en-us https://www.intensedebate.com/users/244623 Comments by Freidenker http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/115#IDComment17389797 I didn't read the New Testament, I'm Jewish (an atheist Jew, anyway, that can be confusing to some) - so I don't know much about it. the Old Testament is written like a well edited legend (and it was probably revised a LOT of times, so much for the inerrant word of God) So yeah, people in the bronze age aren't that imaginative, but they at least made some effort. The Quran, according to that book I'm reading about it now, is just a bunch of fuzzy scribblings Muhammad wrote on his own (unlike the collective Cohanim team that synthesized the Torah) So, it's not a question of which books is better as much as it is a matter of which production was better funded. Sun, 22 Mar 2009 13:23:01 +0000 http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/115#IDComment17389797 http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/115#IDComment17106366 I'm reading a book about Islam (in Hebrew, my regards to Alan, who emphasized succinctly that me not knowing Hebrew is an impediment for understanding the bible, which I studied, in Hebrew) - and I must say: that has got to be the most jerry-rigged hodgepodged piece of claptrap as ever. It's got fucking TYPOS, man. How can any self-respecting human being really believe in that shit? I've also TRIED reading the Kuran (Uzza must chuckle at this, the dude must have like a friggin' PhD in Islam studies with his hilarious blog posts about it). That book is INSANE. It's got ramblings that go on forever and NOTHING makes sense. No wonder every asshat could use "this word of God" to suit his own interests. I must say, the bible IS a better book. At least revision-wise. Some of the stories in the bible even make sense, somehow. I wonder what it is that makes the Muslims you speak about behave the way they do. I don't think it's just because of Islam or particularly, only inspired by the Kuran. I'm banking on poverty and ordained ignorance. I don't understand how anyone can make ANYTHING in particular from the Kuran. It's such a confused and muddled piece of work that you'd have to be schizophrenic to base your identity (read identities) on it. Mon, 16 Mar 2009 20:42:13 +0000 http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/115#IDComment17106366 http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/118#IDComment16614005 It is possible that the thumphead who wrote that piece of nonsense was simply being full of shit. :-) Mon, 9 Mar 2009 07:55:35 +0000 http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/118#IDComment16614005 http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/118#IDComment16182980 Er, like the Jews? You do realize that Israelis celebrate Valentine's day only if their secular? Orthodox Jews are just as against a Christian (? I guess.) holiday. My girlfriend is learning how to drive now, and her driver's ed book was written by this religious kook who keeps yapping crap like : "In Israel, we never have crossroads that are a proper cross, so as to not imitate the Christians." Wed, 4 Mar 2009 22:05:11 +0000 http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/118#IDComment16182980 http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/97#IDComment16106689 The truly amazing part is that after he found out that I'm a native Hebrew speaker and Hebrew-educated, he got on, unphased, and asked me "esoteric questions" (which betray, probably, centuries of Christian portrayal of Jewish theology) about Judaism. Not to mention that he completely sidestepped the issue of being in complete contrast with his own religion. This kind of cognitive dissonance is something I find amazing. Tue, 3 Mar 2009 14:02:31 +0000 http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/97#IDComment16106689 http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/97#IDComment16105307 O. I hereby waiver all good feelings I had when I read that comment :-( Tue, 3 Mar 2009 13:10:55 +0000 http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/97#IDComment16105307 http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/97#IDComment16105265 As they say here in Israel: "Eein Sechel, Eein De'a'got" (No brains - nothing to worry about) Tue, 3 Mar 2009 13:09:39 +0000 http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/97#IDComment16105265 http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/97#IDComment16105243 But dude, the guy said I don't get THE ORIGINAL HEBREW :-S That's simply mind-boggling. I've never met anything like that before, not even in arrogant theists. It's like some guy telling an obstetrician he doesn't know anything about childbirth :-S I'm Jewish-raised, native-Hebrew, mandatory theology-trained! The arrogance is just so amazing, I don't know what to make of it. Tue, 3 Mar 2009 13:08:34 +0000 http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/97#IDComment16105243 