**official politics and religion thread**

[zwa]

If the Gospels are supposed to be, well, gospel, why are there so many self contradictory statements?

Mark and Luke give geneaologies of Joseph. This was to prove the connection to King David. Which is a little odd since if you follow the whole virgin birth thing he was cuckolded by the big man himself and had no real relation. Anyway, one gives 28 generations between between Jesus and David, the other 42. No-biggy. This is only the inerrant word of GOD. So, one of them missed a few in the list. Except the only common names on the lists are David and Joseph.

This is only one example of numerous self contradictory claims in the Bible, which people claim is the inerrant word of God. How can you take the claim that Jesus is the son of God seriously 'because it says so in the bible', when so much of the stupid book is demonstrably false?

You believe that the Bible is the literal (or inspired) word of God and that Jesus is the Son of God-and you believe these propositions because you think they are true, not merely because they make you feel good. You may wonder how it is possible for a person like myself to find these sorts of assertions ridiculous. While it is famously difficult for atheists and believers to communicate about these matters, I am confident that I can give you a very clear sense of what it feels like to be an atheist.Consider: every devout Muslim has the same reasons for being a Muslim that you now have for being a Christian. And yet, you know exactly what it is like not to find these reasons compelling. On virtually every page, the Qur'an declares that it is the perfect word of the Creator of the universe. Muslims believe this as fully as you believe the Bible's account of itself. There is a vast literature describing the life of Muhammad that, from the Muslim point of view, proves his unique status as the Prophet of God. While Muhammad did not claim to be divine, he claimed to offer the most perfect revelation of God's will. He also assured his followers that Jesus was not divine (Qur'an 5:71-75; 19:30-38) and that anyone who believed otherwise would spend eternity in hell. Muslims are convinced that Muhammad's pronouncements on these subjects, as on all others, are infallible.

Why don't you find these claims convincing? Why don't you lose any sleep over whether or not you should convert to Islam? Please take a moment to reflect on this. You know exactly what it is like to be an atheist with respect to Islam. Isn't it obvious that Muslims are not being honest in their evaluation of the evidence? Isn't it obvious that anyone who thinks that the Qur'an is the perfect word of the Creator of the universe has not read the book very critically? Isn't it obvious that Muslims have developed a mode of discourse that seeks to preserve dogma, generation after generation, rather than question it? Yes, these things are obvious. Understand that the way you view Islam is precisely the way every Muslim views Christianity. And it is the way I view all religions.
From: http://richarddawkins.net/article,13...ian,Sam-Harris

[paul_r]

Originally Posted by zwa

If the Gospels are supposed to be, well, gospel, why are there so many self contradictory statements?

Mark and Luke give genealogies of Joseph. This was to prove the connection to King David. Which is a little odd since if you follow the whole virgin birth thing he was cuckolded by the big man himself and had no real relation. Anyway, one gives 28 generations between between Jesus and David, the other 42. No-biggy. This is only the inerrant word of GOD. So, one of them missed a few in the list. Except the only common names on the lists are David and Joseph.

This is only one example of numerous self contradictory claims in the Bible, which people claim is the inerrant word of God. How can you take the claim that Jesus is the son of God seriously 'because it says so in the bible', when so much of the stupid book is demonstrably false?

the gospels were written, 70-100 years after the events and 4 were chosen to be official by the church.

[paul_r]

Originally Posted by DaveNJ

Abraham didn't write the first 5 books. Perhaps you should bone up on the Bible before saying it's all fact, when you obviously have some Old Testament issues. Most of the Old Testament takes place after Abraham's death, making it fundamentally impossible for him to write it. The actual belief is that God gave the Torah to the Israelites, so the Old Testament's author is God.

Also, Spooky, while lab tests have created amino acids, they've failed to produce several of the key building blocks to the formation of single-cell organisms. Not saying that over time science won't prove it, but right now the "life from non-life" is a weak theory. It is a theory, but it's unstable. I think it's presumptuous of us to think that our science right now is so fantastic, to be honest. I'm sure that in 100 years we'll look like Copernicus, thinking we revolved around the sun.

I'll just point you to some background reading

"Creation
On the first day, we unplugged our brains"
http://www.steve.gb.com/rants/creation.html

[da_ticklah]

http://www.boingboing.net/2006/10/04...entifies_.html



didn't spooky telly me they were the only even handed US news cast

[Kodit]

I get kinda scared when people say that the bible is gods words and that they follow them litterally. Does that mean that when your kids are disobediant you go outside dig a nice little hole put them in it and then throw rocks at them?

[deuce]

Originally Posted by Kodit

I get kinda scared when people say that the bible is gods words and that they follow them litterally. Does that mean that when your kids are disobediant you go outside dig a nice little hole put them in it and then throw rocks at them?

only if you are a good parent. most parents don't give a crap nowadays

[DaveNJ]

Originally Posted by Kodit

I get kinda scared when people say that the bible is gods words and that they follow them litterally. Does that mean that when your kids are disobediant you go outside dig a nice little hole put them in it and then throw rocks at them?

Yes, although the hole need not be small, and you can make your kid dig the hole, like Keith's dad did. As long as it's 3 feet in diameter and three feet deep, you're good. Then make them dig up rocks off the property, and take them and throw them at your kid while he stands in the hole. Repeat until your child has a show as popular as Keith's.

[DaveNJ]

Originally Posted by paul_r

I'll just point you to some background reading

"Creation
On the first day, we unplugged our brains"
http://www.steve.gb.com/rants/creation.html

It's interesting, and I'm not saying abiogenesis is not possible, but it has yet to be verified on any level other than the very first. Creation of amino acids from an acid cloud and lightning is possible, but creation of whole live organisms? It's still a toss up. Panspermia is also a weak theory, because even if you believe in panspermia you have to believe in abiogenesis somewhere, maybe not on Earth, but somewhere. It all comes down to belief, and in the end it's best to know where you stand and simply enjoy that fact.

[william]

In the Interesting News Items thread adrian wrote

Originally Posted by adrian

In philosophical terms most religions have a disdain for sex that is based on the premise that it is an "animal" act and that humans were created by god as a greater being.

It is also an easy target for church leaders to hang shame and weakness on.
While declaring themselves celibate church leaders proclaim themselves to have transcended the most basic of human urges.

Sex therefore becomes a frailty and a shameful reminder that we are sinners.
Therefore sex should only be performed in secret with the lights out and definately only in the missionary position. - Anything else being animalistic.

Although I believe the baptists forbid sex standing up on the grounds that it could lead to dancing.

Interesting take, though it was the god who imposed the animal act upon his creation and one can argue that gluttony is a greater sin.

I recall that the rule of celibacy came forth from every escalating fiefdoms as religious titles were passed down from father to son. But I agree, it's an easy target.

Followers of Indian tantrism arrived at the opposite conclusion - sex is seen as a way of meeting god - of enlightement. It is a basic and powerful human need, one that the god instilled upon his ultimate creation. Animals don't seem to have as powerful a drive as man.

God therefore must have taken a good and enhanced it for man.

[paul_r]

faith is the belief in the implausible and improbable, so did g-d put the dinosaur bones in the mix to test the righteous, or did some random god make the universe by jerking off.

/shrug