| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"Discourser" |
| Date: |
12 Aug 2004 02:53:09 AM |
| Object: |
10-COMMANDMENT BELIEVERS IN SLAVERY |
10-COMMANDMENTS' BELIEVERS IN SLAVERY
"nor his manservant, nor his maidservant . . ."
READ THIS:
"Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet thy
neighbor's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor
his *****, nor anything that is thy neighbor's."
-- 10th Commandment of the 10 Commandments of Moses in the Bible
___________________________
Atheists and Humanist oppose mental and physical slavery in all of its
forms.
.
|
|
| User: "Marvin Edwards" |
|
| Title: Re: 10-COMMANDMENT BELIEVERS IN SLAVERY |
12 Aug 2004 04:37:38 AM |
|
|
"Discourser" <discourser@cox.net> wrote in message
news:zlFSc.66751$sh.2524@fed1read06...
10-COMMANDMENTS' BELIEVERS IN SLAVERY
"nor his manservant, nor his maidservant . . ."
READ THIS:
"Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet thy
neighbor's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor
his *****, nor anything that is thy neighbor's."
-- 10th Commandment of the 10 Commandments of Moses in the Bible
_________________________
Atheists and Humanist oppose mental and physical slavery in all of its
forms.
An interesting point, except that if you quoted an atheist or humanist who
existed at that same point in history, you'd probably get the same
statements. Slavery was once a universally accepted practice. Having
defeated an enemy, was it more moral to kill each and every one or more
moral to enslave them? That was the problem back then.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Callipygian Nullifidian" |
|
| Title: Re: 10-COMMANDMENT BELIEVERS IN SLAVERY |
12 Aug 2004 12:23:01 PM |
|
|
"Marvin Edwards" <mbe2uu@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:CTGSc.13865$nx2.9918@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
: "Discourser" <discourser@cox.net> wrote in message
: news:zlFSc.66751$sh.2524@fed1read06...
: > 10-COMMANDMENTS' BELIEVERS IN SLAVERY
: > "nor his manservant, nor his maidservant . . ."
: > READ THIS:
: > "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet
thy
: > neighbor's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his
ox, nor
: > his *****, nor anything that is thy neighbor's."
: > -- 10th Commandment of the 10 Commandments of Moses in the Bible
: _________________________
: > Atheists and Humanist oppose mental and physical slavery in all of
its
: forms.
:
: An interesting point, except that if you quoted an atheist or
humanist who
: existed at that same point in history, you'd probably get the same
: statements. Slavery was once a universally accepted practice. Having
: defeated an enemy, was it more moral to kill each and every one or
more
: moral to enslave them? That was the problem back then.
I rather doubt that slaverly has ever been "universally accepted".
That people with more power than their neighbors have practiced
slavery throughout history is not to be denied, but universally
accepted? Hardly.
.
|
|
|
| User: "GlennGlenn" |
|
| Title: Re: 10-COMMANDMENT BELIEVERS IN SLAVERY |
12 Aug 2004 08:56:49 PM |
|
|
In article <cfg91l$trg$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu>, Callipygian Nullifidian
<mulberry@ameritech.net> wrote:
I rather doubt that slaverly has ever been "universally accepted".
That people with more power than their neighbors have practiced
slavery throughout history is not to be denied, but universally
accepted? Hardly.
Just go back in time and ask the slaves themselves if they'd rather not
be the enslavers!
--
GlennGlenn -- aa#825 --
"You can make an easy kind of link that, if you have a protest group protesting
a war where the cause that's being fought against is international terrorism,
you might have terrorism at that protest. You can almost argue that a protest
against that is a terrorist act. I've heard terrorism described as anything
that is violent or has an economic impact. Terrorism isn't just bombs going off
and killing people." --Mike van Winkle, a spokesperson for the California
Anti-Terrorism Information Center, another spinoff of the Homeland Security
Department
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Katie" |
|
| Title: Re: 10-COMMANDMENT BELIEVERS IN SLAVERY |
12 Aug 2004 08:48:18 AM |
|
|
"Marvin Edwards" <mbe2uu@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:CTGSc.13865$nx2.9918@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
"Discourser" <discourser@cox.net> wrote in message
news:zlFSc.66751$sh.2524@fed1read06...
10-COMMANDMENTS' BELIEVERS IN SLAVERY
"nor his manservant, nor his maidservant . . ."
READ THIS:
"Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet thy
neighbor's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox,
nor
his *****, nor anything that is thy neighbor's."
-- 10th Commandment of the 10 Commandments of Moses in the Bible
_________________________
Atheists and Humanist oppose mental and physical slavery in all of its
forms.
