God

Originally posted by jaywill
What does this have to do with it ?

The Glorious Gospel of Christ marches on to victory among South African young people:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7LRPkQhjVA&feature=youtu.be

it's a parasitical meme.

Originally posted by galveston75
I agree with you. It seems when things slow down here on this forum, this thread always pops back up. They must be board and probably upset with life on some level so they have to blame somebody and it's usually God.

nobody has blamed god for anything. this topic is mislabeled, it's not about god, it's about the beast of the old testament.

Originally posted by galveston75
I agree with you. It seems when things slow down here on this forum, this thread always pops back up. They must be board and probably upset with life on some level so they have to blame somebody and it's usually God.

1) The word is "bored" not "board".
2) if you bother to read my post carefully, instead of knee-jerk firing from the hip, you will notice that I am not blaming anyone for anything.
3) I am not sure which source you have in mind, but I am referring to the God of the Old Testament, Yahweh.
4) Go to this document, read it through, and then refute Dawkins' comments, please, with reference to the text.
5) Then we can have a sensible discussion.
6) Thankyou.

Originally posted by Pianoman1
"The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully"

Wow ...[text shortened]... ve disposition.

Excellent stuff!! (gues I'll just sit and wait for all the thumbs down!)

This presents my view of Richard Dawkins very well:

YouTube

Originally posted by Pianoman1
"The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully"

Wow ve disposition.

Excellent stuff!! (gues I'll just sit and wait for all the thumbs down!)

The sad truth is that......ITS TRUE.

Sad because false religion gives theism a bad name.

False religion is one thing - but true religion is a whole different species.

Dawkins cannot touch true religion.

To find out about true religion.............seek out "Vedic Wisdom"

But it must be true Vedic Wisdom............yes its also sad but true that in this day and age you can go on-line and there are many sites posting up false information about the Vedas.

Originally posted by Dasa
The sad truth is that......ITS TRUE.

False religion is one thing - but true religion is a whole different species.

Dawkins cannot touch true religion.

To find out about true religion.............seek out "Vedic Wisdom"

You tell so many lies, but I believe you just don't know any better. Others on
this website tell lies on purpose. So you are right to call them dishonest. But
you lump everyone that disagrees with you as dishonest and so on that basis
you become dishonest yourself.

Originally posted by Dasa
The sad truth is that......ITS TRUE.

Sad because false religion gives theism a bad name.

False religion is one thing - but true religion is a whole different species.

Dawkins cannot touch true religion.

To find out about true religion.............seek out "Vedic Wisdom"

But it must be true Vedic Wisdom............yes its also sad but true that in ...[text shortened]... age you can go on-line and there are many sites posting up false information about the Vedas.

if vedic wisdom is anything like you describe or in any way reflected in your philosophy, dialog or behavior, then it is just as bad as the old testament nonsense.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Others on
this website tell lies on purpose.

Others on this website cheat at chess as well.

Originally posted by Dasa
Dawkins cannot touch true religion.

Regardless of whether we agree with Dawkins or not, his analysis applies to all religions and to religiosity. The fact that he has not specifically 'targetted' your particular tiny cult does not have anything to do with whether you think your religion is "true" or otherwise.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Typical atheistic sour grapes if you ask me.

Edit: We've heard all this (and more) before. So what's new here?

So you deny all those allegations? The OT seems pretty clear on this as well as Rev. in NT.

Originally posted by RJHinds
You tell so many lies, but I believe you just don't know any better. Others on
this website tell lies on purpose.

Unsurprisingly, you do not seem to understand that a "lie" is a falsehood propagated "on purpose", and that something [claimed to be] false that is propagated by someone because they "just don't know any better" is an "error" or "mistake". You accuse people of being "liars" so often on this forum, it's not too much to ask, I reckon, for you to demonstrate an understanding of the word's meaning.

Originally posted by FMF
Unsurprisingly, you do not seem to understand that a "lie" is a falsehood propagated "on purpose", and that something [claimed to be] false that is propagated by someone because they "just don't know any better" is an "error" or "mistake". You accuse people of being "liars" so often on this forum, it's not too much to ask, I reckon, for you to demonstrate an understanding of the word's meaning.

You do not seem to understand what I just said either.

Originally posted by RJHinds
You do not seem to understand what I just said either.

You are misusing the words "lie" and "liar" when you apply it to people who either simply have different beliefs from yours or who propagate something that is mistaken because they "just don't know any better" [i.e. not on purpose]. You call people "liars" a lot - seemingly every day, sometimes numerous times in the same day - so you ought to use the word correctly. Just saying.

Originally posted by Dasa
The sad truth is that......ITS TRUE.

Sad because false religion gives theism a bad name.

False religion is one thing - but true religion is a whole different species.

Dawkins cannot touch true religion.

To find out about true religion.............seek out "Vedic Wisdom"

But it must be true Vedic Wisdom............yes its also sad but true that in ...[text shortened]... age you can go on-line and there are many sites posting up false information about the Vedas.

I'm afraid the Vedantic religion is not excused. Religion, as ever, is the poison in India's blood.

What is there to repect in the crimes around the world being committed daily in religion's dreaded name? How well, with what fatal results, religion erects totems, and how willing we are to kill for them! . And when we've done it often enough, the deadening of affect that makes it easier to do it again.
India's problem turns out to be the world's problem. What happened in India (millions killed at time of partition, intractable enmity and violence between religious groups) has happened in God's name.

The problem's name is God.

Originally posted by Pianoman1
I'm afraid the Vedantic religion is not excused. Religion, as ever, is the poison in India's blood.

What is there to repect in the crimes around the world being committed daily in religion's dreaded name? [b]How well, with what fatal results, religion erects totems, and how willing we are to kill for them! . And when we've done it often enough, the ...[text shortened]... ween religious groups) has happened in God's name.

The problem's name is God.[/b]

So is the name of the answer.