Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2023 14:42:54 GMT
Yes, I have Google, too.
The Quran doesn't think much to same sex marriages either, does it?
|
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Feb 18, 2023 15:00:02 GMT
Yes, I have Google, too. The Quran doesn't think much to same sex marriages either, does it? Yes but I was pretty much aware of the situation before I googled it. I recall many years ago while on the old BBC? Muslim board. A Muslim posted to me the the Koran is for everyone, I posted back that if that is the case the case then why is it printed in a language that no one understands. He had no answer. I read an article years ago which claimed that those responsible for deciding which of Muhammad's saying would be kept, had to refer to Nomadic scholars for how to record Mohamad's words. It appeared to be the case that Muhammed spoke in the Nomadic language which tends to be more poetic than Arabic. I'm sure you're right on same sex marriage. I doubt there is a religion in the world that is in favour. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Feb 19, 2023 12:58:58 GMT
You think Christians are so away with the fairies, but the other day I found out that the first building to be built higher than the pyramids was Lincoln Cathedral.
Now that take a logical mind, does it not?
Not only that but a chapel in Cambridge was also the world's largest single spanning roof when it was built.
Jeez the depths you will sink to in order to make a pointless post. You do talk shite. Just because you lack the education does not make it wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Feb 19, 2023 13:08:51 GMT
The Bible is the worst advertisment for Christianity and God but nothing can replace it other than commonsense. Well, I've said elsewhere that having told the Abrahammic God he can go fuck off doesnt mean i think all of the ideas his cultists attribute to him are bad ideas. In short, i don’t need to believe in someone else’s supernatural being to consider some behaviours a good idea and others not. I feel entitled to nick their behaviour and copy it. They in turn can feel free to point at me behaving as they do and claim their god told me to. Its utter bollox but I've been accused of worse. You are veering towards the godless replacement belief system of extreme individualism. In prole talk I believe it is known and the me culture. Christianity is about recognising other people's well-being. You might not need it, but if you work in a government lab creating deadlier weapons to kill those in countries our elite don't approve of then I guess you are on a slippery slope. What shit you give out, you sure will get back at some point. Looking after number one can often have the reverse effect. Newton's third law. The trap is that if everyone around you behaves in a mad way, then madness will look normal and normal will look mad. The poison will look like the cure and the cure will look like poison. |
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Feb 19, 2023 13:14:16 GMT
Yes, I have Google, too. The Quran doesn't think much to same sex marriages either, does it? IIRC it's actually less critical than the Bible. It's those damn hate filled hadiths that are the problem with just about all Islamic religions |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Feb 19, 2023 13:19:18 GMT
The web is full of all sorts of bullshit. It doesn't interest me. You only need look at our own history to show the above is misleading, even though they could justify it by obscure reference. Academics are very manipulative. This is a part of our problem. In order to believe that morality came from Christianity in spite of evidence to the contrary, you would have to dismiss the findings of evolutionary biology, history, and anthropology, which comprises cultural anthropology, physical anthropology, linguistics and archaeology. Moreover, you would have to believe that no pre-Christian civilisation possessed any rules of social conduct, including the Incans, the Romans, the Persians, the ancient Greeks, the Chinese, the Mayans, the Egyptians, the North Chico (Peruvians), the Mesopotamians, the Indus Valley peoples, the Jiahu culture and the Aborigines. To believe that what we know about these pre-Christian civilisations is all wrong because it doesn't fit with your religious preconceptions requires you to abandon logic. Why would you do that? There was Mizi from the Zhou dynasty which had the same philosophy as Jesus when he said "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you". These things are universal truths and to a greater or lesser extent appear in other places. The difference with the bible is it is all in one book rather than scattered amongst thoughts that would be seen as unholy. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Feb 19, 2023 14:03:25 GMT
Well, I've said elsewhere that having told the Abrahammic God he can go fuck off doesnt mean i think all of the ideas his cultists attribute to him are bad ideas. In short, i don’t need to believe in someone else’s supernatural being to consider some behaviours a good idea and others not. I feel entitled to nick their behaviour and copy it. They in turn can feel free to point at me behaving as they do and claim their god told me to. Its utter bollox but I've been accused of worse. The way so many Christians carry on, you'd think there were no good people before the first Bible was published. Of course it was written in Latin so only scholars could read it whilst the poor guy in the country lane had to rely on the conniving clergy and pay their tythes. You do not know much about the Christian faith. Have you ever wondered about those church windows? |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Feb 19, 2023 14:17:24 GMT
Yes, I have Google, too. The Quran doesn't think much to same sex marriages either, does it? IIRC it's actually less critical than the Bible. It's those damn hate filled hadiths that are the problem with just about all Islamic religions I think that it is the different interpretations of the Hadiths that are probably the problem. I read of one Islamic scholar who studied the Hadiths, of which there are thousands, and I'm pretty sure he discredited 500 of them as false. |
|
|
|
Post by Ripley on Feb 19, 2023 16:04:14 GMT
In order to believe that morality came from Christianity in spite of evidence to the contrary, you would have to dismiss the findings of evolutionary biology, history, and anthropology, which comprises cultural anthropology, physical anthropology, linguistics and archaeology. Moreover, you would have to believe that no pre-Christian civilisation possessed any rules of social conduct, including the Incans, the Romans, the Persians, the ancient Greeks, the Chinese, the Mayans, the Egyptians, the North Chico (Peruvians), the Mesopotamians, the Indus Valley peoples, the Jiahu culture and the Aborigines. To believe that what we know about these pre-Christian civilisations is all wrong because it doesn't fit with your religious preconceptions requires you to abandon logic. Why would you do that? There was Mizi from the Zhou dynasty which had the same philosophy as Jesus when he said "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you". These things are universal truths and to a greater or lesser extent appear in other places. The difference with the bible is it is all in one book rather than scattered amongst thoughts that would be seen as unholy. You're making my case for me then. Morality is not the product of Christianity. It pre-dates Christianity by a long long way. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Feb 19, 2023 16:33:56 GMT
