Am I getting the wrong end of the stick?

Pocari Sweat

What's all that then?

How come there's a lot of stuff that doesn't seem to add up in religion and why can't the top chiefs and brainboxes sort out answers? Here are a few riddles I can't work out, which is probably why there are so many atheists :


1. If mary is the holy mother of god, and jesus is the son of god, then surely isn't mary the grandmother of jesus? What's all that then?

2. How come if adam and eve were the first two humans, and their sons and daughters followed, how did they get grandchildren without incest going on and was this acceptable in religious times? What's all that then?

3. How come dinosaurs got missed out, back in religious times, and what was the bible doing not mentioning these? What's all that then?

4. If the top commandment was thou shalt not kill, why were all the first born innocent babies of the egyptians getting killed by the religious authorities? What's all that then?

5. If another commandment said thou shalt not commit adultery, then why was mary getting pregnant by someone else and not joseph? What's all that then?

6. How come innocent babies whose lives were cut short before they got christened, were sent to purgatory for an eternity of damnation? What's all that then?


These are just a few quandaries that probably need answers by ecumenical experts in order to get the atheists back on the road of righteousness.

Does anyone know if I have got the wrong end of the stick on the above, or have there been worse cover ups that the religion officials have not sorted out?

Dirk Gently

Questions :eek: , careful now, you'll go to hell for that.

lostexpectation

12. How is transubstantiation more plausible then creationsim?

Pocari Sweat

lostexpectation wrote:

12. How is transubstantiation more plausible then creationsim?

What's all that then?

Merrick

A short description of what a believer's answers to all of the above may be:
God said so, therrefore it's right.

Pocari Sweat

Merrick wrote:

A short description of what a believer's answers to all of the above may be:
God said so, therrefore it's right.

But didn't the church just ban limbo last year?

So is the church saying god was wrong in the first place to introduce limbo?

Crucifix

Pocari Sweat wrote:

But didn't the church just ban limbo last year?

So is the church saying god was wrong in the first place to introduce limbo?

He was taking the mick with the limbo stuff. Just like fossils.

Merrick

Pocari Sweat wrote:

But didn't the church just ban limbo last year?

So is the church saying god was wrong in the first place to introduce limbo?

No no, the church is merely acting because of the will of god, who is never ever ever wrong, but is merely making adjustments. Ergo he is still right. See, it all makes sense.

the real ramon

The short answer is that they kept having to spin ever more complex webs down through the centuries to cover up shortfalls in the reasoning. they'd be better off abondoning the whole thing and starting from scratch with something like : 'God caused the big bang and wrote the laws of the universe. From now on ye good Christians who quest for the truth and the Word of God shall consult a Physics book'.:D

Dades

Pocari Sweat wrote:

3. How come dinosaurs got missed out, back in religious times, and what was the bible doing not mentioning these? What's all that then?

This reminds me of an open debate I heard between a renowned US creationist and an equally renowned sceptic. The question of dinosaurs was raised and the creationist was actually tried to persuade people that there were dinosaurs on Noah's Arc. He actually believed this.

Regarding your other questions:, I think most Christians consider the Old Testament stuff to be more analogous than anything else. Unsurprisingly the less believable bits in particular.

To be fair however I think you have the wrong end of the stick on 1 & 5.

Zombrex

Pocari Sweat wrote:

6. How come innocent babies whose lives were cut short before they got christened, were sent to purgatory for an eternity of damnation? What's all that then?

Original Sin.

The idea goes like this

1 - If humans sin they go to puragory or hell

2 - If humans are born pure, and then sin, God has to send them to hell

3 - God doesn't have to do anything, he is God after all, so 2 doesn't work. You cannot remove the choice from the hands of God

4 - So people must be born in a default state of sin, and through good work to impress him God can choose if someone has redeemed themselves enough from their original sin to get into heaven. So from the situation in 3 where God had to do something it is flipped so the option is back in Gods hands. He does it if he wants to.

Pocari Sweat

Wicknight wrote:

Original Sin.

4 - So people must be born in a default state of sin, and through good work to impress him God can choose if someone has redeemed themselves enough from their original sin to get into heaven. So from the situation in 3 where God had to do something it is flipped so the option is back in Gods hands. He does it if he wants to.

