What is your favorite deadly sin?

[plhogan]

Alright Dev, it's time to come clean about your pain:

Show us on the doll where Judeo-Christianity touched you.

[Big Mon]

Not that much to do with deadly sins,but is anyone familiar with Gnosticism? If I'm de-railing,Archgoat,please let me know and I'll shut up. But the interesting thing about the Gnostics(and there are several different types)is,they believe the god of the Old Testament to be a base,stupid,and cruel warden of Earth. The Demiurge,they call him. Our physical beings would've been considered evil,as would the physical world. Both Jesus and Lucifer are considered heros and bringers of the "Gnosis"(Greek for "knowledge,btw). And the ticket to this religion was to transcend the physical world of the Demiurge,and reconnect with the Godhead,or true creator. Religions of all types interest the shit out of me for some reason.

[plhogan]

Taking the whole of the Old Testament seriously or as literal fact is only done by insane fundamentalists...and apparently some atheists.

[Blackened Soul]

[Archgoat]

Not that much to do with deadly sins,but is anyone familiar with Gnosticism? If I'm de-railing,Archgoat,please let me know and I'll shut up. But the interesting thing about the Gnostics(and there are several different types)is,they believe the god of the Old Testament to be a base,stupid,and cruel warden of Earth. The Demiurge,they call him. Our physical beings would've been considered evil,as would the physical world. Both Jesus and Lucifer are considered heros and bringers of the "Gnosis"(Greek for "knowledge,btw). And the ticket to this religion was to transcend the physical world of the Demiurge,and reconnect with the Godhead,or true creator. Religions of all types interest the shit out of me for some reason.

Aww,you're fine. It is interesting. And it should also be noted that there were/are Gnostic Satanists. Then,within Satanism,you have theistic Satanists,atheistic Satanists,and Luciferianism. It even gets confusing from an insider's perspective,sometimes

[devnulljp]

<Irish accent>
Ah, but is it a Catholic Satanist or a Protestant Satanist that you are?
</Irish accent>

[Doodahman1969]

Homeboy does indeed pinch one off on top of moving traffic in the next 10 seconds following that shot.
If you wanna try to find it ''Le Fils De Caligula'' by Costes.
France 9 tee 2

[devnulljp]

Ooh, ooh, ask me....

[dubkitty]

it's kind of pointless to single out Judaism or Judeo-Christianity for a lack of sanction on, e.g., slavery at a time when ALL civilized cultures (someone quibbles about "slavery" vs. "civilized" in 3...2...1...) considered slavery a normal, natural, and often pre-ordained part of life and existence. it's not as if abolitionism was rife in China, the Indian subcontinent, the temples of Meso-America, or the pyramids of Egypt then. either. any religion or philosophy is going to be stated in terms that speak to the situation of the time in which they're stated; neither Gautama nor Martin Luther had much to say about either stone axes or cable television, and their audience of the time was no more capable of envisioning a world without slavery than it was of envisioning a world with antibiotics. i don't think you can judge the validity of a belief system by whether its principles cover a multiplicity of alternatives; e.g. saying "everybody should be FREE" is so inclusive as to be utterly meaningless. you have to evaluate it on how well its principles can be applied to situations outside their specific purview as well, and to the actual results derived from applying those principles.

[dubkitty]

and don't forget about the Christians with Gnostic tendencies who were purged later on in the 2nd century-ish, the Dead Sea Scrolls folks and all. you really need a scorecard to keep the sects in comprehensible order. i suspect that even the Naked Archaeologist dude has to use notecards.

[plhogan]

it's kind of pointless to single out Judaism or Judeo-Christianity for a lack of sanction on, e.g., slavery at a time when ALL civilized cultures (someone quibbles about "slavery" vs. "civilized" in 3...2...1...) considered slavery a normal, natural, and often pre-ordained part of life and existence. it's not as if abolitionism was rife in China, the Indian subcontinent, the temples of Meso-America, or the pyramids of Egypt then. either. any religion or philosophy is going to be stated in terms that speak to the situation of the time in which they're stated; neither Gautama nor Martin Luther had much to say about either stone axes or cable television, and their audience of the time was no more capable of envisioning a world without slavery than it was of envisioning a world with antibiotics. i don't think you can judge the validity of a belief system by whether its principles cover a multiplicity of alternatives; e.g. saying "everybody should be FREE" is so inclusive as to be utterly meaningless. you have to evaluate it on how well its principles can be applied to situations outside their specific purview as well, and to the actual results derived from applying those principles.

All of this forever.

[devnulljp]

it's kind of pointless to single out Judaism or Judeo-Christianity for a lack of sanction on, e.g., slavery at a time when ALL civilized cultures (someone quibbles about "slavery" vs. "civilized" in 3...2...1...) considered slavery a normal, natural, and often pre-ordained part of life and existence. .

