Catholics Don't Exemplify Christianity...

[Liminal]

Many people are too stupid to understand that religion is not meant to be taken literally, it is a system of metaphors to communicate a feeling that can't otherwise be described. There is a language for everything, we're using one now.

So Jesus's supposed actual words to love your neighbor is not what he meant?

His supposed actual words to love your enemy is not what he meant?

Who decides what that 'metaphor' does mean- or you get to decide that it really means to attack you neighbor?

Yes, because unlike with atheism, you have free will. Religious metaphors are open to constant reinterpretation by contemporary societies.

Then the original message is obscured and just like when you use a compass for direction, even 1 degree can throw you off course on long distance ranges.

No, you misunderstand, differing religions all lead us to drink from the same well. The path may be different, but the goal is the same, and the human need for some form of spiritual connection is universal, timeless and transcends all cultures.

The need is a conditioning of the mind to ease anxieties...

Is that all it is? Who knew? And to think all this time societies could have been based on Xanex, weed, and Jack Daniels. Could have saved everyone a whole lot of trouble with contemplating deeper meanings for their existence.

 

[Liminal]

Begs the question: If atheist are supposed to be more intellectually evolved, why aren't they smarter?

 

[aris2chat]

So Jesus's supposed actual words to love your neighbor is not what he meant?

His supposed actual words to love your enemy is not what he meant?

Who decides what that 'metaphor' does mean- or you get to decide that it really means to attack you neighbor?

Yes, because unlike with atheism, you have free will. Religious metaphors are open to constant reinterpretation by contemporary societies.

Then the original message is obscured and just like when you use a compass for direction, even 1 degree can throw you off course on long distance ranges.

No, you misunderstand, differing religions all lead us to drink from the same well. The path may be different, but the goal is the same, and the human need for some form of spiritual connection is universal, timeless and transcends all cultures.

The need is a conditioning of the mind to ease anxieties...

Is that all it is? Who knew? And to think all this time societies could have been based on Xanex, weed, and Jack Daniels. Could have saved everyone a whole lot of trouble with contemplating deeper meanings for their existence.

Cannabis was created by god, Xanax and Jack were created by man. Cannabis did not come with a sign by god saying do not partake. It has been a medicine for millennia. It is even used to relieve pain of childbirth and ease delivery. It was even one of the major crops by the early christian settlers in the americas. Founding fathers considered it a necessity to grow it, until tobacco eventually became more profitable and promoted slavery to grow it. It has only been seen as harmful and illegal for the last few decades because of the tobacco lobby and xenophobes. There are strains with little or no THC.

Beer, wine and spirits are ancient used by most of the world's societies, including Jesus.

 

[Syriusly]

Begs the question: If atheist are supposed to be more intellectually evolved, why aren't they smarter?

Begs the question- have you stopped beating your wife?

 

[Syriusly]

Well I am an atheist and I don't hate anyone.

And I am not the follower of a religious leader who commands his followers to not only love his neighbor- but to love his enemies.

As an atheist I doubt that you really understand what you believe or why. You probably don't think you subscribe to an ideology.....but you do.

As the believer in fairy tales- and based upon your posts- you clearly don't understand what or why you believe anything.

Me- my ideology is that I don't believe in any fairy tales.

Other than that my ideology is no different than the ideology of someone who chooses not to collect stamps.

Oh really? You don't subscribe to fairy tales? How about the fairy tale that religion is historically responsible for more death and destruction than any other source. While atheists have been a force for the good of human progress. I'll bet you believe that....don't you. Let's pick apart this myth first.

You do have a vivid imagination- but then again you believe in fairy tales.

The answer to your questions is- no.

No what? Feel free to elaborate Aristotle.

No to your questions.

If you want we can play at picking apart your fairy tales, but it doesn't bother me that you believe in fairy tales.
Clearly it irritates you that I don't subscribe to your particular religious fetish.

