Eye of God #fundie #homophobia

Eye of God #fundie #homophobia atheistforums.org

Use your head, theists come with certain beliefs that we are commanded to share. Dur.

[You are also commanded to kill witches and homosexuals. To kill people who wear clothes made of 2 different materials. To kill those who work on the sabbath. You are also commanded to kill atheists and the entire town in which you find said atheist. Do you do these things? Hypocrite.

Don't pretend that you do anything because the bible says so.]

I do everything my Lord commands me. If he were to command of me that I kill homosexuals and people who work on the Sabbath, than I would be forced to do so. However, that order was given to the Israelites for a reason I do not know. NOT ME. Perhaps if I was born an Israeli I might feel differently.

Thankfully, that act has not been asked of me and I am glad because I personally have nothing against homosexuals or working on a Sunday.

29 comments

old comment by You Know It's True

Ladies and gentleman, this is the logical conclusion of a belief system that decides what is good and what is bad based on the whimsy of a tyrant. This is the fundamental anti-humanism that is the heart of all authoritarian religions (and for that matter, authoritarian secular belief systems as well). This is a belief system that is essentially, fundamentally, and basically incompatible with a respect for your fellow human beings.

Whenever someone tells you that they are a believer in the YHVH of the Bible, and that they "love" humanity, you are speaking to somebody who is either entirely ignorant of the basics of their belief system, perhaps willfully so, or you are speaking to one who is lying to you through the honeyed lips of an apologist.

old comment by You Know It's True

^You know, I'm glad that most Christians follow those "philosophers" and not the actual words of the Bible and of YHVH. It's good that most believers pick and choose what to believe, based on their own inherent morality and intrinsic humanism. After all, humans are mostly good. That is a fact that I think most people would agree with, even though their declared God doesn't actually agree.

I'm not blaming people for making up excuses to not follow the savage law of the Bible. The world is a better place because of it. But let's not pretend that the Bible is not exceptionally clear about what we should do to the "unclean". I'm not trying to discourage good behavior, but good Christians are good in SPITE of their religion, not because of it (even if they don't realize that fact).

Of course, all of this is ignoring the fact that religion is ultimately a human creation, and as such, perhaps it is best judged according to the way that most of it's adherents behave, rather than judging it based on it's ostensible foundations (ie, the Bible). I will concede that point, although that wasn't really my main point.

My point, which I stand by, is that the literal words of God, as recorded in the Bible, stand starkly in contrast with a human-centric moral code. People like the one who was quoted are people who realize this fact, and embrace it, rather than denounce it like I am.

old comment by OHP

"I do everything my Lord commands me."

Liar.

"If he were to command of me that I kill homosexuals and people who work on the Sabbath, than I would be forced to do so."

He has commanded it. You merely pick and choose which orders you'll follow based upon how the consequences will effect you in the here and now. So much for faith.

"However, that order was given to the Israelites for a reason I do not know. NOT ME. Perhaps if I was born an Israeli I might feel differently.

ALL OF IT was given directly to someone other than you! What's your method of determining which parts automatically apply to you and which only apply if your god directly addresses you? Besides convenience, I mean.

"Thankfully, that act has not been asked of me and I am glad because I personally have nothing against homosexuals or working on a Sunday. "

And yet you say you'd readily kill them -- violating your own conscience -- if some git on high claiming he can totally make you an immortal spirit person if you obey him told you to. Congratulations: you're a spiritual Nazi! Heavenly Hitler must be so proud.

old comment by gimel

@You know it's true:
I don't think that a strictly anthropocentric code of morality could ever be found in any system that assumes existence of God, or any other beings intrinsically better than most humans (ie. not as flawed as typical human). The "God became human and promised each one of us a share in divinity" perspective of some books of New Testament (coupled with "God believes all humans to have great intrinsic worth, and so should you!" introduced in some books of Old Testament) is as close to anthropocentrism as religion gets, really.