An interesting point, except that if you quoted an atheist or humanist who
existed at that same point in history, you'd probably get the same
statements. Slavery was once a universally accepted practice. Having
defeated an enemy, was it more moral to kill each and every one or more
moral to enslave them? That was the problem back then.
But the question remains.. in the Constitution of the U.S. slavery was
originally okay. Then we amended it to say that it was bad. Why won't they
amend the ten commandments?
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Nuclear Marine" |
|
| Title: Re: 10-COMMANDMENT BELIEVERS IN SLAVERY |
21 Aug 2004 12:34:02 PM |
|
|
"Katie" <notarealaddress@all.stupid> wrote in
news:CyKSc.30223$114.17798@nwrddc02.gnilink.net:
"Marvin Edwards" <mbe2uu@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:CTGSc.13865$nx2.9918@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
An interesting point, except that if you quoted an atheist or
humanist who existed at that same point in history, you'd probably
get the same statements. Slavery was once a universally accepted
practice. Having defeated an enemy, was it more moral to kill each
and every one or more moral to enslave them? That was the problem
back then.
But the question remains.. in the Constitution of the U.S. slavery was
originally okay. Then we amended it to say that it was bad. Why won't
they amend the ten commandments?
Although I agree with your point, it's telling that the 3/5ths compromise
suggests the Constitution wasn't comfortable with the idea of slavery.
It tells that the idea of slavery was contested even in the document
itself.
To be fair, the "nice" treatment of slaves had been advocated throughout
the bible (well, if in a few notable places counts as throughout) but so
has the harsh treatment of the same. Equal concideration of the worth of
a female life (death penalty for murdering a woman) is undercut by the
harsh treatment advocated in other areas.
If the religious ideals were allowed to evolve, I'm sure a democratic
government could have evolved earlier. Sadly, fundementalists and
zealots require strict adherence and little change. From my
understanding, Muhammud was a forward thinking fellow with regards to the
treatment of women (married his boss, daughter was a nurse, some laws of
the worth of women actually forwarded the cause) would be backward today.
Of course that's blatant if you look at the Taliban.
Evolution of religious ideals, wouldn't that be refreshing?
Nuke
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Marvin Edwards" |
|
| Title: Re: 10-COMMANDMENT BELIEVERS IN SLAVERY |
12 Aug 2004 04:18:16 PM |
|
|
"Katie" <notarealaddress@all.stupid> wrote in message
news:CyKSc.30223$114.17798@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
But the question remains.. in the Constitution of the U.S. slavery was
originally okay. Then we amended it to say that it was bad. Why won't they
amend the ten commandments? <
But they have been amended! What you don't amend is history. The original
documents do not change, even though the animal sacrifices required in the
Old Testament have in fact ceased, along with slavery.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Courageous" |
|
| Title: Re: 10-COMMANDMENT BELIEVERS IN SLAVERY |
12 Aug 2004 07:41:34 PM |
|
|
But they have been amended! What you don't amend is history. The original
documents do not change, even though the animal sacrifices required in the
Old Testament have in fact ceased, along with slavery.
There's no statute of limitations for _MURDER_.
Therefore I have to say, if you can provide me a lead to this
Yahweh fucker, I'll have no choice to lock 'em up in a small
cell where Satan can make him his *****.
C//
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ron Peterson" |
|
| Title: Re: 10-COMMANDMENT BELIEVERS IN SLAVERY |
13 Aug 2004 12:07:01 PM |
|
|
In talk.philosophy.humanism Courageous <dontwant@spam.com> wrote:
There's no statute of limitations for _MURDER_.
One can't be tried for murder after one's death.
--
Ron
.
|
|
|
| User: "Courageous" |
|
| Title: Re: 10-COMMANDMENT BELIEVERS IN SLAVERY |
13 Aug 2004 07:12:03 PM |
|
|
There's no statute of limitations for _MURDER_.
One can't be tried for murder after one's death.
Oh yes: God is Dead.
C//
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "GlennGlenn" |
|
| Title: Re: 10-COMMANDMENT BELIEVERS IN SLAVERY |
12 Aug 2004 08:58:17 PM |
|
|
In article <s8RSc.14355$nx2.179@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
Marvin Edwards <mbe2uu@earthlink.net> wrote:
"Katie" <notarealaddress@all.stupid> wrote in message
news:CyKSc.30223$114.17798@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
But the question remains.. in the Constitution of the U.S. slavery
was originally okay. Then we amended it to say that it was bad. Why
won't they amend the ten commandments?
But they have been amended! What you don't amend is history. The original
documents do not change, even though the animal sacrifices required in the
Old Testament have in fact ceased, along with slavery.
What the apologists want to do is amend God®, who at the same time is
alleged to be eternally perfect.
Haw.
