XPost: alt.atheism, alt.politics, aus.politics   
   XPost: alt.religion, aus.religion, alt.politics.republicans   
   XPost: alt.politics.democrats, uk.politics.misc   
   From: herpem@bigpond.com   
      
   "Darrell Stec"  wrote in message   
   news:6uolrbFgh9d0U1@mid.individual.net...   
   > HD wrote:   
   >   
   >>   
   >> "Kate "  wrote in message   
   >> news:49ddfb99.1426688859@news-west.newscene.com...   
   >>> On Mon, 02 Feb 2009 04:34:35 GMT, "HD"  wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>"Kate "  wrote in message   
   >>>>news:49d95b6b.1385682562@news-west.newscene.com...   
   >>>>> On Mon, 02 Feb 2009 01:12:29 GMT, "HD"  wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>"Kate "  wrote in message   
   >>>>>>news:49d0bf9b.1345794281@news-west.newscene.com...   
   >>>>>>> On Sun, 01 Feb 2009 13:48:05 GMT, "HD"  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>"Kate "  wrote in message   
   >>>>>>>>news:49cea36c.1338579328@news-west.newscene.com...   
   >>>>>>>>> On Sun, 01 Feb 2009 03:43:07 GMT, "HD"  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>"Kate "  wrote in message   
   >>>>>>>>>>news:49ccf6c7.1294382062@news-west.newscene.com...   
   >>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 31 Jan 2009 22:33:34 GMT, "HD"    
   >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>"Kate "  wrote in message   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>news:49c8b164.1276619859@news-west.newscene.com...   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 31 Jan 2009 06:22:16 GMT, "HD"    
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>"Peter Webb"  wrote in   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>message   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>news:4983e8a8$0$20975$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Atheists have done lots of bad things, but not because they   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> atheists,   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but because they are bad people.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Whereas Muslim terrorists do bad things because they are   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Muslims.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Atheism is not comparable to having religious beliefs;   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> religious   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nutters   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> quite often kill people for religious reasons; atheists do   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Atheism   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not a religion, and it does not dictate how people should   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> live and   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> who   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they should hate.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>Let me see if I got that right.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>Atheists do bad thinngs because they are bad people.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>Christians do bad things, not because they are bad people, but   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>because   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>they   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>are religious.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>Is that an Irish joke?   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> The point is, atheism doesn't justify doing bad things,   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> religion does.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> Good people do bad things, like not let gay people marry,   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> because   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> of   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> religion.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>"At that time many will call evil good and they will call good   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>evil."   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Precisely - if you rely on religion to tell you what's good,   
   >>>>>>>>>>> eventually your progeny will disown you.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>Why?   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> Because what you did wasn't truly moral - religion isn't about   
   >>>>>>>>> defining morality, it's about power and tribalism.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>If not religion, then who defines morality?   
   >>>>>>>>Where does morality come from?   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Our social genes.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>I'm not bible bashing but maybe the following is interestinng for you.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>The Bible says the following:   
   >>>>>>When Gentiles who do not have the law, by nature do the things in the   
   >>>>>>law,   
   >>>>>>these, although not having the law are a law to themselves   
   >>>>>>Who show the work of the law written in their hearths, their   
   >>>>>>conscience   
   >>>>>>also   
   >>>>>>bearing witness, and between themselves their thoughts accusing or   
   >>>>>>else   
   >>>>>>excusing them.   
   >>>>>>In other words, social genes is God's law written in the hearth of   
   >>>>>>man.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>The Catholic church, rather than being authoritarian and controlling   
   >>>>>>has this to say:   
   >>>>>>From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:   
   >>>>>>"20. Conscience, in Catholic teaching, is God's law written on the   
   >>>>>>human heart (CCC 1777-1802). It is "the most secret core and sanctuary   
   >>>>>>of a man"   
   >>>>>>where "he is alone with God, Whose voice echoes in his depths." To   
   >>>>>>obey   
   >>>>>>conscience "is the very dignity of man; according to it he will be   
   >>>>>>judged"   
   >>>>>>(Gaudium et Spes 16). We are always obliged to follow our conscience   
   >>>>>>because   
   >>>>>>it is our last and best judgment about the morality of a particular   
   >>>>>>act."   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Think about it - morality is about what helps the group over   
   >>>>>>> individuals.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>Can you give me one example where Christian morality differs from   
   >>>>>>this.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> I can't define 'Christian morality' - there is no objective standard   
   >>>>> for it.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>Try the Bible   
   >>>   
   >>> Which one?  There are dozens - and they don't offer an objective   
   >>> standard - only vague conflicting stories.   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> The Bible to look for is the Latin translation by St. Jerome who had all   
   >> the original manuscripts both in Aramaic and Greek. That Bible has been   
   >> translated in every language.   
   >>   
   >   
   > How do you know he had all the original manuscripts.  We do not know which   
   > ones he used.  We do know, he made many mistakes and was not above using   
   > interpolation.   
   >   
   > For instance when translating the Old Testamen, did he use the Masoretic   
   > Texts or the Septuagint?  That would make a big difference.  What we do   
   > know is that some of the earlier Hebrew texts (some found at Qumran), long   
   > out of use have many, may differences from the Masoretic Texts which in   
   > themselves were a retranslation back into Hebrew from Greek texts.   
   >   
   > Can you validate the fact that he had all the original texts?  Of course   
   > not   
   > because for the scriptures there was no such thing as original texts.   
   > What   
   > each book in the bible was was a compilation of a very few texts among   
   > many, many different ones.  How can one separate a text that looks very   
   > ancient and dated by paleography from one that was purposely written to   
   > make it look old and thus authoritative?  Only radiocarbon dating can   
   > settle that matter.  Jerome had not such technology he could use.  And as   
   > for modern days, very few manuscripts are allowed to be scientifically   
   > scrutinized.   
   >   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)