NationStates Jolt Archive

But that doesn't necessarily mean he chooses to view that knowledge. Perhaps he chooses to not see into the future?
If he has chosen not to know something he has given up his status as omniscient. You can't have it both ways.

A perfect being doesn't automatically deserve praise and worship. It's done nothing to earn it's level of perfection. It's had no obstacles to overcome.

A man who has worked to become better is greater than some perfect being. Even if that man remains flawed. There is a dignity in overcomming one's condition and improving one's self.I agree.

Remember, we sinners deserve no mercy. The very fact that God allowed them the chance to turn from their ways before he destroyed them was intrisically merciful. Get past your own blind view of our righteousness and realize that we have none. We all are deserving of hellfire for our transgressions.

Now, lets just pretend for a minute there is no god, ok, just pretend no sin in that, now how is killing a perfectly happy healthy individual merciful, explain.

Snipped

No, Slavery is forced servitude. It's not neutral it's a crime against humanity.

Brutallity is evil but we are all forced to serve our masters anyway. I do not see an overwhelming amount of people who choose to live a life of self sufficiency. We all serve society, if there is a war we all go out to the battlefield to fight and die for our nation, if there is peace we all go to work in order to pay for taxes for our nation and of course to get the food we need to live.

The state and the world forces us to do things that we may not want to do. To claim that working in service of another for our food and such is evil is sort of stupid. No man is ever completely a master, everyone has to serve something or die.

Slavery so long as it is not cruel does not seem to be a crime.

And if you pull your head out of the sand you will see that your claim is false :)
I asked you before what contributions religion made. Your list included one thing that is worthless, salvation, unless you have guilt drummed into you by your christian upbringing, and some emotions and character traits that can be gotten elsewhere.

Sorry, if anyone's head is in the sand it's yours.

I’m joking, you lowly uneducated fool. ;) (j/k)

I know, you unenlightened heathen. :)

Remember, we sinners deserve no mercy. The very fact that God allowed them the chance to turn from their ways before he destroyed them was intrisically merciful. Get past your own blind view of our righteousness and realize that we have none. We all are deserving of hellfire for our transgressions.

So, if no one deserves mercy, how is it wrong if I don't show mercy to others? Yet it's right if God doesn't show mercy.

Now, lets just pretend for a minute there is no god, ok, just pretend no sin in that, now how is killing a perfectly happy healthy individual merciful, explain.



It isn't, but this is not the case :)

Had Christ never come to earth, had God not appeared or spoke to anyone, had this all never occured...all proof for God's existence would be merely philosophical :)
Jesus doesn't prove god's existance. Jesus was just a wandering hippie.

I know, you unenlightened heathen. :)



So, if no one deserves mercy, how is it wrong if I don't show mercy to others? Yet it's right if God doesn't show mercy.



Because, in order to attain salvation, we must try our hardest to seperate ourselves from our sinful nature. Who are we to withhold mercy from someone when we ourselves are not deserving of it?


Matthew 18:21-35 21Then Peter came to Jesus and asked, "Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother when he sins against me? Up to seven times?"
22Jesus answered, "I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times.[f]

23"Therefore, the kingdom of heaven is like a king who wanted to settle accounts with his servants. 24As he began the settlement, a man who owed him ten thousand talents[g] was brought to him. 25Since he was not able to pay, the master ordered that he and his wife and his children and all that he had be sold to repay the debt.

26"The servant fell on his knees before him. 'Be patient with me,' he begged, 'and I will pay back everything.' 27The servant's master took pity on him, canceled the debt and let him go.

28"But when that servant went out, he found one of his fellow servants who owed him a hundred denarii.[h] He grabbed him and began to choke him. 'Pay back what you owe me!' he demanded.

29"His fellow servant fell to his knees and begged him, 'Be patient with me, and I will pay you back.'

30"But he refused. Instead, he went off and had the man thrown into prison until he could pay the debt. 31When the other servants saw what had happened, they were greatly distressed and went and told their master everything that had happened.

32"Then the master called the servant in. 'You wicked servant,' he said, 'I canceled all that debt of yours because you begged me to. 33Shouldn't you have had mercy on your fellow servant just as I had on you?' 34In anger his master turned him over to the jailers to be tortured, until he should pay back all he owed.

