If you remove monuments of slave owners, then also don't endorse the books they wrote (Bible).

You couldn't BE more wrong.

Jesus says that the Old Testament laws are binding on everyone forever. He hasn't the slightest objection to the cruelties of the Old Testament. Credit http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/mt/5.html
Matthew 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill.

5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

5:19 So if you ignore the least commandment and teach others to do the same, you will be called the least in the Kingdom of Heaven. But anyone who obeys God’s laws and teaches them will be called great in the Kingdom of Heaven.


Luke 24:45 Then he opened their minds to understand the Scriptures. 46And he said, “Yes, it was written long ago that the Messiah would suffer and die and rise from the dead on the third day. 47It was also written that this message would be proclaimed in the authority of his name to all the nations,f beginning in Jerusalem: ‘There is forgiveness of sins for all who repent.’ 48You are witnesses of all these things.]

Genesis 17:19

And God said, Sarah thy wife shall bear thee a son indeed; and thou shalt call his name Isaac: and I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his seed after him.

Exodus 12:14, 17, 24

And this day shall be unto you for a memorial; and ye shall keep it a feast to the LORD throughout your generations; ye shall keep it a feast by an ordinance forever. ... And ye shall observe the feast of unleavened bread; for in this selfsame day have I brought your armies out of the land of Egypt: therefore shall ye observe this day in your generations by an ordinance forever. ... And ye shall observe this thing for an ordinance to thee and to thy sons forever.

Leviticus 23:14,21,31

It shall be a statute for ever throughout your generations.

Deuteronomy 4:8-9

What nation is there so great, that hath statutes and judgments so righteous as all this law, which I set before you this day? ... teach them thy sons, and thy sons' sons.

Deuteronomy 7:9

Know therefore that the LORD thy God, he is God, the faithful God, which keepeth covenant and mercy with them that love him and keep his commandments to a thousand generations.

Deuteronomy 11:1

Therefore thou shalt love the LORD thy God, and keep his charge, and his statutes, and his judgments, and his commandments, always.

Deuteronomy 11:26-28

Behold, I set before you this day a blessing and a curse; A blessing, if ye obey the commandments of the LORD your God, which I command you this day: And a curse, if ye will not obey the commandments of the LORD your God.

1 Chronicles 16:15

Be ye mindful always of his covenant; the word which he commanded to a thousand generations ... an everlasting covenant.

Psalm 119:151-2

Thou art near, O LORD; and all thy commandments are truth. Concerning thy testimonies, I have known of old that thou hast founded them forever.

Psalm 119:160

Thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments endureth forever.

Malachi 4:4

Remember ye the law of Moses.

Luke 16:17

It is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.

 

Yes.

You do the same thing. You believe you are more ethical than God and most Christians do you not?

That's far more presumptive than I dare to be.

 

The law was fulfilled when Christ died on the cross and was resurrected.

When a contract is fulfilled it is no longer binding on the former participants in it.

 

You are therefore a supremacist. I am more ethical than god and most Christians NOT, repeat NOT, just because I simply happen to have selected a different god (like you did), no, I'm more ethical because I care for humanity more than god/Jesus and most Christians do.

Let me prove that to you: "if you, Dayton3, had Jesus' alleged all-powerful skills would YOU have warned the victims of the 2004 Aceh Tsumani, enough to that very few would have died?"
I would have, because I'm more ethical than most Christians (trust me, most Christians are not ethical enough, not caring enough, to summon the moral courage to answer "yes" to this very basic moral question - they don't care about hundreds of thousands of innocent lives! Incredible.

What is your answer, Dayton3? If you can't answer "yes", then you might want to take Obi Wan's advice:

 

Then hey, remove it from the OT, right? Right!?

 

It's not presumptive of me, it's just truth...for example, I'm far more ethical than your "Jesus" because he was such an uncaring psycho that in the Bible it says the REASON that he talked in parables was to that non-believers would not understand him - that means that more people would GO TO HELL BECAUSE HE WAS SUCH A PRICK!!

I couldn't imagine being so evil that I, ON PURPOSE, would do things that cause more people to go to hell! What a monster "Jesus" was!

Are people who worship a monster, and feel that said monster is far more ethical than they ar,e very ethical themselves? Well, probably not!

 

Someone needs some Preparation H for their epic butthurt...

 

Knock yourself out. At the church I grew up in New Testaments were what was routinely given out to young people.

 

Bible 2.0 was needed because Bible 1.0 got so much stuff wrong.

 

You......rewriting the Bible?

 

This thread has deteriorated to ranting against text of the Bible - contrasting it historically to nothing.

In the OP, he stated:

I have repeatedly asked the OPer to cite what the specific tenants, rules, requirements and liberties of his ideology of modern secular humanism are. Silence.

From the start, the OP message fails in advocacy of modern secular humanism in in claiming his secret ideology is superior to the words in the Bible as that is meaningless. I could reply "my secret religion" is superior to your "secret modern secular humanism" and it adds up to nothing.

While Jesus spoke slavery, he neither advocated it or defended it from what I see. He merely commented on it and "servant," not "slave" if I remember correctly. He stated how slavery or being a servant works. A fact statement, not an advocacy. From that likely false assertion that Jesus himself advocated for slavery or condoned it, the OPer than tries to equate silence to agreement. So, in that logic, unless the OPer can link to a message of his specifically condemning female genital mutilation we also should rant about how can someone who supports female genital mutilation lecture anyone on morality. What about sex with animals? Pedophilia? Theft? Torture? Anything the OPer has not condemned, he supports.

The logic on slavery doesn't really work as it converts a fact statement or a warning, to an advocacy. For example, in his logic if I say, "do physically resist the police or you might get beaten up by the police," he converts that to my condoning and promoting police beatings. It doesn't work. Overall, Jesus was not speaking of worldly matters, but metaphysical matters.

