Prove there's a god.

Since: May 11

Cardiff, UK

#528029 Aug 18, 2012
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>I'll accept "turgor".
Or "turgidity".
Or "engorgement".
...thank you, I appreciate it.

Since: Jan 11

United States

#528031 Aug 18, 2012
Nontheist wrote:
<quoted text>
Martian nymphomaniacs would be pretty cool, but the part about them laying their eggs in your body cavity for the young to feed on once hatched, sucks.
Then there's the breastfeeding...

...hopefully you're not still alive for that part.

“The eye has it...”

Since: Jan 12

Russell's teapot.

#528032 Aug 18, 2012
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> Hebrew slavery was far more passionate than its pagan counterpart. For once thing they did not make sex slaves out of children. The slaves were prisoners of wars. It was more humane way to treat the conquered as opposed to wholesale slaughter. Slavery is depicted in Scripture as a reconnition as a world reality and not the ideal. Like divorce. It was not part of the original plan.
Yet, it was still practiced, and, as abhorrent as it is, your "deity" never thought to explicitly say;

<the deity> "NO"

Wikipedia entry about the Midrash and its function. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midrash

Also.

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Catholic_Encycl... (1913)/Midrashim
More about slavery in the OT from Judaic Midrash halakha, "VE-eileh ha-mishpatim" (AND these are the statutes). It was a deeper explanation kept by the Rabbi's concerning OT text. An exegesis of the Torah. Essentially ,"fine print".

Quoting:
"Your slaves and maidservants that you shall possess from the nations that surround you, from them you may purchase slaves and maidservants. Also, from the children of the sojourners who reside with you from them you may purchase [slaves], and from their families that live among you that were born in your land.[All these] shall be your permanent possession. You shall will them as inheritance to your children after you as hereditary property; you shall keep them in servitude permanently. However regarding your bretheren, Bnei Yisroel, man over his brother, you
must not rule over him to crush him."
Vayikra 25:39-46
Commentary: A non-Jewish servant, however, can be passed on to descendants through inheritance!

The possession of a non-Jewish slave is eternal. But note another difference: A Jewish slave may not be subjected to “hard labor”(b’farech); a non-Jewish slave has no such condition. Seemingly, a non-Jewish slave may be worked to the bone with the most menial of work.
As we mentioned above, a Jewish servant must be released after six years of work.
Not so, however, is the case for a non-Jewish slave. How are we supposed to understand that they are kept forever? How are we to allow hard labor for someone who was purchased like property? How can we understand the purchase of another human being at all?
The institution of slavery represents a blurring of the line dividing human personhood from property. This blurring is reflected clearly in some of the laws recorded in the parasha (Note that I am treating the institution of slavery in toto, without reference to the important distinction between Hebrew slaves and Canaanite slaves, as in Vayikra 25:39-46):
(a) When a master strikes his slave and the slave subsequently dies (after 24-48 hours), the master is exempt from punishment "because he is his property" (21:21-22. Rashbam: "and the law allows him to strike him in order to chastise him.")
(b) An ox that gores and kills a slave subjects its owner only to a 30-shekel fine and not to "ransom money" designed to redeem the master from a death penalty (21:29-32).
(c) The master may (sometimes) compel his slave to cohabit with a slave-girl and the children will belong to the master (21:4).
End quote. YESHIVA UNIVERSITY http://www.yu.edu/ , and, http://www.slideshare.net/steiny100/jewish-sl...

"the children will belong to the master"

I'm disgusted, are you?

It also appears that the modern day Rabbi is appalled as well, and he should be, but, notice, he's not trying to deny it or explain it away. He doesn't attempt to make excuses or only select the good parts or the parts he likes. The Rabbi doesn't try to ignore anything, but then again...

He's Jewish. In my discussions with those who embrace Judaism, they never seem to shy away from the contradictions and inconsistencies within their religious tomes and beliefs.

They're open to introspection and scrutiny, of themselves, first and foremost, by their self.

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#528033 Aug 18, 2012
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> Children as sex objects was going on long before in Pagan societies in which sex was described as passive and aggressive partners. Not male and female. It was the Hebrews who came out against it from Scripture. Male male and male child was common. So quit imposing standards along with assume the worst when the history of your counterparts is riddled with sexual dysfunction. If it was not for the Jews and later Christians you pagans would still be banging sheep and getting married to your sisters.
LOL! I suggest you read your OT...it is full of it.

That has nothing to with the atrocities of the RCC today and since it's inception(which I was addressing, as the info provided was absolutely incorrect)...You are deflecting attention from actuality.

LAME!

