Racism in the Bible

a reply to: Krazysh0t

So, you are saying that I shouldn't be concerned about the muslims
because they only make up 2% of our population.
During the revolutionary war,it was estimated that only 3% of our
population actually fought against the british.But hey,that's no big
deal.
We have WIDE opened borders,with other than mexicans walking
through our WIDE opened borders.We have military personal being
fired or retired by our "Best government that money can buy"
We have people trying to trash our country's constitution and laws
because "they" want their "One World Government".
But that seems to be no big deal...yeah,right!

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: uncommitted

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: uncommitted

The point is that I only care about the issue effecting my backyard. Christians pushing their bible into government, using it to justify intolerance, using said intolerance as "religious freedom", and similar things is what I'm worried about. If Muslims got a good foothold in this country and tried to do the same, I'd be decrying their actions on the regular too. I don't want ANY religion running my life and I don't want one forced on me. If that isn't you, great, but you and I both know that the religion is more than just you.

No, you missed what my point was. You said you weren't interested in non Western countries, yet you joined a war against one. Not sure what that has to do with the question I asked which is was based around if you are actively doing anything in Western countries where you believe faith isn't being separated from state which is how I perceived your comments. Fighting against a Muslim country is hardly backing that up. Now, if you had been part of UN peace keeping, I could probably understand where you were going.

I joined a war back when I was younger and thought differently than I do today. Remember, after the WoD claim was debunked, we were "bringing democracy to Iraq" as our mission there? I also wasn't there for the initial war. I was there when the Army was a glorified police force.

I admire that you did what you thought was the right thing - if I agree with it or not is neither here nor there, but within the context of this thread.......

You joined and either fought or was in a position to fight if necessary in part of what the American president George W Bush called a crusade (usually defined as a 'holy war') against part of an 'axis of evil' comprising of Iraq, Iran and North Korea.

You then question if the Old Testament is racist? Pardon me, and I mean this with no disrespect to your good self or others who took part in that conflict, but doesn't that strike you as somewhat ironic?

originally posted by: mamabeth

a reply to: Krazysh0t

So, you are saying that I shouldn't be concerned about the muslims
because they only make up 2% of our population.
During the revolutionary war,it was estimated that only 3% of our
population actually fought against the british.But hey,that's no big
deal.

First off, you got a source for that statistic? Second, so what? The Muslims in our country aren't organized on that level and have no ability to do so. You are making an apples to oranges comparison here (and that's IF your statistic is even true).

We have WIDE opened borders,with other than mexicans walking
through our WIDE opened borders.We have military personal being
fired or retired by our "Best government that money can buy"
We have people trying to trash our country's constitution and laws
because "they" want their "One World Government".
But that seems to be no big deal...yeah,right!

Speculation and off topic conspiracy theory nonsense.

The point is that Muslims and their religion AREN'T a threat to our government. They have next to no chance to impose their religion into our government. Meanwhile, 83% of the country self-identifies as Christian. That's what is called a super-majority. As far as religions go, it is clear which one would be more likely to be a threat to separation of church and state.

a reply to: uncommitted

Yes it does and I regret having to do what I did. Also, keep in mind at the time I wasn't agnostic yet. My dogtags listed me as "Christian Non-Denominational". So while I had dropped my Catholicism, I hadn't completely let go of Christianity yet.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: uncommitted

Yes it does and I regret having to do what I did. Also, keep in mind at the time I wasn't agnostic yet. My dogtags listed me as "Christian Non-Denominational". So while I had dropped my Catholicism, I hadn't completely let go of Christianity yet.

Thanks for a very honest response - I think even more of you for making it. It does go back to the point of perspective and context though doesn't it.

a reply to: uncommitted

Sure that is why I have been saying that I'm speaking from experience here. I know how these things effected my brain and understand why they can be dangerous being left as they are.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: uncommitted

Sure that is why I have been saying that I'm speaking from experience here. I know how these things effected my brain and understand why they can be dangerous being left as they are.

So when the tribe of Israel waged war against other tribes, they stated that their God was on their side, when GWB called for conflict and called it a crusade he was effectively saying God was on his side........ if there is a God I don't think he/she/it would have any skin in either game but the OT is a document of its time based on the comments of people from its time and the attitudes of that time, not sure I could give the same excuse to more recent conflicts.