It also can be claimed Jesus in fact did speak against slavery in the Golden Rule.

From here, the OPer rants against threats of hell, asserting Jesus said Gandhi was going to be tortured in hell (Jesus said no such thing and Gandhi professed publicly that Jesus was "the son of God.")

Whether hell is a good thing or not is subjective. SHOULD Hitler have gotten away without punishment? Or should he be tortured forever? Yet, again, Jesus did not advocate FOR hell. Depending on how you interpret the topic, at the most he was simply announcing its existence.

That the Bible speaks of hell is highly disputed. Adam and Eve were not threatened with hell. The actual word translation is "grave," not "hell," and it appears the King James committee made that wrong translation - deliberate or accidental. More on the dispute:
http://www.thehypertexts.com/No Hell in the Bible.htm

What IS the punishment for sin? Is it "hell?" No. It is death.
"For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life through Christ Jesus our Lord." Romans 6:23
Why doesn't it say "the wages of sin is hell?" Because the actual correct translation is "the grave" (death), not "hell."

What a FAIR reading of the Bible tends to lead to is the view that fundamentally evil people are just animals, no immortality. However, people who fundamentally are good and do acts of charity (later converted to the word "love,") have an eternal existence. How good? Depends on how good the person was.

As such, the OPer is ranting against a religion that declares that even if it consumes and cost you your life, acts of charity will be forever rewarded is a fundamentally evil religion and REALLY only fools and chumps would ever risk their life and give up pleasure for charity.

This, then, leads to the REAL issue the OPer seems to have in his mentioning he was a Christian. His beef is with whatever humans taught him, claiming it is Christianity. His beef is with humans, ie humanism.

As Ganhdi explained in his most famous statement on Christianity:
“I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.”

While the OPer rants against Jesus time to time in his messages, his real rant is against human organized Christianity. He should study the evolution of Christianity sometime and the conversion it underwent when it became organized, particularly after Constantine declared it the official religion of Rome, when humanist government increasingly took over Christianity as a worldly organization and extension of the government, ultimately becoming human government itself, essentially the polar opposite of Christ-like Christian practices.

And, as I pointed out, he rants that God isn't a control freak controlling everyone and everything, which apparently is what he believes a God should do.

 

Oh to be sure.

The only question is which should be destroyed/hidden/buried first: the books or the memorials or the art or the founding documents.

It's all gotta go.

Well, except for whatever Little Red Book is authorized for reading/quoting/praising.

 

What is particularly interesting to me of the Bible is:

1. The immortal metaphysical beings texts and
2. The topic of good and evil, ie human's knowledge of it.

Curiously, most liberals and atheists are 100% in agreement with the Bible on the topic of good and evil. It is something I do not agree with.

The definition of "insanity" as a criminal legal defense is that the person did not know the difference between good and evil. If not, the person is "insane" and can not be held responsible. As in the OT, a person MUST know what evil is to be accountable for doing evil. Otherwise the person is not. The "insanity defense" is straight out of the Bible. I reject the core premise of the insanity defense, just as I would declare "don't shoot the rabid dog because it doesn't know what it is doing!"

Nothing is more dangerous than an insane murderer. In my view, if a person absolutely can not grasp that murder is wrong - and that person murders people because of it - in my opinion no person should be more eliminated as the most intolerable of all possible people.

The good and evil, ie that humans have an inherent internal moral compass, raises the question of do ONLY humans have a conscious and, if so, then isn't that what claiming people have a "soul," ie the "inner voice" means?

 

You mean like Jesus, who, in the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, when he was a young person, killed multiple people? The conveniently left the Infancy Gospel of Thomas out of the Bible because it would be problematic to have a loving, compassionate, all-caring savior who was a mass-murderer.

 

Nobody said book burning - just condemning the slavery-loving heroes of the Confederacy, and the slavery-loving heroes of the immoral Bible - BOTH of which were immoral, of course. Not knowing right from wrong means they should not be held up as heroes. Remove those statues, and leave the Bible - simple.

 

No, the OT is 1.0, but it was wrong, so 2.0 (the New Testament) was needed. I guess the all-knowing god got stuff wrong.....ooops.

 

Kind of like SCIENTOLOGY - they aren't fools - they don't hit member with the crazy story of Lord Xenu right away, no, they wait until much more fully indoctrinated to hit them with that real crazy stuff. And the OT is so bat-shiite insane that I'd do that same thing - keep the OT under wraps until they've drank the cool-aid and are fully brainwashed - it's easier to accept unicorns, etc. and all the other insane stuff in the Bible once someone is partially indoctrinated. That's why Scientology doesn't tell them about the evil Lord Xenu right away.

What Scientologist Actually Believe: http://southpark.cc.com/clips/104274/what-scientologist-actually-believe

 

the ten commandments has no more place on the court house lawn then the statue of person that fought to keep blacks enslaved in America

 

Not a hypocrite but not very perceptive.
The statues of confederate "heros" need to come down not because they were slave owners, but because they were traitors to the United States, and their statues were erected by bigots to give the middle finger to blacks.

 

I'm afraid this just doesn't go far enough.

If it offends or may offend in any way, it must be removed.

Sorry.

 

The Old Testament was not flawed.

Humans were flawed (even more so than now) back then

 

I'm with you as soon as you include Washington, Jefferson and numerous others in this purge of culture and history; let us turn our backs on it all, and embody this by the destruction of our cultural legacy.

 

"FreedomSeeker", or "FS" seems to believe that unless a historical figure was hammering away at slavery like Durango Unchained on steroids then they must have actually been in favor of it.

 

Don't know anything about it. Don't care to look it up.

 

So we can safely assume you're on board with all of this: