Presidential seal of approval.

Where do you think the morals you were taught derived from when you were growing up came from? And don't quote me some obscure old testiment passage. Lincoln was a pretty smart guy.

And that came from where? You can't deny the influence of the Bible on society, even if you don't like it. Like the Magna Carta.

No lying? Where? Dictatorships? Romans considered every non Roman as less than human. Many cultures had human sacrifices.

Why can't you give the Bible the slightest credit?

I like Ecclesiastes too. People had alot of the same concerns as today in alot of ways although things were so different. But I appreciate that you can express that although you so often focus on the negatives.

So if you listen to the bible why hasn't the Holy Spirit convicted you yet. Oh maybe cause it says the hardness of your heart

OM obviously finds offense with the Bible and speaks out frequently against it in ways that I find unfair BUT he has taken the effort to read some of it. The Holy Spirit doesn't automatic give rise to seeing the Truth but It should prevail upon you as a believer to try to help guide him to a better understanding of it so as to have a possibly of having him get there, without rancor.

It's claimed to be written by the smartest person in the world up until that time. Take that for what you will. It's more philosophy then religious doctrine. It would be the first book of the Old Testament I'd recommend anyone to read. Seriously, it has short passages and it packs a punch. Try a few pages.

I like history so any thousands of year old Greek or Biblical writings I find fascinating. Homer. Caesar's book on the Gallic wars is a marvel in concise writing. I only wish I could read the original.

Octavia then explain why nations that have had huge Christian influence are thriving, but yet Islamic and Hindu societies are mostly third world

Japan may not be Christian, but it was essentially a puppet of the USA for a while, which was very dominantly Christian.

Korea was American backed, Israel was American backed, China used socialism to its advantage, and I’m not sure about Indonesia.

China? Korea? India? Indonesia? Israel?

Well Japan has had its share of missionaries and also has been westernized
the problem with Africa is that the still choose to live in the stone age due to them being animistic

wOw

The. U.N. would like to know your location

Thriving? The only one that is has been in decline since the 1950s. Countries it backs, mostly in Europe, are boosted by it. And thanks to its current goverment administration, its demise had been rapidly accelerating.

Indus Valley civilizations round 8000 years ago may prove even older than those of the Fertile Crescent - traditionally recognized as the birthplace of civilization.
Hindu religious texts were written millenia before the Jewish God, or even the Jews themselves, or their Canaanite ancestors for that matter - came into being. And yes, there was no Christianity then. Not till 6000 years after civilization blossomed in India.
Third World? They were the First.
Do you know what Europe was doing at the time? No worries, no one else does either. In terms of history, they did not exist, nor would for 5000 years.

Up until a bit over 500 years ago, it was the Islamic World that was thriving. The leader in culture, knowledge, the arts, technology, law, social development, economy... The Silk Road was the economic engine then, extending all the way from China, it too thriving.
Do you know what Europe - Christian Europe - was doing then? This delightful excursion in history known as the Dark Ages you may have heard of. Oh, they did plenty - torture heretics, burn witches, toiled for the Lords that owned them and raped their wives, sell unwanted children into slavery or leave them in the woods to fend for themselves, throw unwanted old folks off cliffs, and attributed scientific inquiry to the hand of the Devil himself punishable by the most heinous death imaginable while priests debated how many angels can fit on the head of a pin. At one point the fine art of writing was almost extinct save for some Irish monks. Everytime some bad thing happened, at least they had Yahweh's Chosen to blame it on, so they got burnt to the ground. But abortion wasn't really happening and not even women wore makeup, so it was all good.

Amen

Even so, everything in Genesis up to Noah was before Hinduism. 99% of the world’s sentient population was killed in a flood that destroyed the ENTIRE Earth.

No.

99% of wha? the Earth doesn't look destroyed. And the Indus Valley was farming as usual while this destructive flood supposedly took place.

Google Gilgamesh for fun.

My point being: how do you know the Indus Valley was being farmed at the time if you weren't there?

I don't get the joke.

Wow. Judging by your below comment you were in the Indus Valley at the time of the flood. You must be really old.