What's all that then?

This particular god, is he juggling or being a bit lazy.

Can we vote him out and get another deity in?

Myksyk

Pocari Sweat wrote:

2. How come if adam and eve were the first two humans, and their sons and daughters followed, how did they get grandchildren without incest going on and was this acceptable in religious times? What's all that then?

When asked this question creationists reply that the 'incest' was in fact allowed as the genetic code was so pure. Yeah sure.

Stephen

Pocari Sweat wrote:

3. How come dinosaurs got missed out, back in religious times, and what was the bible doing not mentioning these? What's all that then?

Bill Hicks has an answer for everything

Bill Hicks wrote:

"You know the world's 12 thousand years old and dinosaurs existed, they existed in that time, you'd think it would have been mentioned in the ****ing Bible at some point. "And lo Jesus and the disciples walked to Nazareth. But the trail was blocked by a giant brontosaurus... with a splinter in his paw. And O the disciples did run a shriekin': 'What a big ****ing lizard, Lord!' But Jesus was unafraid and he took the splinter from the brontosaurus's paw and the big lizard became his friend. And Jesus sent him to Scotland where he lived in a loch for O so many years inviting thousands of American tourists to bring their fat ****ing families and their fat dollar bills.And oh Scotland did praise the Lord. Thank you Lord, thank you Lord. Thank you Lord."

"Get this, I actually asked one of these guys, OK, Dinosaurs fossils - how does that fit into you scheme of life? Let me sit down and strap in. He said, "Dinosaur fossils? God put those there to test our faith." I think God put you here to test my faith, Dude. You believe that? "uh huh." Does that trouble anyone here? The idea that God.. might be.. ****in' with our heads? I have trouble sleeping with that knowledge. Some prankster God running around: "Hu hu ho. We will see who believes in me now, ha ha." [mimes God burying fossils] "I am God, I am a prankster." "I am killing Me."

Pocari Sweat

The monk scribes back in 800 ad were the originators of some good feckin comedy sh*t, and gave Bill some feckin proper material there.

OSiriS

1. There is the concept of the Holy Trinity where God is both one and three beings.

2. Incest was not illegal for a long time, the legality of incest is a practicality issue as opposed to a moral one, due to genetics incest is not a good idea. Granted there may be other reasons it was deemed illegal.

3. If you look back throughout history you will find countless superstitious tales of evil beats, dragons and monsters. These beliefs most likely originated from finding fossilised dinosaurs, so who's to say none were found at any time throughout the bible's history.

5. This would depend on the definition of adultery and the mechanics of the so called "immaculate conception".

Not being particularly religious that is my take on a few of them. As was mentioned above, Christians are pretty fond of the evilness of sin so they have 6 covered. As for 4, the message might be not to piss off god:P

Pocari Sweat

OSiriS wrote:

1. There is the concept of the Holy Trinity where God is both one and three beings.

2. Incest was not illegal for a long time, the legality of incest is a practicality issue as opposed to a moral one, due to genetics incest is not a good idea. Granted there may be other reasons it was deemed illegal.

3. If you look back throughout history you will find countless superstitious tales of evil beats, dragons and monsters. These beliefs most likely originated from finding fossilised dinosaurs, so who's to say none were found at any time throughout the bible's history.

5. This would depend on the definition of adultery and the mechanics of the so called "immaculate conception".

Not being particularly religious that is my take on a few of them. As was mentioned above, Christians are pretty fond of the evilness of sin so they have 6 covered. As for 4, the message might be not to piss off god:P

1. Are you saying god has three heads or occasionally cross dresses?

2. How come god was into incest and not making it illegal from day one, just chopping and changing. Would he have approved of adam bonking his daughters?

3. How come out of all the ancient libraries and centres of learning they kept no records or pictures of any dinosaur finds even up to medievel times and beyond till 1700 / 1800's?

5. I'm not saying god knobbed mary proper, he just got her pregnant all the same, and deflowered mary before even joseph got chance to with his own wife.

6. God washed his hands with adam and eve and let them roam loose after the original sin, probably why he let adam knob his daughters, so why get all snotty with the egyptians and start slaughtering their innocent babies, surely their innocent first born were not the main ones pissing god off, surely it was their dads, so why does god go for the weak or innocent targets, if any at all if he washed his hands of us after the original sin and became more or less absent landlord, apart from killing babies and knobbing mary?

