How do you explain this?

[afr0byte]

I assume you speak from experience. it is quite clear to me that such things happened in your family. A decent person's mind would never wander to such dark places. My sympathies.

Oh no, no one must posit a very real possibility! They're evil if they do!

 

[Un biased]

I assume you speak from experience. it is quite clear to me that such things happened in your family. A decent person's mind would never wander to such dark places. My sympathies.

Um no .. It's dark just to say such a thing . It is trufull given the time periode it is a bit sad how you had to divert from the post to something like that .

 

[DDD]

Not my fault some people cry for their mommy because they get verbally smacked on the forums. Don't take the traits I bestowed upon him (Afro) upon yourself too. By doing that, you're only making yourself a victim and that would be terribly inconvenient.

I understand. But why "smackdown" to begin with? This is how you are getting emotionally compromised you see? Is it satisfying for you to call people as: sons of skanks, idiots, losers, etc, just because they choose to challenge your dogma?

Not at all. It just seems funny. A sad sort of funny, like those videos from funnyordie or most of the comedies that come out of holywood.
I know a bunch of people who said they would convert to Potterism if they could get Hermione. I wouldn't. I'm better than that. I would have her convert to <my family name>-ism. Or... lets say Rainmanism.

Hollywood comedies are cool.

Do tell what would your religion of Rainmanism be about?

 

[Un biased]

"If you don't accept the Bible as being true, you are just here to do a Bible bashing contest of no real substance. I don't do Bible bashes. If you wish to adopt such juvenile behavior, watch Bill maher and others like him. They are people of an inferior mental caliber and hence produce entertainment for like-minded people. Qouted bye : Rainman05:

The bible it self is a bit wrong condsidering that the bible was orignally catholic and they were verry corrupt in the church and people could not have their own bibles untill after the renisance and it was written the way the monarchs wanted it to be since they controlled the church and dont forget there are probally a few translation issues .

 

[DDD]

I assume you speak from experience. it is quite clear to me that such things happened in your family. A decent person's mind would never wander to such dark places. My sympathies.

I am not religious by experience. Should I state that Mary was religious (a particularly dark place for me considering her son's unknown origins [to say the least]), does that mean that me and my family are not religious too? Or am I not decent?

You see I think you are too close to these matters to not get compromised. After all women sadly get raped everywhere, why her raping is so much of importance in order for you to assume projection and implicitly insult with that?

 

[DDD]

Oh no, no one must posit a very real possibility! They're evil if they do!

... and are projecting no doubt according to Rainman.

 

[Rainman05]

Which Bible BTW? The Christian one or the Orthodox one?

Orthodox Christianity is Christianity. I assume you mean Catholicism or Orthodoxism. Again, to each his own. Christianity has 3 main denominations: catholic, orthdoox and protestant. And a lot of small cults out of which Afro will start a new one.

1) Thanks, and it does not has to be. Cannot expect everyone to buy whatever a book tells you to. Some shall challenge, reason and then believe it. 2) Religion to me has long lost its divinity. Life has not though. 3) Dardania is shallow Muslim and not "heavily" Muslim as you state. As you can see and perhaps take example we do not really care religion as much. 4) You call it "blaspheme" for you are religious. I call it pure criticism of old mentality on all three religions that have caused nothing but suffering throughout the ages through political use.

1)no, not in real life, but for the purpose of this topic, yes. 2) Fair enough. 3) You're not representative of Dardania (Kosovo or Albania). You're just an individual. 4) I use blaspheme in relation to Islam, not Christianity.

But I appreciate you worrying about me. Nothing happens here if one criticizes religion. Whichever one we have came across the millennium, be it: Christian,Muslim (chronologically speaking), Catholic+Orthodox(schism was after Islam started),

But how about you? You seem to take this sort of conversation personally enough to respond with passive aggressiveness. Do not you criticize your religion over there?

I'm not taking anything personally. It's the internet. We criticize everything we want here, but religion (Orthodox) is not a problem and has never been a problem. The only people who have a bother with our religion here are the people who have their heads up their asses and haven't looked at the real problems facing the country. Which have nothing to do with religion.

