Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Yet only a few Christian denominations follow it, mostly the Fundie ones, and even they cherry-pick from it. Example; it's okay to hate gays while eating a Shrimp Po'boy or Pulled Pork BBQ sandwich, drinking a keg of beer, voting for adulterous leaders and yelling "God damn!" whenever their team misses a field goal.The OT is still in the Bible that Christians give their children - but not in Scientific Humanism (except for parts that might "rate" - compared to the best parts of Buddhism, New Atheism, Hinduism, etc.)According to the OT. Again, more cherry-picking from religious partisans.As a society, we are more ethical than the Bible
Our society has outlawed slavery, provided equal rights to women, recognized Civil Rights, accepted gays as equals, outlawed cruel and unusual punishment, protected children, many states have outlawed capital punishment
Things the Bible still endorses
So we agree that our 10 are better than God's 10 in the Bible, right?Is acting smug, superior and haughty #11?Good one. Yes, some New Atheists have raised him to god-like status....ironic, no? Hehe. "Atheist Pope Richard Dawkins".How about the High Priest of Atheists like Richard Dawkins?Very valid question. When I say "we" I'm generally referring to the typical Scientific Humanist, but I have not been elected Pope of Scientific Humanism."We"? I've noticed you've done this a few times. One might be a simple writing error, but multiple times proves you intended to say "we". Are you the official spokesperson for all "Scientific Humanists"? Is that an elected position or an appointed one?We like some of the philosophical teachings in the Bible, and urge people to read the Bible and all of the top 10 religions - lots of good stuff there. New Atheists tend to only bash, in a mean-spirited way, the Bible and other religions. They say mostly what they are against (Dawkins had a big "A" button on his lapel - he's Atheist - "a" means non, I'm NOT a theist). We like to spell out what we are FOR, mostly.
But ultimately we couldn't ethically bring forward into our belief system the immoral parts of the Bible (it's ok to beat slaves to death as long as the death drags out past a few days), so we have a more ethical belief system - the best of the best - than Christians have. Our children deserve the best! I'm sure that you love your kids too much to endorse a book (Bible/Qur'an) that says to KILL them if they turn out like god (allegedly) made them - say if they turn out gay.
Scientific Humanism:
No slavery.
Bible:
When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)
Fortunately, Scientific Humanists have moved beyond Dawkins to not create a mean-spirited belief system - Dawkins is often viewed as mean and condescending to no end. He also doesn't promote, as much, what he's FOR. In that photoshopped graphic it even shows the religious symbols crossed out, we don't do that, we bring forward the scientifically-correct parts that happen to be what's best for the world (Golden Rule, etc.). But no, like Dawkins, we know that science is more accurate than the unscientific parts of those religions' texts. Dawkins and Scientific Humanists are too smart to bring forward the dragons, and unicorns, and "angels" (and "jinns" in Islam) that the Bible mentions.
We have many things that we are FOR (see below).
The more one if FOR something, and less only AGAINST something, the better off it is for the world. A positive belief system, not a negative one.
The Ten Commandments of Scientific Humanism
1. Believe in freedom:
a. Political (secular democracy)
b. Religious
c. Freedom of speech (vs. being overly politically-correct, etc.)
2. Be extremely skeptical of all supernatural-related claims.
For the answers to Universe/Nature look to evidence-based scientific-inquiry (current and future progress,) and human reason.
3. Increase the overall happiness of society, by being very ethical, legal, and being good for the sake of being good.
4. Have love and compassion for everyone in the world brother/sisterhood, even people of different religious/political/societal beliefs, and your “enemies”. Treat others as you would want to be treated.
5. Treat people equally, regardless of gender, race, “caste”, sexual-orientation, etc.
6. Follow our '12 Best Steps to Wellness''
7. Work smart and hard.
8. Do charity/volunteer work.
9. Work for peace and harmony.
10. Help our environment.
Actually, I'd be hard pressed to find any mainstream religious, political or secular group that disagrees with those principles. I agree with all of them 100% except #6 and only because I don't know what that is. OTOH, following a healthy lifestyle is always a good goal.
