Quote:

r3x29yz4a said:
this started when you said civilization was based on a foundation of Judeo/Christianity.
I said you were wrong.



I said no such thing. All I said was that it was the first real and orchestrated philosophy to be created.

Quote:

I'm no wasting my time going back and rereading every nuance of every thread. I'll respond to what you're typing now, but I have these religious debates enough that it could've been anytime this thread got started.
Way to focus on the issues, junior.



I'm not sure what the last sentence is supposed to mean, but if you don't want to show the courtesy of reading back on the subject, as I have done, just to make sure we're arguing proper context, then you shouldn't have even responded to my post that resurrected this topic. I find it hard to believe that you've already forgotten the fact that you're repeating the arguments you're using now and have failed to refutiate my pointing out their flaws mere pages ago.

Quote:

show me the Jewish Klansman.



This doesn't prove shit. simply cuz' there weren't any Jews apart of the Klan, that doesn't mean the Klan itself is an official concentration of Christians. You'd prolly find Jewish people who hate black people, whilst not being apart of the Klan, though.

Quote:

Show me the non-Christians who use the cross as a symbol in this modern age.



Again, not all of the KKK were/are Christians. That's just your gross estimation based solely on the fact that Klan activity was centered in the Bible Belt. That, in and of itself, is not a proper indicator.

Quote:

there's no slaves in the bible, no oppression in the bible?



No. There's no encouragement of either--If that's what you're getting at. There are, however, analogous situations presented in the form of slavery and oppression on how to deal with such situations if you are indeed the oppressed or slave. And there's also verses within the Bible that say what do if in the vicinity of oppressed individuals; help them.

Quote:

and to my knowledge there was nothing about grand iquisitions in the biblical text, but the Spanish still did it.



The Spanish inquistion in particular wasn't acting on Vatican authority. When inquistions were officially instated, most were genuinely used for teaching.

In any event. I already explained to you that because the heinous acts in some of the inquisition are not endorsed by the Bible, it's not truly apart of the religion/philosophy and is moreso a problem with fanatics. So your absurd spin and attempt at double-speak fails.

Quote:

The Virginians still did their Witch Trials.



I can't really speak much for the Protestants since their version of the religion was changed according to Lutheran standards from Catholicism's. However, I'd be willing to bet that there was nothing in their doctrine that equated such behavior and they relied solely on fanaticism. In which, case the problem was themselves and not the religion--Although that does not mean I endorse Protestantism.

Quote:

you're such a bigot. Islam does not teach violence and terrorism (the CIA taught them that, but it's a whole other issue).



The legitimate teachings of Islam does indeed. We've already gone over this in past pages as well as recent posts.

Quote:

There's as much violence and bloodshed in the bible as the koran. With both religions the mainstream these days denounce violence.



The Bible describes bloodshed and violence. It does not, however, give credence to its use.

Quote:

So same as how you might be offended with the cross being used as a sign of death (which is it's original purpose technically) so might the majority of Muslims be appalled by terrorist acts.



Perhaps, but that doesn't change the fact that the religion itself is indeed proponed to such actions as terrorism since it is a way to carry out a Jihad.

Quote:

you said the ten commandments were straight forward and not really open to interpretation, I was making the argument that any religious text can be interpreted to the reader's views.



So what you're trying to say is that these particular terrorists took "Thou shalt not kill" to mean, "Kill abortion doctors"?

Quote:

magicjay38 said:
The Jews borrowed heavily from the 2 empires that affected them in their early days: Egypt and Mesapotamia. The whole idea of monotheism was first promoted by Ahknaten who was Pharoh for part of the time jews spent in servitude. Hence you have Moses with his knickers in a knot over idols and one god. Old Yaweh himself was base on a God called Baal by the Mesapotamians. The point is Judaisim was not by any stretch the first religion or philosophy as you call it.



This is totally wrong. Both Egypt and Mesopatamia were polytheistic-based countries. And Baal had nothing to do with Yaweh. And my assertion was that the Judaism religion was the first philosophy, not the first religion.

Quote:

Some how I thought objectivism was a philosophy created in the 20th century by Ayn Rand, who at this very moment is giving Karl Marx a rim job in hell. It's vision of utopia involves free market capitalism with very little government, free love and social darwinism. That doesn't sound like the Roman Empire or the Middle Ages in Europe. And by the way, Pariah, I don't think objectivists are very big on the god thing either. It conflicts with being master of your own destiny.



Objectivism's been around forever. Ayn Rand just gave it a name and more pronounced protocol so it could be more legitimately claimed as a true philosophy.

As for the "master of your own destiny" shite: Running a country through objectivism and practicing it as an individual are two very different things.