Seriously, what is wrong with Christians?

They don't believe in morals tests but do believe in drug tests; and, not only that, but they are willing to deny and disparage Intelligent Design "theory", through the coercive use of force of a secular and temporal State while laying claim to the subjective value of morals of Religion.

 

Explain svp how this is different from doing the same for the teaching
of voodoo, astrology, scientology, and Maoism in publicly funded schools.

As for your "morals of religion", the endless falsehoods and
bad reasoning that come from the fundies are their morals, and, they are welcome to them.

Lkikewise to the morals of the "god" in the ot.

No, we outside the "faith" dont lay claim to those.

What, exactly, is a morals test? Did you make that up?
Did you make up the thing about "they" who dont "believe in" it?

Who are "they"?

 

The Old Testament isn't about the "morals of God"... Its the history of the Jewish people from the time of their ancestor (Adam) and their relationship with God.

 

I will agree that it is not about god in the sense that god is a literary device, a fictitious character

 

Whether or not the OT is "about" the morals of God, it can't be denied they are on display there, in a literalists understanding.

 

The Bible being interpreted as history or science is relatively new.. Historically the Bible read as metaphysical.. to be studied for spiritual enlightenment.

I think... what you are finding difficult is the gyrations that some Christians go thru to make it inerrant.

The ancient Jewish sages state that if science trumps the allegory .. science wins.

The Holy Spirit is sometimes referred to as the breath of God.

 

Uh, no I didn't, you might want to reread what I wrote.

Either that, or those who reject Him are.

I have no clue what you mean but I'm glad you're entertaining yourself.

- - - Updated - - -

Suit yourself, it won't stop me from responding to your errors.

 

I took your side here when someone did, as you do, misquoting and misrepresenting.

Too bad you prove incapable of taking responsibility for yourself regarding this:

(remember this?)


(Since you made this up this falsehood about me equating these)

and are still trying to put the blame off on others, for your own egregious behaviour.

I notice you dont "respond to my error", so I guess that is a tacit admission its not an error. Tacit is not really very straightforward and honourable but its a bit better than a lie.

Man up, sometime, if you have it in you.

 

Since the Council of Nicea and before it has been attempted to reconcile it literally.

 

Im not having a difficulty with it, I know a lot of people are bonkers, and for some, religion makes them worse.

 

I never thought of the Council of Nicea in those terms.

 

We note the endless justifications / denial of OT slavery, rape, torture, and mass murder of innocents by or in the name of said "god" in whose image we are said to be formed.

 

The Arianism debate is all about literalism.

- - - Updated - - -

Totally agree.

 

I see..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arianism

No end of controversy.

 

You can see that the argument is about whether he is literally the son of god or one entity and so on.

 

Oh yes.. but so much was written about Jesus and there were so many opinions..... so many writings were not included in the canon.

 

That is exactly why the Council was convened, to put a stop to the controversies of the time.
Some that disagreed were excommunicated at Nicea.

 

I had read that somewhere.. It had taken on correct political implications.

I know you are familiar with these writings that have survived.

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/

 

I've come to the conclusion all your blather about others lying is nothing but projection from you. You seem incapable of debate.

- - - Updated - - -

True, but this is a far cry from saying Nicea 'invented' Christianity, as some claim.

 

Ok. Start a thread about that.
How does it relate to what Margot and I were discussing?
Try to focus, kiddo.

 

Do I need to post sarcasm alerts or something? I realize there's a 50 point difference in IQs at play. But I keep trying to give people credit for having SOME level of intelligence. Does anyone around here have a sense of humor for that matter?

And am I the ONLY person with enough sense to know that the Bible either was or was not inspired by god. If it was then it should have MUCH higher standards than it does. And if it wasn't then they should quit saying that it was. Letting them bounce back and forth between the two when it suits their needs is disingenuous at best.

 

Perhaps this is evidence that what you said about IQ is correct, that it can mean brilliance in one area and poverty in another.
Perhaps you are just a particularly lousy communicator. Puzzle that at your next meeting.
But perhaps I'm wrong.
Posting the exact opposite of what someone says and attributing it to them may seem brilliant in your lofty circles.
To us Luddites it seems merely stupid or dishonest.

 

Your IQ again? Two of my brothers are Mensa.. and they think Mensas are largely creeps.

What have you accomplished with your super IQ?

 

We know one thing it didn't provide him.
In general his posts could have been written by a provocative middle schooler.

 

Oh I thought he was a she.......

When he sells his business for 60 million dollars, I will be impressed with his IQ.

One can talk a good game or DO.................