@Жұқтыру: I beg to differ. All i did was posting bible verses oftened ignored or dismissed when we talk about christianity. All of these verses are found in the Bible. Thats it. These verses are obviously horrific and this is why Eklipse felt offended, and in stead of adressing what i wrote, he just went on and attack me personnally, instead of engaging in a mature discussion. And barely answering his post? are you kidding? here is some of the lies he attributed to me, just because i posted bible verses:

Posting here just to attack religion is really petty and makes me wonder if you're in some way insecure about your own beliefs

(personnal attack)

those like you who refuse to let people believe what they choose to believe in

(flat out lie)

You keep using the word "push" as to imply that everyone here is somehow obligated to listen

Just after i said that i am ok with him pushing his ideas as long as he is ok with his ideas being criticized AND that i recognized that admitted that i wasn't forced to do anything.

Eklipse has no intellectual honesty, and try to use every trick in the book to discredit me personally in a vain attempt to discredit what i actually wrote. I don't have any respect for this type of behaviour nor to the person that comes with it.

@The Man Who'd Buy Spain:

When people, Christians and atheists alike, quote things from the Old Testament to try and define Christianity. Things like stoning adulterers and homosexuals and women who talk back and the like. Christianity---> Christ---> Jesus---> New Testament.

Matthew 5
17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them

Jesus refers to the old testament all the time, and the bible is composed of both the new testament and the old. In fact the new testament doesn't make any sens without the old testament, since the new testament is to be about the fullfilling of the old testament's prophecies.

Also, Christianity---> Christ---> Jesus---> God ---> Old Testament.
Jesus is God right? And by God, it means that he IS the same exact God that the old testament talks about. The God that gave His Laws in the Pentateuch (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy).
I'm glad that you don't embrace the teachings of the Old testament, but you don't get to dismiss it as if this had nothing to do with christianity.

And the fact of the matter is that i quoted about the same amount of verses from the old testament than from the new testament. The Old testament surely wins the prize for most violent of the two, but there is a number of verses in the new testament that i find rather immoral.

@Relm: I do respect your right to believe whatever you want, and i do respect your right to post and say whatever you want.
However, you don't get to choose who can and who can't respond to this thread.
If you decide to post bible verses on a public gaming forum - and you have the right to do it - you also have to accept that those who opposes what you are putting forward (if the word "push" bother you) have the right to say so. Just because you created the thread doesn't mean you own it.
If i were to create a faschist thread and say that my thread is for fascists only, would you accept that? In a gaming commity forum? Well i wouldn't. On the other hand, if this was a religious website, in a religious community, then i would totally get why someone with my views wouldn't be accepted, and i would be ok with it.
As for you explaining in what context these verses should be read, i don't ask you to do it. You quoted bible verses, i did the same. If you feel like you need to explain some of these verses, you can do it here, or on another thread if you want. And i'll respond. But i sincerely doubt that you can come up with a "context" in wich stoning homosexuals to death, or torturing people for eternity by making them rot in a lake of fire because the don't believe, would be a good and moral thing to do. Maybe you personnaly don't believe in these verses, but the Bible is very clear about that. And if you want to promote a book that states that people like me deserves to suffer for eternity, then i have a problem with it, and i am not apologizing for fighting it.

Matthew 5
17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them

Jesus is the fulfillment he is talking about. He is obviously not talking about the laws of Moses, because he basically refuted those through his actions.

I agree with you on the importance of the Old Testament, but that book is not the world Jesus lived in. Jesus brought about tolerance of people.

He forgives, but since he is God, I guess it's His job. That doesn't mean people should live by all laws of the Old Testament, though. We are to love everyone, and we are not to judge anyone, for we are not God. We are also to obey the laws of our government while still keeping true to His name.

Mark 12
Render Unto Caesar

13And they sent unto him certain of the Pharisees and of the Herodians, to catch him in his words.

14And when they were come, they said unto him, Teacher, we know that you are true, and care for no man: for you regard not the person of men, but teach the way of God in truth: Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar, or not?

