CDA zijn de zogenaamde naamchristenen, of christelijk op wielletjus
SGP, GPV en RPF dat zijn nog echte christelijke partijen.
En die basis zou toch niet de wetten van een boerenvolkje van 5000 jaar geleden moeten zijn.
Als ze goed zijn, waarom niet?
Heb weer een brief teruggekregen
[quote]
> Of course the bible is very
> often mistaken but don't tell nonsense about it.
My goal is to clear up the nonsense. The biggest nonsense is the notion
that this book has any value toward teaching morals.
> I don't like to be anti. I also don't like to be pro (goes for almost
> anything). I think it is better too stand between both sides so you
could
> better observe both sides and if needed join the 'good' party after some
> time.
You can and should stand at a distance when making your observations.
However, when it comes to changing things, you must make a clear decision,
and powerfully move toward a specific, simply and lucidly stated goal.
This is the only way change takes place.
As for the Bible, many Americans (particularly those stumping for National
Bible Week) are telling the public that the Bible (which most haven't
read) is worth reading because of its moral value. My counterpoint is to
point out that not only are many of its teachings despicable, but many of
the more innocuous teachings are only beneficial when given a superficial
examination: when you look deeper, and compare the Bible's teachings with
the modern, post-Enlightenment humanistic ethical systems and trends, you
see that in many cases, the "biblical" teachings are not biblical at all,
but have been given a humanistic interpretation. Many even blatantly
oppose the humanistic spin, and become very consistent in their Christian
fundamentalism, bringing sexism, racism, war-mongering, and many other
evils that an uncolored reading of the Bible will show.
> There are some more things in the bible who could be an excellent thing
in
> the poster.
I worked on this off and on for two years, and considered all the
questionable passages. I went for ease of presentation (which ones would
be understood by the widest audience) and greatest impact (which ones
would upset the most people (naturally, the women and children passages
and the Fig Tree Enigma passage).
> For example the story of judges 19..... very cruel
This was up there, but lost out because most are familiar with the similar
story of Lot and his daughters. I was also going for some new stuff that
many haven't encountered. The donkey cocks and horse jizz passage in
Ezekiel is so shocking that people have actually bet me that I'm lying
(and I've won the bets).
> When are you (according to you) a fundamentelist?
To me, the main mark of fundamentalism is that the question is settled and
no longer subject to the person's own scrutiny (or anybody else's, in
their minds). Thus, there are fundamentalist atheists who know for a fact
that there cannot possibly be a god of any kind. While I live my life as
if there are no gods, I am always open to the possibility that someone may
come along and show me something that may overthrow my current opinion on
the matter. That's what distinguishes me from a fundamentalist -- who
otherwise holds similar opinions, but holds them differently from the way
I do.
> And why did the do this cruel acts? because the
> bible did so? No because they wanted too..... so it is NOT the bibles
> fault..... if there wasn't a bible they made up another thing to
justifiy
> their cruel acts.
Sometimes the Bible actually inspired the acts (such as the auto da fe --
see John 15:6) and more often the Bible was successfully used to justify
the evil in the eyes of the public, giving them opportunities to commit
evil that they might not otherwise have had: the Bible made the
difference.
> Than you base it on the 'bible' of another culture, I don't care.
Why does it have to be a "bible"? Why can't we simply put our heads
together and agree that we, the people, will do certain things in specific
ways (such as punishing all murder)? I have more faith in the great
majority of the human race (the criminal element notwithstanding) than to
think that we need a "bible" of some sort in order to put together a
peaceful society.
> Lutherans too? Mmm I thought the lutherans were very against graven
images
> (because Luther himself was very very agianst graven images) of the
> catholics.
The modern Calvinists are strictly biblical -- fundamentalists of the most
vicious variety. They will derive their list of Commandments straight from
the Bible. I am rather certain that the modern Lutherans still use the
Catholic version of the Ten Commandments. I know they once did, but may
have changed. My sources for this information is almost 100 years old, but
I don't see churches changing very fast.
> > Ideally, this should be the responsibility of all healthy citizens,
> > distributed evenly in the form of a tax and distributed fairly through
> > neutral government agencies. This way, nobody can play favorites and
> > nobody can pat themselves on the back.
>
> Ofcourse it is their responsibility but you can't arrest them because
they
> don't do so..... and ofcourse the non-christians also gives a lot of
money.
> But they don't organise things, they just give money.........
They can and do arrest people for tax evasion.
The non-Christians organize government agencies to take care of these
things the proper way. Many of the great help and educational agencies
(The American Red Cross; The Carnegie Institute; The Smithsonian) were
started by atheists. Henry Ford was an atheist and did some wonderful
things toward eliminating poverty in our country (and our world). Ditto
for Edison.
Cliff Walker
"Positive Atheism" Magazine
P.O. Box 16811
Portland, OR 97292
http://www.PositiveAtheism.org /
editor@PositiveAtheism.org
"As soon as you're born
They make you feel small..."
-- John Lennon (1940-1980)
"Changes take place, not independent of
man's will, but on account of man's wills.
Civilization has progressed by man's
interference with material conditions."
-- Gora (1902-1975)
"The legitimate powers of government extend
to such acts only as are injurious to others.
-- Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826)
"I've gone into thousands of [fortune teller's
parlors], and have been told thousands of
things, but nobody ever told me I was a
policewoman getting ready to arrest her."
-- NYC detective
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dirk-Jan van Vliet" <morgoth@wish.net>
To: "Positive Atheism" <editor@positiveatheism.org>
Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2000 6:04 AM
Subject: Re: Positive_Atheism_Letters_Section
> > Well, then, if you're not a fundamentalist, then why are you defending
the
> > very Bible which, because of other peoples' fundamentalism throughout
> > history, has caused untold misery with admittedly absurd concepts such
as
> > "women must remain silent in church" being taken way too seriously at
> > various times throughout history? Why not join us in our effort to
alert
> > people to the fact that such passages exist and ought to be denounced?
> > that the Bible is not what the fundamentalists say it is?
>
> Because there are so many people who know (almost) nothing about the
bible
> and just 'heard' something
:strip_icc():strip_exif()/u/2032/rorty2.jpg?f=community)
/u/3670/tweakerslogo.png?f=community)
.):strip_icc():strip_exif()/u/3095/nietzsche.jpg?f=community)
:strip_exif()/u/2349/VU_icon.gif?f=community){kind=icon}
:strip_icc():strip_exif()/u/3228/crop5d113bdb41aeb_cropped.jpeg?f=community)
:strip_icc():strip_exif()/u/2626/nice_eye.jpg?f=community)