http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/97#IDComment16100131 Yeah, I was kinda disappointed that there were only two people in it, one, apparently, exhibits a completely ridiculous and indefensible position, and me, which I thought didn't, but I'm sure I could have managed better. I think the most hilarious part was when Alan had the gall to tell me that I misrepresent the bible because I don't know the original Hebrew. Listen, I'm an Israeli, Jewish-raised, NATIVE HEBREW SPEAKER. Besides sign language (parents are deaf) - Hebrew is THE FIRST LANGUAGE I studied, and the language I studied (and still study) theology in. I've studied poetry, literature, math, even ENGLISH in Hebrew. Sometimes the simply mind-boggling arrogance of some Christians (or theists, Jews are just like that) confounds me. Tue, 3 Mar 2009 08:48:39 +0000 http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/97#IDComment16100131 http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/97#IDComment16100075 Lol, was that addressed at me?! I HAVE been seeing you around in the comments for some reason, but other than visiting your personal blog and going around the atheist blogosphere, there really isn't any stalking involved! Too bad, since apparently that'd mean I get to frolic over some atheist chick's underwear drawer :-P I'll take a look at that blog, whether someone like me is missing there or not. Tue, 3 Mar 2009 08:45:45 +0000 http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/97#IDComment16100075 http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/97#IDComment16070904 That's what I thought :-/ Apparently, this guy contradicts the worldview of his own religion. That's not just sad, it's also frackin' weird. Oh, and check out my correspondence with Alan. Hilarious. Mon, 2 Mar 2009 19:10:33 +0000 http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/97#IDComment16070904 http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/97#IDComment16070500 Ha'koanim (what you call "Levitical law") were created by ancient Israelites, and ruled by "Hakoen Hagadol" (high priest) - it was a political and religious tool designed to enforce and propagate the word of God, and it's still being used today in some neighborhoods in Jerusalem. Laughable. You question the nonexistence of levitical law today, knowing full well that it doesn't exist because in most modern cultures, it's considered heinous and evil (especially by the culture I live in, the founder of these laws!) And I'M continually distorting and misquoting you? Laughable. If your argumentation wasn't so poorly made, it would be despicable. Otherwise, all I can do is shake my head and laugh. Get back here when you have something substantial to say, man. If you Christians had any real balls at all, you'd say something insulting and not just use that awfully embarrassing passive-aggressive bullshit you Christians are so good at. "A respectable discussion". What's respectable about telling a native Hebrew that he doesn't know Hebrew? What's so respectable about your mind-boggling arrogance? Next time, just call me an asshole. At least then you don't have to pretend you're not acting like one. Mon, 2 Mar 2009 19:06:17 +0000 http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/97#IDComment16070500 http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/97#IDComment16068214 Vayikra and Dvarim are, according to my lessons in theology, consisting of vast plagiarism (presumably, in that order) - Dvarim and Vayikra contain, according to a book that is canonized by either Christians and Jews - the word of God. "The bible defines religion", you say? Well, in that case, the bible tells you to stone homosexuals. If you fail to do that, you deliberately disavow the words of God. That people don't use the bible anymore as a basis for their morality is a problem for you, not for me. Mon, 2 Mar 2009 18:50:47 +0000 http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/97#IDComment16068214 http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/97#IDComment16066828 I'm too lazy to study the Hebrew language? ROFL!!!!!!! Dude, my NATIVE TONGUE is Hebrew, I can give you lessons in it, you arrogant person! Bechayai, me'olam lo nitkalti be'mishu ka'ze yahir! And my point is uneducated? I had FORMAL TRAINING in theology, man. This last comment was hilarious. Let me know if you have any arguments to address, and when you feel less like whining about arbitrary quotes from the bible. I wonder if you'd like to counter the bible itself in the quest to somehow absolve it of some of its horrible moral baggage. I bet you will. "Ben sorer u'mo"reh" - the Tanach calls it. I'll never forget that term. It takes the kind of cognitive dissonance to ignore the unadulterated evil in D'varim when reading this passage. Mon, 2 Mar 2009 18:40:13 +0000 http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/97#IDComment16066828 