15Shall we give, or shall we not give? But he, knowing their hypocrisy, said unto them, Why tempt you me? bring me a penny, that I may see it.

16And they brought it. And he said unto them, Whose is this image and superscription? And they said unto him, Caesar's.

17And Jesus answering said unto them, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's. And they marveled at him.

The poster above makes a great point, Jesus is the fulfillment of the prophecies.

@The Man Who'd Buy Spain

He is obviously not talking about the laws of Moses, because he basically refuted those through his actions.

But of course he is talking about the laws of the old testament. What laws would he be refering to?
Now does the actions of Jesus contratict the old testament? Yes.
Is there verses in the new testament that contradicts the old testament? yes, plenty.
I can point to you other verses of the new testament that says the old testament is to be taken seriously, and I can also point to you verses that contradict that. So the general guideline for christians seem to be: whenever the 2 contradict themselves, always go for the new testament, and if it is written in the old testament, but not in the new testament, then do whatever you want.

It is a nice way to avoid the brutality of the old testament, but really it seems to me that it is just a cop out.
I mean if god changed his mind about the death sentences for all the sinners, don't you think that he would have thrown in a little verse about it, like:
"On second thoughts, if a child disrespect his parent, don't kill him. Take away his desert maybe, but don't kill him". No, you don't see that, in fact there are verses where jesus lectures some jews for not observing Moses Law, on that very same death sentence (Mark 7:8-10 for example)
What about slavery? Don't you think that if god changed his mind about slavery there would be a verse in the new testament that said: "by the way, no more slavery".
No, instead of that, you get 1 Peter 2:18 and 1 Timothy 6:1-2.

Anyway, even if he didn't wanted christians to follow the OT anymore, he is still the god that made these laws in the first place. Are you really going to argue that the law of the OT were actually good and moraly right at the time of the OT?

Anyway, even if he didn't wanted christians to follow the OT anymore, he is still the god that made these laws in the first place. Are you really going to argue that the law of the OT were actually good and moraly right at the time of the OT?

No, not at all.

Jesus affirmed the Torah with the gospels.

Did nobody watch my video it was on the topic of the argument.

and in stead of adressing what i wrote, he just went on and attack me personnally, instead of engaging in a mature discussion

I've addressed nearly every last thing you've posted, piece by piece. Meanwhile, you cherry pick small parts of my posts that you've taken personal offense to and try to discredit everything solely on that.

instead of engaging in a mature discussion

Oh please. You've been the least mature person in this entire thread. You complain about cherry picking, and then cherry pick posts of those who call you out. You WHINE non-stop about personal attacks, and then flat-out call me retarded. Every last logical fallacy you accuse me of you turn right around and do the same. (I.E: Calling my comparison ridiculous when you used one even more outrageous)

You're a blatant hypocrite. Oh let me guess, calling you out on that counts as a "personal attack" in your book doesn't it? I'm supposed to never say a word about how uncivil you've been and focus on your cherry-picked,slanted argument.

Eklipse has no intellectual honesty, and try to use every trick in the book to discredit me personally in a vain attempt to discredit what i actually wrote.

I've attacked your argument, and the way you've behaved on this thread. Nothing more. And looking back through this thread you've taken far more personal shots at me than I have at you. Get off your high horse and stop criticizing the logic of others' until you can get your own straightened out.

Edited 10/7/2015 13:47:43

You're a blatant hypocrite. Oh let me guess, calling you out on that counts as a "personal attack" in your book doesn't it? I'm supposed to never say a word about how uncivil you've been and focus on your cherry-picked,slanted argument.

Well at least you have an argument for calling me a hypocrite. Even if i don't think it is a valid one, it is better than nothing. Better than calling me insecure because i've posted bible verses you don't like...

Calling my comparison ridiculous when you used one even more outrageous

I didn't adress that claim so i'm gonna do it now. The comparison i used was to illustrate that the concept of "forcing someone", "obligating", was different than the concept of "pushing something upon someone". Also the metaphor were not meant to be outrageous. I personnaly don't have a problem with human genitals, i don't think any part of our body are "shameful". But i can see why you would think that human genitals are outrageous, given your beliefs and the book you take them from. Granted, the metaphor was not a particularly good one, but calling it outrageous is excessive.