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#528034 Aug 18, 2012
Nontheist wrote:
<quoted text>
Martian nymphomaniacs would be pretty cool, but the part about them laying their eggs in your body cavity for the young to feed on once hatched, sucks.
"BURN THE EGG SAC!"

Oh, good grief.

Now I'm quoting "Red Planet".

*sigh*

Since: Jan 11

United States

#528035 Aug 18, 2012
Happy Lesbo wrote:
.. being drunk is a reality ..
It does make for great reality TV.

psssst...shhhh! Look at this:
http://i.imgur.com/AxmCv.jpg

Don't let anyone else see.

Since: Jan 11

United States

#528036 Aug 18, 2012
Nontheist wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =xu8VNxbdj2QXX
It applies to both the comment and question.
I wonder if Rooty got arrested or something.

Maybe he really went to Poland.

Since: May 11

Cardiff, UK

#528039 Aug 18, 2012
Jedi Mind Trickers wrote:
<quoted text>Since, you are ignorant on this subject, then your assertion is that less than .001% of the population can be classified as homosexual. 97% are heterosexual and 2.999% are bisexual.
Let me deal with your trick question. The Bible does not deal with sinners who have genetic malfunctions. You are referring to intersexed people, and if you knew this, then every intersexed person grows into an a sex where that sex is pronounced and takes over. In other words, the person becomes either male or female.
You failed to answer my question, and trying to beat around it is obvious to me.
Try again:
There are two circumstances:
1) Men who are on the down low or in the closet.
2) The second is drug induced or Hollywood thrill seeking, which includes perversion.
Consider the second, I could show you men who look better than and more like women than women do. You would do one of three things, reject the idea of the penis, like me; or be moved by the physical attractions; or the whole perverse idea of having sex with a woman but it is a man.
Answer this: 1. What are transsexual MTF pre-op, who have sex with a gay men? Is he gay or straight, and is the gay man straight or gay.
Okay, got your answer, so what are they after the MTF is post-op and they are having sex.
If you answer changes, then you believe that homosexuality is a choice. If your answer does not change, you still believe that homosexuality is a choice.
Yes, this is a trick question, and I heard two gay men interviewed explain the answer and I agree, but it goes beyond.
If your answer is bisexual, then you are saying that all transsexuals are really bisexual. Also, the DSM documents that 75% of transsexuals are homosexuals, which is way out of line being as only 1% of the population are homosexuals.
It is irrelevant what you believe about choice, you do not understand it and most people do not. A drug addict makes a choice, a child born a drug addict has a parent who makes a choice and that is in treatment. How many drug addicts choose suicide or to OD? Zero, by your thoughts, but it is all choice, incremental choice and often unconscious choice. Most of what you learn is choice, albeit unconscious. Do you have to think about all the choice mechanism?
and btw:

"Do intersex conditions affect sexual orientation?

"Most people with intersex conditions grow up to be heterosexual, but persons with some specific intersex conditions seem to have an increased likelihood of growing up to be gay, lesbian, or bisexual adults. Even so, most individuals with these specific conditions also grow up to be heterosexual."

http://www.apa.org/topics/sexuality/intersex....

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#528040 Aug 18, 2012
MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>
...thank you, I appreciate it.
Sorry.

I have occasional aspirations towards wordsmithery.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#528041 Aug 18, 2012
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>Which was approved by the deity.
Approved? Why would you assume that? Other than willfull ignorance which borders on the criminal?
Did he not offer all the animals of the planet to Adam as potential mates, before creating Eve?
As potential mates? Where? Chapter and verse? Or are you talking out of your as_!

“Seventh son”

Since: Dec 10

Will Prevail

#528042 Aug 18, 2012
Jedi Mind Trickers wrote:
<quoted text>No, he was spot on and you do not get either point. If the danger of drunk driving were apparent, it would not be such a problem. As a matter of fact, the more drunk a person gets, the less than see the problem is drunk driving. They have a belief that they are in control, and that there is no danger. The more the person gets away with driving drunk, the less danger they see in it. They seldom see the problem, until they are wrapped around a tree or are being lowered into a box. How is this not just like the impending hell. You don't see the danger there either.
The analogy is spot on, and in both cases is does involve belief and the idea that you are in control.
If there something you do not feel the need to whine about let us know.