--
GlennGlenn -- aa#825 --
"You can make an easy kind of link that, if you have a protest group protesting
a war where the cause that's being fought against is international terrorism,
you might have terrorism at that protest. You can almost argue that a protest
against that is a terrorist act. I've heard terrorism described as anything
that is violent or has an economic impact. Terrorism isn't just bombs going off
and killing people." --Mike van Winkle, a spokesperson for the California
Anti-Terrorism Information Center, another spinoff of the Homeland Security
Department
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Courageous" |
|
| Title: Re: 10-COMMANDMENT BELIEVERS IN SLAVERY |
12 Aug 2004 09:19:09 AM |
|
|
But the question remains.. in the Constitution of the U.S. slavery was
originally okay. Then we amended it to say that it was bad. Why won't they
amend the ten commandments?
Yes, I've often heard the "but the New Testament is good" mantra,
but people really blink when I reply with "then rip the old testament
off, throw it on the ground, and ***** on it."
LOL.
C//
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mikhail" |
|
| Title: Re: 10-COMMANDMENT BELIEVERS IN SLAVERY |
12 Aug 2004 10:44:14 AM |
|
|
Katie wrote:
"Marvin Edwards" <mbe2uu@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:CTGSc.13865$nx2.9918@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
"Discourser" <discourser@cox.net> wrote in message
news:zlFSc.66751$sh.2524@fed1read06...
10-COMMANDMENTS' BELIEVERS IN SLAVERY
"nor his manservant, nor his maidservant . . ."
READ THIS:
"Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet
thy neighbor's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor
his ox,
nor
his *****, nor anything that is thy neighbor's."
-- 10th Commandment of the 10 Commandments of Moses in the Bible
_________________________
Atheists and Humanist oppose mental and physical slavery in all of
its
forms.
An interesting point, except that if you quoted an atheist or
humanist who existed at that same point in history, you'd probably
get the same statements. Slavery was once a universally accepted
practice. Having defeated an enemy, was it more moral to kill each
and every one or more moral to enslave them? That was the problem
back then.
But the question remains.. in the Constitution of the U.S. slavery was
originally okay. Then we amended it to say that it was bad. Why won't
they amend the ten commandments?
They were, but Christians don't read their Bibles to find out about the
changes. They keep pointing to the first set, and drooling, while
ignoring it.
--
Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never
stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and
neither do we.
-George Bush 2004/08/20040805
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "GlennGlenn" |
|
| Title: Re: 10-COMMANDMENT BELIEVERS IN SLAVERY |
12 Aug 2004 10:25:21 AM |
|
|
In article <CTGSc.13865$nx2.9918@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
Marvin Edwards <mbe2uu@earthlink.net> wrote:
"Discourser" <discourser@cox.net> wrote in message
news:zlFSc.66751$sh.2524@fed1read06...
10-COMMANDMENTS' BELIEVERS IN SLAVERY
"nor his manservant, nor his maidservant . . ."
READ THIS:
"Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet thy
neighbor's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor
his *****, nor anything that is thy neighbor's."
-- 10th Commandment of the 10 Commandments of Moses in the Bible
_________________________
Atheists and Humanist oppose mental and physical slavery in all of its
forms.
An interesting point, except that if you quoted an atheist or humanist who
existed at that same point in history, you'd probably get the same
statements. Slavery was once a universally accepted practice. Having
defeated an enemy, was it more moral to kill each and every one or more
moral to enslave them? That was the problem back then.
But the above are purportedly the Words of God®, not the words of
humanity of that time. Are you suggesting that God® had to tailor His®
speech to accommodate the "universally accepted practice" of the era of
humanity in which He® delivers it?
--
GlennGlenn -- aa#825 --
"You can make an easy kind of link that, if you have a protest group protesting
a war where the cause that's being fought against is international terrorism,
you might have terrorism at that protest. You can almost argue that a protest
against that is a terrorist act. I've heard terrorism described as anything
that is violent or has an economic impact. Terrorism isn't just bombs going off
and killing people." --Mike van Winkle, a spokesperson for the California
Anti-Terrorism Information Center, another spinoff of the Homeland Security
Department
.
|
|
|
| User: "Marvin Edwards" |
|
| Title: Re: 10-COMMANDMENT BELIEVERS IN SLAVERY |
12 Aug 2004 04:18:17 PM |
|
|
"GlennGlenn" <dipthotdipthot@yahoo.yahoo.com.com> wrote in message
news:120820040824423383%dipthotdipthot@yahoo.yahoo.com.com...