Sure, guy, I saw the rise and fall.

You must be really stupid.

You're the one who acted like he had proof of farming in the Indus valley at that time.

You truly are an idiot.

If you want to feign ignorance I'm cool with that. Not especially sure you're feigning it though. :

Says the troll who's asking if I was a farmer in the Indus Valley 8000 years ago.

Define "murder."
In your view, abortion is not murder.
In mine, even breathing is murder, as the countless microbes that die with each breath we take can attest to. Almost.

In between, wars, executions, famine, and other almost-sort-of-but-not-according-to-my-dictionary variation on killing that which is in our convenience for us to do so wend their way to the side of the line of our choosing. Cannibals, head hunters, human sacrificers - hey, it isn't murder if it to appease to the Rain Gods, right? Meat is murder, so let's eat grain, and hope all we kill when we till, fertilize, pesticide, and herbicide acres to death understand their deaths are to feed the most wastefully murderous creatures on Earth, humans.

Murder doesn't mean squat, just a cute word which allows us to judge others while offering justification for us doing the same.

All that 'non-murderous' killing is also theft. Agriculture is theft. Property is theft. Jobs are theft. You rip someone off to do something that costs you less to do, otherwise it wouldn't be profitable. The best, most efficient workers? Volunteers.

Lying is another bs word. Taqiyya and kitman (sanctioned by Islam to be done unto us evil infidels), lying to our enemies, lying to our allies, lying in internationally recognized legally binding treaties made to be broken, lying while bargaining, lying while playing poker. The closest to an honest person you can meet is one that admits they lie.

Ironically, it is the Bible which elevated humanity to Lordship over all on Earth and thus custodians of it and, over time, responsible for all under our dominion that ultimately birthed this thing called America which, in its self absorbed pompous superiority complex, took it upon itself after WWII to recreate the World in its image, shaking it from the rusting clanging chains of tradition and turning progress from the turgid process spanning centuries to one where even the most viciously dangerous of us have more rights than average citizens used to have a century ago.
This was no accident, no coincidence. This was not despite the Bible, but because of it.

Amen.

Yes, the Bible should endorse pagan cults, right :rollseyes:

How can you demonstrate that? That's the faith part. Our brains are the single most complex system/organ/computer/creation or whatever you want to call it. It more complex than NASA technology. Even Purgey lol. Have you seen the Harvard computer simulation that came out 10 years ago that displayed what goes on at a microscopic level with the cell? How can you not think we, and other creatures, were intelligently designed?

Remember, back in those days there were alot of religious cults that sacrificed children and were alot worse than the Israelites. As my below comment was a tad as_____ish.

Your right cause the bible makes clear this world is going to be destroyed. We need to prepare for the afterlife

It's called 'faith'. You prove there isn't one.

You just demonstated one gigantic problem I always had with Christianity. It always alienates, trivializes, and sometimes, even demonizes the world we're living in. It gives people the idea of the "Promised Land" to which they'll go after they die, so who gives a shit about this planet? Humans have, by far, caused more harm to this planet and all living things on it than all other species combined. And after all that, Christians have the nerve to call this planet wretched and cry for God and Jesus to save them from their (self-created) Hell on Earth and wait for thr afterlife which doesn't exist, while leaving behind a ruined paradise which does exist. Pitiful.

First of all, do you get all your quotes from dictators like Napoleon?
Also, you make it seem like emotional dependency on Jesus is a bad thing.

Dictators like Napoleon are most fit to talk about control and tools of control. Hitler, Göering, Mussolini and Stalin also have a few good ones regarding the topic. Context. Learn it.

Linguistic issues (english is not my native naguage). By emotional dependancy, I mean an addiction. That's right, an addiction. Christians cannot live without Christianity just like alcoholics cannot live without alcohol. They cannot live without the erroneus belief that they will go to Heaven and their enemies will go to Hell, the erroneous beliefs that Jesus died on the cross for their sins so they don't have to facw their inner darkness themselves, because that'd actually require some guts on their side, and the most erroneus belief of them all, that God is on their side and will save them from from all the evil of this "sinful" world so they don't have to do it themselves, because that'd actually require some guts on their side.