Dirk Gently

Pocari Sweat wrote:

1. Are you saying god has three heads or occasionally cross dresses?

2. How come god was into incest and not making it illegal from day one, just chopping and changing. Would he have approved of adam bonking his daughters?

3. How come out of all the ancient libraries and centres of learning they kept no records or pictures of any dinosaur finds even up to medievel times and beyond till 1700 / 1800's?

5. I'm not saying god knobbed mary proper, he just got her pregnant all the same, and deflowered mary before even joseph got chance to with his own wife.

6. God washed his hands with adam and eve and let them roam loose after the original sin, probably why he let adam knob his daughters, so why get all snotty with the egyptians and start slaughtering their innocent babies, surely their innocent first born were not the main ones pissing god off, surely it was their dads, so why does god go for the weak or innocent targets, if any at all if he washed his hands of us after the original sin and became more or less absent landlord, apart from killing babies and knobbing mary?

This gets my vote for post of the month, I reckon a few people might get sig material outa that one. Personally I reckon Joseph shuda done a braveheart on God after he knobbed mary before he got his go.

Dades

Pocari, there nothing wrong with being light-hearted but try to remember this forum is not the exclusive haunt of non-believers. (Indeed your questions would be better answered by believers). I'm not suggesting you change your views or stifle your questions, just perhaps that you maintain the tone of your OP rather than your last one.

Re Dinosaurs, I think as most Christians accept the world is billions of years old, the question of why dinosaurs aren't in the bible is irrelevant. They're not in it for the same reason they're not in the Magna Carta or the Declaration of Independance.

Pocari Sweat

The Atheist wrote:

Pocari, there nothing wrong with being light-hearted but try to remember this forum is not the exclusive haunt of non-believers. (Indeed your questions would be better answered by believers). I'm not suggesting you change your views or stifle your questions, just perhaps that you maintain the tone of your OP rather than your last one.

Re Dinosaurs, I think as most Christians accept the world is billions of years old, the question of why dinosaurs aren't in the bible is irrelevant. They're not in it for the same reason they're not in the Magna Carta or the Declaration of Independance.

Sorry to go a bit monty python, I often forget this sometimes offends the odd bod.

Sticking to theme of original post, noteably dinosaurs, I get the impression this always gets the clergy in a kerfuffle.

I had a local priest visit me one sunday afternoon, checking the neighbourhood on a walkaround. I thought he was just dropping in on odd neighbours, saying hello, but he asked my religion / church attendance and I said I was provisional agnostic or just agnostic, and he starts going on about Adam and Eve and the beginning, and I politely asked what about the dinosaurs and he nearly choked and said a prayer for me, and left.

How come neither the foot soldiers of the church or the top chiefs answer the dinosaur question, and get all stuffy with threats of prayers and the like?

Why can't they just answer the darn question.

Crucifix

I'm a little surprised the dinosaurs thing bothers many of em. Isn't the catholic church's official line that Adam and Eve was a metaphor or something, and evolution is the way? I thought creationists were a thing of American christianity.

Pocari Sweat

If the Magna Carta and Declaration of Independence were read from century to century and were acknowledged in a fairly straightforward manner without much interpretation or major changes in the stance of their original meaning, then how come in just after the last 100 years, after the bible was already a long established document, were the post victorian readers of the bible starting to radically jettison any real seriousness with the writings of genesis when they were previously drawn in hook line and sinker?

Dades

Pocari, you know you're preaching to the converted here for the most part.

I'll bet if you ask the same questions in the Christianity forum you'll get a more consistant answer than you did from the priest at your door. (Apart from the odd creationist fruit like JC). Something along the lines of what Crucifix suggests.

But yes, the decisions that certain elements of the bible are "metaphor" in the light of scientific advancement does raise questions for those who choose to think about it.

Pocari Sweat

Well that's it then.

HealingBlight

1. Jesus is his own father in a way, which is just as messed up, but this is god, so it’s alright, apparently.

2. How come adam and eve got punished for doing something wrong when they didn’t have knowledge of good and evil beforehand? That’s more of a strange point.
Yes, there would of had to be rampant incest, especially to get up to the time of moses, but that was ok. I think I saw a chart from a Kent Hovind presentation that shows moses father knew adam if the ages were correct. Also messed up.