35"This is how my heavenly Father will treat each of you unless you forgive your brother from your heart."

Meh, the same could be said about many philosophies. Nihilism is not a very pleasant belief either, ultimately everyone believes in something otherwise they are a nihilist who believes in nothing. Now if the beliefs that everyone chooses to have are all complementary then there is no problem. But if people choose of their own accord differing beliefs then problems start occuring. Religion is a differing belief from secular humanism or whatever the heck the atheists here believe. That is part of the division.

We have seen before that it is not only religions that kill people, the communists in charge of the atheist dictatorships have killed many millions of people.

Unless you wish to end all divisions by making everyone believe as you do the point is stupid. There would be no divisions if everyone believed as the Christians did or the Muslims did or the Jews did and so on and so forth.Some beleifs contribute tangible benefits. Guarantees of human rights in the constitution, knowledge and medicine through the scientific method, etc. Religious beleif contributes no tangible benefits as far as I've seen.

Jesus doesn't prove god's existance. Jesus was just a wandering hippie.



His miracles and his rise from death do though ;)

Some beleifs contribute tangible benefits. Guarantees of human rights in the constitution, knowledge and medicine through the scientific method, etc. Religious beleif contributes no tangible benefits as far as I've seen.


DCD, I have a feeling you have never even read the Bible (especially not the New Testament) from a statement like that. Is this true, or are you disregarding the truth for the sake of argument?

And that is where you are incorrect, the concept of liberty and freedom to make decisions outside of the moral spectrum is a human contrivance. The Bible never espouses the American ideals of freedom, it focuses on devotion, piety, and the surrender of our own will to God's. We have no dignity, we are wretched creatures full of sin and evil and thus deserve nothing better than to be treated with disgust. Fortunately, God has provided an escape from our fate through Christ's sacrifice and cruel slaveowners would forfeit that salvation through disobedience of God's will.
You may be a wretched creature. I'm something greater. I'm a free man. The fact that you would justify slavery to avoid criticism of your religion really does disgust me. Don't you realize that you're saying one person should be able to own another and take complete control of his or her life? Don't you see how if there was a god and that god had any decency he or she would be disgusted by your statement?

It isn't, but this is not the case :)

It isnt the case, true, but explain how in a real and specific way how fgod doing it automaticly makes it good, and if it wasnt a good and merciful thing to do how can god be completely good and merciful? how was lots wife worthy of being smote into salt or whatever just for what she did? explain the mercy in mortal terms.

I asked you before what contributions religion made. Your list included one thing that is worthless, salvation, unless you have guilt drummed into you by your christian upbringing, and some emotions and character traits that can be gotten elsewhere.Yeah, "salvation" is just a way to console people that they're going to die anyway and nothing really matters that much.

1. God gives and God takes, nobody truly owns anything as all things are granted to us by God

2. Even so, God didn't do it, Satan did :p

*Edit: regarding Job - this thread moves faster than a startled cockroach.

God let Satan do it. On a wager. And God created Satan. I think you're just trying to dodge bullets, here.

God is just as evil as God is good. Trying to set Satan up as the fall-guy for all bad things going reeks of corruption.

DCD, I have a feeling you have never even read the Bible (especially not the New Testament) from a statement like that. Is this true, or are you disregarding the truth for the sake of argument?

Tell me how the bible is so tangible

Human dignity and liberty are just made up concepts. To claim that they are supremely special requires some faith on your part. Some people would claim that our obsession with our liberties and individualism is a flaw that causes many problems within our society.

The only belief that does not take much assumption is nihilism which is not a pleasant ideology.
Sure it takes faith to belive that humans have special dignity and rights that deserve protection. But that faith has tangible benefits. It has resulted in free societies that produce art, science, and wealth.

Because, in order to attain salvation, we must try our hardest to seperate ourselves from our sinful nature. Who are we to withhold mercy from someone when we ourselves are not deserving of it?
*snip*

Assume we don't believe in an afterlife, or at least, the Christian version. What's to compell us to believe others are deserving of mercy, then?

You may be a wretched creature. I'm something greater. I'm a free man. The fact that you would justify slavery to avoid criticism of your religion really does disgust me. Don't you realize that you're saying one person should be able to own another and take complete control of his or her life? Don't you see how if there was a god and that god had any decency he or she would be disgusted by your statement?