No, because we don't claim that we are so smart that we can pick the one true religion out of the 5000 gods on offer - w/out any more proof than any of the other religions have - like Christians do.Is acting smug, superior and haughty #11?Good one. Yes, some New Atheists have raised him to god-like status....ironic, no? Hehe. "Atheist Pope Richard Dawkins".How about the High Priest of Atheists like Richard Dawkins?Very valid question. When I say "we" I'm generally referring to the typical Scientific Humanist, but I have not been elected Pope of Scientific Humanism."We"? I've noticed you've done this a few times. One might be a simple writing error, but multiple times proves you intended to say "we". Are you the official spokesperson for all "Scientific Humanists"? Is that an elected position or an appointed one?We like some of the philosophical teachings in the Bible, and urge people to read the Bible and all of the top 10 religions - lots of good stuff there. New Atheists tend to only bash, in a mean-spirited way, the Bible and other religions. They say mostly what they are against (Dawkins had a big "A" button on his lapel - he's Atheist - "a" means non, I'm NOT a theist). We like to spell out what we are FOR, mostly.
But ultimately we couldn't ethically bring forward into our belief system the immoral parts of the Bible (it's ok to beat slaves to death as long as the death drags out past a few days), so we have a more ethical belief system - the best of the best - than Christians have. Our children deserve the best! I'm sure that you love your kids too much to endorse a book (Bible/Qur'an) that says to KILL them if they turn out like god (allegedly) made them - say if they turn out gay.
Scientific Humanism:
No slavery.
Bible:
When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)
Fortunately, Scientific Humanists have moved beyond Dawkins to not create a mean-spirited belief system - Dawkins is often viewed as mean and condescending to no end. He also doesn't promote, as much, what he's FOR. In that photoshopped graphic it even shows the religious symbols crossed out, we don't do that, we bring forward the scientifically-correct parts that happen to be what's best for the world (Golden Rule, etc.). But no, like Dawkins, we know that science is more accurate than the unscientific parts of those religions' texts. Dawkins and Scientific Humanists are too smart to bring forward the dragons, and unicorns, and "angels" (and "jinns" in Islam) that the Bible mentions.
We have many things that we are FOR (see below).
The more one if FOR something, and less only AGAINST something, the better off it is for the world. A positive belief system, not a negative one.
The Ten Commandments of Scientific Humanism
1. Believe in freedom:
a. Political (secular democracy)
b. Religious
c. Freedom of speech (vs. being overly politically-correct, etc.)
2. Be extremely skeptical of all supernatural-related claims.
For the answers to Universe/Nature look to evidence-based scientific-inquiry (current and future progress,) and human reason.
3. Increase the overall happiness of society, by being very ethical, legal, and being good for the sake of being good.
4. Have love and compassion for everyone in the world brother/sisterhood, even people of different religious/political/societal beliefs, and your “enemies”. Treat others as you would want to be treated.
5. Treat people equally, regardless of gender, race, “caste”, sexual-orientation, etc.
6. Follow our '12 Best Steps to Wellness''
7. Work smart and hard.
8. Do charity/volunteer work.
9. Work for peace and harmony.
10. Help our environment.
Actually, I'd be hard pressed to find any mainstream religious, political or secular group that disagrees with those principles. I agree with all of them 100% except #6 and only because I don't know what that is. OTOH, following a healthy lifestyle is always a good goal.
Yet only a few Christian denominations follow it, mostly the Fundie ones, and even they cherry-pick from it. Example; it's okay to hate gays while eating a Shrimp Po'boy or Pulled Pork BBQ sandwich, drinking a keg of beer, voting for adulterous leaders and yelling "God damn!" whenever their team misses a field goal.The OT is still in the Bible that Christians give their children - but not in Scientific Humanism (except for parts that might "rate" - compared to the best parts of Buddhism, New Atheism, Hinduism, etc.)According to the OT. Again, more cherry-picking from religious partisans.As a society, we are more ethical than the Bible
Our society has outlawed slavery, provided equal rights to women, recognized Civil Rights, accepted gays as equals, outlawed cruel and unusual punishment, protected children, many states have outlawed capital punishment
Things the Bible still endorses
Most atheists you'll never know they are thereHopefully we can respect others enough to not call them vile names (Jesus called people "vipers", and we choose not to endorse that verse in the Bible to our children.) Thanks.Your thoughts, guys?
With Scientific Humanism we can possibly show you many things that are so great that they even go beyond what billions of people consider to be the smartest entity of all time – their god. You might not believe this because all your life Jesus/Bible, while well-intended, have told you that you are a “sinner”. But we can show you how you are a winner, not a “sinner”. The Golden Rule is wonderful, but in the verse right before mentioning the Golden Rule, Jesus allegedly said that you are “evil” or “wicked” – but we believe that you are good….and smart too! So we might have to improve your self-image before you believe that you can maybe be even smarter than “god”.