At first I just took it from Mary being virgin thing and then I saw the OP. I think it is a valid point and that you are contesting yourself with this reply here. How can all scriptures be real and conflicting at the same time under one God? Wait, do not tell me, you are not going to hide behind the old shelter of "Almighty God knows these things, us humans cannot comprehend" are you?

Because there isn't just one God. I mean, there is one for some religions, for others there is another and another or others... And no, I'm not going to hide behind that because I am not hiding.

As for comprehending God... I don't consider God to be human. Being all knowing and all powerful goes against the human condition, so you can't really consider God to be human, a very mystical extraordinary human, but still human. A pan-human sort of human. And even if he were like that... for crying out loud, I can't understand women, half the population. And you want me to understand God? I can't even understand or grasp much of what other people, even men, have intentions or expectations or whatever... and you want me to understand something like that? No. It's easier if you don't consider himself as human and stop bothering with it.

Muslims in general are educated to like Jesus and Abraham followers also, for ultimately these messiahs are also mentioned and revered to. The hate thing is political as it is always the case. Religion being used for politics again. But not that it matters when one is not religious to begin with.

fair enough, but I wasn't saying that Allah will kill if you condemn Islam, radical muslims will. And yes, they have been radicalized by entities who have political agendas. A book, regardless of how compelling it is, cannot force you do anything.

Makes sense.

If you enter the world of the Bible and accept the supernatural then no need to seek for evidence to support conflicting statements to begin with. I think once one accepts those non-religious statements at the cost of reason, then why getting back to reason again might push one out of those non reasonable beliefs to begin with.

This is where it indeed ends. Each to their own. You believe what you want and I will do so as well. As long as we state that it is our beliefs and that the reality does not belongs to one type of interpretation (and of course that interpretation is yours) then there is less conflict.

If I may suggest, please add personal statements to your beliefs. So as then people would know that it is just you and you are not preaching how others should perceive, believe, or think.

My personal belief is just that, my own. Yes, I am Orthodox, but everything else is pretty much unimportant here in this topic. This entire discussion wasn't done from me being a Christian. Even if I were an atheist I still would have argued the same thing and on the same lines. It's not a matter of what my religion says, it is a matter that there are nuances in this dialogue and ignoring them doesn't help to come to a conclusion. Apparently with some, exposing them accomplishes zilch just as well.

 

[Rainman05]

Um no .. It's dark just to say such a thing . It is trufull given the time periode it is a bit sad how you had to divert from the post to something like that .

My sympathies.

 

[Un biased]

My sympathies.

Your just trolling now Good bye :2wave:

 

[Rainman05]

I understand. But why "smackdown" to begin with? This is how you are getting emotionally compromised you see? Is it satisfying for you to call people as: sons of skanks, idiots, losers, etc, just because they choose to challenge your dogma?

Smackdowns are like cans of whopass. They are not emotional. They are just there. And I am taking no pleasure in giving people a taste of their own medicine back. After all, they incriminated themselves. They aren't challenging my dogma at all. They are simply being slanderous. And the people who they slander are dead and have been for a long time.

Hollywood comedies are cool.

Do tell what would your religion of Rainmanism be about?

No they aren't. 99% of them are crap.

Sexual satisfaction.

 

[Rainman05]

Your just trolling now Good bye :2wave:

I am not trolling at all. I am deeply concerned as to why people seem to go to very dark places and make unfounded slanderous accusations when discussing long time dead people. Necrophilia? I hadn't thought of that.

If it isn't necrophilia... then it must be because of their personal lives. One brings into conversation his personal experiences first.

 

[Rainman05]

You do realize that the entire purpose of this thread was to bash/challenge the validity of the Bible, right? The OP isn't a believer himself. Also, you only consider it bashing because you happen to believe everything in the Bible is true. I think it's funny that you have to result to insults.

I don't believe everything in the Bible is true. And the OP, regardless of his religious inclination, didn't frame the topic of the conversation in this manner but in the manner I presented above. With my solution, which seems awfully reasonable.

