The Old Testament was found to be more than twice as violent as the Quran

[dontsnitch]

Hell as described is far worse than any thing that could happen in today's life. Judaism forbids torture and sadism. Furthermore, some rabbis could of mentioned supremacist material but that does not signify God's word. And lastly anyone who believes in hell as described in those religions (Islam and Christianity). I think is giving into the opium of the masses and is willing to believe in a sick system out of a deep seated fear of the unknown and sometimes out of supremacist ideological outlook. For example I have met many Christians (some on this forum) who brag/boast about how those without Jesus will go to hell.

Far worse than even the worst Rabbis saying Jews are superior. Which is worse the belief that someone is lower of status but still entitled to a place and relationship with God? Or the belief that God is exclusive to only a few who believe in his doctrine and "messiah" and that all those disobey suffer for all eternity. Not to mention Christianity is based on what I'd say is a less devout and logical basis.

First of all, they don't believe that Gentiles/Goyim have a place with God. It's why we are referred to as animals. It's why they can treat people with brutality, and do.

Secondly, and I can't say this enough, the belief in hell is not worse. I believe that if you put your hand on a hot stove it will hurt. That doesn't mean that I want your hand to melt.

As for Christians who want people to go to hell, well, they're despicable.

Last thing on the subject, not all Christians believe in a literal hell. Conditionalism, a view that I am leaning towards, is much closer to what Jews believe.

 

[SouthoftheAndes]

What has the Romans attackig Jews and the Nazis got to do with the Old Testament that predates both by a long time.

A lot of people have also been genocided and lost millions of their kinfolk.
It is estimated that 15+ million Amerindians perished as a result of colonialism. Many Amerindian ethnic groups have been totally wiped out.
In the Belgian Congo, over 10 million Blacks were slaughtered.
In Nambia the Germans genocided the Herrero and used lessions learnt there to apply to the Nazi holocaust.
Anywhere between 15-20 million Blacks perished as a result of the trans Atlantic slave trade, and that is not even counting the Arab slave trade that took Blacks to the MidEast and South Asia.

You agreed with and supported the Israeli politicians who called African asylum seekers as a cancer. You supported the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians. You have a Darwinian view of the world..only when it benefits Israel but you trot out the anti-Semitic smear against those who criticize Israeli policies. There is no difference between you and a the KKKers/Nazis on Stormfront who feel White supremacsy is perfectly justified but anti White supremacsy is hatred against Whites.

I thought it was 100 million natives died by disease. How many died as a result of genocide? I could see 15 million being legit especially in South America. Also, I thought more Africans died via slave trade?

Oh and the rest of the stuff you said is just false. Look I support Israels efforts to seal her borders and protect their people. I also, support any other nation that wishes to do that. Check my post history I think Europe especially western Europe is making a big mistake by having open borders. Did an Israeli call African migrants a cancer? Perhaps so I don't remember maybe I said I supported those words by mistake. That is my bad I don't support that language especially now that I have turned a new leaf over. However, I still stand with the Likud government in their rationalization of this issue. Many of these migrants are economic migrants who want to suck off the system and make up claims of "refugee status". Furthermore, Israel would lose its Jewish demographics and unity if it took in massive waves of Africans hence the need for a fence.

And lastly I don't see why you want to badly for Israel to ruin itself with mass immigration. When western Europe will show us before 2030 surely the negative affects of breaking down society via poor assimilation.

 

[SouthoftheAndes]

First of all, they don't believe that Gentiles/Goyim have a place with God. It's why we are referred to as animals. It's why they can treat people with brutality, and do.

Secondly, and I can't say this enough, the belief in hell is not worse. I believe that if you put your hand on a hot stove it will hurt. That doesn't mean that I want your hand to melt.

As for Christians who want people to go to hell, well, they're despicable.

Last thing on the subject, not all Christians believe in a literal hell. Conditionalism, a view that I am leaning towards, is much closer to what Jews believe.

