in your religion is bigotry and hatred toward anyone who refuses to join the cult.

And how far would I have to go to find another uber Christian who would say the same about _your_ claims?

Take Revelations, for example. It makes so many wild and ambiguous claims that it's no wonder different Christians will say different things about what EXACTLY is being 'revealed'. It's the Texas Sharpshooter effect-- claims are made and bullseyes are painted around them after the fact ( if there are any facts).

-Kerry O.

Close but no cigar...
You claim that God directs his people to kill. I suggest you read that chapter to the end.

And in no way does that chapter suggest killing a heathen simply for being a heathen.

Double-fail

And there are current laws in the US against the same type of actions although I don't think any carry the death penalty. It's called "soliciting" and it's just as illegal to solicit another to commit a crime as it is to commit the crime yourself.

There would be no satan without the Christian god so yea, god definitely exists for satanists.

There isn't much difference from the flying spaghetti monster and the religious ideals of god now is there?

This is only one of the contradictory ideals in the major religions.

If you want to lead people down the merry trail after the Pied piper all you have to do is be ambiguous and confusing and tell them that it is because the message is too large for their meager understanding. It works well from what I can see.

It doesn't do any good to respond to your requests for proof because you always remain in denial the proofs anyway.

There was nothing in the verses I've referred to about soliciting anyone to commit crimes. It speaks solely to the issues of people asking people to serve other Gods.

So your response to those verses doesn't even make any sense.

My point stands. These verses could indeed be used by a Christian Kings in medieval times to justify an all-out attack on any society that preaches other religions that don't worship the Biblical God.

Couple that with the fact that Jesus said that Till heaven and earth pass not one jot nor one tittle shall in no wise pass from law, and you've got complete justification for going out and burning down pagan temples and killing pagans. (Which is PRECISELY what the Christians did!), And that was even before the crusades!

And it can all be justified via the Bible if a person is so inclined to use the book for that purpose.

That's the only point I need to make Peter. I don't even need to agree with those interpretations or justifications. All I need to do is recognize how someone else could see that in these scriptures and that's enough right there to recognize that the scriptures themselves cannot be the word of any all-wise God, because an all-wise God would have have left open such gaping loop-holes.

The only thing I need to show is that these writings cannot be the writings of an "all-wise" god.

And I've done that repeatedly.

Well, I certainly agree with Spider about what Cowboy said.

To tell people they they know they are purposefully rejecting God is absolutely going to convince people that Cowboy is telling lies.

After all, people KNOW what they know. And for Cowboy to pretend that he knows more than they do about their very own mind is arrogance beyond belief.

Tell me that I know that I'm rejecting God and all you've done is demonstrate to me that you belong in a mental institution.

"Deuteronomy chapter 13.

God directs his people to kill all of the inhabitants of any city where the people are teaching people to serve other Gods."

So, after re-reading that chapter, do you deny that you are incorrect in your above quoted words? First, that God gave the instructions. Second, that "teaching people" was incorrect instead of "teaching the Hebrews themselves to serve other gods". Which leads to yet another question... Do you condone the human sacrifices that were commited by those people?

You keep using a strawman that the writings were written by God. Not one person besides you makes that claim. It's well known they were written by men.

And I never want to hear you question the definition of pagan again. You constantly say we don't agree on it, then use it the exact same way you object to it being used by myself.


It is you who denies proof. The only problem you have with me is that I don't agree with your views, not that I am denying proof...

Well excuse me.

If you're saying that the Bible is not the word of God, but it's merely the words of men, then I'd say we're in 100% agreement because that's what I've been saying all along.

In fact, I have never accepted the claim that the Bible is the "Word of God"

god was created in the image of man....and is only limited by the fervour attached to that image.

For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts."—Hebrews 8:10


AND WRITE THEM IN THEIR HEARTS.

The bible itself is not the "word" of god in exacts no. What is contained in the bible is the word of God though.

"Cloak of Righteousness" is a subjective concept relative to a persons interpretation of 'right'.

Bet a beliver in Islam has a vastly different idea of what is 'righteous' then the one you hold dear...

indeed many 'christians' hold vastly different ideas of correct 'righteousness' than do you.

CowboyGH...

I believe that our Conscience is what is being talked about here, do we agree on that?

What I disagree with you on is that non-believers know the Bible is true. I don't believe that and I don't know of any scriptures that would support that contention. The problem is this: How does someone know the Bible is true, if he or she has never even heard of it or read it? I agree that the natural law is known to all men and have argued that in these forums, so you are preaching to the choir on that.

Jesus is the cloak of righteousness. If "Christians" disagree with me on that, then they do so in opposition to the scriptures (which might be why you put the word in quotes...). We are still the same people under the cloak, but God doesn't see our sins, but rather our acceptance of Jesus as our savior.

Isaiah described God as a furnace that destroys anything that is unrighteous. The Bible describes angels using their wings to shield themselves from God's holiness. It is through Jesus that mankind will be able to stand in God's presence without being destroyed. God's perfection is so great that the imperfect cannot exist in the same place as God.

Hewbrews 10:16
This the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;
------------------------

And this is why people have a good conscience regardless if they believe in our father or not. They know the laws and are obedient without even knowing of such. They just act upon things as they know, which the knowledge has been placed their by our father.

The "bible" isn't in the hearts of man. The "covenant" that our father has made with us is. Again that explains why one would have a good conscience and see things in a loving manner just as our father. May not have ever read the bible or even heard of the bible, but still knows what he/she should or shouldn't do. The bible itself is more or less history. The history contains the knowledge of the covenant yes, but the knowledge itself of the covenant is in our hearts and mind already.

If god destroys anything that is unrighteous nothing but the righteous would exist upon the earth.

As this is not the case 'righteous' must therefore be a subjective human term and not a portion of god.

If Jesus was or is the cloak of 'righteousness' then Islam could not exist by your reasoning (being destroyed by the furnace of god)... This is obviously not the case as Islam is - by count of persons claiming it - larger than christianity).

as I am made in gods image I need not jesus to stand between me and god...

God stands with me... as He stands with you.

With god as my cloak I need not be 'righteous'...

I must simply 'be' and I am.

1) We aren't in the presence of God, so we aren't destroyed. See how that works?
2) Islam has over a billion fewer followers than Christianity. I'm not sure how that has any impact on what I said, but you brought it up.
3) Stop talking like Yoda.