You are not greater than me, rather you are just as wretched as I am. You are either a slave to God/good or a slave to Satan/evil. There is no neutrality here. You are not free, you are just deluding yourself into thinking so. We are all slaves in one sense and have no freedom. When you learn that there is no true freedom, then say that.

Yeah, "salvation" is just a way to console people that they're going to die anyway and nothing really matters that much.

Refer to Fight Club for a further expansion on that philosophy. Love that movie.

His miracles and his rise from death do though ;)Yeah...if they ever happened, which I doubt. What proof do you have beyond a book that may not be true? All those miracles and resurrection are all just metaphors. You're taking Matthew, Mark, Luke, & John far too literally.

Assume we don't believe in an afterlife, or at least, the Christian version. What's to compell us to believe others are deserving of mercy, then?



Why are you bringing this up? You and I both know very well that my points presuppose the existence of God and fall apart if He does not exist. There is no point in stating my position in a purely atheistic sense.

Brutallity is evil but we are all forced to serve our masters anyway. I do not see an overwhelming amount of people who choose to live a life of self sufficiency. We all serve society, if there is a war we all go out to the battlefield to fight and die for our nation, if there is peace we all go to work in order to pay for taxes for our nation and of course to get the food we need to live.

The state and the world forces us to do things that we may not want to do. To claim that working in service of another for our food and such is evil is sort of stupid. No man is ever completely a master, everyone has to serve something or die.

Slavery so long as it is not cruel does not seem to be a crime.
Every man who lives in a free society is his own master. You say we're forced to fight in wars. Not really. Look at those who went to Canada during vietnam, or those who got conscientious objector status. We choose who we will work for in peacetime, or we choose to start a business and work for ourselves. Really, it's almost like your saying since we can't choose to grow wings and fly we're slaves anyway.

Yeah...if they ever happened, which I doubt. What proof do you have beyond a book that may not be true? All those miracles and resurrection are all just metaphors. You're taking Matthew, Mark, Luke, & John far too literally.



These were not metaphorical, and no Christian could possibly state that position. The life, death, and resurrection of Christ are fully literal.

His miracles and his rise from death do though ;)
You mean the unverifiable miracles that are very similar to miracles claimed by other people throughout history and the fact that only his followers ever claimed that he rose (and they had interests to protect by claiming that)

Every man who lives in a free society is his own master. You say we're forced to fight in wars. Not really. Look at those who went to Canada during vietnam, or those who got conscientious objector status. We choose who we will work for in peacetime, or we choose to start a business and work for ourselves. Really, it's almost like your saying since we can't choose to grow wings and fly we're slaves anyway.



You are never truly free. You could claim to be free of society and its regulations, and move into the woods and live self-sufficiently. But, guess what? You're a slave to nature :p

You are not greater than me, rather you are just as wretched as I am. You are either a slave to God/good or a slave to Satan/evil. There is no neutrality here. You are not free, you are just deluding yourself into thinking so. We are all slaves in one sense and have no freedom. When you learn that there is no true freedom, then say that.Don't you realize, you unenlightened blind Biblical literalist, that good and evil are flip sides of the same coin? Yin and yang. Whatever. One cannot exist without the other. Everything contains some of each. Humans are partly good and partly evil; sometimes they lean one way, sometimes the other, and no-one leads a completely good or evil life. Likewise natural disasters have both good and bad sides: forest fires kill hundreds of plants, but at the same time allow the soil to be fertilized for trees to start their life cycle again. Nothing is absolute.

There is no such thing as a "Holy War". You cannot attribute the actions of individuals to a religion, lest you remove the concept of personal responsibility.

Then I guess we can't really attribute Christianity with doing good either since it's really about the actions of individuals. ;)

You are not greater than me, rather you are just as wretched as I am. You are either a slave to God/good or a slave to Satan/evil. There is no neutrality here. You are not free, you are just deluding yourself into thinking so. We are all slaves in one sense and have no freedom. When you learn that there is no true freedom, then say that.

What's funny, is that you're not supposed to judge others, but that's what you're doing. You're calling all of humanity wretched, and evil. I don't recall a single passage in the Bible which states that. If we're supposed to be the favourites of God's children, I'm of the opinion that that's rather untrue, despite my personal feelings towards humanity.