We love the good parts of other belief systems/religions, and have brought forward a number of the good things that their gods have allegedly said. We believe that about 70-80% of most religious texts are good, so let’s focus on those good parts – and move beyond the other 20 – 30%.
Four ways you could possibly be smarter than even “god”
1. Scientific Humanism has a great principle: “let’s have the most compassionate belief system.” So instead of killing virtually all humans in the Biblical god’s alleged world-wide flood, which also killed almost all innocent animals, too, would you be smart enough to forgive them, instead? Are you smart enough and loving enough to think up creative solutions instead of resorting to genocide of virtually all humans and virtually all animals….such as to come down and educate them? As a Scientific Humanist, because our belief system is based on evidence, reason, and common sense, you can answer “yes” to all the questions herein. We believe in you! However, if you can’t answer “yes” to all these questions, then The Center For Scientific Humanism offers you a potentially great way to improve your self-esteem.
Unlike Scientific Humanism, their god generalized that all humans were bad, so he killed every single person (except the eight people on Noah’s Ark.) However, Scientific Humanism has a principle that states: “people are innately good”, so would you have been more compassionate than he was? Because we respect all groups so much, we have the principle “don’t stereotype”. But generalizing an entire group like that is even worse than saying, for example, “ALL MUSLIMS ARE TERRORISTS!!” So would you also be smart enough to not generalize about an entire group?
We believe “love your brother/sister like yourself”. Would you be loving enough to at least have spared families who had babies?
2. As a Scientific Humanist, you strive to create the most loving belief system that you possibly can. If you were in god’s shoes you’d pick a “prophet” (to spread your most-important-message-of-all-time!) that lived up to the highest moral standard of Scientific Humanism. You would have picked someone who believes in our axiom of “love everybody, equally”. So you would have moved beyond picking someone even as great as Moses (Moses had 3000 innocent people killed in Exodus 32:25-28 - this is slightly more than the 2,996 innocent people that Osama Bin Laden had killed on 9/11/2001.)
3. As a Scientific Humanist, you are so caring that you believe that you need to take care of our most vulnerable family members, first! You would have picked someone who believes in our cherished principle of “put children first”. One thing Scientific Humanism holds “sacred” is our children. We teach to “love your children so much that you could never abandon them.” You also believe in our principle of “avoid extremism”. So you would have moved beyond picking someone even as great as Jesus (Jesus wanted his followers to abandon their own children, and to hate their own children.)
4. If you were god giving his favorite “prophets” the most important messages of all time, then thinking like a Scientific Humanist, would do that with at least 30 witnesses, and not just to the prophet all my himself, alone? Doing so would of course keep fewer people out of the “hell” you created because 30 witnesses is far more credible and believable than just to one self-serving person. As a Scientific Humanist you are driven by your love of humanity (one reason that “humanity” is in the name!) Those 30 would remember what you told them more than just one single person would, too, of course.Most people don’t believe that a particular god’s prophet is actually telling the truth, since no religion has over 29% of the world’s population as followers. When talking to Moses via the “burning bush”, or to Joseph Smith, Jr. (Mormon founder), would you have done that with 30 witnesses, so that your message was believed by far more people? People could think that one person could just be drunk, or high, or delusional, or lying about the encounter – but 30 people would be far more believable. Instead of the prophet saying “god talked to me”, the groups would say “god talked to us” – this helps people to more easily believe a prophet’s self-serving/unscientific unique claim of being the greatest human ever favored by god. If you would do this, then more people would follow your word, so fewer would need to be tortured in the “after-life”. As a loving Scientific Humanist you strive for win/win situations like this!
ScientificHumanism.org
.....
Fucking atheists are worse than Jehovah's witnesses.
......
We will likely believe in a god that cares about us enough to provide a court-room level of evidence for his existence - above the 5000+ other gods that are would obviously be false if there is only one god.
Here's a pray that we can say: "god, please provide a court-room level of evidence that you are more real than any other god, so that we can believe in you and therefore avoid hell. Thank you".
Can you please say this prayer to your god: "god, please provide a court-room level of evidence that you are more real than any other god, so that non-believers can believe in you and therefore avoid hell. Thank you".
Thanks.
Have a great week!