I've attacked your argument, and the way you've behaved on this thread.

No, you've attacked my alleged behaviour and attacked imaginary arguments that you put in my mouth (like refusing to let people believe what them want to believe, or insinuing that i was against him speaking whatever he wants), when in fact all i did was quoting the Bible, wich you saw as an attack.

Now the only thing you got right is that it was in fact an attack, but not an attack toward christians or an attack toward OP's freedom of expression or freedom of religion. It was me exercizing my freedom of expression to criticize the BOOK he was refering to, simply by showing some of the verses people like to ignore.
OF COURSE i cherry picked the bad verses, but i'm not the one preaching that the bible is the word of an all powerful and benevolent god that everyone should believe in if they don't want to suffer for eternity (wich is the message behind 2 Timothy 4: "preach the word", "do the work of an evangelist") . So in order to prove that wrong, all i need is to point at a few counter examples in the bible where god is not bevevolent by any definition according to universally accepted and basic morals.

May we stop this pointless bickering? It leads us nowhere.

I beg to differ. All i did was posting bible verses oftened ignored or dismissed when we talk about christianity. All of these verses are found in the Bible. Thats it. These verses are obviously horrific and this is why Eklipse felt offended, and in stead of adressing what i wrote, he just went on and attack me personnally, instead of engaging in a mature discussion. And barely answering his post? are you kidding? here is some of the lies he attributed to me, just because i posted bible verses:

You are retarded

Of course, Eklipse has no grounds to be offended, what a flibbergiblet.

Well at least you have an argument for calling me a hypocrite. Even if i don't think it is a valid one, it is better than nothing. Better than calling me insecure because i've posted bible verses you don't like...

I'm trying to keep it family friendly here

You are retarded

Hypocrite established - did you forget to address this? Like Eklipse said: Get off your high horse and stop criticizing the logic of others' until you can get your own straightened out.

No, you've attacked my alleged behaviour and attacked imaginary arguments that you put in my mouth (like refusing to let people believe what them want to believe, or insinuing that i was against him speaking whatever he wants), when in fact all i did was quoting the Bible, wich you saw as an attack.

Well, you are refusing to let people believe what they want to; obviously, you can't ban or illegalise faith, nor really discriminate against most Warlight-ers in any significant way, so you're doing the next best thing: dissuasion.

Induce (someone) to do something through reasoning or argument.
Indicate that one is not willing to accept or grant (something offered or requested).

Now the only thing you got right is that it was in fact an attack, but not an attack toward christians or an attack toward OP's freedom of expression or freedom of religion.

- I struck him down with my machete, but it's a victimless crime, anyway.

It was me exercizing my freedom of expression to criticize the BOOK he was refering to, simply by showing some of the verses people like to ignore.

Well, yeah, every word you say here is excercising your "freedom of expression" - I could say "Fizzer is a dumb rock" - it doesn't make it right nor useful that I said that.

And before you call me out for not addressing all you said, I'm leaving that to Eklipse, I'm mainly pointing things out in your arguing that are, as you like to say, void of intellectual honesty.

Eklipse has no intellectual honesty, and try to use every trick in the book to discredit me personally in a vain attempt to discredit what i actually wrote.

And you call out Eklipse for insulting...

Edited 10/7/2015 20:38:09

Eklipse & Juq made very true arguments and I cannot disagree with them in any way. I'll just stay out of this though.

yeah, i think thats for the best.

Better than calling me insecure because i've posted bible verses you don't like...

You keep acting as if I've insulted you directly. My first post did not mention a single user by name. You were the one who took personal offense to it and began raging on about how you've been personally attacked.

I personnaly don't have a problem with human genitals, i don't think any part of our body are "shameful". But i can see why you would think that human genitals are outrageous, given your beliefs and the book you take them from.