I don't believe in God, or Satan, or any other absolute source of good and evil, and I know I'm not a slave to either one.

You mean the unverifiable miracles that are very similar to miracles claimed by other people throughout history and the fact that only his followers ever claimed that he rose (and they had interests to protect by claiming that)



Duh, the Pharisees, upon learning of his resurrection, bribed others to keep hush-hush about the whole thing because they were proven wrong. Christ appeared to about 500 people in the marketplace, to the disciples, to Mary, etc. Wouldn't the best method of discrediting something be claiming it never occured? This is what the Pharisees did. In addition, nearly every apostle and many of his disciples died horrible deaths without recanting their beliefs. If they had "interests" to protect, then wouldn't they certainly choose life over death?

You are never truly free. You could claim to be free of society and its regulations, and move into the woods and live self-sufficiently. But, guess what? You're a slave to nature :p

Uh..No. You coexist with Nature. You take care of it, it takes care of you.

Why are you bringing this up? You and I both know very well that my points presuppose the existence of God and fall apart if He does not exist. There is no point in stating my position in a purely atheistic sense.

Curiosity, I suppose.

DCD, I have a feeling you have never even read the Bible (especially not the New Testament) from a statement like that. Is this true, or are you disregarding the truth for the sake of argument?
I haven't read the bible in years.

Uh..No. You coexist with Nature. You take care of it, it takes care of you.



But you are subject to its whims and tyrannies, you do not ever master it. Natural disasters, plagues, droughts, and famines come to mind.

You are not greater than me, rather you are just as wretched as I am. You are either a slave to God/good or a slave to Satan/evil. There is no neutrality here. You are not free, you are just deluding yourself into thinking so. We are all slaves in one sense and have no freedom. When you learn that there is no true freedom, then say that.
I'm a slave to nothing. I choose to be loyal to my friends, my family, my country, and my employer. I'm a free man.

You are not greater than me, rather you are just as wretched as I am. You are either a slave to God/good or a slave to Satan/evil. There is no neutrality here. You are not free, you are just deluding yourself into thinking so. We are all slaves in one sense and have no freedom. When you learn that there is no true freedom, then say that.

Well, whatever happened to that 'free will' jazz the Lord supposedly endowed everything with? What about that?

Never mind the fact that Satan is just an avatar of God anyway.

These were not metaphorical, and no Christian could possibly state that position. The life, death, and resurrection of Christ are fully literal.I am of the opinion that the "miracles" Christ performed are metaphors for record conversion based on the gifts he himself already had, such as being an excellent orator, a good philosopher, etc. Likewise, his "resurrection" is nothing more than the explosion of his teachings around the world of that time, despite Roman opposition, and the record conversion of thousands of people within the next few centuries. Hence Christ's teachings are banned, and then—by 337 AD, when Christianity is adopted as the official Roman religion—"resurrected". Makes sense, doesn't it?

But you are subject to its whims and tyrannies, you do not ever master it. Natural disasters, plagues, droughts, and famines come to mind.

You don't master it, no, but it doesn't necessarily master you. With technology, or even simple survival skills, you're equipped to survive a large portion of what nature can throw at you.

I'm a slave to nothing. I choose to be loyal to my friends, my family, my country, and my employer. I'm a free man.


You are a slave to time, death, nature, the universe, the laws of phsyics, society, etc.

You are never truly free. You could claim to be free of society and its regulations, and move into the woods and live self-sufficiently. But, guess what? You're a slave to nature :p
Your definition of freedom is assinine. You claim I'm a slave because I can't choose to violate natural law. That's dumb. I'm free because I can make my own decisions within the limits of physical laws.

You don't master it, no, but it doesn't necessarily master you. With technology, or even simple survival skills, you're equipped to survive a large portion of what nature can throw at you.



Anything which has any power over you at all is your master to a degree. You can reduce the likelihood that it will kill you, and you can adapt some aspects of it to your benefit, but you are always subject to it. No technology can fully protect you.

Uh..No. You coexist with Nature. You take care of it, it takes care of you.Yeah, same as everything else, like human society.