Hell is worse by basically every definition. And study and look up non-talmudic sources. The Talmud is oral law and also rabbinic arguments. In any case though Jews are not chosen because they are 'superior' but rather because they were the only ones who chose to enter into the covenant with God. Furthermore, Jews believe that one can be righteous without being Jewish and find God that way as well. If you deny this then you are unaware of a core train of thought in Judaism.

 

[SouthoftheAndes]

I can see what you're saying. I don't think its wrong to want people to suffer for their crimes whether or not they were punished here on earth but maybe eternal hell fire is a bit much.

I agree but Christian and Islamic doctrine will send to hell even those who believe in their faith. Plus, not accepting their prophets even if you were raised in an environment which made it extremely difficult is not an excuse.

 

[Islam Imamate]

I meant eternally speaking. Surely you don't want people to suffer for an eternity...

Nevertheless, there is a clear distinction in believing in eternal punishment and wishing it on people.

I'm not even a big fan of life in prison without the possibility of parole so yes I don't think eternal punishment is great.

And I acknowledge that distinction but I also think the thought of a cosmic, just deity who punishes those who have done wrong is comforting for some. If they don't get theirs here then they'll answer to the man upstairs.

 

[in the]

Really I think the Sharia is worse for Muslims than non-Muslims. Its a massive weight for those Muslims who find spiritual satisfaction from their faith but don't wish to suffer under a theocracy. They really don't have a good argument for not accepting the Shariah as far as I know.

The West won't see an Islamic theocracy anytime soon I imagine, which is not to say there shouldn't be resistance to lunatic fanatics who cling to such a delusion.

In the west, it's more along the lines of threatening freedom of expression/speech, most notably blasphemy laws. There are other subversions, but that's the main one other than the Muslim Brotherhood covertly trying to gain a foothold in government positions. I personally view the MB and all its affiliates as bigger threats to western democracies than terrorist groups.

I do agree that Sharia is worse for Muslims in Muslim countries (even worse for the non-Muslims in Muslim countries). It's clearly an obstacle to progress. The long term hope is that through different means (the media and internet especially), the west can affect societal change within Muslim countries.

 

[Islam Imamate]

In the west, it's more along the lines of threatening freedom of expression/speech, most notably blasphemy laws. There are other subversions, but that's the main one other than the Muslim Brotherhood covertly trying to gain a foothold in government positions. I personally view the MB and all its affiliates as bigger threats to western democracies than terrorist groups.

I do agree that Sharia is worse for Muslims in Muslim countries (even worse for the non-Muslims in Muslim countries). It's clearly an obstacle to progress. The long term hope is that through different means (the media and internet especially), the west can affect societal change within Muslim countries.

I think its better for the Muslim world to progress on its own terms rather than swallow some pre-approved package that makes secular liberals feel good but fails to gain the sort of traction and penetration necessary for long term cultural change and the same goes for the African continent. Which is not to say the West can play no part but I'm not a fan of just foisting values onto people who have repeatedly shown themselves resistant to them. If they take from the West here and there, great. If not, I don't give a shit.

In the end I'm a results guy; if you can maintain stability and perform well on certain metrics(life expectancy, infant mortality, literacy, crime,etc ) I really don't care if you're a liberal democracy or not. I'm not that well read on East Asia but it seems to me they've been able to forge their own path more so than MENA and Sub-Saharan Africa and its worked out better for them. They've had other advantages in their favor but being able to articulate in your own cultural terms a path for development and progress is preferable to me than blindly accepting the values of others that rest on fundamental assumptions that are alien to most of your populations.

So in a sense I agree to an extent with cultural relativists but more form a pragmatic standpoint. I don't believe cultural autonomy should be preserved because all cultures are equal but rather because a people are better able to progress when their cultural autonomy is mostly preserved rather than going through the disruptive experience of having one's culture fundamentally undermined. That doesn't mean we can't criticize their cultural practices but honestly when I hear of Ayaan Hirsi Ali described as a Muslim Reformer by the likes of Sam Harris I can't help but roll my eyes.