3. Apparently there are some people that say there are a few creatures mentioned in the bible (I cant say for sure, probably OT by the sounds of it) that could be seen as dinosaurs, but really, its more likely that if you don't know it exists, it doesn’t exist.

4. The first bourn baby thing. didn’t that happen -before- the 10 commandments? But I'm pretty sure that lots of murder happened as a result of gods orders after the commandments, give me a minute and I'll find a link to a post that basicly shows most important biblical figures breaking the commandments aswell as god itself. Even if they were around -before- the 10 commandments, thier close relationship with god should of meant that god could of told them to stop what they are doing.

5. Once again, its god, so its ok, you see, even if there was morality handed down from a god, it is still based on the whim of that god, so the idea that morals are objective is kind of.... it -is- stupid.

6. They got rid of purgatory last I heard.

MeditationMom

Go for it!

What are you waiting for? Permission to leave your church,faith? How much confirmation do you need to turn your back on all of this obvious nonsense the church has been conditioning you with your whole life? They mean well, in most cases, so no need to get mad, just say "thank you" and move on.

This is coming from a person who a long time ago found herself in the same situation, with all the same questions, dilemas etc. There are some real treasures of truth in the bible, and you could read it and decide which ones touch your heart and soul deeply, but since these treasures are buried in this huge mess of all this nonsense you rightfully list in your thread, you might have to get as far away from the whole package as you can.

My suggestion- not that you asked for it - but I am after all Meditation"MOM" - so I can't help myself - stick with what Jesus taught first, since that seems to be the same in all other religions and non-religious teachings. It will also make it easier on you, since it eliminates a huge effort on your part to have to go completely against your upbringing.

Just be really, really curious how Jesus found what he preached and taught to be so true and so important that he was willing to be tortured to death for it in the most insane and cruel manner, by none other than "the church" of his day - it will help you tremendeously to leave the church "of your day". Don't doubt for a moment that your church wouldn't be willing to kill someone like Jesus if he showed up today. People like Jesus who are one with God, (in other traditions, they would be called enlightened or having reached Nirvana, Satori, Samadhi, Self-Realization, Liberation), are a huge threat to the church, or state - just like you are starting to be with your incest and dinosaur inquiries.

Forget who did who, in the presence or absence of dinosaurs, though - it is truly irrelevant!!! -but, yes, quite useful to torture priests with- I have to admit.

Also, rest assured that all that nonsense taught to you has not been in vain. The closer you come to truth over your lifetime, the more mysterious, divinely paradox, amusing, it will all be in the end and it will set you free. So this early experience of complete nonsense, in a strange way, prepares you for the truth, which is even more beyond logic and human understanding than the religious nonsense you've grown up with.

So stop believing in God! It is time you start looking for God yourself, with all your might, all your heart, using your own judgement, until it is all revealed to you - and then you'll have a good laugh. That's when you know beyond a doubt that you've found each other. Go for it! All power to you!

Pocari Sweat

Well I reckon there could be a god, and that jesus chap sounds a decent sort, but I would not try to spiritualise meself to invent what I reckon some sort of god is supposed to be like.

As for hearts and souls... A heart is a blood pumping muscle and has no significance for spiritual beliefs, because our own imaginations take care of that in our brains. And as for souls? whats all that then?

Some cheeky chap in the past, decided our blood pumping muscles were somehow more than just lumps of tissue getting haemaglobin round to our toes and fingers and it was probably the same bloke who rustled up that cheeky porky about souls.

Invent something with a mysterious name and function, introduce it as part of the religious package so it can't be dismissed too easily, thereby confirming it as fact like the rest of the "truth" or "gospel".

The soul issue then, right. All living beings have one? Just us or all other animals, insects?

If it is just us then do the 600 or so billion people who previously died have souls floating about? When we were monkeys did we have souls then, or at what point in the last million years was the soul introduced?

What happens to all the trillions of souls floating about, when man is taken over by evolution of new species or when the sun burns out.

Angels will be out of a job I'm sure, and the saints and gods, surely.

Or will all the souls be rounded up and taken off somewhere?

