It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

'Duck Dynasty' Star Imagines Vivid Rape And Murder Scenario For Atheist Family

page: 7
31
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 12:10 PM
link   
a reply to: peskyhumans

I could quote extracts from "Moby Dick" to you in the same way as your using biblical scripture in the post!. You would ignore that If I did, however, I give as much credence to your biblical text as I would to Moby Dick! Your wasting your time!




posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 12:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: flammadraco
a reply to: StalkerSolent

The Pagans managed perfectly well with having a moral compass before the religious nuts spread the word of Christ!


Indeed. The pagans also believed in a transcendent moral order.



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 12:16 PM
link   
You can cry, shout, and gnash your teeth as much as you want. The fact is, in Christianity Jesus is the Christ, who is the son of God. What he tells us to do is the word of God. If he says that marriage is between a man and a woman, and is an act of God, then that is exactly what makes marriage a Christian sacrament. Only Christianity has the sacrament of marriage, which is an act of the God of Abraham.

You can compare marriage to pagan weddings as much as you want, but that will not reduce the significance of Christian marriage.

It seems you won't accept anything I say, so there is no point in continuing this any further.



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 12:17 PM
link   
a reply to: undo

Thanks!

It's a fascinating topic



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 12:18 PM
link   
a reply to: peskyhumans

Um, that's a "Birds and Bees" talk about where babies come from, not a marriage ceremony treatise. What happens when a man and a woman get together? They make a baby, two flesh made into one! Married people don't really become one flesh! LOL

The scripture is a polemic against divorce, or desertion, not an treatise on what a Christian marriage is. As a matter fact, Jesus was condemning Jewish law that allowed for divorce. Jesus didn't create marriage, he forbid spousal desertion. It's ironic, because Jesus called for many people to leave their families behind and follow him.

I'm still waiting for you to provide me with a biblical cannon of what a Christian, or Jewish, marriage consisted of. Where was it preformed and by whom, what were the vows or oaths and by whom, etc.

BTW, are Christian sacramental marriages still pre-arranged by the father of the bride, with or without her consent? Are Christians still married if either party aren't virgins?
edit on 26-3-2015 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 12:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

Well dropping the adjective makes it vaguer. I guess TECHNICALLY you can describe the idea of natural dignity with the description of regular dignity, but I kind of see that as using a set to describe a subset (ex: using the description of canines to describe wolves).


You're right, dropping the adjective probably does make it vaguer. It doesn't help that "dignity" has more than one simple meaning. Hopefully I explained what I meant



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 12:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: peskyhumans
You can cry, shout, and gnash your teeth as much as you want. The fact is, in Christianity Jesus is the Christ, who is the son of God. What he tells us to do is the word of God. If he says that marriage is between a man and a woman, and is an act of God, then that is exactly what makes marriage a Christian sacrament. Only Christianity has the sacrament of marriage, which is an act of the God of Abraham.

You can compare marriage to pagan weddings as much as you want, but that will not reduce the significance of Christian marriage.

It seems you won't accept anything I say, so there is no point in continuing this any further.


Not everyone is Christian though, so why should your belief system be imposed onto the rest of society?



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 12:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: StalkerSolent

originally posted by: flammadraco
a reply to: StalkerSolent

The Pagans managed perfectly well with having a moral compass before the religious nuts spread the word of Christ!


Indeed. The pagans also believed in a transcendent moral order.


Pagans believed in gods. That's about it. They certainly didn't believe that their gods were perfect or sinless.

Here's the "Pagan 10 Commandments"

The Ten Commandments of Solon (founder of Athenian democracy)
1. Trust good character more than promises.
2. Do not speak falsely.
3. Do good things.
4. Do not be hasty in making friends, but do not abandon them once made.
5. Learn to obey before you command.
6. When giving advice, do not recommend what is most pleasing, but what is most useful.
7. Make reason your supreme commander.
8. Do not associate with people who do bad things.
9. Honor the gods.
10. Have regard for your parents.
edit on 26-3-2015 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 12:30 PM
link   
a reply to: peskyhumans




You can cry, shout, and gnash your teeth as much as you want. The fact is, in Christianity Jesus is the Christ, who is the son of God. What he tells us to do is the word of God. If he says that marriage is between a man and a woman, and is an act of God, then that is exactly what makes marriage a Christian sacrament. Only Christianity has the sacrament of marriage, which is an act of the God of Abraham.


Secular society doesn't care about what Christians think marriages are, or how sacred they are, in their eyes. Lots of non-Christians get married everyday, and now LGBT couples, Christian or not, will also be getting married. That has no affect of how Christians should view their own marriages.



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 12:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: peskyhumans
You can cry, shout, and gnash your teeth as much as you want. The fact is, in Christianity Jesus is the Christ, who is the son of God. What he tells us to do is the word of God. If he says that marriage is between a man and a woman, and is an act of God, then that is exactly what makes marriage a Christian sacrament. Only Christianity has the sacrament of marriage, which is an act of the God of Abraham.