 

[afr0byte]

I am not trolling at all. I am deeply concerned as to why people seem to go to very dark places and make unfounded slanderous accusations when discussing long time dead people. Necrophilia? I hadn't thought of that.

If it isn't necrophilia... then it must be because of their personal lives. One brings into conversation his personal experiences first.

No one is denying that the thought of someone being raped is awful. You seem to be saying that positing a very real possibility means that the person doing the positing is necessarily a bad person. You're letting your emotions get the better of you. You're acting as if we'd said that we hoped Mary had been raped.

 

[afr0byte]

I don't believe everything in the Bible is true. And the OP, regardless of his religious inclination, didn't frame the topic of the conversation in this manner but in the manner I presented above. With my solution, which seems awfully reasonable.

How do you know the virgin birth is true, then? How do you decide which parts are true?

 

[German guy]

Index to Old Testament Prophecies of Christ



The Jews didn't "ignore".

They just didn't believe that the guy who claimed to be the Messiah was actually the Messiah.

In large part because he didn't fulfil the prophecies that they were really waiting around for someone to fulfil.

Jesus didn't build the Third Temple (Ezekiel 37:26-28).

He didn't gather all Jews back to the Land of Israel (Isaiah 43:5-6).

He didn't usher in an era of world peace, and end all hatred, oppression, suffering and disease. As it says: "Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall man learn war anymore." (Isaiah 2:4)

And he didn't spread universal knowledge of the God of Israel, which would unite humanity as one. As it says: "God will be King over all the world ― on that day, God will be One and His Name will be One". (Zechariah 14:9)

Basically he fulfilled a lot of the superficial prophecies (being born of a virgin, would be from Bethlehem, a massacre of children would happen at Messiah's birthplace).

But on the big stuff, the stuff that would lift the Jewish people out of their suffering and raise them up to a position of prominence, he was pretty sorely lacking.

Can't really blame them for that.

If I was a Jew I'd still be waiting too. In terms of being a saviour or liberator (Messiah) Jesus was something of a disapointment.

Likewise, the Christians ignored prophet Mohammed when he revealed Quran, although he was prophecized the NT (John 14, IIRC). And the Christians and Muslims ignored Baha'u'llah, when he once again brought a new revelation from God.

That's what we Baha'i believe. The Christians and Muslims fail to acknowledge Baha'u'llah for the same reason Jews fail to acknowledge Jesus Christ.

 

[Rainman05]

No one is denying that the thought of someone being raped is awful. You seem to be saying that positing a very real possibility means that the person doing the positing is necessarily a bad person. You're letting your emotions get the better of you. You're acting as if we'd said that we hoped Mary had been raped.

No. You just accused her of being a whore and unbiased called her a rape victim. So.. that's pretty low. Of course, I am not surprised of how low some people can get. It's not like everybody had a proper upbringing. I feel pity for such people. Maybe that's the emotion that is also getting the better of me... pity... for some people.

 

[Rainman05]

How do you know the virgin birth is true, then? How do you decide which parts are true?

That's not the issue here. It's not about what I personally think or decide what is true and what is not. For the purpose of staying on topic, the OT and the NT must be considered true or untrue.
If considered true, then any statement attacking the events in the Bible must be substantiated with evidence and if considered untrue... then you're turning the thread into a bible bashing contest.

 

[afr0byte]

No. You just accused her of being a whore and unbiased called her a rape victim. So.. that's pretty low. Of course, I am not surprised of how low some people can get. It's not like everybody had a proper upbringing. I feel pity for such people. Maybe that's the emotion that is also getting the better of me... pity... for some people.

I didn't say she was a whore. You did. I said cheating on her husband seems more likely than a virgin birth. Un biased did NOT call her a rape victim. He said that it was a possibility. We know from accounts of other women that they're often ashamed of having been raped, so it wouldn't have been a surprise if Mary had been (had she been raped, which we don't know). You even admitted we don't know either way. You're obviously emotional, as you feel the need to insult me for some reason.

 

[afr0byte]

If considered true, then any statement attacking the events in the Bible must be substantiated with evidence and if considered untrue... then you're turning the thread into a bible bashing contest.