Would higher levels of evolutionary species brainier than us, be allowed souls, or will a new god have to be introduced to create a new type of soul for them?

Do dolphins have souls? If dolphins get any brainier in the next million years, will they be allowed souls if man is still around?

Does god grade souls into different categories of niceness and put all the top people's souls in proper decent parts of heaven, and the crappier ones in average parts of heaven?

Can a soul have a fight with another soul if he calls his pint a poof.

I think if you invent something daft, then daft questions are going to be asked.

When we were monkeys

Dades

Pocari Sweat wrote:

The soul issue then, right. All living beings have one? Just us or all other animals, insects?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2054936493
This thread might interest you.

Pocari Sweat

Good one The Atheist.

Right then souls. It appears there is some justification that souls exist in the link you provided because genesis was meant to be true after all.

If genesis was true and animals have souls as well, then this is nice, because why should just the monkey men have souls and not nicer critters like elephants and dolphins?

Right back to reality, one post in your link, suggested souls are provided to those able to tell right from wrong.

OK. In human society, the top of the animal chain..? ... we are like sh*t off a shovel when it comes to sortin out right and wrong and have courts and judges and stuff to sort all this out.

Incidentally didn't some saint, god, prophet or other say, don't judge, lest ye be judged, that'll put a few judges out of a job if they take religion too seriously.

Hold on, they use the bible to swear witnesses into court before it all kicks off? What's all that then, are they serious about this religious stuff after all?

But when it comes to it, in court, swear on the bible or not, judge ye not, lest ye be judged, the judge and all the lawyers still think religion is a load of owl ballocks.

Set the scene... court in session, witness sworn in, case about malpractice by surgeons who cocked up an operation and the patient dies on the operating table fore a few minutes until he is revived, and tries to sue hospital for loss of his soul that has floated off.

The judge starts off that there is nothing in human justice that takes into account souls or law regarding the loss of it.

Defending barrister says that his defendent is sure he has lost his soul and has all the symptoms as outlined in all parts of the bible that points to the loss of his soul.

Judge says, does that include genesis? Barrister confirms it does.

Judge says genesis is metaphorical and not to be taken seriously.

Barrister disagrees and says it is the word of the lord.

Judge says, fer feck sake shut yer cake hole, its all a load of owl tripe.

Barrister says, the bible you dish out for swearing on includes genesis.

Judge says, yeh most of it is OK but that part is shoit.

Barrister says make yer mind up.

Judge kicks off, right souls are not part of the law.

Barrister - why not?

Judge - cos they are not proven.

Barrister, feck we'll go round in circles here, all day talking crap, and you make it worse by making people swear on the "good book" when its all a load of ole toss.

Judge, so how does yer client know he has lost his soul.

Barrister, cos he feels all empty inside and does not know the difference between right and wrong, and stuff.

Judge - he's a crazy mixed up led and suffering from trauma.

Barrister - we ain't suing for trauma, just the loss of his soul.

Judge - my cat, lost his soul after coming back from the vet.

Barrister - feck off, cats ain't got souls.

Judge - how de ye know.

Barrister - its in the bible.

Judge - is it feck, the bible states in over 100 incidents of animals having souls.

Barrister - I'm losing the will to live, my head hurts.

Judge - feck off ye poof.

Dades

No offence Pocari - but I think your diatribes here might be better suited to a blog.
Have you thought about setting one up? You can get one going on Boards here:
http://my.boards.ie/blog/

Threads may well go off on tangents but we try to keep rants to the minimum.

Thanks for your expected co-operation.

pH

Whilst we're on a "what's that all about thread"

Why do Christians pray to dead humans?

I can understand how you can believe there is a God and He can intervene and make things happen down here, but where did the idea that some dead people get elevated with special super-powers come from?

• Why 'pray' to St Anthony or Mary rather than directly to God?
• Where in the Bible does it say that this happens?

Why do Christians pray *for* dead humans
So you live your life, you get 'judged' and you then have eternity in heaven or hell based on how well you lived. Fine I understand that belief, but what I don't understand is why living people 'pray' for the dead. Is it some form of voting, can God's mind be changed if enough people pray? Can his mind be changed the other way?

Dades

pH wrote:

Why do Christians pray to dead humans?