http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/97#IDComment16066150 The bible qualifies a lot of things that you would scorn today (stoning homosexuals, stoning unruly children, stoning witches, stoning adulterers) - well, at least I hope you do. In any case, if what I just said fails to register with you, it means it contradicts your earlier claim that the bible qualifies what religion is - because if you "reinterpret the bible" differently than the bland version of it goes, then you're no longer allowing "the bible to define religion". So, you're either a liar (the bible *doesn't* define religion) or a hypocrite (it defines religion up to the point where that religion conflicts with my personal interpretation). I suggest you simply move that pawn back to where it was. Oh, and "The truth doesn't depend on me, if I die today, truth still exists"? That's soooo not "high and mighty", right? Puh-leez. You humbly (yeah, right) coronate yourself the harbinger of truth and yet "high and mighty" fails to describe you? You know, atheists aren't perforce morons, man. By the way, I think it's just hilarious to get this kind of "Oh, you just don't know what religion is really about" talk from a Christian.. I may not profess belief now, but I was *raised* Jewish, and in Israel, we have mandatory Jewish theology lessons. Hell, I study, in conjunction to biology, Jewish philosophy and Talmud! Despite what you say, the advocated of the old testament themselves (i.e, the Jews) claim religion is something completely distanced from what you'd like it to be. Which is sad, but if it wasn't true, I'd never distance myself from it. I never did before I confronted "this is what they truly believe" kind of material. Oh, and in case you're going to say that Jesus somehow distanced himself from the old testament - I suggest you don't go there, that's just friggin' embarrassing - if Jesus in any way alluded to distancing Christians from the old testament, then whatever God says isn't infallible to begin with, and that included Jesus (his son, to your version), as well. Mon, 2 Mar 2009 18:26:33 +0000 http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/97#IDComment16066150 http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/97#IDComment16064846 Ah, the "No True Scotsman" argument. Wonderful. A little reality dose for you, Alan. The "Foundation" you speak of has nothing to do with theistic/atheistic worldviews - it has to do with the biology and psychology of an individual. I have never raped, murdered or severely injured anyone. The person who assassinated Itzchak Rabin, our Prime Minister on November 95, was a man called Igal Amir, a highly devout Jew, who happened to study in the same college as I study at now. So, since the crusaders were "No True Christians" (even if they were ordered by the Pope!) - this makes the "True Christian" argument completely meaningless, since it's circular: if it's good - it's Christian, if it's not, it's not. In that case, Christian is just some arbitrary synonym for "good", and thus helps your arguments not at all. BTW, I was completely disgusted at your claim that it's exceptional for atheists to do charity work. You simply assume that somehow, Christians are more prone to do charity work than atheists. Based on what? Wishful thinking? I've never met an atheist who never donated to charity. Donating to charity is an Israeli cultural more, not a Jewish cultural more. We have dozens of charity affiliations that have nothing to do with religion. Maybe it's different in America, but your claim is simply disgusting and teeming with arrogance. Atheism is not characterized as free thought, but free thought perforce characterizes atheism = if you truly think freely, you will not bind your thought to a God, or anyone or thing, for that matter, before you think. This allows for atrocities as well as great things, but "slavethought", as I often call theism, allows the same, too. The capacity to do evil things does not lie in belief or disbelief in God. History shows that very well, and using the "No True Scotsman" argument won't change that. It is only a pity that a "Good Christian" such as you will be so hypocritical and claim that all "True Christians" are somehow high and mighty while atheists are only good as an exception. The yoke of proof is on you, Alan. And so far, your arguments have devolved into some kind of self-stroking arrogant smear campaign against some vague "Not Really a Christian" type of Christian, which apparently is extremely widespread - while completely ignoring the fact that atheism per se cannot be thought of as a direct cause for anything evil. You've already admitted that, and anything else beyond that is irrelevant. You say that atheism is needed for people to do evil? Even if that's true, it doesn't matter, it means you've abdicated the argument that atheism *is* the cause of evil. Once atheists can do