1.) In the country I live in indecent public exposure towards someone can easily land you jail time, double so if a minor views it. Plus, I didn't say genitals are outrageous. I said that comparing someone talking about religion to a naked man running down the street is outrageous.

2.) Another issue here is that you seem to be making a lot of assumptions about me without proper evidence. Nowhere in this thread have I said anything that can lead you to conclude what my religious beliefs are.

Granted, the metaphor was not a particularly good one, but calling it outrageous is excessive.

If my metaphor was bad enough to warrant you calling me retarded, I think it's well deserved to describe your metaphor as outrageous.

Eklipse, it's not brave to post your faith outlooks - but you're going to have to deal with criticism. Say I promote to kill all Jews - should we just leave me alone? Relm is promoting this on a forum - a public talking space, and you call "attacking" if there's any frains or arguments against Christianity.

Sorry I've ignored your response for this long. I sometimes have difficulty maintaining more than one conversation per thread and my focus has been elsewhere.

Now to answer. You make a good point, and criticism is always something you have to be prepared for. However, this wasn't the place. By OP's admission it's a thread for Christians, Jews, and Muslims to exchange their own views regarding faith. Coming in here to attack faith completely derails the original intention, crashes the thread into flame wars, and in the end nothing is really accomplished.

For example. If someone created a thread about Atheism, with the expressed intent for Atheists to talk about Atheism. Would it be right for me to go in and fill the thread up with anti-Atheism posts? Or to start posting religious speeches there?

I'd also wager that this isn't comparable to promoting antisemitism. Nothing in this thread was posted with the intent to encourage violence, it was supposed to be the opposite: A peaceful discussion between three groups who are known to be at each other's throats.

Again though, I do see where you are coming from. Personally, I think I may have gotten a bit too defensive to start with. However, my issue in this thread has been far more with Hitchslap's attitude than anything else.

*dropped museum popcorn*

o.0 I do believe Eklipse and Xapy are right on this topic, but this is coming from a guy who sees differences in the Old and New Testaments.

Now to answer. You make a good point, and criticism is always something you have to be prepared for. However, this wasn't the place. By OP's admission it's a thread for Christians, Jews, and Muslims to exchange their own views regarding faith.

Well, first, Relm said that a while after, second, I don't agree that this is the best way to exchange thoughts between Christians, Jews, and Muslims - by unreadable Bible text and no context? And then Relm said to ask any frains - sounds more like a Christian wanting to argue or get into an argument, or at best, an AMA on Christianity.

I'd also wager that this isn't comparable to promoting antisemitism. Nothing in this thread was posted with the intent to encourage violence, it was supposed to be the opposite: A peaceful discussion between three groups who are known to be at each other's throats.

I don't think it was supposed to be the opposite - I think Relm specifically said that the problem he had when arguing against Muslims and Jews was that he didn't have enough information. And antisemitism doesn't mean violence, necessarily - but replace racism perhaps with an argument about toppling the Burj Khalifa, restricted to only Taliban, Al-Qaida and North Caucasus Emirate.

Personally, I think I may have gotten a bit too defensive to start with. However, my issue in this thread has been far more with Hitchslap's attitude than anything else.

In my opinion, Hitchslap's first two posts were not outrageous - they were very un-diplomatically done and in a jeering manner that, that just makes folk hate you, but they were a valid point, still, especially since Relm didn't specify much yet.

Edited 10/8/2015 00:17:14

You are retarded

Of course, Eklipse has no grounds to be offended, what a flibbergiblet.

Eklipse was offended before that, he was offended because of the verses of the bible that i quoted.
And i don't care if he is offended anyway, especially considering all the shit coming out of his brain.

I'm trying to keep it family friendly here

You are retarded

Hypocrite established - did you forget to address this? Like Eklipse said: Get off your high horse and stop criticizing the logic of others' until you can get your own straightened out.

hahaha i'm guessing irony isn't your strong suit, hey? At least have the decency to quote the joke in its entirety. It was an offensive joke, no doubt about that though.

Well, you are refusing to let people believe what they want to; obviously, you can't ban or illegalise faith, nor really discriminate against most Warlight-ers in any significant way, so you're doing the next best thing: dissuasion.