And like all other addictions, this one has it's symptoms and withdrawal symptoms.
Symptoms:
- Inferiority complex
- Superiority comlex (yes, those two simultaneously)
- Willful ignorance of the flaws of Christianity
- Aggresive outbursts/condescending responses to anyone attemting to criticize Christianity for even the tiniest problems
- Naīve belief in whatever priests/pastors/preachers preach
- Childishness and irresponsibility (expecting God to do everything for them via prayers)
- Looking at Judaism and Islam as if those three are actually three seperate religions
- (Unconscious) condemnation of all the members of other religions
- Demonization of anything and anyone opposing Christianity and many other symptoms
Withdrawal (atheism) symptoms:
- Existential crisis/nihilism
- Temporary depression
- Great discomfort in using terms like "God" or "spirituality"
- Condemnation of every religion by applying the flaws of Christianity to all of them
- Scientism and many other symptoms

Do you think now that emotional depedancy on Jesus is not a bad thing?

Those Christians that told you that are either not really Christians, or they're just really bad at presenting the Gospel to people.

You're not threatened to choose anything when it comes to salvation. If I offer someone a ticket to a movie as a gift, they can choose to take it or not. I'm not threatening them to accept the gift.

So, now we're going with the "they aren't REAL Christians" excuse, huh? Sorry, seen that before, ain't working. But let's assume, for the sake of the argument, that it is true, and that also, a Chriatian is a person which lives according to everything in the Bible, obeying every single thing it says. It is, then, impossible to be a "true" Christian (or a "true" Jew, for that matter) because of the massive amount of self-conflict and contradictions within the Bible. Proof:
Exodus 20:13 "Thou shalt not kill"; Deuteronomy 13:12-16 Kill everyone who worships other Gods, destroy the town they live in and never rebuild it.
Exodus 20:12 "Honor thy father and mother..."; Luke 14:26 Whoever does not hate his mother, father, wife, brothers, sisters and his own life cannot be a disciple of Jesus.
I'd say these two examples are enough. And these are just law-wise contradictions. Story-wise contradictions run MUCH deeper and grrater. So, with all these inconsistencies, no wonder Christians (and Jews) are such collosal hypocrites.

Let me correct your movie ticket analogy. A guy comes to you and tells you that he'll give you a movie ticket if you become his friend. If you refuse, he'll kidnap you and give you to a psychopath who'll torture you for the rest of your life.
Your analogy would hold true if there was an option to get neither Heaven nor Hell. But since Christians don't believe in reincarnation, or in the end of the existence of the soul after death, your analogy is not very accurate.

Mm. So you think there are people in the world that have never done anything wrong?

I said that I understand where people who say that everyone sins come from. We have all done some wrong, whether small or big, purposefully or accidentally, punished or unpunished.
But Christianity manages to create this inferiority complex by constantly using terms such as "sinful" or "unworthy" and utterly destroys their self-esteem by doing so. And on top of that, Christianity gives this figure of Jesus, and portrays him in as godly and positive manner possible: "The Truth, The Life and The Way", "Alpha and Omega", "The One who died for our sins", " The Son of God" etc. And when a person with such an inferiority complex witnesses such a magnificent, selfless and virtuous figure such as Jesus, they immediately devote all their thoughtsand emotions to Jesus, hoping they'll be like him. This creates a strong, hardly-breakable emotional chain between Christians and Christ and is yet another reason why it is difficult for Christians to let go of Christianity.

Also, Christianity tends to use the term "sinful" in such a way as if humans are inherently bad, immoral and evil, and need Jesus and the Bible to go on the right track. And this, again, creates an emotional dependancy on Jesus and the Bible.

If you haven't figured this out by now, my perspective on Christianity is such as a mind-control device, because that's all it really is. The best way to bring people to submission by slavers (government) is to convince them that it will all be worth it in the end (Heaven).

