I grew up atheist for 16 years. I had always kept an open mind towards religion, but never really felt a need to believe in it. My sister started going to a Wednesday night children's program at a church. Eventually, I was dragged into a Christmas Eve service. Scoffing, I reluctantly went, assuming that this was going to be a load of crap, but when I went, I felt something. Something that I've never felt before. I felt a sense of empowerment and a sense of calling. Jesus called upon my soul, just like he did with his disciples. he wanted me to follow him. Now, my life is being lived for Christ. He died on the cross for my sins, and the sins of everyone who believes in him. He was beaten, brutalized, struck with a whip 39 times, made to carry a cross up to the stage of his death. This I believe to be true, and I can never repay him for what he has done. I still have my struggles with Christianity, but I've found this bit of information most useful. Religion is not comprehensible in the human mind, because we cannot comprehend the idea of a perfect and supreme being, a God, but we can believe it in our heart, and that's the idea of faith. Faith is, even though everything rides against me believing in Jesus, I still believe in him because I know that it's true in my heart. I invite my fellow Brothers and sisters of the LORD to talk about how Jesus has helped you in your life. No atheists and no insults please
Not really,It is said in history that even after 600 years the Quran remains unchanged from its original pretext so no
The problem lies in written word and how just about every word means something slightly different between any two people. Example: toaster. Most think of an object with places to cook bread, but specifics are varied. # of slots? Dial or digital? Slot thickness? Outer color? Unless you know exactly what the author was thinking of, there will be differences. Add hundreds/thousands of years of trying to pass down what the words mean to all adherents, and we've got billions of individual interpretations. Even if it was never translated or altered, by what basis would you know that the words in Arabic mean exactly what it meant when it was written? Your thoughts on the word itself would differ from the meaning of the author.
And lets not even include all the translation from a translation of a translation of the origin. Just be sure that thd writer of the bible didnt knew english, or latin,or greek, or aremite. And even the hebrew one is largly base pn stories from ear to ear and political issues and accidents.
Evidently, given the events happening in "Will Christianity Die out?" Thread, it might be time to bring this back to life so we do not detract from that thread..
To restate lessons we have learned over the past few months: Steve-ism is right, agnosticism is alright, and I still owe HahiHa a story.
Ugh, this is the ORIGINAL bible quote. Again, not a new, protestant one. http://www.biblestudytools.com/rhe/deuteronomy/passage.aspx?q=deuteronomy+22:13;deuteronomy+22:19;deuteronomy+22:28-29
And i'm out, i forgot how stubborn you all are.
Ok, let's throw out the rape one. What about the plethora of other rules not followed?
Ok, let's throw out the rape one. What about the plethora of other rules not followed?
Yes, let's discuss this. Fornication, which is a serious sin, is not being rewarded. Having to marry the woman (Who never had much to say in the choice back then) would be a punishment for commiting the sin. God's like, "Alright, you wanna treat her like your wife, then she's your wife, and you have to pay the father in addition to your punishment."
Not related to the above posts, but to this thread perhaps that by its revival now just happened to drift into my view, this just happened to pop up in the Dutch news, something to do with some interview by Oprah Winfrey of one Diana Nyad, apparently here: http://www.oprah.com/own-super-soul-sunday/Oprah-and-Diana-Nyad (the Dutch article notably points to part two of it).
Counter-arguments raised would then be (among many others, no doubt) here, here and here.
To be honest, I'm indifferent enough (albeit not uninterested, perhaps because of it) to religion that I can't really be bothered one way or the other, but, FYI, and the argument may well fit those want to wear it.
I just don't like her or the fanboying going on so I blocked her, what's the big deal.
I'd hardly see rape as "treating her like your wife", but that doesn't answer the question of the picking and choosing of certain laws over others, as Emp was trying to get to in the other thread.
-----
@MacII I remember seeing the interview a while back, and to defend Oprah, the way Nyad described herself made her come off as more of a pantheist than an atheist, followed by then poor wording on Oprah's part.
I'd hardly see rape as "treating her like your wife"
"treating her like your wife" is a nicer way of saying "taking care of her like your possesion" because during those times, women WERE nothing but posession.
its a very sophisticated way out of this. then again, pro-gays could say "sleeping with a man as if a woman" means its ok to be with another guy as long as you dont disrespect him and treat him like your own possesion (woman) but yeah... dont we already know the wonders of cherry picking and lack of logic?
I'd hardly see rape as "treating her like your wife", but that doesn't answer the question of the picking and choosing of certain laws over others, as Emp was trying to get to in the other thread.
He wasn't talking about rape, but about fornication in this case. (oh, and I think you copied the wrong quote there...). But you're right in that I don't see how his excursus about fornication answers your question.
God's policy on women. You break it, you buy it. Sounds like a swell guy, right?
Yes, let's discuss this. Fornication, which is a serious sin, is not being rewarded.
Yes, let's. Why is the woman punished because the man forced her into doing something? As you admitted, women didn't have much of a choice back then. Why would God, this supposedly all loving, all knowing, all powerful being, pass down a law like this? Even if you want to punish people for sex outside of marriage, I can think of better ways off the top of my head.
1) Forbid those two from seeing each other. 2) Have them each ask God for forgiveness. 3) I don't know, talk to both of them so they understand what they did was "wrong?"
Why would God impose a money fine. Seriously. This "law" is just, "you slept with my daughter? Great, a sucker to take her off my hands! Pay me x amount of money and you won't get in trouble, and you'll have a new wife!"
It's only a punishment for the woman, something all too common in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. The man has free license to coerce a woman (rape her) into sex so that he can make her his wife. All that's required is a bit of money.
(oh, and I think you copied the wrong quote there...)
Well now..that is just a tad-bit embarrassing..
You know what, no. I totally meant to quote that. It's just...um..so obscure. Yeah. Totally.
As for the rest of what you mentioned, it comes from the quote in the bible about a man raping a woman, but KnightDeclan states that the actual quote is just about fornication in general.