 

[Syriusly]

Well I am an atheist and I don't hate anyone.

And I am not the follower of a religious leader who commands his followers to not only love his neighbor- but to love his enemies.

As an atheist I doubt that you really understand what you believe or why. You probably don't think you subscribe to an ideology.....but you do.

So tell us all.

How do you love your neighbor?

How do you love your enemy?

Many people are too stupid to understand that religion is not meant to be taken literally, it is a system of metaphors to communicate a feeling that can't otherwise be described. There is a language for everything, we're using one now.

So Jesus's supposed actual words to love your neighbor is not what he meant?

His supposed actual words to love your enemy is not what he meant?

Who decides what that 'metaphor' does mean- or you get to decide that it really means to attack you neighbor?

Yes, because unlike with atheism, you have free will. Religious metaphors are open to constant reinterpretation by contemporary societies.

LOL.......you are rather a George Orwell kinda guy aren't you.

The Bible just means whatever you want it to mean- ignore the words.

Oh well- like I said- you are welcome to your own particular religious fetish. Enjoy it.

 

[Liminal]

Begs the question: If atheist are supposed to be more intellectually evolved, why aren't they smarter?

Begs the question- have you stopped beating your wife?

Not much to you....is there.

 

[Liminal]

Yes, because unlike with atheism, you have free will. Religious metaphors are open to constant reinterpretation by contemporary societies.

Then the original message is obscured and just like when you use a compass for direction, even 1 degree can throw you off course on long distance ranges.

No, you misunderstand, differing religions all lead us to drink from the same well. The path may be different, but the goal is the same, and the human need for some form of spiritual connection is universal, timeless and transcends all cultures.

The need is a conditioning of the mind to ease anxieties...

Is that all it is? Who knew? And to think all this time societies could have been based on Xanex, weed, and Jack Daniels. Could have saved everyone a whole lot of trouble with contemplating deeper meanings for their existence.

Cannabis was created by god, Xanax and Jack were created by man. Cannabis did not come with a sign by god saying do not partake. It has been a medicine for millennia. It is even used to relieve pain of childbirth and ease delivery. It was even one of the major crops by the early christian settlers in the americas. Founding fathers considered it a necessity to grow it, until tobacco eventually became more profitable and promoted slavery to grow it. It has only been seen as harmful and illegal for the last few decades because of the tobacco lobby and xenophobes. There are strains with little or no THC.

Beer, wine and spirits are ancient used by most of the world's societies, including Jesus.

Uh huh.....and?

 

[Liminal]

As an atheist I doubt that you really understand what you believe or why. You probably don't think you subscribe to an ideology.....but you do.

So tell us all.

How do you love your neighbor?

How do you love your enemy?

Many people are too stupid to understand that religion is not meant to be taken literally, it is a system of metaphors to communicate a feeling that can't otherwise be described. There is a language for everything, we're using one now.

So Jesus's supposed actual words to love your neighbor is not what he meant?

His supposed actual words to love your enemy is not what he meant?

Who decides what that 'metaphor' does mean- or you get to decide that it really means to attack you neighbor?

Yes, because unlike with atheism, you have free will. Religious metaphors are open to constant reinterpretation by contemporary societies.

LOL.......you are rather a George Orwell kinda guy aren't you.

The Bible just means whatever you want it to mean- ignore the words.

Oh well- like I said- you are welcome to your own particular religious fetish. Enjoy it.

You really don't know anything about anything......do you.

 

[Liminal]

Holy shit! Is this really the best they can do? Are all atheists this dull and slow witted?

 

[Liminal]

Atheists and fundamentalists are just the flip sides of the same coin of stupid.

 

[aris2chat]

Atheists and fundamentalists are just the flip sides of the same coin of stupid.

Not all atheists are zealots. They have a right to express themselves though.

 

[Liminal]

Atheists and fundamentalists are just the flip sides of the same coin of stupid.

Not all atheists are zealots. They have a right to express themselves though.