"Religion is excellent for keeping common people quiet. Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich." - Napoleon Bonaparte

The funny thing is. All your points you've made hinge upon my beliefs being erroneous. Yet you can't prove that they are erroneous.

What do you mean "I can't prove they're erroneus"? It's obvious they're erroneus. It doesn't need proof or explanation.

But fine, let's have it your way, and have me explain why Christian beliefs are erroneus (I can' believe I'm doing this).

1. The idea of Jesus as a historical person. Other that the NT books, there is not a single evidence from the first century that there ever existed a person called Jesus Christ, or anyone similar to him. No rabbi, philosopher, government official, historian or anyone else (other than the apostoles) ever spoke or wrote about him. NT books are the only written document from the time where Jesus is mentioned. And yes, I understand that absence of the evidence is not evidence of the absence, but this is a different situation, for one single reason: Roman empire. Jesus was accused of claiming the right to the throne as the King of Israel, was sentenced to death by crucifiction, resurrected three days later and ascencded some time later. If you expect me to believe that the Roman government, which was very obssesive about documenting everything, never wrote anything anout any of what I've said, then you're out of your mind. Hell, nobody writing anything about Jesus turning water into wine is suspicious enough.

2. God's forgiveness. So, according to the NT books, Father gave birth to his Son through Virgin Mary, had him preach all around and perform miracles, until the Romans noticed him and crucified him, so our sins may be forgiven.
First, why would Father be willing to forgive humanity for it's sins in the first place? He wasn't willing to do that when he flooded the Earth, so why now?
Second, Father has a very strange and sadistic way of forgiving people. Sending his Son to the most brutal and painful death known at the time, so we may be forgiven. Was it really necessairy? And don't forget, Father and Son are both the same God, so essentially, God sacrificed himself to himself, so he can save us from what he has condemned us to. If that's not erroneus to you, I don't know what to say.

3. Biblical contradictions. I've already explained this one, so I don't think anything more needs to be said.

That's about all I can think of and the moment, and I'd say it's more that enough.

Christians aren't supposed to say "Join us or you'll burn forever in anguish etc."
Going to Heaven or Hell is a result of the choice you make whether or not to accept Christ, not the driving force for that choice. The driving force is either closeness or separation from God. Don't judge all Christians by what just one might tell you.

And yet, a great majority of Christians I have talked to threaten me with Hell by saying stuff like "May God have mercy on your soul", "You'll fall into the hand of the one your serve, demon-worshipper" and "Oh, you'll be roasted in Hell so fiercely for your blasphemy" for questioning their pathetic beliefs. I would be disgusted if I wasn't amused by them.

It doesn't matter if Heaven or Hell are the driving force or not. If you're told that one decision yields eternal satisfacion, and the other eternal damnation, you are by default threatened and coerced to choose the former, bcause of the fear of ending up getting the latter.

Your first point is untrue. I've heard of secular accounts of Jesus. First one that comes to my mind is a historian from the time, Josephus, who wrote of Jesus.
Yep, just checked, and basically every historian, Christian or secular, can't deny the existence of Jesus. Maybe you should do a little research next time.
Second and third points aren't any sort of proof, they're interpretation and opinions.

I think you don't understand what a Christian is. A Christian isn't someone who does a lot of good things and obeys all aspects of the law. A Christian is someone who excepts Christ and asks Him to take away their sin.

This was a good explanation I heard for the Luke passage:
Jesus is not teaching a new commandment of hating people. He is teaching about the cost of following Him.
The clue is in Luke 14:33 when Jesus says:

“In the same way, any of you who does not give up everything he has cannot be my disciple.”

It’s about what we must be prepared to do to follow Jesus. It’s about giving up everything, even our very lives for Him. He doesn’t say, “by doing this you will get into heaven”. Jesus clearly teaches that through faith in Him we have eternal life (John 3:16). Through His death on the cross, we have the forgiveness of sins (Romans 6:23).

However, as His followers, are we willing to place Him in first position and place the most important people in our lives in second place?