I have no respect at all for Atheists. It's as if a bunch of legalistic zealots finally grasp that there is no evidence of a god, but love the trappings of religion so much that they built dogmatic adherence to Nogod. No one is more determined to "convert" others than are atheists.
Oh, I can say no prayer to "my god." I used to have a god, but he kept crapping on the rug so I had to get rid of him....
I have never had an atheist knock on my door and try to convert me
I've never met an atheist who DIDN'T try and convert me.
Southern Baptists are the biggest haters there areYet only a few Christian denominations follow it, mostly the Fundie ones, and even they cherry-pick from it. Example; it's okay to hate gays while eating a Shrimp Po'boy or Pulled Pork BBQ sandwich, drinking a keg of beer, voting for adulterous leaders and yelling "God damn!" whenever their team misses a field goal.The OT is still in the Bible that Christians give their children - but not in Scientific Humanism (except for parts that might "rate" - compared to the best parts of Buddhism, New Atheism, Hinduism, etc.)According to the OT. Again, more cherry-picking from religious partisans.As a society, we are more ethical than the Bible
Our society has outlawed slavery, provided equal rights to women, recognized Civil Rights, accepted gays as equals, outlawed cruel and unusual punishment, protected children, many states have outlawed capital punishment
Things the Bible still endorses
That is utter horseshit.
I've taught Sunday school in a Southern Baptist church. That is a completely false narrative you have up there, and reflects a complete ignorance of what Christianity is all about. You misinterpret it, then pass judgement on US because we don't fulfill YOUR misinterpretation.
Most atheists you'll never know they are there
Feel free to assert that the actions of man are directed by God. It's tacit admission on your part that God exists. Again, as funny as watching a five year old blame the dog.I don't claim to know everything about the Bible, but I can educate you here that Moses was a mass-murderer (based on one's religion - kind of like ISIS) - and Scientific Humanists believe in our children so much that we feel they deserve better role models than that. We dearly love Christians, and can show them a better way.
Exodus 32:25-28 (NASB)
Now when Moses saw that the people were out of control—for Aaron had let them get out of control to be a derision among their enemies—then Moses stood in the gate of the camp, and said, “Whoever is for the LORD, come to me!” And all the sons of Levi gathered together to him. He said to them, “Thus says the LORD, the God of Israel, ‘Every man of you put his sword upon his thigh, and go back and forth from gate to gate in the camp, and kill every man his brother, and every man his friend, and every man his neighbor.’ ” So the sons of Levi did as Moses instructed, and about three thousand men of the people fell that day.
When did this place turn into such a hate christian forum ?
Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk
And, originally, Democrats. LOLSouthern Baptists are the biggest haters there areYet only a few Christian denominations follow it, mostly the Fundie ones, and even they cherry-pick from it. Example; it's okay to hate gays while eating a Shrimp Po'boy or Pulled Pork BBQ sandwich, drinking a keg of beer, voting for adulterous leaders and yelling "God damn!" whenever their team misses a field goal.The OT is still in the Bible that Christians give their children - but not in Scientific Humanism (except for parts that might "rate" - compared to the best parts of Buddhism, New Atheism, Hinduism, etc.)According to the OT. Again, more cherry-picking from religious partisans.As a society, we are more ethical than the Bible
Our society has outlawed slavery, provided equal rights to women, recognized Civil Rights, accepted gays as equals, outlawed cruel and unusual punishment, protected children, many states have outlawed capital punishment
Things the Bible still endorses
That is utter horseshit.
I've taught Sunday school in a Southern Baptist church. That is a completely false narrative you have up there, and reflects a complete ignorance of what Christianity is all about. You misinterpret it, then pass judgement on US because we don't fulfill YOUR misinterpretation.
They are the ones who hate gays, fought against Civil Rights and demand the death penalty
Hopefully we can respect others enough to not call them vile names (Jesus called people "vipers", and we choose not to endorse that verse in the Bible to our children.) Thanks.Your thoughts, guys?
With Scientific Humanism we can possibly show you many things that are so great that they even go beyond what billions of people consider to be the smartest entity of all time – their god. You might not believe this because all your life Jesus/Bible, while well-intended, have told you that you are a “sinner”. But we can show you how you are a winner, not a “sinner”. The Golden Rule is wonderful, but in the verse right before mentioning the Golden Rule, Jesus allegedly said that you are “evil” or “wicked” – but we believe that you are good….and smart too! So we might have to improve your self-image before you believe that you can maybe be even smarter than “god”.