You can compare marriage to pagan weddings as much as you want, but that will not reduce the significance of Christian marriage.

It seems you won't accept anything I say, so there is no point in continuing this any further.


If it was as you said and Christianity only had the sacrament of marriage then it would not be recognized by US government.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,"


So there you go. If things were recognized as you wanted them to be then every marriage within the US would by law be effectively annulled.

It is a good thing you are off your rocker and have nothing that can back up your statements because that would be a mess.



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 12:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: flammadraco

originally posted by: undo
a reply to: flammadraco

you mean they won't be allowed to vote their consciences?


Not if their consciences is dictated by two thousand year old scripture, then no. In the same way I would not want someone in power who used "Moby Dick" as a source for their conscience.



everyone's conscience is dictated by old codes, to one degree or another. for example, survival of the fittest mechanisms, charity, justice, the impropriety of lying to gain advantage, work ethics, betterment ethics, laws governing adultery (i do believe i saw one in the code of hammarabi) and property law (so people can't just come up and take your house and give it to their uncle or second wife or mistress, etc), and so on. just because something is old, doesn't mean it's bad.



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 12:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: StalkerSolent
I'm not having it "both ways"! Either there is an objective moral stand that applies to everyone all the time, or there isn't.


Exactly! And then you're suggesting that other moral standards are immoral. To claim that other moral standards are immoral implies that there is an objective moral standard you are measuring them against.



There is no objective moral standard, and all the examples of moral standards that you've provided are subjective, not wrong. They're subjective because they don't apply to everyone all the time.

Do you understand the difference?


Sure I do.



The 10 Commandments require the worship of a God. Do you think that worship is a question of morality?


Yes...



The 10 Commandments say not to kill, but then the following commandments command its adherents to kill.


It says not to murder...



The God of the Bible was not the god of everyone. There were other nations who worshipped other gods. The "God was Israel" was their exclusive God. Jesus, supposedly, came through the God of Israel for the people of Israel. He didn't "come" for gentiles or "Samaritan dogs". He came for "his sheep" not for those whose "father is Satan", or those whom are among the "goats" and "tares". Christianity is NOT inclusive, or objective.


Eh...no, that's not really true.



The Bible clearly condones slavery, and Christian used the Bible to justify slavery until they no longer could. Christianity is riddled with corruption and so full of contradictions that if you twist your head just right, Jesus gives you permission to do just about anything, in his name! But, one thing that Christianity doesn't give us is a consistent set of "objective moral standards" that are alway true for everyone all the time!


And yet, oddly enough, Christians have been at the forefront of the anti-slavery movement and in favor of "objective moral standards" throughout most of history. Amazing, huh?

I'd add that people can justify about anything using anything if they twist their head just right




You can't say that the Bible provides an "objective moral standard", when the morals proposed are considered immoral by today's standards. At best, the Bible provides a subjective set of morals that work sometimes for some people.


On what basis can you claim that is true?



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 01:01 PM
link   
originally posted by: windword



Pagans believed in gods. That's about it.


That's pretty important.



They certainly didn't believe that their gods were perfect or sinless.


Likely depends on who you asked. Wasn't it Socrates who asked the famous question "is something good because the gods approve of it, or do the gods approve of it because it is good?"
edit on 26-3-2015 by StalkerSolent because: Formatting




posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 01:06 PM
link   
a reply to: peskyhumans


You can cry, shout, and gnash your teeth as much as you want. The fact is, in Christianity Jesus is the Christ, who is the son of God. What he tells us to do is the word of God. If he says that marriage is between a man and a woman, and is an act of God, then that is exactly what makes marriage a Christian sacrament. Only Christianity has the sacrament of marriage, which is an act of the God of Abraham.

You can compare marriage to pagan weddings as much as you want, but that will not reduce the significance of Christian marriage.

It seems you won't accept anything I say, so there is no point in continuing this any further.


The above is a good example of why we need to rework the way history is taught in schools.



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 01:06 PM
link   
a reply to: undo

But it doesn't work, explain to me why only 0.07% of the U.S. prison population are classed as Atheist?

27 percent identify as Protestant and 24 percent Catholic. Obviously religious morals has not worked for these folks.

Probably goes some way to prove that one does not need Relgious dogma to have morals. I've very high morals but thats something that comes from within and empathy being the most important aspect.

Unfortunately "empathy" is something that most religious folk are sadly lacking in today's society.



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 01:11 PM
link   
a reply to: StalkerSolent


Christians have been on the forefront of anti slavery movements


Except for murder, slavery has got to be one of the most immoral things a person can do. Yet slavery is rampant throughout the Bible in both the Old and New Testaments. The Bible clearly approves of slavery in many passages, and it goes so far as to tell how to obtain slaves, how hard you can beat them, and when you can have sex with the female slaves.