ETA - effectively you could argue the Vietnamese conflict was similar in all but name - war against the Communist Vietnam in a massively mistaken attempt to prevent the spread of communism, so I'm not singling GWB out as the only example.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: mamabeth

a reply to: Krazysh0t

So, you are saying that I shouldn't be concerned about the muslims
because they only make up 2% of our population.
During the revolutionary war,it was estimated that only 3% of our
population actually fought against the british.But hey,that's no big
deal.

First off, you got a source for that statistic? Second, so what? The Muslims in our country aren't organized on that level and have no ability to do so. You are making an apples to oranges comparison here (and that's IF your statistic is even true).

We have WIDE opened borders,with other than mexicans walking
through our WIDE opened borders.We have military personal being
fired or retired by our "Best government that money can buy"
We have people trying to trash our country's constitution and laws
because "they" want their "One World Government".
But that seems to be no big deal...yeah,right!

Speculation and off topic conspiracy theory nonsense.

The point is that Muslims and their religion AREN'T a threat to our government. They have next to no chance to impose their religion into our government. Meanwhile, 83% of the country self-identifies as Christian. That's what is called a super-majority. As far as religions go, it is clear which one would be more likely to be a threat to separation of church and state.

Yea that's prob the silliest conspiracy ever!


We have no Muslim elected officials, no Muslim judges, no Muslim generals or high ranking military, hell you rarely ever meet a Muslim.... Yet shiria law is comming?!?!? What?!?!


It shows a complete lack of knowledge of the constitution and how laws are made. Yet it's always spouted by constitutionalist!!!! LOL

originally posted by: uncommitted

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: uncommitted

Sure that is why I have been saying that I'm speaking from experience here. I know how these things effected my brain and understand why they can be dangerous being left as they are.

So when the tribe of Israel waged war against other tribes, they stated that their God was on their side, when GWB called for conflict and called it a crusade he was effectively saying God was on his side........ if there is a God I don't think he would have any skin in either game but the OT is a document of its time based on the comments of people from its time and the attitudes of that time, not sure I could give the same excuse to more recent conflicts.

ETA - effectively you could argue the Vietnamese conflict was similar in all but name - war against the Communist Vietnam in a massively mistaken attempt to prevent the spread of communism, so I'm not singling GWB out as the only example.

I agree, the Iraq war is a modern day example of a religious nut claiming god is siding with their side in a war then using intolerance to promote that division. GWB was using religious precedence though. He knew he wasn't the first to do it, it's in the bible so clearly God condones it, so he felt justified in his words. That is the problem I'm trying to highlight in the OP. This is why the bible needs to be updated, so that it is clear that these things WEREN'T sanctioned by god. That god loves all people regardless of where they happened to be born and lives that decree out by not taking sides in petty conflicts between different groups of humans.

a reply to: Entreri06

Well there ARE Muslim politicians, they just don't have anything close to the representation that is needed to bring about Sharia Law. Now the representation to bring up Christian Law, that certainly IS present. Good thing that there are Christians who DO actually know what separation of church and state means.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: uncommitted

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: uncommitted

Sure that is why I have been saying that I'm speaking from experience here. I know how these things effected my brain and understand why they can be dangerous being left as they are.

So when the tribe of Israel waged war against other tribes, they stated that their God was on their side, when GWB called for conflict and called it a crusade he was effectively saying God was on his side........ if there is a God I don't think he would have any skin in either game but the OT is a document of its time based on the comments of people from its time and the attitudes of that time, not sure I could give the same excuse to more recent conflicts.

ETA - effectively you could argue the Vietnamese conflict was similar in all but name - war against the Communist Vietnam in a massively mistaken attempt to prevent the spread of communism, so I'm not singling GWB out as the only example.

I agree, the Iraq war is a modern day example of a religious nut claiming god is siding with their side in a war then using intolerance to promote that division. GWB was using religious precedence though. He knew he wasn't the first to do it, it's in the bible so clearly God condones it, so he felt justified in his words. That is the problem I'm trying to highlight in the OP. This is why the bible needs to be updated, so that it is clear that these things WEREN'T sanctioned by god. That god loves all people regardless of where they happened to be born and lives that decree out by not taking sides in petty conflicts between different groups of humans.

