"Slavery and beheadings, it is part of our religion"

are you referring to the God that the Jewish,Muslims and Christians believe in?

I mean that God ordered people killed for just picking up sticks around the yard on the weekend, not a nice guy at all, heard he was very jealous too

he even pulled a Andrea Yates and drowned billions of children.... so they say

.

 

Maybe you don't, let's find out: have you removed the parts of your religious texts that imply that killing gays is a good thing (if any). If you're already a Modern Secular Humanist, so you don't have those in your overall belief system then great, otherwise, if your texts have them, have you removed them (parts that say to kill gays)?

 

- - - Updated - - -
Well it is likely that the scenario you present as a hypothetical, is also an improbability based on the fact that you named it as a hypothetical. Therefore, based on your improbable scenario, I would have to say that the answer would be 'no, it is highly improbable."

 

The gods of the Abrahamic faiths, yes. Obviously not worthy of worship (except by maybe Satanists.)

 

What are you babbling about?

 

See, guys, THIS is what I'm talking about! Jesus has sucked the morality right out of them. All he had to say was "yes, if Jesus ACTUALLY approved of slavery then of course I'd condemn that as immoral, but again, I do not think he did". The reason they can't do that is because Jesus, their role model, is so immoral, he's put so much fear in their heart, that they can't be moral. Sad, so sad.

 

If your religious book said to kill gays (Bible/Islamic texts do), then have you removed those parts? If you're not of those faiths, then if they did (hypothetically) say to kill gays would you remove those parts from your belief system? A moral person would of course say "yes!" [Note exclamation mark.]

- - - Updated - - -

I can read religious people like a book (of course I knew he's say something like this - anything but ever even entertain the idea that Jesus could be immoral - even in a hypothetical - clearly brainwashing takes place in churches)....well, not an unclear book like the Bible, but, uh, a clear book like a Richard Dawkins book.

 

Did Jesus actually say such a thing as you described, or are you still trying to convince others of your highly improbable scenario as being real, true, valid, actual? You are living in a fantasy world with such irrational thoughts. If grasshoppers were capable of carrying weapons comparable to a 45 magnum, then it is reasonable to assume that birds would not mess with them if the birds knew what those weapons could do.

 

What religious book are you referring to? What difference does it make what I did with it? For the record, not part of my belief system says "kill gays" and I'm completely baffled at why you would suppose it does from anything I've written.

 

Then go peddle your wares to people who are willing to listen to the babble of such people as Dawkins.
BTW: I would not waste my money on such books as those that he writes.

 

Great, so you're not of the Abrahamic faith, then, correct?

 

What difference does my faith make as to anything I've written?

 

Instead of science and reason, you prefer books with unicorns, talking donkeys, talking snakes, dragons, people living to 950 years old, the earth is 6000 years old, kill gays, women are worth 1/2 a man, and eternal torture for moral people who don't buy into Jesus' magic tricks.

- - - Updated - - -

All I'm saying is that you would not be moral if, repeat if, your religious texts (not that you've written) said to kill gays (Bible/Islamic texts do), and you weren't moral enough to remove those parts, that's all I'm saying.

- - - Updated - - -

Hypothetically, if he did (he may not have), would you condemn him for accepting slavery? This is not admitting he did, just if, repeat if, for argument's sake. Would you?

 

Thanks for sharing your opinion. So what does it have to do with the thread or my posts?

 

Do I sense a dodge?

- - - Updated - - -

Yeah, I'm pretty sure by your constant evasions that your religious book DOES say to kill gays, and you can't admit your religious book is wrong, because then your whole world view would be shattered. Sad, really.

 

You'd have to have asked me something relevant for it to be a dodge.

 

I haven't said anything about my religious views. I have pointed out that the Bible contains passages permitting slavery and calls for stoning people for all sorts of infractions, and having gay sex I believe is one of them.

For the record, I think that slavery is wrong, and so is stoning people, regardless of what the Bible says.

 

I applaud that.
And do you believe that moral Christians, if they care for their children, should remove the parts that say to kill those kids if they turn out to be gay?

 

Is that all your getting from that article? Its pretty chilling really. That article is indicative of the main goal of Isis. World control. It also demonstrates that a muslim population values stability over freedom. Yeah..they are scared...but things are stable. The article demonstrates the difference between a nation with Christian values and a nation without.

Slavery and beheadings is all you get from that? And what is this about "texts". Who cares what is in a book, Bible or Koran, if you are a non-believer. We are ignorant of the Koran---but we can see what is happening in the world, what people of different faiths are doing. Its the fruits.....not the word on paper that you pay attention to.

You ought to hope that this nation stays Christian....otherwise we will willingly lose our freedoms here like Muslims are over there. You can't depend on Atheists to protect our freedoms or notice a real enemy even when its in front of their nose.

 

IMO no one should read religious text of any stripe too literally.

Do you believe that you must support slavery and stoning gays to be a Christian?

 

Should we remove all killing and references to slavery from the history books as well? Sorry kids, that rumor about an Atomic Bomb of Japan was a myth.

 

The difference of course is that your magic invisible friend (god/jesus) approves of the violence/slavery in the Bible, as he often did the violence himself, or encouraged it, or approved of slavery. That's because you picked an immoral invisible friend, I'm afraid. Unless of course genocide, rape, slavery in the Bible is actually morally ok......

 

Because secular humanism is so great....

I looked up the local chapter and it had this event posted for children...http://lowcountryhumanists.org/eventview.php?idno=462

... well here is part of that Bible they are promoting to read to the children...https://www.facebook.com/AwkwardBible/photos/pb.313075568706546.-2207520000.1419303705./959587320722031/?type=1&theater



Holy freakshow Batman. Modern Secular Humanism is well represented by you, that's for certain. I wouldn't doubt you are on some terrorist watch list after looking at your website.

 

Here's a beheading story from the hadiths

(1) Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu'minin: No woman of Banu Qurayzah was killed except one. She was with me, talking and laughing on her back and belly (extremely), while the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) was killing her people with the swords. Suddenly a man called her name: Where is so-and-so? She said: I I asked: What is the matter with you? She said: I did a new act. She said: The man took her and beheaded her. She said: I will not forget that she was laughing extremely although she knew that she would be killed. (Book #14, Hadith #2665)
http://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=14&translator=3&start=0&number=2665#2665

 

And your preference is a multitude of books all based upon the same assumption and that assumption is needed to justify the use of the primary tool used by the authors of those books.... that tool being the 'scientific method'.... a tool whose foundation has never been proven to bee true.

I don't care to join you in your fantasy world. As you have pointed out I have my own fantasy world (at least according to you). Can you offer proof that the scientific method and its foundation assumptions are true?