Perhaps people pray to the deceased in the same way they would have turned to them in life to help them through. I guess it's a way of rekindling the connection. You can imagine why people want to believe such a thing.

I'd imagine Saints are like your local TDs. If you've lost something valuable you go to St Anthony, and he brings your case before An Taoiseach.

robindch

> Why do Christians pray to dead humans?

On the simple human side, the act of christians praying to dead people is morphologically identical to the ancestor worship seen in many other 'primitive' religions, and I'd imagine that the two rest upon the same expectations of the human brain -- that the person isn't really dead at all, but just, er, resting. At the social level, plenty of cultures have evolved similar customs (usually helpfully suggested by eldery people) to venerate the dead, in the hope if not the expection, that the obediently praying youth might respect the still-living eldery a bit more.

At the risk of straying OT, quite a few roman emperors chose to raise the previous incumbent to god-status, in the expectation that next guy would oblige to he current one. Needless to say, the Vatican carried on this glorious Roman tradition, so we find that most of the first ten or fifteen popes are all saints as well. The Vatican kept the Roman Imperial purple too, hence the wearing of purple by bishops.

But as to what on earth christians believe that praying to the dead is supposed to achieve? Heaven only knows

Pocari Sweat

Praying to lost ones. Obviously religion and god and praying etc, are not tangible things we can get to grips with, they are products of our psychology.

Because the average brain power of yer average animal is not like humans, their psychology is more based on survival, not much spare thinking power to chew on the imponderables.

We however are blessed / cursed with extra brain power coupled with the luxuries of life and spare time to over analyse stuff and talk crap, as suggested by The Atheist and the crap I come out with.

One by-product of this unique sense of consciousness we have is imagination and self delusion.

Praying for lost ones therefore, is more of a pschological denial of the complete loss of a loved one, and the subsequent invention of immortality imbued upon those lost in the way of a soul and living in heaven and possibly having mediums to contact the by-products of our physical existence in the afterlife via etherial means to gain a sense of comfort.

Its actually tripe but at the same time a good thing as it calms those who can't accept that we are just here and have to make the best of what we have got and instead of going cracked we just make stuff up instead.

No harm in that, I wouldn't slag off The Atheist if she went cracked and started going on about religion, because I don't think the people who actually believe in it are bad, its just the concept itself I think is doolally.

The_Minister

No one really tried to answer this so I'll give it a go.

Pocari Sweat wrote:

1. If mary is the holy mother of god, and jesus is the son of god, then surely isn't mary the grandmother of jesus? What's all that then?

Jesus is part of God. He ascended into heaven (allegedly) and rules with God and is referred to as part of God. Mary is the mother of Jesus. Its simple wordplay

Pocari Sweat wrote:

2. How come if adam and eve were the first two humans, and their sons and daughters followed, how did they get grandchildren without incest going on and was this acceptable in religious times? What's all that then?

Its more a practical thing(the incest ban) but I seem to remember some mass of humans "springing up". I'll look it up but I think it is explained (of course the Catholic Church believes it a metaphor. JP2 said that evolution may be more than a theorey.

Pocari Sweat wrote:

3. How come dinosaurs got missed out, back in religious times, and what was the bible doing not mentioning these? What's all that then?

The bible mentions few animals (except for Farmyard ones). Just because there are no biblical elephants does not mean that people don't think they exist.

Pocari Sweat wrote:

4. If the top commandment was thou shalt not kill, why were all the first born innocent babies of the egyptians getting killed by the religious authorities? What's all that then?

This is a mistranslation. It is more accurate to read "thou shalt not murder". Since the Egyptians had ignored and insulted God they were being righteously punished s it was not murder.

Pocari Sweat wrote:

5. If another commandment said thou shalt not commit adultery, then why was mary getting pregnant by someone else and not joseph? What's all that then?

It was immaculate (no sex involved) so it was not adultery. Thats like saying that women who get IVF are adulterous.

Pocari Sweat wrote:

6. How come innocent babies whose lives were cut short before they got christened, were sent to purgatory for an eternity of damnation? What's all that then?

This was never said by God but by the Catholic Church due to Original Sin. All humans are born tainted due to the first sin so if they die before baptisement they are still sinful. Oh and that is no longer held true and it was Limbo not pergatory.