I don't think updating the Bible would be useful. A couple of reasons why - it's a record of its time, and reflects those who wrote it. To update it wouldn't be helpful is it could lead to accusations of customising it to reflect 21st century thinking - what could and maybe should happen is that study notes point to the history, perspective and context in which the passages were written. That's what theology is all about after all.

Second point is that maybe people take the book way too literally, unfortunately that may never change, but I seriously doubt the Bible is the only instance of that being the case.

ETA, and I'm making way too many of those today, the precedence for this isn't only the Bible, show me a war from any period where we have written records where one if not both of the groups taking part did not say one deity or another was on their side. That's not even really anything to do with religion as such, it just shows the mindset of people. Please don't mistake this as stating that religion is the cause of all wars - I totally disagree with that argument, but to tell your troops that God is on your side is a very common way of reinforcing someones will to do what they are told. Not only religion though, Cambodia did it through ideology as did Stalins Russia using a similar concept but without the God aspect.

originally posted by: uncommitted
I don't think updating the Bible would be useful. A couple of reasons why - it's a record of its time, and reflects those who wrote it. To update it wouldn't be helpful is it could lead to accusations of customising it to reflect 21st century thinking - what could and maybe should happen is that study notes point to the history, perspective and context in which the passages were written. That's what theology is all about after all.

The problem is that the message should be easily accessible to all, not something one only sees after years of intense study.

Second point is that maybe people take the book way too literally, unfortunately that may never change, but I seriously doubt the Bible is the only instance of that being the case.

This we are in complete agreement.

ETA, and I'm making way too many of those today, the precedence for this isn't only the Bible, show me a war from any period where we have written records where one if not both of the groups taking part did not say one deity or another was on their side. That's not even really anything to do with religion as such, it just shows the mindset of people. Please don't mistake this as stating that religion is the cause of all wars - I totally disagree with that argument, but to tell your troops that God is on your side is a very common way of reinforcing someones will to do what they are told. Not only religion though, Cambodia did it through ideology as did Stalins Russia using a similar concept but without the God aspect.

Of course, just like much bigotry can be traced back to military conquest as well through dehumanization. I'm well aware of the history of both tactics, but just because it was done else where doesn't mean that Christians should be excused for doing it. The point is that Christianity is supposed to be ABOVE the rest, not among the rest.

a reply to: windword

I hope that you and your Christian friends stay away from cotton/rayon blends, shrimp cocktails and lobster bisque. Where do you take your mouthy and rebellious teenagers and non-virgin unmarried girls to stone them to death?

You show hatred and your foul temper describes your inner self to the world. This shows that you cannot debate like a educated person should but resort to deceiving lies and unjustified half truths. You not only do not understand Christianity but you have nothing to offer anyone but hate.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Sorry,but the muslims are a very serious threat to our country.The muslims
are already in our government...we have a muslim in the white house! We
have muslims in key positions in our government including the department
of homeland security.If my opinions,thoughts,ideologies...are considered
conspiracy theories.This site happens to be a conspiracy theory website!

The christians are being alienated,persecuted,ridiculed in this country and
abroad.A lot of christians are listening to preachers who tickle their ears
instead of preaching from God's word.In muslim controlled countries christians
are being slaughtered.So,they are still not a threat according to you and they
are considered too disorganized to be any real threat to the rest of us.Bye!

originally posted by: mamabeth
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Sorry,but the muslims are a very serious threat to our country.The muslims
are already in our government...we have a muslim in the white house!

No we don't... Anyone who still believes that lie has had their head so far buried in the right wing propaganda sand that they should be able to see China. Obama has only been in office for going on 7 years now and we are no closer to Sharia Law than before he entered office.

We have muslims in key positions in our government including the department of homeland security.

And the DHS is doing a SWELL job of supporting Muslims aren't they? They are only continuing to heavily discriminate against them left, right, and center for "National Security reasons".

If my opinions,thoughts,ideologies...are considered conspiracy theories.This site happens to be a conspiracy theory website!

That doesn't excuse you from going off topic in a thread that discusses NONE of those topics.

The christians are being alienated,persecuted,ridiculed in this country and
abroad.A lot of christians are listening to preachers who tickle their ears
instead of preaching from God's word.