We love the good parts of other belief systems/religions, and have brought forward a number of the good things that their gods have allegedly said. We believe that about 70-80% of most religious texts are good, so let’s focus on those good parts – and move beyond the other 20 – 30%.
Four ways you could possibly be smarter than even “god”
1. Scientific Humanism has a great principle: “let’s have the most compassionate belief system.” So instead of killing virtually all humans in the Biblical god’s alleged world-wide flood, which also killed almost all innocent animals, too, would you be smart enough to forgive them, instead? Are you smart enough and loving enough to think up creative solutions instead of resorting to genocide of virtually all humans and virtually all animals….such as to come down and educate them? As a Scientific Humanist, because our belief system is based on evidence, reason, and common sense, you can answer “yes” to all the questions herein. We believe in you! However, if you can’t answer “yes” to all these questions, then The Center For Scientific Humanism offers you a potentially great way to improve your self-esteem.
Unlike Scientific Humanism, their god generalized that all humans were bad, so he killed every single person (except the eight people on Noah’s Ark.) However, Scientific Humanism has a principle that states: “people are innately good”, so would you have been more compassionate than he was? Because we respect all groups so much, we have the principle “don’t stereotype”. But generalizing an entire group like that is even worse than saying, for example, “ALL MUSLIMS ARE TERRORISTS!!” So would you also be smart enough to not generalize about an entire group?
We believe “love your brother/sister like yourself”. Would you be loving enough to at least have spared families who had babies?
2. As a Scientific Humanist, you strive to create the most loving belief system that you possibly can. If you were in god’s shoes you’d pick a “prophet” (to spread your most-important-message-of-all-time!) that lived up to the highest moral standard of Scientific Humanism. You would have picked someone who believes in our axiom of “love everybody, equally”. So you would have moved beyond picking someone even as great as Moses (Moses had 3000 innocent people killed in Exodus 32:25-28 - this is slightly more than the 2,996 innocent people that Osama Bin Laden had killed on 9/11/2001.)
3. As a Scientific Humanist, you are so caring that you believe that you need to take care of our most vulnerable family members, first! You would have picked someone who believes in our cherished principle of “put children first”. One thing Scientific Humanism holds “sacred” is our children. We teach to “love your children so much that you could never abandon them.” You also believe in our principle of “avoid extremism”. So you would have moved beyond picking someone even as great as Jesus (Jesus wanted his followers to abandon their own children, and to hate their own children.)
4. If you were god giving his favorite “prophets” the most important messages of all time, then thinking like a Scientific Humanist, would do that with at least 30 witnesses, and not just to the prophet all my himself, alone? Doing so would of course keep fewer people out of the “hell” you created because 30 witnesses is far more credible and believable than just to one self-serving person. As a Scientific Humanist you are driven by your love of humanity (one reason that “humanity” is in the name!) Those 30 would remember what you told them more than just one single person would, too, of course.Most people don’t believe that a particular god’s prophet is actually telling the truth, since no religion has over 29% of the world’s population as followers. When talking to Moses via the “burning bush”, or to Joseph Smith, Jr. (Mormon founder), would you have done that with 30 witnesses, so that your message was believed by far more people? People could think that one person could just be drunk, or high, or delusional, or lying about the encounter – but 30 people would be far more believable. Instead of the prophet saying “god talked to me”, the groups would say “god talked to us” – this helps people to more easily believe a prophet’s self-serving/unscientific unique claim of being the greatest human ever favored by god. If you would do this, then more people would follow your word, so fewer would need to be tortured in the “after-life”. As a loving Scientific Humanist you strive for win/win situations like this!
ScientificHumanism.org
.....
Fucking atheists are worse than Jehovah's witnesses.
......
We will likely believe in a god that cares about us enough to provide a court-room level of evidence for his existence - above the 5000+ other gods that are would obviously be false if there is only one god.
Here's a pray that we can say: "god, please provide a court-room level of evidence that you are more real than any other god, so that we can believe in you and therefore avoid hell. Thank you".
Can you please say this prayer to your god: "god, please provide a court-room level of evidence that you are more real than any other god, so that non-believers can believe in you and therefore avoid hell. Thank you".
Thanks.
Have a great week!
I have no respect at all for Atheists. It's as if a bunch of legalistic zealots finally grasp that there is no evidence of a god, but love the trappings of religion so much that they built dogmatic adherence to Nogod. No one is more determined to "convert" others than are atheists.