There I have tried by best to answer your questions I am not that religious, but aside from number two all had simple and straightforward answers. If you were looking to trip up some Christians then you failed. In the context of the bible there are answers.

Pocari Sweat

Firespinner wrote:

No one really tried to answer this so I'll give it a go.

Jesus is part of God. ?

Its more a practical thing(the incest ban). ?

The bible mentions few animals. ?

This is a mistranslation. ?

Thats like saying that women who get IVF are adulterous. ?

This was never said by God ?

Firespinner, I have grave doubts about your soul if there is a god. I have never heard such a weaving of waffle like the stuff in your last post and I am very, very disappointed in you.

1. You mention JC rules with god in heaven, so it appears you are saying there are two gods. The bible also gives this view because they say jesus was the son of god. As mary is often quoted as being the mother of god, then either she is JC's grandmother in some daft way, or in your condradicting terms you sort of leave the possibilty that JC is his own grand dad.

2. What exactly is your answer for this question. Just talk straight and clear and genuinely like clown bag, or don't bother attempting it.

3. You are just being mendacious there. It is quite simple that Adam and Eve were not far off Noah in the bible timeline until JC came along, so we are only talking a few extra thousand years. The various common and less common animals, quoted or unquoted in the bible are not of concern to this debate. It is huge great massive, firey tempered, big teethed, giant Tyrannosaurus Rexs, I am worried about, running around Noah's Ark and in the lands of the bible times, if you are going to include them, who would have done some serious, eating of saints and prophets and other bible type people, because they took some serious feeding. Of course they should be mentioned, forget, earthquakes, floods, etc, they would be feckin terrifying.

4. Twisting stuff again. It is thou shalt not kill, lets read it as we read it. And we are not talking mere punishment, tap on the bum. We are talking wholesale slaughter of the young and often innocent, babies, yeh whip the fathers for "punishment", but as for killing - and in your words "murdering" young innocents for hypocritical reasons. You have not answered the Q.

5. Right, you are definitely getting worse fire. If your wife goes and gets IVF pregnant by another bloke, and comes home with a big belly, and you have not had chance to get her pregnant after marrying her, then she can say all she likes about dicks not being involved.

6. Again, you are twisting things right proper here. You are saying it was not said by god, when I already clearly stated all these 6 points were religious matters, and the top brain boxes in religion.


Firespinner, you are the typical, wavering, waffling, nonsense I hear from most religious types. Total dross.

Asiaprod

Pocari Sweat wrote:

Firespinner, I have grave doubts about your soul if there is a god. I have never heard such a weaving of waffle like the stuff in your last post and I am very, very disappointed in you.

You have been warned many times Pocari to cut this sh*t out. You were even asked politly to start a blog. You still don't get it do you! You are neither funny nor smart. This board was not formed so you could conduct your private rant against Christianity, and treating other posters here in this manner is not tolerated. You are begining to reflect badly on the rest of us. Any more and I will personnaly make it my mission to have your As* banned.
I am not joking.

Dades

Pocari Sweat wrote:

No harm in that, I wouldn't slag off The Atheist if she went cracked and started going on about religion

She?!

Pocari will be taking a week's retreat to reflect on life, the universe, and how not to post on this forum. Reading material should include the Charter.

Asiaprod wrote:

Any more and I will personnaly make it my mission to have your As* banned.

Then today is your lucky day.

That is all.

ronanp

2. How come if adam and eve were the first two humans, and their sons and daughters followed, how did they get grandchildren without incest going on and was this acceptable in religious times? What's all that then?

Rest easy, there's no need to fear that we are the product of a long line of incestous liaisons - there's no mention of Adam and Eve having any daughters!

Anyone I know who knows stuff about the bible says it's "thou shalt not murder", anyway...

Hagar

Pocari Sweat wrote:

But didn't the church just ban limbo last year

No they banned Mambo, dancing leads to sex.

Dades

Hagar wrote:

No they banned Mambo, dancing leads to sex.