But the above are purportedly the Words of God®, not the words of humanity
of that time. Are you suggesting that God® had to tailor His® speech to
accommodate the "universally accepted practice" of the era of humanity in
which He® delivers it? <
There was a book my mother had called "Dispensational Truths" which
suggested that God's relationship to man evolved as man matured, such that
God always spoke at any give point in history in terms man could understand.
.
|
|
|
| User: "GlennGlenn" |
|
| Title: Re: 10-COMMANDMENT BELIEVERS IN SLAVERY |
12 Aug 2004 08:55:56 PM |
|
|
In article <t8RSc.14356$nx2.1108@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
Marvin Edwards <mbe2uu@earthlink.net> wrote:
"GlennGlenn" < > wrote in message
news:120820040824423383%...
But the above are purportedly the Words of God®, not the words of
humanity of that time. Are you suggesting that God® had to tailor
His® speech to accommodate the "universally accepted practice" of
the era of humanity in which He® delivers it?
There was a book my mother had called "Dispensational Truths" which
suggested that God's relationship to man evolved as man matured, such that
God always spoke at any give point in history in terms man could understand.
Heh. So "Slavery is an abomination" would be far too complex a message
to the Israelites... after they had been allegedly FREED FROM SLAVERY
themselves!
Oh, the irony.
--
GlennGlenn -- aa#825 --
"You can make an easy kind of link that, if you have a protest group protesting
a war where the cause that's being fought against is international terrorism,
you might have terrorism at that protest. You can almost argue that a protest
against that is a terrorist act. I've heard terrorism described as anything
that is violent or has an economic impact. Terrorism isn't just bombs going off
and killing people." --Mike van Winkle, a spokesperson for the California
Anti-Terrorism Information Center, another spinoff of the Homeland Security
Department
.
|
|
|
| User: "Courageous" |
|
| Title: Re: 10-COMMANDMENT BELIEVERS IN SLAVERY |
12 Aug 2004 10:02:02 PM |
|
|
Heh. So "Slavery is an abomination" would be far too complex a message
to the Israelites...
Well, it might not have been what they wanted to hear. "Kill
their men, and take their women." Yeah, that's more like it.
Nothing like pillage and rapine to make our benevolent creator's
day, eh?
C//
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "ralph" |
|
| Title: Re: 10-COMMANDMENT BELIEVERS IN SLAVERY |
12 Aug 2004 01:41:57 PM |
|
|
In message <120820040824423383%dipthotdipthot@yahoo.yahoo.com.com>,
GlennGlenn <dipthotdipthot@yahoo.yahoo.com.com> writes
In article <CTGSc.13865$nx2.9918@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
Marvin Edwards <mbe2uu@earthlink.net> wrote:
"Discourser" <discourser@cox.net> wrote in message
news:zlFSc.66751$sh.2524@fed1read06...
10-COMMANDMENTS' BELIEVERS IN SLAVERY
"nor his manservant, nor his maidservant . . ."
READ THIS:
"Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet thy
neighbor's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor
his *****, nor anything that is thy neighbor's."
-- 10th Commandment of the 10 Commandments of Moses in the Bible
_________________________
Atheists and Humanist oppose mental and physical slavery in all of its
forms.
An interesting point, except that if you quoted an atheist or humanist who
existed at that same point in history, you'd probably get the same
statements. Slavery was once a universally accepted practice. Having
defeated an enemy, was it more moral to kill each and every one or more
moral to enslave them? That was the problem back then.
But the above are purportedly the Words of God®, not the words of
humanity of that time. Are you suggesting that God® had to tailor His®
speech to accommodate the "universally accepted practice" of the era of
humanity in which He® delivers it?
I don't understand this discussion. Do people think that atheists and
humanists *should* cover their neighbour's wife etc?
If so, why?
If not, what?
--
ralph
.
|
|
|
| User: "GlennGlenn" |
|
| Title: Re: 10-COMMANDMENT BELIEVERS IN SLAVERY |
12 Aug 2004 08:52:29 PM |
|
|
In article <ea3Gc$B1n7GBFwd2@eddlewood.demon.co.uk>, ralph
<ralph@eddlewood.demon.co.uk> wrote:
In message <120820040824423383% >,
GlennGlenn <> writes
In article <CTGSc.13865$nx2.9918@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
Marvin Edwards <mbe2uu@earthlink.net> wrote:
"Discourser" <discourser@cox.net> wrote in message
news:zlFSc.66751$sh.2524@fed1read06...
10-COMMANDMENTS' BELIEVERS IN SLAVERY
"nor his manservant, nor his maidservant . . ."
READ THIS:
"Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet thy
neighbor's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor
his *****, nor anything that is thy neighbor's."
-- 10th Commandment of the 10 Commandments of Moses in the Bible
_________________________
Atheists and Humanist oppose mental and physical slavery in all
of its forms.