So why are so many Christians ignoring this part of the bible but so hung up on other parts?

edit on 26.3.2015 by flammadraco because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 01:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: flammadraco
a reply to: StalkerSolent


Christians have been on the forefront of anti slavery movements


Except for murder, slavery has got to be one of the most immoral things a person can do. Yet slavery is rampant throughout the Bible in both the Old and New Testaments. The Bible clearly approves of slavery in many passages, and it goes so far as to tell how to obtain slaves, how hard you can beat them, and when you can have sex with the female slaves.

So why are so many Christians ignoring this part of the bible but so hung up on other parts?


Maybe because there are instructions in the Bible explaining the purpose of the Old Testament law (not morality, but law) and why it was no longer relevant? This is pretty basic Christian doctrine. It comes out if you read the whole Bible.



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 01:32 PM
link   
a reply to: StalkerSolent

Try again! There is Slavery in the New Testament as well. Children were still being sold into slavery in the first century.

Matthew 18:25: "But forasmuch as he had not to pay, his lord commanded him to be sold, and his wife, and children, and all that he had, and payment to be made."

Priests still owned slaves:

Mark 14:66: "And as Peter was beneath in the palace, there cometh one of the maids of the high priest:"

Jesus is recorded as mentioning slaves in one of his parables. It is important to realise that the term "servant" or "maid" in the King James Version of the Bible refers to slaves, not employees like a butler, cook, or maid. Here, a slave which did not follow his owner's will would be beaten with many lashes of a whip. A slave who was unaware of his owner's will, but who did not behave properly, would also be beaten, but with fewer stripes.

This would have been a marvelous opportunity for Jesus to condemn the institution of slavery and its abuse of slaves. But he is not recorded of having bothered to taken it:
edit on 26.3.2015 by flammadraco because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 01:33 PM
link   
a reply to: StalkerSolent




Exactly! And then you're suggesting that other moral standards are immoral. To claim that other moral standards are immoral implies that there is an objective moral standard you are measuring them against.


No, I'm not suggesting morality doesn't exist. I'm saying it doesn't come from the Bible or from a "creator god". I'm suggesting that, according to my personal moral compass, derived from empathy, those rules violate my personal, subjective moral standard, and are therefore immoral according to my viewpoint, and, many of them are either illegal or considered immoral in today's society's mores. If these morals don't apply to everyone, then they aren't objective.



It says not to murder...


It says "Thou Shall Not Kill". But, regardless, the Biblical God has his children killing their brothers and sisters and neighbors for infractions of the laws, in his name.



And yet, oddly enough, Christians have been at the forefront of the anti-slavery movement and in favor of "objective moral standards" throughout most of history. Amazing, huh?


Christians fighting against Christians! Who would've thunk it! Why did it take Jesus and his army 1900 years to end slavery in Christian territories?

Jesus didn't teach of an all inclusive god.


Matthew 10:5 These twelve Jesus sent out, instructing them, “Go nowhere among the Gentiles and enter no town of the Samaritans, 6 but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.



Mark 4:11
And He was saying to them, "To you has been given the mystery of the kingdom of God, but those who are outside get everything in parables, 12so that WHILE SEEING, THEY MAY SEE AND NOT PERCEIVE, AND WHILE HEARING, THEY MAY HEAR AND NOT UNDERSTAND, OTHERWISE THEY MIGHT RETURN AND BE FORGIVEN."



Matthew 15:22-28New International Version (NIV)

22 A Canaanite woman from that vicinity came to him, crying out, “Lord, Son of David, have mercy on me! My daughter is demon-possessed and suffering terribly.”

23 Jesus did not answer a word. So his disciples came to him and urged him, “Send her away, for she keeps crying out after us.”
24 He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.”
25 The woman came and knelt before him. “Lord, help me!” she said.
26 He replied, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs.”
27 “Yes it is, Lord,” she said. “Even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table.”

28 Then Jesus said to her, “Woman, you have great faith! Your request is granted.” And her daughter was healed at that moment.


Jesus breaks his own rule and gives into empathy! (Or was he just playing games?)

His God was his father but not everyone's father.


John 8:44
You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father's desires.



Matthew 7:21
"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.




ME
You can't say that the Bible provides an "objective moral standard", when the morals proposed are considered immoral by today's standards. At best, the Bible provides a subjective set of morals that work sometimes for some people.

YOU
On what basis can you claim that is true?


Round and round we go! On the basis that the Bible presents no objective moral standard that is true for everyone all the time! One must rely on their own moral compass when wading through the "advice" given in the Bible.
edit on 26-3-2015 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 01:38 PM
link   
a reply to: flammadraco

hospital records. people who don't practice, when asked and say i'm this religion or that, for burial purposes, end up with that listed on their hospital records which follow them to prison. and it's never amended unless they request an amendment. so there's really no telling how many practicing believers are in prison. i know i sure have tried hard to obey the laws and taught my children to, as well.



new topics

top topics



 
31
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join