Oh, I can say no prayer to "my god." I used to have a god, but he kept crapping on the rug so I had to get rid of him....
I have never had an atheist knock on my door and try to convert me
Every time you turn on the TV
.The O/P is very weak about his/her notion of what is God?.I'm not sure that you can specifically refute any of the 4 specific claims in the OP, my friend. Give it a try, I do believe in you, however.Your question misses an important option addressing the anthropomorphic error. In other words, asking whether God is "smart" is wrongly presupposing God's human characteristics. It's like asking whether we can be smarter than Truth. God conceived non-anthropomorphically renders the question unintelligible.
Your question misses an important option addressing the anthropomorphic error. In other words, asking whether God is "smart" is wrongly presupposing God's human characteristics. It's like asking whether we can be smarter than Truth. God conceived non-anthropomorphically renders the question unintelligible.
so the OP should have used the anthropomorphic god of the 4th century christian bible as an example is correct ... what conceived non-anthropomorphically creator of a scriptural religion exists on plant Earth to be discussed, do you have one.
Extremely weak philosophically, in terms of formal Modern Philosophy.
Relatively weak in terms of Christian, Jewish, or Muslim doctrine.
Probably has studied little about Asian Eastern Religions either.
The O/P's narrative seems to be sinister -- ergo since God does not communicate well (a false premise) therefore God does not exist.
This argument and thread are all Satanic.
This O/P has a place in Hell waiting for him/her.
The O/P's narrative seems to be sinister -- ergo since God does not communicate well (a false premise) therefore God does not exist.
Yes, they are progressives who claim to be adhering to Biblical tenets they don't understand, believe in, or read.When did this place turn into such a hate christian forum ?
Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk
I've said it before and I'll say it again - I don't hate Christians, although I'm very doubtful that they actually exist.
I do however, despise the inhuman and inhumane monsters who use the bible, god, Jesus to spread hate and do hard,
And you know who you are.
for the last 50 years......staunch RepublicansAnd, originally, Democrats. LOLSouthern Baptists are the biggest haters there areYet only a few Christian denominations follow it, mostly the Fundie ones, and even they cherry-pick from it. Example; it's okay to hate gays while eating a Shrimp Po'boy or Pulled Pork BBQ sandwich, drinking a keg of beer, voting for adulterous leaders and yelling "God damn!" whenever their team misses a field goal.The OT is still in the Bible that Christians give their children - but not in Scientific Humanism (except for parts that might "rate" - compared to the best parts of Buddhism, New Atheism, Hinduism, etc.)According to the OT. Again, more cherry-picking from religious partisans.
That is utter horseshit.
I've taught Sunday school in a Southern Baptist church. That is a completely false narrative you have up there, and reflects a complete ignorance of what Christianity is all about. You misinterpret it, then pass judgement on US because we don't fulfill YOUR misinterpretation.
They are the ones who hate gays, fought against Civil Rights and demand the death penalty
for the last 50 years......staunch RepublicansAnd, originally, Democrats. LOLSouthern Baptists are the biggest haters there areYet only a few Christian denominations follow it, mostly the Fundie ones, and even they cherry-pick from it. Example; it's okay to hate gays while eating a Shrimp Po'boy or Pulled Pork BBQ sandwich, drinking a keg of beer, voting for adulterous leaders and yelling "God damn!" whenever their team misses a field goal.The OT is still in the Bible that Christians give their children - but not in Scientific Humanism (except for parts that might "rate" - compared to the best parts of Buddhism, New Atheism, Hinduism, etc.)
That is utter horseshit.
I've taught Sunday school in a Southern Baptist church. That is a completely false narrative you have up there, and reflects a complete ignorance of what Christianity is all about. You misinterpret it, then pass judgement on US because we don't fulfill YOUR misinterpretation.
They are the ones who hate gays, fought against Civil Rights and demand the death penalty
Nope, not a god, just more ethical than one.We can't bring forward that god has "infinite foreknowledge" or else of course he would have spoken up and agreed with Scientific Humanism's "no slavery" belief, obviously!......It would be great if god was a better communicator - can we agree on that? For example, you want the best communication between you and your children, right? Same thing with god and his "children" (humanity), right?Parables are not meant to be taken literally. Servant in this parable implies "spiritual" servant, imo.
God's infinite foreknowledge has predestined you to Heaven or Hell already.