 

[Luger]

That just means the extremists happen to be right for once.

By taking out a sentence and ignoring the context to do bad things, is the right thing to do?

 

[KONG-D'SNT-TAP]

We show throw both books in the fireplace and make it illegal to worship any faith based nonsense.

One day in the future this will be the norm.

Sadly most will be dead before we can see that come to fruition.

 

[Luger]

We show throw both books in the fireplace and make it illegal to worship any faith based nonsense.

One day in the future this will be the norm.

Sadly most will be dead before we can see that come to fruition.

Many countries have tried this and failed.
China now, the Soviets...

 

[IDL]

Many countries have tried this and failed.
China now, the Soviets...

Well he did say most will die before it comes to fruition, so it sounds pretty accurate.

 

[KONG-D'SNT-TAP]

Many countries have tried this and failed.
China now, the Soviets...

A world without religion is a much better world to live in.

In the future this will be the norm. I'm excited for anyone who loves during that era.

 

[Luger]

I'd like to see the stats on how much atheism is growing in general.
I know that in the west, specifically UK, some Scandinavian countries they have been rising pretty fast.

 

[IDL]

I'd like to see the stats on how much atheism is growing in general.
I know that in the west, specifically UK, some Scandinavian countries they have been rising pretty fast.

It's correlated with dropping birth rates so it doesn't seem sustainable.

 

[Luger]

http://www.ibtimes.com/pew-survey-p...despite-growing-religiosity-worldwide-1869696

By 2050, only 13 percent of the world’s population would not be religiously affiliated, as opposed to over 16 percent in 2010, according to a new Pew Research Center study published Thursday. The survey, which forecast a rise in the number of religious people globally over the next three decades, said that by 2050, the ranks of all major religions, expect Buddhism, would expand -- with Islam leading the trend.

According to the study, by 2050, perhaps for the first time in history, the number of Muslims would nearly equal the number of Christians. While Christianity would remain the world’s largest religion, with 2.92 billion believers, the population of Muslims would grow rapidly -- from 1.6 billion in 2010 to 2.76 billion in 2050.

I guess it will take a while for religion to go away.

 

[Harmonica]

The Old Testament is full of sex...

Yeah, "Song of songs" was one of the first porns I was exposed to.

 

[dontsnitch]

Hell is worse by basically every definition. And study and look up non-talmudic sources. The Talmud is oral law and also rabbinic arguments. In any case though Jews are not chosen because they are 'superior' but rather because they were the only ones who chose to enter into the covenant with God. Furthermore, Jews believe that one can be righteous without being Jewish and find God that way as well. If you deny this then you are unaware of a core train of thought in Judaism.

I never said they are superior, I said that they believe they are superior. It's no surprise that they don't let anyone in their little country and routinely do racist things. To deny this, I believe you need to turn a blind eye.

 

[dontsnitch]

I'm not even a big fan of life in prison without the possibility of parole so yes I don't think eternal punishment is great.

And I acknowledge that distinction but I also think the thought of a cosmic, just deity who punishes those who have done wrong is comforting for some. If they don't get theirs here then they'll answer to the man upstairs.

I'm a big fan of life in prison with out parole. While I do find the concept of justice very satisfying; that everyone will be held accountable for their misdeeds, I find eternity to be slightly too severe. I feel it becomes unjust at some point, but it's just an opinion.

 

[bjjHERRERA]

the n.i.v. is SO far OFF the masoretic text its not not even fair to compare. but if you want to be muslim because it is a religion of peace... go for it.

 

[Bloodworth]

Blah blah blah,,,,it's 2016, people should be more evolved...comparing the atrocities of what people.did a long time ago to what.the do today is not fair.