But you are subject to its whims and tyrannies, you do not ever master it. Natural disasters, plagues, droughts, and famines come to mind.That's ridiculous. Nature never masters you, you never master it. That's because it was never our lot to "rule" anything in the first place. We're supposed to coexist and like it.

Duh, the Pharisees, upon learning of his resurrection, bribed others to keep hush-hush about the whole thing because they were proven wrong. Christ appeared to about 500 people in the marketplace, to the disciples, to Mary, etc. Wouldn't the best method of discrediting something be claiming it never occured? This is what the Pharisees did. In addition, nearly every apostle and many of his disciples died horrible deaths without recanting their beliefs. If they had "interests" to protect, then wouldn't they certainly choose life over death?
The disciples lied about the resurection because if it didn't happen they couldn't claim to be the earthly representatives of a living god and therefore couldn't claim the power that goes along with that.

Your definition of freedom is assinine. You claim I'm a slave because I can't choose to violate natural law. That's dumb. I'm free because I can make my own decisions within the limits of physical laws.



My point is, you are never free. You are always a slave to something or someone.

But you are subject to its whims and tyrannies, you do not ever master it. Natural disasters, plagues, droughts, and famines come to mind.
Plagues have been cured and eliminated, like smallpox and bubonic plague. Famines are limited to only the poorest parts of the earth now. Actually we have mastered nature to some extent, and that was through science, not religion.

The disciples lied about the resurection because if it didn't happen they couldn't claim to be the earthly representatives of a living god and therefore couldn't claim the power that goes along with that.



Yes, and I'm sure that's why they were able to cure sicknesses and cast out demons ;)

You are a slave to time, death, nature, the universe, the laws of phsyics, society, etc.You can be free within any of those. Freedom within limitations exists.

Plagues have been cured and eliminated, like smallpox and bubonic plague. Famines are limited to only the poorest parts of the earth now. Actually we have mastered nature to some extent, and that was through science, not religion.



But nature can always eliminate our civilizations at the slightest whim. Catastrophic earthquakes, global warming, asteroids crashing into earth, etc. You will never be truly safe. You can only claim to have mastered something when it no longer has any power over you.

Yes, and I'm sure that's why they were able to cure sicknesses and cast out demons ;)Modern doctors can cure sicknesses and "exorcise" the demented, and I don't think too many of them studied with Christ. :D

Anything which has any power over you at all is your master to a degree. You can reduce the likelihood that it will kill you, and you can adapt some aspects of it to your benefit, but you are always subject to it. No technology can fully protect you.

That's not a slave. That's like a paid servant, at best. I prefer to think of it as coexisiting. I may not be able to control the effects of nature upon me, but I can help take care of it, and as you said, reduce its likelihood of hurting me.

You are a slave to time, death, nature, the universe, the laws of phsyics, society, etc.
Nope. I dont' serve time, death, nature, the universe, or the laws of physics. I'm merely subject to the limits that they impose because I'm a part of the universe. I CHOOSE to serve society and I CHOOSE how much to give to it. A slave doesn't choose his master and has no say in what he'll give his master..

You can be free within any of those. Freedom within limitations exists.



But freedom with limitations is not true freedom, it is quasi-freedom :)

My point is, you are never free. You are always a slave to something or someone.
Your point is wrong. A free man chooses whether to serve or not and who or what to serve.

Yes, and I'm sure that's why they were able to cure sicknesses and cast out demons ;)
Science cures sicknesses. Demons dont' exist. The disciples were scam artists like Benny Hin

Nope. I dont' serve time, death, nature, the universe, or the laws of physics. I'm merely subject to the limits that they impose because I'm a part of the universe. I CHOOSE to serve society and I CHOOSE how much to give to it. A slave doesn't choose his master and has no say in what he'll give his master..



To be subject to said laws is to serve their will (assuming one could personify them). You do not choose how much you give to society...at least, not for long, because then the IRS comes after you ;)

But freedom with limitations is not true freedom, it is quasi-freedom :)

And religion is freedom, with limitations and restrictions. It dictates what you can, and cannot (or at least, should and should not) do. So, in my mind, you just admitted you're willingly partcipating in some form of pseudofreedom. Or is being a slave to God, and having a limitation in free will outside of your own choosing, supposed to be noble?