An interesting point, except that if you quoted an atheist or humanist who
existed at that same point in history, you'd probably get the same
statements. Slavery was once a universally accepted practice. Having
defeated an enemy, was it more moral to kill each and every one or more
moral to enslave them? That was the problem back then.
But the above are purportedly the Words of God®, not the words of
humanity of that time. Are you suggesting that God® had to tailor His®
speech to accommodate the "universally accepted practice" of the era of
humanity in which He® delivers it?
I don't understand this discussion.
Clearly not. Try reading it slowly. That often helps.
Do people think that atheists and humanists *should* cover their
(I assume you mean "covet"?)
neighbour's wife etc?
What "etc." are you talking about? General covetousness is elemental
to the success of capitalism... and coveting someone else's wife seems
endemic to the Divorce Belt... I mean the Bible Belt. (Sorry, my
goof.)
The fact is, the morality of coveting is kinda murky... and is often
vieiwed as a response to stimuli, not an act. I see something I like
very much, I just might not control how much I think about how much I
like it and want it for myself.
Meanwhile, I'm hurting no one, which makes me wonder why it hit the
"top ten" next to murder and lying.
But that is not part of the issue above. Someone tried to rationalize
away the fact that the Bible sanctions slavery by referring to the time
in which it was written... as if God® Himself® changed His® mind about
a basic moral question of human ownership of another human.
If so, why?
Tell me: Why should I regard the First Commandment with anything but
derision?
If not, what?
What what?
--
GlennGlenn -- aa#825 --
"You can make an easy kind of link that, if you have a protest group protesting
a war where the cause that's being fought against is international terrorism,
you might have terrorism at that protest. You can almost argue that a protest
against that is a terrorist act. I've heard terrorism described as anything
that is violent or has an economic impact. Terrorism isn't just bombs going off
and killing people." --Mike van Winkle, a spokesperson for the California
Anti-Terrorism Information Center, another spinoff of the Homeland Security
Department
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: 10-COMMANDMENT BELIEVERS IN SLAVERY |
13 Aug 2004 02:15:45 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 15:25:21 GMT, GlennGlenn <dipthotdipthot@yahoo.yahoo.com.com> wrote:
"Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet thy
neighbor's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor
his *****, nor anything that is thy neighbor's."
-- 10th Commandment of the 10 Commandments of Moses in the Bible
An interesting point, except that if you quoted an atheist or humanist who
existed at that same point in history, you'd probably get the same
statements. Slavery was once a universally accepted practice. Having
defeated an enemy, was it more moral to kill each and every one or more
moral to enslave them? That was the problem back then.
But the above are purportedly the Words of God®, not the words of
humanity of that time. Are you suggesting that God® had to tailor His®
speech to accommodate the "universally accepted practice" of the era of
humanity in which He® delivers it?
Not even you understand what you just said.
.
|
|
|
| User: "GlennGlenn" |
|
| Title: Re: 10-COMMANDMENT BELIEVERS IN SLAVERY |
13 Aug 2004 09:00:08 PM |
|
|
In article <lp4qh0p9ia5aot3uu5e59s7pic3auvrad2@4ax.com>, duke
<duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 15:25:21 GMT, GlennGlenn
< > wrote:
"Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet thy
neighbor's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor
his *****, nor anything that is thy neighbor's."
-- 10th Commandment of the 10 Commandments of Moses in the Bible
An interesting point, except that if you quoted an atheist or humanist who
existed at that same point in history, you'd probably get the same
statements. Slavery was once a universally accepted practice. Having
defeated an enemy, was it more moral to kill each and every one or more
moral to enslave them? That was the problem back then.
But the above are purportedly the Words of God®, not the words of
humanity of that time. Are you suggesting that God® had to tailor His®
speech to accommodate the "universally accepted practice" of the era of
humanity in which He® delivers it?
Not even you understand what you just said.
Okay, I'll use Playskool® English for you, Earl:
If your God® is, will be, and always was good, and slavery is will be,
and always was bad, then why couldn't He® just *say* so back then?
Why didn't he just, you know, call it "an abomination" (like eating
ccrustaceans) and leave it at that? Seems like many of the world's
problems would have never occurred had He® done this.
To excuse God® for not doing so by calling slavery "once a universally
accepted practice" (a lie to begin with) seems rather, well, stupid,
given His® alleged eternal nature.