Since: May 11

Cardiff, UK

#528043 Aug 18, 2012
Jedi Mind Trickers wrote:
<quoted text>Sorry, I do not mean to insult you, I will try not to. I am going to address your posts in part. At no point this you address this post.
Also, I doubt you are looking at a DSM IV, if so give me the page no. I own a DSM-IV, but how come you don't know that it is irrelevant and was replaced and revised by the DSM-IV-TR. In other words, if the APA instructed from the DSM-IV, they would lose their credentials because they got called to task for the very things they have not corrected in you.
But, please don't forget the bisexual thing and you eluding to there only being .001% gays.
302.6 and 302.85.

at what point did I say that a thousandth of one percent of the population are gay?...and do please tell me how you arrived at that based upon ANYTHING I have said.

I think it's you who simply pull statistics out of the ether hoping that other posters will let them slip by, there are lies, damn lies and statistics....and then there are your statistics.

“MEET KIKI -She Seeks Home”

Since: Oct 10

With Established Harem

#528045 Aug 18, 2012
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
It does make for great reality TV.
psssst...shhhh! Look at this:
http://i.imgur.com/AxmCv.jpg
Don't let anyone else see.
... psssst...shhhh! Look at this:
http://i.imgur.com/AxmCv.jpg
Don't let anyone else see

http://media.photobucket.com/image/lesbian%20...

“The eye has it...”

Since: Jan 12

Russell's teapot.

#528046 Aug 18, 2012
lightbeamrider wrote:
''If an Israelite saw a beautiful woman amoung captive prisoners of war, he was permitted to take her into his house.'' She was given a month to morn. At the end of that time the Israelite could have sex with her but if he did then she became his wife, not a slave.[Dt.21:13]
You'll probably take this as an insult.

Sometimes I wonder about how you(the royal, all inclusive "you" as in Christianity at large) reason things and then feel as if its acceptable, mainly because it is in your bible.

Deuteronomy 21:10-13

10) When you go out to battle against your enemies, and the Lord your God delivers them into your hands and you take them away captive, 11) and see among the captives a beautiful woman, and have a desire for her and would take her as a wife for yourself, 12) then you shall bring her home to your house, and she shall shave her head and trim her nails. 13) She shall also remove from her the clothes of her captivity and shall remain in your house, and mourn her father and mother a full month; and after that you may go in to her and be her husband and she shall be your wife.

Lemme ask you something.

If there was a war, and during that your wife was slain, or maybe she wasn't, and she's the object of desire by the conquering soldier.

But let's say your daughter was the "the beautiful woman"(keeping in mind age 14 and at times younger was the approximate age of womanhood in that time) and a soldier chose her as his desire.

How would you feel about that? Do you think a month is long enough for her to mourn you and your wife, and possibly a brother or sister slain?

Now, imagine, the soldier who desires her strides into the room and says:

"It's been a month, you've had plenty of time to accept your loss, sorry my neighbor chopped off your fathers head in front of you, he's really a nice guy, it's wife time, lets go, make sure to bathe, because we're having sex tonight, too....WIFEY!"

None of your reasoning is compelling to me, inasmuch as the directions you point to, are the alleged words and desires of your deity in how it desired its chosen people to live.

Whether written by "divine inspiration", or by guessing at what they thought the deity would prefer.

It doesn't appear to be divine.

Maybe you can explain how it is.

“I am who I am”

Since: Jun 11

Upstate NY

#528047 Aug 18, 2012
Jedi Mind Trickers wrote:
<quoted text>I would love to get into this whole slavery idea and their confusion regarding it. I have to get in the right frame of mind. I want to get back to this, You are right on.
There is no way that the Hebrews practiced the same type of slavery that they were in bondage to for over 400 years. When Moses was one foot from the throne, he did not even understand the slavery and bondage that he was responsible for, as a Prince of Egypt, soon to be Pharoah.
The topic of slavery in the Bible is very often misunderstood because of the culture, the language, and the subject of slavery in modern history.

1) In antiquity, slavery was a term that was used in a variety of contexts. In Hebrew culture, slaves were either captives as a result of war, or voluntary servants working in a barter type of arrangement.

1a) If slaves were taken as a result of war, it wasn't to punish them or humiliate them, but to care for them because their homes and male fighting men who were husbands and brothers, were often killed. So slaves were basically integrated into the culture and cared for, and were given an opportunity to work for themselves and start life over again. This was very similar to what some Native American tribes did. The Shoshone and Cheyenne were well known for taking children and women into the tribe. But they weren't allowed to sit around and mope about their losses. They were part of the community, were treated fairly, and were expected to be productive members of their new society.

1b) Voluntary slaves were workers who would offer their labor in exchange for food, shelter, and clothing for a period of time. There was usually a verbal contract, and would last between 3-10 years, sometimes longer and sometimes shorter.

