Dawkins Demolished

[MrGongGong]

Does this help?
You shall not murder or You shall not kill, KJV Thou shalt not kill (LXX οὐ φονεύσεις, translating Hebrew לֹא תִּרְצָח lo tirṣaḥ), is a moral imperative included as one of the Ten Commandments in the Torah,[1] specifically Exodus 20:13 and Deuteronomy 5:17.
The imperative is against unlawful killing resulting in bloodguilt. The Hebrew Bible contains numerous prohibitions against unlawful killing, but also allows for justified killing in the context of warfare, capital punishment, and self-defense.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_shall_not_murder

aaah so it is "morally relativistic" then
and I always thought Christianity was about peace
better not tell the Quakers then

[Serial_Apologist]

aaah so it is "morally relativistic" then
and I always thought Christianity was about peace
better not tell the Quakers then

But do they contribute here? I always thought they were too busy having their oats.

[Serial_Apologist]

Ah - THOSE Quakers...

[scottycelt]

I'm always fascinated by the way some non-believers constantly lecture and preach to Christians about their faith and even occasionally 'thump' the Bible ...

Is it because they haven't any bibles of their own to thump .. ?

[MrGongGong]

I'm always fascinated by the way some non-believers constantly lecture and preach to Christians about their faith and even occasionally 'thump' the Bible ...

Is it because they haven't any bibles of their own to thump .. ?

I thought you were supposed to believe in it ?
So it is more than a little inconsistent to claim it's a book of "truth" then play "pick and mix" with it's contents !
Is what you mean by "faith" the ability to ignore the uncomfortable bits then ?
When I was dragged up going to church on Sundays I (foolishly ?) believed that when they said that Christianity was a "moral compass" that helped people to live a good and honest life. Obviously I was wrong and its ALL relative , even the bits that say they are absolute !
There are (more than a few in my experience ) Christians who DO make an effort (and i'm not referring to the nutcase literalists , though it seems that its now OK to let THEM be in charge of schools ) and all respect to them............

[jean]

Does this help?
You shall not murder or You shall not kill, KJV Thou shalt not kill (LXX οὐ φονεύσεις, translating Hebrew לֹא תִּרְצָח lo tirṣaḥ), is a moral imperative included as one of the Ten Commandments in the Torah,[1] specifically Exodus 20:13 and Deuteronomy 5:17.
The imperative is against unlawful killing resulting in bloodguilt. The Hebrew Bible contains numerous prohibitions against unlawful killing, but also allows for justified killing in the context of warfare, capital punishment, and self-defense.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_shall_not_murder

Yes, I think it does.

I don't know any Hebrew, but the Greek verb φονεύειv is I think more condemnatory than (say) kteinein (can't do Greek characters unless I copy them!) - and while we are while we are all being very morally superior, there isn't a society, ancient or modern, that has not sanctioned some forms of killing.

And remember:

THOU shalt have one God only; who
Would be at the expense of two?
No graven images may be
Worshipped, except the currency:
Swear not at all; for, for thy curse
Thine enemy is none the worse:
At church on Sunday to attend
Will serve to keep the world thy friend:
Honour thy parents; that is, all
From whom advancement may befall:
Thou shalt not kill; but need'st not strive
Officiously to keep alive:
Do not adultery commit;
Advantage rarely comes of it:
Thou shalt not steal; an empty feat,
When it's so lucrative to cheat:
Bear not false witness; let the lie
Have time on its own wings to fly:
Thou shalt not covet, but tradition
Approves all forms of competition.

Arthur Hugh Clough

[MrGongGong]

there isn't a society, ancient or modern, that has not sanctioned some forms of killing.

apart from Jainism, of course
and ............






(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jainism)

[scottycelt]

I thought you were supposed to believe in it ?
So it is more than a little inconsistent to claim it's a book of "truth" then play "pick and mix" with it's contents !
Is what you mean by "faith" the ability to ignore the uncomfortable bits then ?
When I was dragged up going to church on Sundays I (foolishly ?) believed that when they said that Christianity was a "moral compass" that helped people to live a good and honest life. Obviously I was wrong and its ALL relative , even the bits that say they are absolute !
There are (more than a few in my experience ) Christians who DO make an effort (and i'm not referring to the nutcase literalists , though it seems that its now OK to let THEM be in charge of schools ) and all respect to them............

So your real 'beef' is with those awful Christians and not Christianity itself then ... ?

[amateur51]

So your real 'beef' is with those awful Christians and not Christianity itself then ... ?

Is it a practical proposition to try to tell them apart?!

[MrGongGong]

So your real 'beef' is with those awful Christians and not Christianity itself then ... ?

As I don't believe in god (or even God) I find that it's impossible to separate one from the other and find that the whole "we can't live up to God's standards" argument has been used far too much as an excuse for people doing things that are quite frankly evil.
There's nothing wrong with trying to live a good and honest life, doing no harm and trying to make the world a better place BUT one doesn't need the threat of eternal suffering to do that.

[french frank]

apart from Jainism, of course

So they would be perfectly entitled to throw stones at the rest of us, then?

[Serial_Apologist]

So they would be perfectly entitled to throw stones at the rest of us, then?

I'd already pondered on that, FF!

The answer is of course that "he who casts the first stone" would thereafter be a sinner!

[scottycelt]

As I don't believe in god (or even God) I find that it's impossible to separate one from the other and find that the whole "we can't live up to God's standards" argument has been used far too much as an excuse for people doing things that are quite frankly evil.
There's nothing wrong with trying to live a good and honest life, doing no harm and trying to make the world a better place BUT one doesn't need the threat of eternal suffering to do that.

I simply wondered ...

One minute you accuse Christians of not taking the Bible literally and then in the next breath you describe those who do as 'nutcase literalists'.

It' must very confusing and upsetting for poor Christians to know what the heck to do to please you ...

[Serial_Apologist]

I simply wondered ...

One minute you accuse Christians of not taking the Bible literally and then in the next breath you describe those who do as 'nutcase literalists'.

It' must very confusing and upsetting for poor Christians to know what the heck to do to please you ...

It IS very confusing for non-Christians to know what to conclude.

[MrGongGong]

It IS very confusing for non-Christians to know what to conclude.

indeed

as it all seems to be "open to interpretation" ..............