Science cures sicknesses. Demons dont' exist. The disciples were scam artists like Benny Hin



So, you're claiming they used science to cure ailments that we can't even cure today? Wow, you have more faith than I do :D

But nature can always eliminate our civilizations at the slightest whim. Catastrophic earthquakes, global warming, asteroids crashing into earth, etc. You will never be truly safe. You can only claim to have mastered something when it no longer has any power over you.
Nature has no whim. Conditions change, and science, not religion, has given us skills and tools that allow us to adapt.

But freedom with limitations is not true freedom, it is quasi-freedom :)Listen...if you had "true" freedom, you'd be tumbling through space at the speed of light, because you are currently bound by the laws of gravity!

I have news for you: Sometimes, some limitations are GOOD. They are not necessarily slavery. However, don't you agree that it would be far better to be a "slave" to the law of gravity than free from it? ;)

But freedom with limitations is not true freedom, it is quasi-freedom :)
Slavery is absolute lack of freedom. So we have you, advocating slavery because otherwise your god looks brutal, and we have the atheists who advocate the maximum possible ammount of freedom. I know where I stand, and it ain't in the slave quarters.

And religion is freedom, with limitations and restrictions. It dictates what you can, and cannot (or at least, should and should not) do. So, in my mind, you just admitted you're willingly partcipating in some form of pseudofreedom. Or is being a slave to God, and having a limitation in free will outside of your own choosing, supposed to be noble?



My point is, DCD was claiming to be a slave to no one. If you follow God's will then you are His slave. If you do not, then you are Satan's slave. He was denying being anyone's slave ;)

So, you're claiming they used science to cure ailments that we can't even cure today? Wow, you have more faith than I do :D[off-topic] Why haven't you responded to any of my posts yet?

[on-topic] The demons, once again, are metaphors for various forms of dementia that often accompanied the plague. And all of the "fatal" diseases of that time are today curable. Nowadays, of course, we have things like AIDS, which is obviously a plague sent by God to punish us for our arrogance. ;)

But freedom with limitations is not true freedom, it is quasi-freedom :)


But there arent degrees of slavery, its impossible to set degrees to it, so of course the absence of slavery means freedom.

To be subject to said laws is to serve their will (assuming one could personify them). You do not choose how much you give to society...at least, not for long, because then the IRS comes after you ;)
1 They're not people, so don't personify them. They're laws of nature that nothing gets around.

2 I can move and change my citizenship if I want. I can choose to work at a job wher I earn less money and pay less taxes. I can choose to work under the table and pay no tax. Yep. I'm free to choose.

My point is, DCD was claiming to be a slave to no one. If you follow God's will then you are His slave. If you do not, then you are Satan's slave. He was denying being anyone's slave ;)

And I deny being anyone else's slave, as well. I do both good and evil, entirely of my own choosing, fully aware of the consequences of my actions, not out of fear of some spiteful deity, or from compulsion from some malign one.

Slavery is absolute lack of freedom. So we have you, advocating slavery because otherwise your god looks brutal, and we have the atheists who advocate the maximum possible ammount of freedom. I know where I stand, and it ain't in the slave quarters.



And do slaves not have some freedoms under their master? Can their master "force" them to do anything? They have incentive to, in order to avoid punishment, but they are never true slaves of their master. They can follow the will of God, or they can obey that which is contrary to that. Slavery never removes the one freedom that truly matters in life.

And I deny being anyone else's slave, as well. I do both good and evil, entirely of my own choosing, fully aware of the consequences of my actions, not out of fear of some spiteful deity, or from compulsion from some malign one.



But your actions place you in the servitude of either one or the other. You are never truly independent. You serve to further the will of one or the other.

Does the good brought by Religion outweigh the bad?

I say no. Simple as that.

What about you?

Organised religion in my opinion has always been a means of control and manipulation, but can do great things as far as giving the masses something to put faith in. The problem arises when the priest gets into bed with the president so to speak, that is a problem we here in the USA are going to learn real fast. I propose that in order to hold public office one must be an athiest.
Enough said.

My point is, DCD was claiming to be a slave to no one. If you follow God's will then you are His slave. If you do not, then you are Satan's slave. He was denying being anyone's slave ;)I consider myself a slave to no one except time, the laws of physics, and science. :p

So, you're claiming they used science to cure ailments that we can't even cure today? Wow, you have more faith than I do :D
I'm claiming they cured nothing. They only made people feel a little better through the placebo effect and used it as evidence that they had godly powers in order to squeeze money and power out of the rubes.