2) The confusion regarding slavery in the Bible often stems from our own recent history [compared to the rest of world history, the 1860s is fairly recent] with slavery, and the Jim Crow laws that followed this period. Colonial slavery was an economic evil. That is, it existed because people wanted to get rich from the sale and labor of other people regardless of whether or not those slaves agreed with it or not. This is what we see in the sex slave trade today.
It was Christians who spearheaded and worked hard to abolish slavery in the United States. In the south, there was still an aristocratic European mindset of entitlement and superiority. Plantation owners cared about their business more than they cared about the immorality of involuntary human bondage. In the American south, belonging to a Christian congregation was often seen as a convenient way of forming business alliances. As such, it was inevitable that some slave holders would attempt to justify their actions by using the Bible. This was a perversion based upon financial convenience.

This is why the arguments of skeptics fail when it relates to the mention of slavery in the Bible. They're thinking of 1860s America and trying to apply it to ancient Hebrew culture. It's just not the same.
christinaity is EVIL

Waterloo, Canada

#528048 Aug 18, 2012
TruthinFaith wrote:
Prove there is a God. Okay, for one. Jesus is God. For two, with out excepting Jesus we would all go to hell on judgement day.
Here a thought.
With out the creation of EARTH by God(Jesus) nothing would be in it's right place. You want proof there is a God, then look around you. Where did the people come from, where and how did the animals get on this earth, how did all the vegitation get here, and among other things. Dugh, if there is no God as you say, then how in the hell are you breathing?!!!! dugh.
and remember this, for every sin you commit you will be punished for it. In ways you don't even see. I can tell you that for sure. plus the only greatest sin is Denying Jesus.
Wake up people, read the prophacies in the bible and then read what has happend in this world and is going on right now. Those have come true and those that are happening right now. Dugh.
sin is Self Inflicted Nonsense,..duh

the universe always existed ,no gods needed

you have NO proof only baseless ASSertion FALLACY

and your religion svks
www.evilbible.com

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#528049 Aug 18, 2012
Black Thunder 42 wrote:
<quoted text>LOL! I suggest you read your OT...it is full of it.
Incest as it relates to Adam and Eve through Genesis was permitted and perhaps the norm. Post Genesis it stops. Bestiality never permitted.
That has nothing to with the atrocities of the RCC today and since it's inception(which I was addressing, as the info provided was absolutely incorrect)...You are deflecting attention from actuality.
LAME!
It seems only the RCC is guilty of atrocities while your pagan counterparts and everyone else including teachers who have had sex with minors in far greater numbers is all ignored. My point is to add some context as it relates to your group and their history. And point out your hypocrisy. Uner non theism there is no objective basis to conclude these things are wrong in the first place given human history up to the present day. It was for the most part the norm until recent events changed these things. Children are still used as sex toys in other countries. Slavery still happens. Families including children live in dumps in parts of the world. This all goes on today. You single out the RCC while ignoring everything else including your own anti theism which does not allow for any invective against these things which carries any real weight!

“The eye has it...”

Since: Jan 12

Russell's teapot.

#528051 Aug 18, 2012
Brother Marine wrote:
<quoted text>
The drunk driver never sees the danger, because he himself IS the danger. If he could see it and understand it, he wouldn't do it.
So it is with atheism.
I tend to think the analogy works better, if you look at the theist as the drunk driver, and before he gets in the vehicle, in a loud voice says;

"Loord..please don't let me kill anyone while I'm driving, because I'm so drunk I can't see a thing"

And a passerby says; "Hey, buddy, you're talking to a dumpster, are you drunk or what?"

But, you know, I guess it's all in the way you look at things.
Proof

Brentwood, NY

#528052 Aug 18, 2012

“I am who I am”

Since: Jun 11

Upstate NY

#528053 Aug 18, 2012
Nontheist wrote:
<quoted text>
I tend to think the analogy works better, if you look at the theist as the drunk driver, and before he gets in the vehicle, in a loud voice says;
"Loord..please don't let me kill anyone while I'm driving, because I'm so drunk I can't see a thing"
And a passerby says; "Hey, buddy, you're talking to a dumpster, are you drunk or what?"
But, you know, I guess it's all in the way you look at things.
LOL I see what you mean.

Bottom line:

Each side is convinced they're right and the other side is wrong.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 5 min LAWEST100 615,603
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 6 min truth 627,708
Poll If you're Christain what kind are you? (Oct '07) 6 min JesusLover 17,858
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 15 min gundee123 14,490
*** All Time Favorite Songs *** (Dec '10) 28 min lil whispers 3,371
Play "end of the word" part 2 35 min ImFree2Choose 706
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 43 min Freebird 180,035
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 48 min AussieBobby 278,460
More from around the web