Nope, i juste quoted offensive bible verses, i never even mentioned OP. Stop with your bullshit
And how is dissuasion through reasoning a wrong thing to do anyway? How can you compare that to banning religion and discriminate against it?
And again, you imply that what i want to do is to ban/illegalise faith and discriminate against christians. Wich is actually worse than what Eklipse is saying.
Are you in the Psychic business? How can you know that my intentions are to ban religion and discriminate against religious people from a list of bible verses that i posted?
Do you even realise what you are saying? and how defamatory it is?
Don't say shit like that without at least giving a reason.

Induce (someone) to do something through reasoning or argument.
Indicate that one is not willing to accept or grant (something offered or requested).

Wrong again, more bullshit.

By the way, "inducing" is probably not the word you are looking for, "convincing" would be the appropriate word. (or else you are going to have to explain exactly what i am trying to induce him to do)

But even if i was trying to "induce" him to "do something", wich obviously i am not doing (what is wrong with you people?), it still wouldn't "indicate" that i am not willing to accept him or his views, there is no logical connection here.

And if "convincing" is the word you meant, It would just mean that i disagree and that i am using the only right way to make my case: Argument and Reasoning (what's wrong with that?), it would not mean that "i am not willing to accept" or some other bullshit.

BUT the funny thing is, i did none of that! I am not trying to convince him that religion is bad, i don't care about what he believes.
What i care about is showing the other side of the bible, not just the hippi jesus stuff, so that the people that he is trying to evangelize by posting bible verses on a public forum may have other sources of information. I wouldn't have posted these bible verses if he hadnt posted his bible verses.

And if the bible verses that i posted convince anyone that the god described in the bible isn't exactly the tolerant and benevolent god that christians are usually selling (wich is obviously my position), then good, i don't see anything wrong with that, on the contrary.

Now the only thing you got right is that it was in fact an attack, but not an attack toward christians or an attack toward OP's freedom of expression or freedom of religion.

- I struck him down with my machete, but it's a victimless crime, anyway.

It was me exercizing my freedom of expression to criticize the BOOK he was refering to, simply by showing some of the verses people like to ignore.


Well, yeah, every word you say here is excercising your "freedom of expression" - I could say "Fizzer is a dumb rock" - it doesn't make it right nor useful that I said that.

hahah whaaaat? your analogies don't make any sense.
For the 10th time, i have not attacked anyone on my first post, all i did was quoting Bible verses for fuck sake.

Eklipse has no intellectual honesty, and try to use every trick in the book to discredit me personally in a vain attempt to discredit what i actually wrote.

And you call out Eklipse for insulting...

I'am not calling him out for insulting me per say, i am calling him out for ONLY insulting me, without actually explaining what exactly, in what i wrote, was wrong and therefore "deserved" the insult.
When i insulted him, at least i explained why by refering to what he actually said.

I am calling him out for lying about what i said.

I'm calling him out for making up ideas that i never had, and attribute them to me.

All of this was an obvious way to divert the conversation on "my behaviour", rather than adress what i actually wrote: Fucking Bible Verses!


So, I challenge you to quote me and provide evidences for your claims against me, namely:

- I refuse to let people believe what they choose to believe in
- I want to ban/illegalize religion, and discriminate against religious people
- I am trying to induce Relm to "do something" (do what? and please quote the passage where i mention OP or any other christian that i want to "induce" to "do something")

You don't get to spill out such garbage and walk away. Now obviously you wont provide evidences for these claims, since there isn't any, and it is only fair to say that you are both morons for making such claims. (see? no discrimination here!)

You keep acting as if I've insulted you directly. My first post did not mention a single user by name. You were the one who took personal offense to it and began raging on about how you've been personally attacked.

Oh really?

And the fact that you choose ad hominem attacks toward atheists

Not true. My post was directed specifically at those who've shown up to attack religion in this very thread. I made no insults towards Atheists in general

To whom was this insult "specifically directed"?

lol talk about hypocrisy, you don't even have the decency to stand by what you say.