There is a video on this link and the first guy they talk to says he is praying for the victims family. He is praying for the woman's family to the thing that killed the woman in the first place. That's kind of like praying to the shooter on behalf of the family of the person they just shot and killed. What's says faith is not crazy.
3 plus ones
Shared publicly•View activity
View 9 previous comments
- Of course I have actually done so. I'm guessing you may not have (and no, reading a few verses out of context on some atheist site doesn't count.) Why should I "stay a christian (sic)"? For the same reason I became one a coupe years ago, it's true. Incidentally, that's the only reason you should believe anything. Pax.Sep 6, 2014
- Yes I have from cover to cover.
A couple of times.
None of it corresponds with reality.
The creation mythology for a start.
The flood is pure bullshit.
The rest is just confirmation of the Israelite belief that they are "chosen".
The pervasive sense of self justification for the barbarity permitted in the name of "god" is disgusting.Sep 6, 2014
- Well, it seems you've managed to read it without understanding it, then. At least you've read it, though. I don't know how many atheists I've talked with whose sole knowledge of the Bible is something they've heard Dawkins quote. I'll only note, reading it "cover to cover" is a great way to miss the point, though. You have to remember the Bible isn't really a book - its a mini-library of books which were written by diverse people over many centuries. As going to the local library and deciding to learn a subject by starting with whatever author's name happens to start with "A" would only lead to confusion, so too with the Bible. Making things yet more complicated are the various genres contained within. Reading Byron's "The Destruction of Sennacherib" the same way you'd read Newton's Mathematical Principals or even Gibson's Decline and Fall would result in absurd conclusions being drawn. Of course that would say little about any of those works, but might say a lot about the readers mistaken approach. Thus all without even looking at the supernatural dimensions of the book. When those are accounted for the whole notion of sitting alone reading what is a liturgical book meant for proclamation to the gathered people of God with, undoubtedly, a false hermeneutic of suspicion, will only leave you little better off than the atheist who has only read a few passages in Dawkins. Such applies, of course, to our fundamentalist friends, who misunderstand it as much you do, but choose to believe rather than disbelieve (I've yet to meet an atheist who doesn't read the Bible like a Fundamentalist Christian). But, I do give you credit for reading it. Such is the first step to understanding it (although I fear it might be your last). Pax.Sep 6, 2014
- Comparing the bible to reality as it should be is a fine way to go.
Supernatural reasons for the universe are idiotic.
I get more from Aesop's Fables and the fairy tales of the Grimms.
Quite simply it is a mythology based in the middle east that has as much validity as the Norse myths or the mythology of the Indian pantheon.
It is an abhorrent discussion on the "rights" of a deity that has never been considered the mythology it is.
Most likely because the power of the church want it that way.Sep 6, 2014
- Oh I LOVE that statement - "you've managed to read it without understanding it" that's right up there with "You're just not open to it"
Unlike I have not manage to get through the bible, I've tried but it is so insane to me when I read it and try to contemplate that some people actually think this stuff is true.
You have to remember that the bible is not only not a book but it is a bunch of stories that had been passed down verbally from person to person for years before someone was ABLE to write them down. And from bits of scripture found here and there. And then many people tried to mash together all these stories into a single book and then those separate books were put together into the bible where it was rewritten again trying to get all the lesser books mashed together. And then it was translated a few times by people who probably had no Idea what the real message was and were free to put their own spin on it. AND THEN it was translated into other languages and eventually into english.
So yes, I would say you've managed to read it without understanding it is a fair assumption because it doesn't make and bloody sense.Sep 7, 2014
- What you get from it also depends on the translation. NIV, ISV, KJV, AKJV, HCSV, NASV, BoM, NLT, ESV, God's word, KJ2000, Young's literal, Douay-Rheims, Darby, Wycliffe, TAB, AB, AAT, SGAT, out of 100+ at least in modern English, old English and middle English, but then there are less mistakes if you read the original Aramaic which was translated to Hebrew to match the rest. So the Torah would be a good middle ground to start understanding, wouldn't it?
Reality doesn't have 1000+ versions of its perception, but fantasy does.Sep 7, 2014