Except your supposed to be talking about the perfect word of the almighty supreme loving beneficent ruler of the universe, not just human cultures, so you'd think he'd be able to get it right. Isn't that supposed to be the whole point? Isn't it supposed to be a "Hey you fuckheads, stop all that bad stuff (like worshipping other gods, which accounts for an an inordinate %age of the 10 condiments, butthat's another story) and do this stuff that I approve of."
You'd think if he could find time to mention that shellfish is an abomination, and mixed fibres are an abomination, and buggery is an abomination, and tattoos are an abomination, and planting different crops side by side is an abomination, he could have said something in passing about depriving people of their liberty for your own selfish ends.
You could also use your argument that ALL civilised cultures had shellfish eaters and homosexuals and mixed fibre wearers, and all those things were considered normal, natural, and often pre-ordained parts of life and existence too.

Funny set of priorities in that old book.

[Gearmond]

explicitly DESCRIBES, not endorses.
lern yer bibble.

Sigh ... why is it I know more about that stupid bloody book than people who claim to live by it do? Have none of you read the bloody thing?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xwZt8ypufE[/youtube]

SPOILER : show

Rape, pillage, plunder, etc.
Judges 21:10-24
Numbers 31:7-18
Deuteronomy 20:10-14
Deuteronomy 22:28-29
Deuteronomy 22:23-24
2 Samuel 12:11-14
Deuteronomy 21:10-14
Judges 5:30
Exodus 21:7-11
Zechariah 14:1-2

Slavery
Leviticus 25:44-46
Exodus 21:7-11
Exodus 21:2-6
Exodus 21:7-11
Exodus 21:20-21
Ephesians 6:5

Housabout good old murderdeathkill?
Deuteronomy 17:12 <--What's the punishment for not listening to your priest? Hint: DEATH
Leviticus 20:13 <--What's the punishment for being gay? Hint: DEATH
Leviticus 20:27 <--What's the punishment for being a fortune teller? Hint: DEATH (Maybe Harold Camping didn't read this bit?)
Exodus 21:15 <--if you hit your dad? DEATH
Proverbs 20:20 <--Curse your parents? DEATH
Leviticus 20:9
2 Chronicles 15:12-13 <---I love how people criticise Muslims for this, conpletely missing the point that it's in the babble too.
Zechariah 13:3 <---Again with the Harold Camping?
Deuteronomy 13:13-19
Deuteronomy 22:20-21
Deuteronomy 13:7-12 <----Again with the jihad.
Deuteronomy 17:2-5
Leviticus 24:10-16 <---Oops, death for blasphemy. I'm noticing a pattern here.
Exodus 31:12-15

How about all the times god kills people? (The headcount BTW is interesting. Lucifer: 10 (as a bet with ... God. Yay!); God: 2million+ not counting Noah's flood, Sodom and Gomorrah, or all the plagues and famines. Knocked that one out of the park. Way to go YHW)
2 Kings 2:23-24
1Samuel 6:19-20
1 Kings 20:35-36
2 Samuel 6:3-7

Ezekiel 9:5-7
Jeremiah 51:20-26
Isaiah 13:15-18 <--double whammy, rape and killing babies.

Demanding murder and genocide
1 Samuel 15:2-3
Jeremiah 48:10
Jeremiah 15:1-4
Exodus 23:23
Joshua 8:1-29
Joshua 6:20-21
1 Kings 14:9-16
Judges 20:48
2 Kings 19:35
Exodus 32:26-29
Numbers 25:1-9 <---Again with the jihad.
Jeremiah 50:21-22

Aha! Only the old testament (as though that somehow excuses it?)

Ephesians 6:5
1 Timothy 6:1-2
Luke 12:47-48
And of course good old Matthew 5:17 -- 'Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.'

So don't lecture me on the things I need to lern from the babble. I've definitely lerned quite enough of this barbaric brain-dead tribal bronze-age bullshit over my lifetime.

you actually don't otherwise you'd know that they're simply mentioning it, being spoken by people being written about. but the clincher here is that they're all in the pentateuch or the history books which are not to be taken as law nor are they meant to be followed to the T. you're being silly and stupid quite frankly. much like the people you so condemn. you also are a fan of quoting out of context as well, particuarly with the matthew thing seeing as you're interpreting it literally (SPERGTASTIC!) when realistically, the actions of jesus and basically every other passage contradict your assumed stance of "he means the slavery and rape things too".

moreover the idea that the book is the be all end all of ANY religion is only true with the Sikhs. i'll lecture you as i see fit because you're being haughty, dismissive, and know-it-all about the ordeal, which is exactly how the preachers and followers you have SUCH UTTER AND DESERVED DISTAIN FOR and who have TOTALLY RUINED YOUR LIFE act. so in effect, you come off as a silly pseudo-intellectual hypocrite that is just as guilty of the accusations you throw at the religious.