--
GlennGlenn -- aa#825 --
"You can make an easy kind of link that, if you have a protest group protesting
a war where the cause that's being fought against is international terrorism,
you might have terrorism at that protest. You can almost argue that a protest
against that is a terrorist act. I've heard terrorism described as anything
that is violent or has an economic impact. Terrorism isn't just bombs going off
and killing people." --Mike van Winkle, a spokesperson for the California
Anti-Terrorism Information Center, another spinoff of the Homeland Security
Department
.
|
|
|
| User: "Courageous" |
|
| Title: Re: 10-COMMANDMENT BELIEVERS IN SLAVERY |
14 Aug 2004 11:10:58 AM |
|
|
To excuse God® for not doing so by calling slavery "once a universally
accepted practice" (a lie to begin with) seems rather, well, stupid,
given His® alleged eternal nature.
Not to forget his ability to see the future. You'd think he'd
think ahead to the time where people would revile him for these
sorts of things.
C//
.
|
|
|
| User: "GlennGlenn" |
|
| Title: Re: 10-COMMANDMENT BELIEVERS IN SLAVERY |
14 Aug 2004 12:48:48 PM |
|
|
In article <d9esh09ftqpm2lbjvtkb1sbb32q4lti18e@4ax.com>, Courageous
<dontwant@spam.com> wrote:
To excuse God® for not doing so by calling slavery "once a universally
accepted practice" (a lie to begin with) seems rather, well, stupid,
given His® alleged eternal nature.
Not to forget his ability to see the future. You'd think he'd
think ahead to the time where people would revile him for these
sorts of things.
The odd thing is that few actually *do*. The biblical God® is more
popular than ever.
--
GlennGlenn -- aa#825 --
"You can make an easy kind of link that, if you have a protest group protesting
a war where the cause that's being fought against is international terrorism,
you might have terrorism at that protest. You can almost argue that a protest
against that is a terrorist act. I've heard terrorism described as anything
that is violent or has an economic impact. Terrorism isn't just bombs going off
and killing people." --Mike van Winkle, a spokesperson for the California
Anti-Terrorism Information Center, another spinoff of the Homeland Security
Department
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "seeker" |
|
| Title: Re: 10-COMMANDMENT BELIEVERS IN SLAVERY |
14 Aug 2004 05:38:29 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 14:15:45 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 15:25:21 GMT, GlennGlenn <dipthotdipthot@yahoo.yahoo.com.com> wrote:
"Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet thy
neighbor's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor
his *****, nor anything that is thy neighbor's."
-- 10th Commandment of the 10 Commandments of Moses in the Bible
An interesting point, except that if you quoted an atheist or humanist who
existed at that same point in history, you'd probably get the same
statements. Slavery was once a universally accepted practice. Having
defeated an enemy, was it more moral to kill each and every one or more
moral to enslave them? That was the problem back then.
But the above are purportedly the Words of God®, not the words of
humanity of that time. Are you suggesting that God® had to tailor His®
speech to accommodate the "universally accepted practice" of the era of
humanity in which He® delivers it?
Not even you understand what you just said.
Seems perfectly clear to me. The bible is written by man, and
reflects the beliefs and customs of the men at that time. Today it
would read You will not covet or lust after your neighbors SUV.
Man doesn't` understand the nature of God, religions use God or god
beliefs to control the actions of other men. All to often for evil
selfish purposes. In a few rare cases religion is used to promote good
causes, then some preacher will get power hungry, and start ripping
people off. Never trust a man that claims to speak for God, for he is
a liar. Trust the man that tells you to think for your self, and
search for the truth. Jesus will provide you with the truth, but not
use a preacher to do it. Never believe a man that takes up a
collection to pay for his service, he doesn`t work for God or Jesus
he`s a panhandler.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Marvin Edwards" |
|
| Title: Re: 10-COMMANDMENT BELIEVERS IN SLAVERY |
14 Aug 2004 08:42:32 PM |
|
|
"seeker" <seek@utopia.com> wrote in message
news:sb3th01ietkqv0oqiuearunp3b70j4g9q6@4ax.com...
Seems perfectly clear to me. The bible is written by man, and reflects
the beliefs and customs of the men at that time. Today it would read You
will not covet or lust after your neighbors SUV. <
Indeed.
Man doesn't` understand the nature of God, religions use God or god
beliefs to control the actions of other men. All to often for evil selfish
purposes. In a few rare cases religion is used to promote good causes, then
some preacher will get power hungry, and start ripping people off. ... <
That's a bit too cynical for me. I was raised by Christians and my mother is
still very active in her church. There's not a selfish or evil bone in her
body. The point of the "God" concept, I believe, is to encourage people to
do and be good. Most religions teach some form of morality and ethics, and
that is a valuable thing. But you are right that there are many examples of
human corruption in the churches, just like there are in most other human
enterprises. I don't think the religion itself is the source of the problem.