No they aren't. Christians make up 83% of the population as I already posted. They are the majority. The only thing that is happening to them is that people are trying to get their religious beliefs OUT of government and Christians are pretending like that was the way things always were and feigning persecution. It's silly and ridiculous. Not to mention sad. Almost akin to throwing a temper tantrum.

I challenge you to find ONE example of REAL Christian persecution in this country.

In muslim controlled countries christians
are being slaughtered.So,they are still not a threat according to you and they
are considered too disorganized to be any real threat to the rest of us.Bye!

That is a red herring. We are talking about Muslims in this country being a threat to the rule of THIS country. Not muslims halfway around the world running their own countries. But besides that, no one in the middle east or any groups within poses a threat to the nationality of the united states.

You really need to turn off Fox News. It is effecting your judgment of reality.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Entreri06

Well there ARE Muslim politicians, they just don't have anything close to the representation that is needed to bring about Sharia Law. Now the representation to bring up Christian Law, that certainly IS present. Good thing that there are Christians who DO actually know what separation of church and state means.

Fair enough, didn't think there was even one, but I guess there is... Just one! Lol so I think my points still hold true.

However, I think we are fairly safe from Christian theology as well. Because no two Christians believe the same thing. There are a million different flavours and everyone thinks everyone else is wrong. So hopfully that will be some protection.

originally posted by: Entreri06

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Entreri06

Well there ARE Muslim politicians, they just don't have anything close to the representation that is needed to bring about Sharia Law. Now the representation to bring up Christian Law, that certainly IS present. Good thing that there are Christians who DO actually know what separation of church and state means.

Fair enough, didn't think there was even one, but I guess there is... Just one! Lol so I think my points still hold true.

There's more than one. That was just an example of the first. Of course your point still stands though.

However, I think we are fairly safe from Christian theology as well. Because no two Christians believe the same thing. There are a million different flavours and everyone thinks everyone else is wrong. So hopfully that will be some protection.

True that, their inability to agree on what exactly IS Christian and what isn't may be saving the rest of us.

a reply to: peter vlar

Leviticus 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.
Leviticus 20:13 And if a man lie with mankind, as with womankind, both of them have committed abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

Matthew 5:17 Think not that I came to destroy the law or the prophets: I came not to destroy, but to fulfil.

Nothing more to say. Jesus said it all.

a reply to: Seede

I did forget that the main theme of this thread was gay rights.
Thank-you for reminding me of what God's word says.
In a country that has a large number of christian people living
in it.Gays do have rights to live their lives according to their
wishes.Christians can't accept and shouldn't accept a marriage
between gays.
Marriage is defined as a union between a man and a woman.
Gays in muslim controlled countries are executed.I think it should
be more important to a gay person to be allowed to live then to
squabble over their rights to marry.

originally posted by: Entreri06

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: mamabeth

a reply to: Krazysh0t

So, you are saying that I shouldn't be concerned about the muslims
because they only make up 2% of our population.
During the revolutionary war,it was estimated that only 3% of our
population actually fought against the british.But hey,that's no big
deal.

First off, you got a source for that statistic? Second, so what? The Muslims in our country aren't organized on that level and have no ability to do so. You are making an apples to oranges comparison here (and that's IF your statistic is even true).

We have WIDE opened borders,with other than mexicans walking
through our WIDE opened borders.We have military personal being
fired or retired by our "Best government that money can buy"
We have people trying to trash our country's constitution and laws
because "they" want their "One World Government".
But that seems to be no big deal...yeah,right!

Speculation and off topic conspiracy theory nonsense.

The point is that Muslims and their religion AREN'T a threat to our government. They have next to no chance to impose their religion into our government. Meanwhile, 83% of the country self-identifies as Christian. That's what is called a super-majority. As far as religions go, it is clear which one would be more likely to be a threat to separation of church and state.

Yea that's prob the silliest conspiracy ever!


We have no Muslim elected officials, no Muslim judges, no Muslim generals or high ranking military, hell you rarely ever meet a Muslim.... Yet shiria law is comming?!?!? What?!?!


It shows a complete lack of knowledge of the constitution and how laws are made. Yet it's always spouted by constitutionalist!!!! LOL

How do you know the religion of all the the people in the roles you have mentioned above? Why is their religion any of your business unless they wish to impose certain elements of it on the general populace without the agreement of the people it would be imposed on?