So, you're claiming they used science to cure ailments that we can't even cure today? Wow, you have more faith than I do :D

pst, wanna here a secret?
I dont think he believs they did those things

My point is, DCD was claiming to be a slave to no one. If you follow God's will then you are His slave. If you do not, then you are Satan's slave. He was denying being anyone's slave ;)
Bullshit. Neither god nor satan exist and I make decisions for myself.

[off-topic] Why haven't you responded to any of my posts yet?

[on-topic] The demons, once again, are metaphors for various forms of dementia that often accompanied the plague. And all of the "fatal" diseases of that time are today curable. Nowadays, of course, we have things like AIDS, which is obviously a plague sent by God to punish us for our arrogance. ;)


But paralysis, blindness, palsy, etc. were then and still are incurable.

But your actions place you in the servitude of either one or the other. You are never truly independent. You serve to further the will of one or the other.Suppose you do both good and evil. As 99.999999999999% of the human population do. Whose slave are you then? Mine? ;)

Bullshit. Neither god nor satan exist and I make decisions for myself.



Keep saying that, you'll see the truth in the afterlife :D

And do slaves not have some freedoms under their master? Can their master "force" them to do anything? They have incentive to, in order to avoid punishment, but they are never true slaves of their master. They can follow the will of God, or they can obey that which is contrary to that. Slavery never removes the one freedom that truly matters in life.
Slaves have no freedom under their master.

Slave: I feel like taking the day off. It's the sabbath.
Master: Get to work or I'll whip the hell out of you
Slave: Keep your whip off my body
Master: *whips the hell out of the slave* now get to work or I'll kill you.

The point is that religion contributes little or nothing positive but it's just another excuse for divisions and warfare.

and if you caught my other post, those who see no good from religion CHOOSE to see no good. Religion is responsible for many of mans greatest achievements, in art, architechure, culture, literature, and humanity. You underestimate the power of faith as it inspires hope in those otherwise hopeless.. without the idea that those impoverished masses have something better waiting for them after life.

Religion has many benifits, more then people care to admit... I belive clearly more then any faults, because those faults which lead to murder would occur regardless of if religion existed or not

But paralysis, blindness, palsy, etc. were then and still are incurable.It says among other things that Jesus made the lame walk and opened the eyes of the blind. All this could be metaphorical, after all. And anyway....laser vision surgery? Artificial body parts? Brain transplants? It's not 50 BC anymore, you know. ;)

But paralysis, blindness, palsy, etc. were then and still are incurable.
And the disciples didn't cure them either. It's just hype to get more followers, more money, and more power.

Suppose you do both good and evil. As 99.999999999999% of the human population do. Whose slave are you then? Mine? ;)

Damn it, man, I was just typing out an identical question.

Keep saying that, you'll see the truth in the afterlife :D
No, there is no afterlife, so I'll see nothing.

You're the one who beleives that there is an afterlife. Show me some evidence.

Keep saying that, you'll see the truth in the afterlife :DWhat if you don't believe in an afterlife? :D

Suppose you do both good and evil. As 99.999999999999% of the human population do. Whose slave are you then? Mine? ;)



Satan's, God requires purity, whereas Satan requires just the slightest imperfection. But through Christ's sacrifice, it would be impossible to serve God :D

What if you don't believe in an afterlife? :D



Then we'll just have to see when we die :)

and if you caught my other post, those who see no good from religion CHOOSE to see no good. Religion is responsible for many of mans greatest achievements, in art, architechure, culture, literature, and humanity. You underestimate the power of faith as it inspires hope in those otherwise hopeless.. without the idea that those impoverished masses have something better waiting for them after life.

Religion has many benifits, more then people care to admit... I belive clearly more then any faults, because those faults which lead to murder would occur regardless of if religion existed or not
You're wrong. The benefits of religion that you listed could come from less divisive and more beneficial sources like a beleif in human rights, in justice, and in rule of law. Look at the monuments great democracies have built. Look at the literature they've inspired. Plus the give other benefits.