They only think they aren't zealots. Atheist are all pretty much unthinking automatons, they can't possibly stray outside the confines of their limitations.

 

[Treeshepherd]

Atheists and fundamentalists are just the flip sides of the same coin of stupid.

I've said the same here in this forum.

I think that probably most atheists don't spend any time on religion. But there's a minority of atheists who spend almost all of their time talking religion. And they tend to insist of a literal interpretation of the Bible and by extension claim that Christianity teaches slavery and disrespect for women's rights and all sorts of archaic nonsense. But, it all begins with a literal interpretation of scripture.
So, the difference between evangelical atheists and fundamentalists is merely in the total rejection or adoption of scripture. The approach to scripture is the same.

 

[Liminal]

Atheists and fundamentalists are just the flip sides of the same coin of stupid.

I've said the same here in this forum.

I think that probably most atheists don't spend any time on religion. But there's a minority of atheists who spend almost all of their time talking religion. And they tend to insist of a literal interpretation of the Bible and by extension claim that Christianity teaches slavery and disrespect for women's rights and all sorts of archaic nonsense. But, it all begins with a literal interpretation of scripture.
So, the difference between evangelical atheists and fundamentalists is merely in the total rejection or adoption of scripture. The approach to scripture is the same.

No one takes scripture literally, if they did they'd have to stone their wives, sisters and mothers every time they sinned with another man. Societies have always reinterpreted the metaphors and defined the rules for themselves.......no society has ever really followed a literal interpretation.

 

[Treeshepherd]

No one takes scripture literally, if they did they'd have to stone their wives, sisters and mothers every time they sinned with another man. Societies have always reinterpreted the metaphors and defined the rules for themselves.......no society has ever really followed a literal interpretation.

Well, not 100%, but you know what I mean. A fundamentalist will tell you that you aren't a real [insert religion here] because you haven't adhered to scripture. An evangelical atheist will tell you that since there are references to slavery in ancient texts, your religion teaches slavery.

 

[IsaacNewton]

Atheists and fundamentalists are just the flip sides of the same coin of stupid.

LOL Not even close.

One believes in a supernatural being that uses magic. No evidence is needed, it is a mental creation.

The other doesn't believe in any supernatural being, and there is no magic in the real physical world. There is physics and chemistry. Reality is based on evidence.

You cannot equate the two on any level.

 

[Liminal]

No one takes scripture literally, if they did they'd have to stone their wives, sisters and mothers every time they sinned with another man. Societies have always reinterpreted the metaphors and defined the rules for themselves.......no society has ever really followed a literal interpretation.

Well, not 100%, but you know what I mean. A fundamentalist will tell you that you aren't a real [insert religion here] because you haven't adhered to scripture. An evangelical atheist will tell you that since there are references to slavery in ancient texts, your religion teaches slavery.

You can always remind them that the 20th century spawned a number of atheist movements that resulted in the deaths of many millions of people, and made slaves of hundreds of millions more. Communism is an atheist organization. Shouldn't we brand all atheist as Communist murderers? Makes just as much sense as atheist do when they judge religions by the behavior of the faithful.

 

[Liminal]

Atheists and fundamentalists are just the flip sides of the same coin of stupid.

LOL Not even close.

One believes in a supernatural being that uses magic. No evidence is needed, it is a mental creation.

The other doesn't believe in any supernatural being, and there is no magic in the real physical world. There is physics and chemistry. Reality is based on evidence.

You cannot equate the two on any level.

Because atheist already know how much you can't know.

 

[aris2chat]

Atheists and fundamentalists are just the flip sides of the same coin of stupid.

LOL Not even close.

One believes in a supernatural being that uses magic. No evidence is needed, it is a mental creation.

The other doesn't believe in any supernatural being, and there is no magic in the real physical world. There is physics and chemistry. Reality is based on evidence.

You cannot equate the two on any level.

in his imagination