good, you have no moral basis to rebuke atheism apart for its haphazard correlation with evil men - and again, that's not singular to atheism, nor has never been. Mon, 2 Mar 2009 17:55:32 +0000 http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/97#IDComment16064846 http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/97#IDComment16063531 Again, never in any point did I claim that Hitler did what he did because of Christianity (or at least, not because of it alone). You are right that the mainstay of Nazi ideology stems from racism, not from Christianity (which is racist to boot, but let's forget about that for now). Proper disclosure: I am an atheist Jew, an descendant of a a large family that was almost entirely wiped out by Hitler (and a great portion of my ancestors in Latvia were thrown to the Gulags to die there, too). I have first hand profiles of what it was like to be a Jew, atheist or otherwise, in the 30's and 40's in Europe - and I know that the key feature of that had nothing to do with atheism leading a corrupt worldview on Germans and Europeans -I only find it tragic that Christians now shoehorn atheism, which is merely correlated with freethought sometimes, but not always, with fascist ideologies, which are mostly secular, but very, very far from freethought. Mon, 2 Mar 2009 17:19:56 +0000 http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/97#IDComment16063531 http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/97#IDComment16063428 You're right. If you look at Adolf Hitler's actions, you see a man who cares for nothing and no one except for an evil, megalomaniac, racist plan. You do not see Richard Dawkins, and you do not see the Pope. You see a deranged bastard who uses whatever propaganda he can use to assume power. However, after reading the entire Thus Spoke series by Neitzche, I still find nothing in common with weirdos of the like. So what kind of an atheist does that make me? If the allegation is that atheism somehow magically creates a malign ideology that endangers mankind, you must explain how atheism is the cause of it. You have not, and you cannot, because atheism is first and foremost the *lack* of something. The absence of a third nipple in Adolf Hitler does not and cannot be used to explain the Holocaust - it is only by what we see that we can determine causal relationships, not by what we don't see. (I would be tremendously embarrassed and disgusted to find out that Hitler did have a third nipple, but that wouldn't actually harm the validity of my argument) You see anti-religious policies by Hitler? Well, the Crusades were anti-religious. They just happened to have a religious basis for them. In Hitler's case - any anti-religious policies were atheistic, but it is not their "atheism" that *explains them* - and this is where your argument fails - the *lack* itself explain nothing - it is the capacity associated with that lack that singles out Hitler as the genocidal creep he was - and that is not singular to atheism, or to theism, for that matter - it is a psychological, observed, commonplace trait - that is independent of religion *entirely* - and that, as a professed atheist, I call "evil" - the careless, reckless, haunted search for power at everybody else's expense, with the guise of some half-assed ideology. The basis of any anti-religious policy, either by Hitler or by Stalin, was a desire for despotic power and a competition with the equally power-hungry Church. That explains it well, and has many historical evidence to back it. The lack of belief in gods does not, and this is why your argument fails. Mon, 2 Mar 2009 17:16:34 +0000 http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/97#IDComment16063428 http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/97#IDComment16059157 LOL Check this out, " Adolf Hitler: I am a Catholic I am now as before a Catholic and will always remain so. - Adolf Hitler, to General Gerhard Engel, 1941 " How much is 1941 - 1937 again? I guess that as an eternal catholic, he certainly didn't like his own church. "I won't spend my time educating you on history" - Yeah, right. Mon, 2 Mar 2009 14:51:55 +0000 http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/97#IDComment16059157 http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/97#IDComment16058744 *blinks* Okay. Your argument goes something like this: Atheism was inherent in their belief system - hence atheism causes them to do those things or is strongly correlated to it - without that atheism - they wouldn't behave this way. How could this possibly distort your words - it's precisely what you're saying. What are you playing at? If atheism doesn't cause these players to behave that way, your entire argument against atheism is meaningless to boot. So either your argument doesn't help you, or your argument is just wrong. Mon, 2 Mar 2009 14:36:05 +0000 http://odd-innuendo.net/archives/97#IDComment16058744