You're just trying to pigeon hole me. Once again, I'm not bashing the Bible for the sake of bashing the Bible, I'm providing a possible alternative to the virgin birth story. If you want to require yourself to start with the Bible being true then go for it. I'm not going to assume it's true.

 

[Rainman05]

I didn't say she was a whore. You did. I said cheating on her husband seems more likely than a virgin birth. Un biased did NOT call her a rape victim. He said that it was a possibility. We know from accounts of other women that they're often ashamed of having been raped, so it wouldn't have been a surprise if Mary had been (had she been raped, which we don't know). You even admitted we don't know either way. You're obviously emotional, as you feel the need to insult me for some reason.

=whore. or skank. or such.

Yes, he did.

Yes, I am overwhelmed with pity for people who stoop so low on the moral dignity ladder.

I didn't admit to anything, and especially, I didn't admit to knowing/not knowing if the virgin birth is true. I have simply stated that if you believe the NT and OT to be true...then not believing in the virgin birth needs to be substantiated with evidence or else, its slander. And if you don't, you might as well be a bible basher. I am actually pretty insulated in this whole affair. You say that I have insulted you, and that may be true. But from my POV, I guessed certain traits and life experiences which you have. I have yet to be proven wrong in my assessments.

 

[Rainman05]

You're just trying to pigeon hole me. Once again, I'm not bashing the Bible for the sake of bashing the Bible, I'm providing a possible alternative to the virgin birth story. If you want to require yourself to start with the Bible being true then go for it. I'm not going to assume it's true.

Then our discussion is over.
if you don't assume the Bible to be true then it means that God isn't real and that means that every supernatural recording in the Bible isn't true and that means that Jesus wasn't God and that makes this whole thread a futile experiment for you.

A question.

If you don't believe the Bible to be true, then why the hell do you join discussions about the Bible except to take a piss at it? Bible basher.

 

[afr0byte]

=whore. or skank. or such.

Yes, he did.

Unbiased said it was possible that Mary was raped.

Yes, I am overwhelmed with pity for people who stoop so low on the moral dignity ladder.

I didn't admit to anything, and especially, I didn't admit to knowing/not knowing if the virgin birth is true. I have simply stated that if you believe the NT and OT to be true...then not believing in the virgin birth needs to be substantiated with evidence or else, its slander. And if you don't, you might as well be a bible basher. I am actually pretty insulated in this whole affair. You say that I have insulted you, and that may be true. But from my POV, I guessed certain traits and life experiences which you have. I have yet to be proven wrong in my assessments.

I don't believe the NT and OT are true, so I guess it's not slander.

 

[afr0byte]

Then our discussion is over.
if you don't assume the Bible to be true then it means that God isn't real and that means that every supernatural recording in the Bible isn't true and that means that Jesus wasn't God and that makes this whole thread a futile experiment for you.

A question.

If you don't believe the Bible to be true, then why the hell do you join discussions about the Bible except to take a piss at it? Bible basher.

I like discussing whether things make sense or not. You can call it Bible bashing if you want. The OP was, by your definition, bashing the Bible (or at least interpretations of the Bible) himself. I was following suit I suppose. It's also fun to get people like you upset, though that wasn't my intention initially.

 

[Rainman05]

I like discussing whether things make sense or not. You can call it Bible bashing if you want. The OP was, by your definition, bashing the Bible (or at least interpretations of the Bible) himself. I was following suit I suppose. It's also fun to get people like you upset, though that wasn't my intention initially.

No. he was trying to answer a theological question. It wasn't bible bashing. You and unbiased are bible bashing by calling the virgin mary a whore and a rape victim.

 

[afr0byte]

No. he was trying to answer a theological question. It wasn't bible bashing. You and unbiased are bible bashing by calling the virgin mary a whore and a rape victim.

Nope, sorry, he was pointing out a contradiction. You should look at his history, he likes to bash religion/the Bible. As far as me being a basher, well no. I simply don't consider the Bible a holy book, so I was analyzing parts of it. You're putting your emotional slant on things.