It all boils down to the fact that (even according to Catholic theology!) Bible is incoherent, being human work, at least as much as word of God. Not surprising, seeing as it was compiled over some 600 years (if not more). Almost every book contradicts a dozen others on many subjects, including, of course, morality. Therefore, whenever you invoke "literal words of God, as recorded in the Bible", you always have to add which words, which God, which part of the Bible.

As for OP, well, it would seem that the ban on the forum was well-earned. We are commanded to share our faith but, by God, we are also commanded not to be obnoxious assholes.

old comment by You Know It's True

@gimel
Out of curiosity, are you a believer? I want to make it clear, for the record, that I bear no ill-will towards believers. I just have pretty strong convictions to the effect that I think that human beings should place the well-being of themselves, as a collective (and other forms of life, whenever possible) over the opinions of any self-proclaimed God. If you do believe in a benevolent God, then I can understand why you might think that my line of thinking is missing the point (ie. that God actually DOES know what's best for us in the long run, and that we really would be better off under his care).

It seems to me that, if you are a believer, then you are taking a different stance towards God than the people who wrote the Bible did. I think that's a good thing, personally, but I won't mince words here... I've read the Bible front-to-back myself on more than one occasion, and I don't see how you could possibly walk away from that book with any idea other than that YHVH was the villain. If you believe in him, then it seems to me that you are (well-intentioned though you may be) siding with the bad guys, so to speak.

I'm not going to tell you you're wrong for not being a Biblical literalist, for all the reasons you've already said. However, what is the basis of Christianity if not the Bible? Flawed though it may be, isn't it all you have, really? If the foundation of the religion is a flawed book written by flawed people, then I don't think it deserves to be treated any more seriously than we would treat any other book thusly written. One should not build their Church upon shifting sands, but upon a solid rock, after all.

I'm not trying to attack you; I just want you to be able to take a step back and see it from my perspective.

It's not even that I bear any ill-will towards a hypothetical God, assuming that he/she/whatever actually was benevolent towards us. I am genuinely confused as to how one might come to the conclusion that there is a benevolent God, however. Once again, that's not a personal attack. I'm just saying that my mind can't really wrap my head around it. I imagine it must be a pretty comforting thought, however, even if I don't believe it.

old comment by Jumping spider

@You Know It's True

Anti-humanist doesn't mean anti-human. Just because you don't have a worldview that is centered on collective humankind doesn't mean that you are against people. I am anti-humanist, but that's because I think humanism is flawed and often discounts subjective experiences. I'm apatheist too, because I think the existence or lack of a God is meaningless if we cannot escape the reality of ourselves that holds us, not Christian or any other religion. You can ask about any of my beliefs if you want, please don't assume, because I'm unusual, and not not religious or empiricist. I don't have a problem with people having most any beliefs as long as they are motivated by compassion though.

old comment by You Know It's True

^I'm not sure I would call myself "humanist" per se. I only use the term because I think that it's close enough to get the basic idea across. I guess if I had to make up a phrase, I would be a pragmatic, practically and objectivity-motivated "person-ist" or "life-ist", but I am also very flexible about when and where "life" should be preserved or destroyed in regards to a greater good, if any of that makes sense. I actually hold a lot of beliefs that most proper secular-humanists would probably find objectionable.

In an ideal world, I think we would be better off abandoning a lot of traits that most people associate with humanity, in an effort to live in a way that is more pragmatic and self-sustaining, but I also realize that idealism (and I'm using that term in a vulgar sense, as in holding onto a set of ideals instead of pragmatism) only gets you so far in the real world.

Just based on what you said, I imagine we have more common ground than you might think. I would like to think that I base my beliefs on a genuine attempt to enhance the livelihood of all persons, human or otherwise.

Also, I hope I am not derailing the comments section. Sorry if I am.

Eye of God #fundie #homophobia atheistforums.org

29 comments

Confused?