Woo!
Underground Mambo classes, here I come...

lostexpectation

Asiaprod wrote:

You have been warned many times Pocari to cut this sh*t out. You were even asked politly to start a blog. You still don't get it do you! You are neither funny nor smart. This board was not formed so you could conduct your private rant against Christianity, and treating other posters here in this manner is not tolerated. You are begining to reflect badly on the rest of us. Any more and I will personnaly make it my mission to have your As* banned.
I am not joking.

huh mr sweat wasn't too bad(in this thread), firespinner gave good answers, but its all still highly dubious, eg righteous murder, firespinner didn't seem too bothered eitherway

imho

Asiaprod

lostexpectation wrote:

huh mr sweat wasn't too bad(in this thread), firespinner gave good answers, but its all still highly dubious, eg righteous murder, firespinner didn't seem too bothered eitherway

imho

Its all water under the bridge, it was nothing to do with answers, it was a question of tone and nothing more. Mr. Sweat writes some great stuff which I for one very much enjoy reading:)

Pocari Sweat

Well at this juncture I will resume me attendance on this thread after having me botty slapped.

Sorry for being a bit a schiessen haussen with my tone, I did not want to upset anyone with undue ranting, I sometimes get carried away.

So, righteous murder? Whats all that then?

God, gives up on adam and eve, and then makes a come back later on by whooping some ass in the way of wholesale slaughter of the first born of the egyptians, cos he is not a happy camper?

I know Cecille B. DeVille got a bit carried away in the 1950's with his mad genesis stuff, but its also a bit dodgey doing that sort of biblical type tackle with his particular surname, and depicting god as being righteous when also kicking ass with innocent offspring of naughtier parents.

The_Minister

Pocari Sweat wrote:

Firespinner, you are the typical, wavering, waffling, nonsense I hear from most religious types. Total dross.

I'm not going to respond to the rest of your points since you were clearly just hoping to be annoying, but I would point out that I'm actually not sure if there is a God and I come from a very laid-back house when it comes to religion. I mistook your questions as genuine and so tried to respond as best I could. I would suggest that if you really need to prove your an Athiest that badly then I doubt your "unbelief" is more than merely a rebellious sham. I think we'll be seeing a death-bed repentence from you yet.

Pocari Sweat

Fire, I remember we had some chit chat previously, I know although there is not much to go on, in putting the record straight on the tough questions in my OP from the side of the bible, I will still attempt as best I can to follow any users evaluations without much fussing or banter.

I will compliment you anyway on falling alongside the agnostic standing I have in neither taking atheism or god too seriously, they are not worth getting into a kerfuffle about.

Dades

Pocari Sweat wrote:

they are not worth getting into a kerfuffle about.

My sentiments exactly.

Welcome back Pocari. Remember just because God isn't, doesn't mean nobody is watching you.

Pocari Sweat

Oooh big brother.

Pocari Sweat

ronanp wrote:

Rest easy, there's no need to fear that we are the product of a long line of incestous liaisons - there's no mention of Adam and Eve having any daughters!

Were Kane and Abel giving their mother Eve a stuffing? Or was Eve abusing her sons, a bit like those other religious nut jobs that were doing the same to young boys - catholic priests. It seems ingrained in the code of the bible.

When Eve got pregnant by Kane and Abel, and maybe had a few daughters on the quiet, were Kane and Abel at it again, giving their hill billy sister type daughters a good stuffing too?

Adam and Eve, allowing family incest whether symbolic nonsense, still does'nt explain why the church engaged in wide spread rape, torture and murder of Irish children, as seen for example in Letterfrack in Connemara in the 1950's and 1960's, where the Christian Brothers of the Industrial School there, systematically raped and then killed dozens of young children that were trusted in their care, hiding their bodies in the grounds of the school to be found decades later.

Forget nazi germany and the politics of the time, just look at the holy church in peacetime, rural ireland, commiting far more brutal crimes and getting off scot free, and running other rackets like the slave laundries for girls at a similar time.

This nightmare vision of totalitarian hypocrasy, has not caused the removing of one stone of one single institution where these more serious crimes against humanity took place.

These places should have been flattened and the church made immediately accountable by the state, and a garden or rememberance put in their place, and although non church sex fiends are dealt with by mass protests and emergency legislation as seen in the last few weeks, it seems the more systematic, and extensive crimes the church are allowed to get away with, are somehow gently forgotten and service is resumed as normal, and church followers told to go about their business quietly and without any fuss.



oops this should be going in another thread.