Most people who go to church on Sunday are basically good people, and most
ministers sincerely attempt to improve the character and behavior of their
people.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bobs Boyfriend" |
|
| Title: Re: 10-COMMANDMENT BELIEVERS IN SLAVERY |
14 Aug 2004 09:07:00 PM |
|
|
In article <cczTc.25560$Jp6.10029@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
"Marvin Edwards" <mbe2uu@earthlink.net> wrote:
"seeker" <seek@utopia.com> wrote in message
news:sb3th01ietkqv0oqiuearunp3b70j4g9q6@4ax.com...
Seems perfectly clear to me. The bible is written by man, and reflects
the beliefs and customs of the men at that time. Today it would read You
will not covet or lust after your neighbors SUV. <
Indeed.
Man doesn't` understand the nature of God, religions use God or god
beliefs to control the actions of other men. All to often for evil selfish
purposes. In a few rare cases religion is used to promote good causes, then
some preacher will get power hungry, and start ripping people off. ... <
That's a bit too cynical for me. I was raised by Christians and my mother is
still very active in her church. There's not a selfish or evil bone in her
body. The point of the "God" concept, I believe, is to encourage people to
do and be good. Most religions teach some form of morality and ethics, and
that is a valuable thing. But you are right that there are many examples of
human corruption in the churches, just like there are in most other human
enterprises. I don't think the religion itself is the source of the problem.
Most people who go to church on Sunday are basically good people, and most
ministers sincerely attempt to improve the character and behavior of their
people.
The religous disprove their own religion through their own
contradictions.
For example, if you have been following the discussion with Diana, you
will not that her own beliefs disproves the existance of a jesus that is
found in predominantly in the Christian religions. What is Christianity
without the Christ figure?
By Diana's estimation, a human being can only exist if their is a
combining of male and female sex cells. This discounts the existence of
jesus as a human male. For jesus to have existed and for Diana's beliefs
to be true the following assumptions can be made:
1. Jesus must have had two human parents
2. If jesus was a clone then he still must have had human parents
3. For Jesus to be an acitvated egg, there still must be human parents
as she sees this process as cloning
4. Jesus must be the by product of an interspecies mating, since god is
not described as human and Mary was
5. Or that the defintion of a human that Diana provided is incomplete
given the "facts" that are accepted that jesus was human, god wasn't and
that Mary was.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Marvin Edwards" |
|
| Title: Re: 10-COMMANDMENT BELIEVERS IN SLAVERY |
15 Aug 2004 07:46:50 AM |
|
|
Interesting. But if you have an all-powerful God in the mix, who can even
alter the nature of reality, then such contradictions are easily overcome
with a little imagination. For example, if God created the male sperm and
implanted it in Mary's egg then everything else falls into place.
"Bob's Boyfriend" <together@wyoming.com> wrote in message
news:together-566D0C.22071314082004@nntp.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...
In article <cczTc.25560$Jp6.10029@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
"Marvin Edwards" <mbe2uu@earthlink.net> wrote:
"seeker" <seek@utopia.com> wrote in message
news:sb3th01ietkqv0oqiuearunp3b70j4g9q6@4ax.com...
Seems perfectly clear to me. The bible is written by man, and
reflects
the beliefs and customs of the men at that time. Today it would read You
will not covet or lust after your neighbors SUV. <
Indeed.
Man doesn't` understand the nature of God, religions use God or god
beliefs to control the actions of other men. All to often for evil
selfish
purposes. In a few rare cases religion is used to promote good causes,
then
some preacher will get power hungry, and start ripping people off. ... <
That's a bit too cynical for me. I was raised by Christians and my
mother is
still very active in her church. There's not a selfish or evil bone in
her
body. The point of the "God" concept, I believe, is to encourage people
to
do and be good. Most religions teach some form of morality and ethics,
and
that is a valuable thing. But you are right that there are many examples
of
human corruption in the churches, just like there are in most other
human
enterprises. I don't think the religion itself is the source of the
problem.
Most people who go to church on Sunday are basically good people, and
most
ministers sincerely attempt to improve the character and behavior of
their
people.
The religous disprove their own religion through their own
contradictions.
For example, if you have been following the discussion with Diana, you
will not that her own beliefs disproves the existance of a jesus that is
found in predominantly in the Christian religions. What is Christianity
without the Christ figure?