[devnulljp]

you actually don't otherwise you'd know that they're simply mentioning it

Simply mentioning it. As in describing how Adonai told them to do it?

SPOILER : show

Jeremiah 50:21-22 for example:

21Go up against the land of Merathaim, even against it, and against the inhabitants of Pekod: waste and utterly destroy after them, saith the LORD, and do according to all that I have commanded thee.

22A sound of battle is in the land, and of great destruction.

simply mentioning it eh?

Deuteronomy 7:1-2?

1When the LORD thy God shall bring thee into the land whither thou goest to possess it, and hath cast out many nations before thee, the Hittites, and the Girgashites, and the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and mightier than thou;

2And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them:

simply mentioning it eh?

Leviticus 25

1And the LORD spake unto Moses in mount Sinai, saying,
...
44Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids.
45Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession.
46And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour.

simply mentioning it eh? This is god telling moses not to have hebrew slaves, but to take slaves from among the goy.
Where do you get this simply mentioning it apologetics nonsense?

but the clincher here is that they're all in the pentateuch or the history books which are not to be taken as law nor are they meant to be followed to the T.

And you know that this is not to be taken as law and not meant to be followed to a T how exactly? Funny, because those are the bits that are quoted every time some christian decides he doesn't like gays or divorce or sex before/instead of marriage. So, which is it?
"See, it's in the bible ... unless it's inconvenient that is."

How do you manage to shoehorn Ephesians, Timothy, and Luke into the Pentateuch BTW?

i'll lecture you as i see fit

Matt Dillahunty -- ex fundie and seminary student BTW -- sums it up nicely at the end:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMQaScTiTJw[/youtube]

[Gearmond]

you actually don't otherwise you'd know that they're simply mentioning it

Simply mentioning it. As in describing how Adonai told them to do it?

SPOILER : show

Jeremiah 50:21-22 for example:

21Go up against the land of Merathaim, even against it, and against the inhabitants of Pekod: waste and utterly destroy after them, saith the LORD, and do according to all that I have commanded thee.

22A sound of battle is in the land, and of great destruction.

simply mentioning it eh?

Deuteronomy 7:1-2?

1When the LORD thy God shall bring thee into the land whither thou goest to possess it, and hath cast out many nations before thee, the Hittites, and the Girgashites, and the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and mightier than thou;

2And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them:

simply mentioning it eh?

Leviticus 25

1And the LORD spake unto Moses in mount Sinai, saying,
...
44Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids.
45Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession.
46And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour.

simply mentioning it eh? This is god telling moses not to have hebrew slaves, but to take slaves from among the goy.
Where do you get this simply mentioning it apologetics nonsense?

but the clincher here is that they're all in the pentateuch or the history books which are not to be taken as law nor are they meant to be followed to the T.

And you know that this is not to be taken as law and not meant to be followed to a T how exactly? Funny, because those are the bits that are quoted every time some christian decides he doesn't like gays or divorce or sex before/instead of marriage. So, which is it?
"See, it's in the bible ... unless it's inconvenient that is."

How do you manage to shoehorn Ephesians, Timothy, and Luke into the Pentateuch BTW?

i'll lecture you as i see fit

Matt Dillahunty -- ex fundie and seminary student BTW -- sums it up nicely at the end:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMQaScTiTJw[/youtube]

so i take it you missed the bit about how said books and quotations are simply historical and mythological texts in accordance to both judaic and christian teaching. and just for a bit of a kicker on the moses one, note that you're wrongly inferring slavery from the word "bondmen" when its actually closer to indentured servitude.

And you know that this is not to be taken as law and not meant to be followed to a T how exactly? Funny, because those are the bits that are quoted every time some christian decides he doesn't like gays or divorce or sex before/instead of marriage. So, which is it?
"See, it's in the bible ... unless it's inconvenient that is."

you mean by christians who nitpick what they follow to excuse their bigotry, when in fact they are either nullified or revised during more recent texts? funny how revelatory religion works, innit? anyways, point is those people are no better christians than the WBC, and anyone who thinks they're as much representative of the christian faith as li'l wayne is for black people should know that they're fucking morons for doing so.

i didn't shoehorn those documentary letters into the pentateuch and history books. because they're documentary letters. go back to angry teenage atheist bible study camp, kiddo. or realize that you don't have to wait for 20 to stop being pissed off about something largely irrelevant.