There was Mizi from the Zhou dynasty which had the same philosophy as Jesus when he said "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you". These things are universal truths and to a greater or lesser extent appear in other places. The difference with the bible is it is all in one book rather than scattered amongst thoughts that would be seen as unholy. You're making my case for me then. Morality is not the product of Christianity. It pre-dates Christianity by a long long way. You make an academic case. My claim is it made us moral and through morality we gained great success. The destruction of Christianity in the UK is for the purpose of replacing it with an amoral system designed by academics. Christianity liberates people and the powers that be do not like it. They want to enslave us. I mean like the Amazon workers, treated no better than slaves. Christianity is also the basis of capitalism, which is trade via trust and goodwill. Without it you ask for a command type soviet economy where the state dictates all due to lack of trust for our fellow men. Disagreements can't be resolved civilly so they need the state courts to dictate to them. |
|
|
|
Post by Ripley on Feb 19, 2023 17:25:09 GMT
You're making my case for me then. Morality is not the product of Christianity. It pre-dates Christianity by a long long way. You make an academic case. My claim is it made us moral and through morality we gained great success. The destruction of Christianity in the UK is for the purpose of replacing it with an amoral system designed by academics. Christianity liberates people and the powers that be do not like it. They want to enslave us. I mean like the Amazon workers, treated no better than slaves. Christianity is also the basis of capitalism, which is trade via trust and goodwill. Without it you ask for a command type soviet economy where the state dictates all due to lack of trust for our fellow men. Disagreements can't be resolved civilly so they need the state courts to dictate to them. I'm making a factual, logical case. If by your own admission the Zhou dynasty, which began 1000 years before Christ, embraced the philosophy of "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you", then clearly morality existed long before Christ and cannot have arisen from Christianity. Morality doesn't need religion. Religion needs morality. An argument can be made that it is religion that does the enslaving, not academia, and you should question why the religious right wants to ban books and keep its acolytes from increasing their knowledge. Don't the Scandinavian countries seem to manage trade just fine without a soviet type economy or religion? As for the courts, even civil, well-behaved people sometimes have irreconcilable differences and these disputes are better settled in a court of law. Even the ancient code of Hammurabi recognized that more than a millennium before Christ. ( c1792–1750 BC) |
|
|
|
Post by Toreador on Feb 19, 2023 17:30:21 GMT
The way so many Christians carry on, you'd think there were no good people before the first Bible was published. Of course it was written in Latin so only scholars could read it whilst the poor guy in the country lane had to rely on the conniving clergy and pay their tythes. You do not know much about the Christian faith. Have you ever wondered about those church windows? Have you ever wondered whether you are quite the ticket? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2023 19:08:00 GMT
There was Mizi from the Zhou dynasty which had the same philosophy as Jesus when he said "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you". These things are universal truths and to a greater or lesser extent appear in other places. The difference with the bible is it is all in one book rather than scattered amongst thoughts that would be seen as unholy. You're making my case for me then. Morality is not the product of Christianity. It pre-dates Christianity by a long long way. Even the 10 commandments predate Christianity by probably 1300 years. They have elements of morality. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Feb 19, 2023 19:09:48 GMT
You make an academic case. My claim is it made us moral and through morality we gained great success. The destruction of Christianity in the UK is for the purpose of replacing it with an amoral system designed by academics. Christianity liberates people and the powers that be do not like it. They want to enslave us. I mean like the Amazon workers, treated no better than slaves. Christianity is also the basis of capitalism, which is trade via trust and goodwill. Without it you ask for a command type soviet economy where the state dictates all due to lack of trust for our fellow men. Disagreements can't be resolved civilly so they need the state courts to dictate to them. I'm making a factual, logical case. If by your own admission the Zhou dynasty, which began 1000 years before Christ, embraced the philosophy of "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you", then clearly morality existed long before Christ and cannot have arisen from Christianity. Morality doesn't need religion. Religion needs morality. An argument can be made that it is religion that does the enslaving, not academia, and you should question why the religious right wants to ban books and keep its acolytes from increasing their knowledge. Don't the Scandinavian countries seem to manage trade just fine without a soviet type economy or religion? As for the courts, even civil, well-behaved people sometimes have irreconcilable differences and these disputes are better settled in a court of law. Even the ancient code of Hammurabiu recognized that more than a millennium before Christ. ( c1792–1750 BC) Yes there are a few examples where it did. I think the Egyptians also had one or two ideas that are in the bible. In Britain though things were not so good before it arrived and even for a long time after that until it became the region of the state, which was around the 10th century. From there until the end of the Victorians it gradually developed and improved. Like before the Victorians relatively minor criminals would be executed because they did not have the prisons. These muppets running us now want to go backwards in evolution. You need to study them closer to see what is going on. There is this favouring of the primitive. You often see it in the environmental movement. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Feb 19, 2023 19:23:51 GMT
You do not know much about the Christian faith. Have you ever wondered about those church windows? Have you ever wondered whether you are quite the ticket? For the poor people:
|
|