By Diana's estimation, a human being can only exist if their is a
combining of male and female sex cells. This discounts the existence of
jesus as a human male. For jesus to have existed and for Diana's beliefs
to be true the following assumptions can be made:
1. Jesus must have had two human parents
2. If jesus was a clone then he still must have had human parents
3. For Jesus to be an acitvated egg, there still must be human parents
as she sees this process as cloning
4. Jesus must be the by product of an interspecies mating, since god is
not described as human and Mary was
5. Or that the defintion of a human that Diana provided is incomplete
given the "facts" that are accepted that jesus was human, god wasn't and
that Mary was.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bobs Boyfriend" |
|
| Title: Re: 10-COMMANDMENT BELIEVERS IN SLAVERY |
15 Aug 2004 10:59:36 AM |
|
|
In article <_WITc.21913$nx2.5621@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
"Marvin Edwards" <mbe2uu@earthlink.net> wrote:
Interesting. But if you have an all-powerful God in the mix, who can even
alter the nature of reality, then such contradictions are easily overcome
with a little imagination. For example, if God created the male sperm and
implanted it in Mary's egg then everything else falls into place.
How did he accomplish this?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Marvin Edwards" |
|
| Title: Re: 10-COMMANDMENT BELIEVERS IN SLAVERY |
15 Aug 2004 11:34:15 AM |
|
|
"Bob's Boyfriend" <together@wyoming.com> wrote in message
news:together-5AC332.11594915082004@nntp.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...
In article <_WITc.21913$nx2.5621@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
"Marvin Edwards" <mbe2uu@earthlink.net> wrote:
Interesting. But if you have an all-powerful God in the mix, who can
even
alter the nature of reality, then such contradictions are easily
overcome
with a little imagination. For example, if God created the male sperm
and
implanted it in Mary's egg then everything else falls into place.
How did he accomplish this?
Teleportation? Abduction by God-fearing aliens in a flying saucer who
implanted the carefully contructed sperm into Mary? The point is that all
someone really has to say is that God has the ability to do anything, and
presume he did His thing, in whatever mysterious way "his wonders to
perform". "The ways of the almighty are beyond man's ken." Etc.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bobs Boyfriend" |
|
| Title: Re: 10-COMMANDMENT BELIEVERS IN SLAVERY |
15 Aug 2004 11:50:03 AM |
|
|
In article <bgMTc.22799$nx2.22377@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
"Marvin Edwards" <mbe2uu@earthlink.net> wrote:
"Bob's Boyfriend" <together@wyoming.com> wrote in message
news:together-5AC332.11594915082004@nntp.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...
In article <_WITc.21913$nx2.5621@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
"Marvin Edwards" <mbe2uu@earthlink.net> wrote:
Interesting. But if you have an all-powerful God in the mix, who can
even
alter the nature of reality, then such contradictions are easily
overcome
with a little imagination. For example, if God created the male sperm
and
implanted it in Mary's egg then everything else falls into place.
How did he accomplish this?
Teleportation? Abduction by God-fearing aliens in a flying saucer who
implanted the carefully contructed sperm into Mary? The point is that all
someone really has to say is that God has the ability to do anything, and
presume he did His thing, in whatever mysterious way "his wonders to
perform". "The ways of the almighty are beyond man's ken." Etc.
And that is the point. Diana must reconcile what she knows to be true
and what her religion requires her to believe.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "seeker" |
|
| Title: Re: 10-COMMANDMENT BELIEVERS IN SLAVERY |
18 Aug 2004 08:53:52 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 01:42:32 GMT, "Marvin Edwards"
<mbe2uu@earthlink.net> wrote:
"seeker" <seek@utopia.com> wrote in message
news:sb3th01ietkqv0oqiuearunp3b70j4g9q6@4ax.com...
Seems perfectly clear to me. The bible is written by man, and reflects
the beliefs and customs of the men at that time. Today it would read You
will not covet or lust after your neighbors SUV. <
Indeed.
Man doesn't` understand the nature of God, religions use God or god
beliefs to control the actions of other men. All to often for evil selfish
purposes. In a few rare cases religion is used to promote good causes, then
some preacher will get power hungry, and start ripping people off. ... <
That's a bit too cynical for me. I was raised by Christians and my mother is
still very active in her church. There's not a selfish or evil bone in her
body. The point of the "God" concept, I believe, is to encourage people to
do and be good. Most religions teach some form of morality and ethics, and
that is a valuable thing. But you are right that there are many examples of
human corruption in the churches, just like there are in most other human
enterprises. I don't think the religion itself is the source of the problem.
Most people who go to church on Sunday are basically good people, and most
ministers sincerely attempt to improve the character and behavior of their
people.
I too was raised a Christian, and still believe in God, and the
teaching of Jesus. Basically I agree with every thing you say. However
most Christians support laws that force other to live according to
their creed.
We Christians have to stand up and speak out against the evil that
any church promotes.
Listen to the Atheist most left the Church because of the stupid
evil they witnessed. Atheist don`t need to try to convert, the church
drives away some of the best and most intelligent. Who said Christians
are the best argument against a God?
With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people
can do evil; but for good people to do evil - that takes religion.
[Steven Weinberg]
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