Let’s paint the scene. In Luke 14:25, large crowds were travelling with Jesus because they had seen him healing people, feeding people and teaching people at no cost. Why not follow Jesus? You can get something for nothing. However, in this passage we see Jesus turn around to them that following him is not without cost - you have to place him before other important people in your lives. You even have to place him before yourselves.

To get his point across he uses very emotive and challenging language - you must hate everyone else. In so doing he is not saying that you do it literally but you must be prepared to put everything else second

As for the Exodus example, by kill that means murder. Murder is different from judgment. That's why killing in war isn't a sin in itself.

Your version of said movie theater analogy is flawed. Our punishment for sin is Hell. God is offering an alternative for that. We were already "not going to see the good movie" but then we can choose to receive the ticket and go, or we can refuse and just not go.
A better analogy might be walking down a road towards a cliff. Someone tells us another way to go that is a way that will not lead to that cliff. We can listen to them, and avoid the cliff, or keep going the way we're going and fall off.

Right there, at the first parahraph, is another great problem I have with Chriatianity: the sin exaggerations.
First exaggeration: Everyone is sinful. I understand where people who say this are coming from, but there are good people put there. Very few, I agree, but they are there. Plus, adding Jesus to the equation is a perfect way to create the cultist mentality of Christians, which we'll talk about in a few moments.
Second exaggeration: Only Jesus (and God) can save us and cleanse us from our sins. Why can't I do some inner work on my own? If I sin, and then I ask Jesus for forgiveness and receive it, I did nothing to deserve that forgiveness. There needs to be some inner work done. And if you do that, you'll realize you don't need Jesus or anyone to forgive you. You just improved yourself, and became a greater man than when you sinned.

Next, being prepared to put everything else second so Jesus can be first. That is the cultist mentality I've been speaking of earlier. By everything, do you really mean everything? Even breaking the Ten Commandments, like it is written in Luke 14:26?
Also, if Jesus comes first, would you do anything Jesus may tell you to do, whatever that may be? If yes, then not only do you have the extreme cultist mentality, but also a gigantic moral desert within you, just like the idiot OP who said that people wouldn't know right from wrong without the Bible.

You're right about Exodus. It talks about murder, not kill. "Thou shalt not kill" is a mistranslation (among many) and is supposed to say "Thou shalt not murder". And that is why killing in war is absolutely a sin. There are only two types of moral warfare, and those are rebellion and defense against invasion. And mass murder of other gods' worshippers and ravaging their settlement is neither.

Mine and your perspectives of Heaven and Hell are exactly the same, just worded a little differently.
Your: You are going to Hell for your sins, but you can be saved and enter Heaven if you ask Jesus for forgiveness.
Mine: If you accept Jesus and ask for his forgiveness, you will enter Heaven. If not, you will be thrown in Hell and forever be tortured in there.

Mine sounds more coercive, while your sounds more salvating. But whatever perspective you look at it from, Heaven and Hell are excellent tools of fear-mongering and scare tactics, and is the number one reason why Christians who are taught Christianity as children remain Christians as adults. Because they fear the alternative.

And you have proof there's no "afterlife?"

You say humans basically wrecked this planet then that Christians have a lot of nerve to say Earth is a mess? Umm...

And I don't need proof. The idea of Heaven and Hell is fear-mongering of legendary proportions. "Join us and you'll forever enjoy the endless satisfactions and pleasures of Heaven after you die. If you don't, you will forever rot in utter pain, suffering and anguish in the eternal falmes of Hell after you die." This one explains it better than I ever could: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Y201QzDdzbg

I think you misunderstood what I said. Here, I'll tie in an image with this comment which may clear a few things up. I've exaggerated it a little bit, but only to clarify my point as much as possible.

I have to agree with Octavia. 63% of the entire UK claim to have no religious affiliation. Is 63% of the UK out killing each other in the streets?

This quote is saying we have no internal moral compass. I don't believe that for a second. Sure, Lincoln was an intelligent man. That doesn't make this statement fact.

"Is 63% of the UK out killing each other in the streets"

No its the leave and remain voters XD

You hate the bible Cause it destroys your world view