He does not have "foreknowledge", just the knowledge that barbaric men had in barbaric times (slavery is cool, kill gays, women need to shut up in church, women are inferior to men and only worth half a man, etc.) So we believe god was just created by men of those days (not women, by the way.) When a particular unique god cares about us enough to provide a court-room level of evidence that he's more real than the other 5000 gods, then we will consider him being real. Until then, he's not WORTHY of our worship.
Now that you have made yourself a god, what will you do to "save" mankind?
What's the plan Stan?
I have a hunch that you are too - let me ask you this question to find out - Votto, which is more moral, throwing Jews into a "lake of fire", or throwing them into ovens?
No, god is an idiot, the Bible says the sun revolves around the EARTH.Nope, not a god, just more ethical than one.We can't bring forward that god has "infinite foreknowledge" or else of course he would have spoken up and agreed with Scientific Humanism's "no slavery" belief, obviously!......It would be great if god was a better communicator - can we agree on that? For example, you want the best communication between you and your children, right? Same thing with god and his "children" (humanity), right?
God's infinite foreknowledge has predestined you to Heaven or Hell already.
He does not have "foreknowledge", just the knowledge that barbaric men had in barbaric times (slavery is cool, kill gays, women need to shut up in church, women are inferior to men and only worth half a man, etc.) So we believe god was just created by men of those days (not women, by the way.) When a particular unique god cares about us enough to provide a court-room level of evidence that he's more real than the other 5000 gods, then we will consider him being real. Until then, he's not WORTHY of our worship.
Now that you have made yourself a god, what will you do to "save" mankind?
What's the plan Stan?
I have a hunch that you are too - let me ask you this question to find out - Votto, which is more moral, throwing Jews into a "lake of fire", or throwing them into ovens?
God's judgment is just because he has all knowledge.
......
No, god is an idiot, the Bible says the sun revolves around the EARTH.Nope, not a god, just more ethical than one.We can't bring forward that god has "infinite foreknowledge" or else of course he would have spoken up and agreed with Scientific Humanism's "no slavery" belief, obviously!......
God's infinite foreknowledge has predestined you to Heaven or Hell already.
He does not have "foreknowledge", just the knowledge that barbaric men had in barbaric times (slavery is cool, kill gays, women need to shut up in church, women are inferior to men and only worth half a man, etc.) So we believe god was just created by men of those days (not women, by the way.) When a particular unique god cares about us enough to provide a court-room level of evidence that he's more real than the other 5000 gods, then we will consider him being real. Until then, he's not WORTHY of our worship.
Now that you have made yourself a god, what will you do to "save" mankind?
What's the plan Stan?
I have a hunch that you are too - let me ask you this question to find out - Votto, which is more moral, throwing Jews into a "lake of fire", or throwing them into ovens?
God's judgment is just because he has all knowledge.
......
Too bad god isn't actually real, or he could have obviously come down and educated those people, taught them that they were wrong - I'd have done that, because I'm more caring that the genocidal invisible man in the sky.Nope, not a god, just more ethical than one.We can't bring forward that god has "infinite foreknowledge" or else of course he would have spoken up and agreed with Scientific Humanism's "no slavery" belief, obviously!......It would be great if god was a better communicator - can we agree on that? For example, you want the best communication between you and your children, right? Same thing with god and his "children" (humanity), right?
God's infinite foreknowledge has predestined you to Heaven or Hell already.
He does not have "foreknowledge", just the knowledge that barbaric men had in barbaric times (slavery is cool, kill gays, women need to shut up in church, women are inferior to men and only worth half a man, etc.) So we believe god was just created by men of those days (not women, by the way.) When a particular unique god cares about us enough to provide a court-room level of evidence that he's more real than the other 5000 gods, then we will consider him being real. Until then, he's not WORTHY of our worship.
Now that you have made yourself a god, what will you do to "save" mankind?
What's the plan Stan?
I have a hunch that you are too - let me ask you this question to find out - Votto, which is more moral, throwing Jews into a "lake of fire", or throwing them into ovens?
God's judgment is just because he has all knowledge.
Looking back at Sodom, what would you do to a town that raped any foreigners coming into their city when they are their own law in their own city?
What would you do to the Canaanites who sacrificed their children to pagan gods?
And this is just a small bit as to how evil they were. My guess is that they were far worse.
What would you do to Nazi's who participated in the Holocaust?
Two can play at this game.
I have encountered various evil in my life, and I understand it. It must be snuffed out, but how?