No, there is no afterlife, so I'll see nothing.

You're the one who beleives that there is an afterlife. Show me some evidence.



Show me some evidence of no afterlife. There is evidence of a metaphysical dimension where the spirit would be located, but that's about all I can give you ;)

You're wrong. The benefits of religion that you listed could come from less divisive and more beneficial sources like a beleif in human rights, in justice, and in rule of law. Look at the monuments great democracies have built. Look at the literature they've inspired. Plus the give other benefits.



But the fact is, they didn't. We could debate the possibilities all night, but what we're dealing with now is what did happen.

Damn it, man, I was just typing out an identical question.Great minds think alike, eh? :)

Satan's, God requires purity, whereas Satan requires just the slightest imperfection. But through Christ's sacrifice, it would be impossible to serve God :D That means no-one will ever reach God? Because there is no-one who has done absolute good. No-one. Not even your precious Christ. :rolleyes:

Great minds think alike, eh? :)

That means no-one will ever reach God? Because there is no-one who has done absolute good. No-one. Not even your precious Christ. :rolleyes:


Actually, Christ is the One who lived a life of perfection. He was the perfect atonement for ours sins. Through Him, our sins can be forgiven and, through Him, we can attain salvation.

Show me some evidence of no afterlife. There is evidence of a metaphysical dimension where the spirit would be located, but that's about all I can give you ;)
You're making a positive claim. "there is an afterlife."

I'm making a negative claim. "there is no afterlife."

Since it's impossible to prove a negative, the burden of proof rests on you.

Oh, and that stuff about "a metaphysical dimension where the spirit would be located" requires something to back it up before I'll buy it. Where's the evidence for that?

Then we'll just have to see when we die :)And if there isn't an afterlife? We can't take what you say as gospel, you know. (No pun intended.) ;)

Great minds think alike, eh? :)

Indeed.

That means no-one will ever reach God? Because there is no-one who has done absolute good. No-one. Not even your precious Christ. :rolleyes:

Well, not the purity and perfection that God is supposed to have. Consider the fact that it's said if God were to speak to a mortal, they'd die, and that if a mortal saw the face of God..They'd die.

You've a TG, btw, Czardas.

But the fact is, they didn't. We could debate the possibilities all night, but what we're dealing with now is what did happen.
Actually they do. Great art, literature and architecture all come from secular as well as religious sources. Great democracies build monuments to themselves and their citizens create art to celebrate their societies.

You're wrong. The benefits of religion that you listed could come from less divisive and more beneficial sources like a beleif in human rights, in justice, and in rule of law. Look at the monuments great democracies have built. Look at the literature they've inspired. Plus the give other benefits.

modern law is based on the ideas founded by people who were themselves greatly religious, thus influenced by religion.. You need look no further then Supreme Court to see the eternal effect religion has had on our society. Im not speaking just of christianity either, but every religion, religion in general has crafted most rule of law world wide.

and while those same benifits COULD come from less divisive sources, the fact remains many of them did not. At the very least you must concede then that religions benifits and costs negate one another and reach equilibrium as all the costs produced by religion as well can be produced by those so called less divisive sources... (as democracy). This is no more evident then France, Germany, and now Iraq. Democracy with the exception of England has always been born from violence.

You're making a positive claim. "there is an afterlife."

I'm making a negative claim. "there is no afterlife."

Since it's impossible to prove a negative, the burden of proof rests on you.

Oh, and that stuff about "a metaphysical dimension where the spirit would be located" requires something to back it up before I'll buy it. Where's the evidence for that?



Actually, you're claim would be free from needing the burden of proof if you simply said "I don't know whether or not their is an afterlife". But you stated an absolute like I, therefore you also need to provide proof. As for the metaphysical stuff, read our thread on gap theory since I'm not explaining it again :p With that, I'm going to log off for a few hours while you read the thread, since I need a break.

Actually, Christ is the One who lived a life of perfection. He was the perfect atonement for ours sins. Through Him, our sins can be forgiven and, through Him, we can attain salvation.How? He's dead. He was the 0.0000000001% who actually got into heaven. How do we attain "salvation" through him—by living his life to the letter, nailing ourselves to a cross at the end, etc.? And even then we'd be doing it with a selfish motive (to get into heaven). No—the only way to lead a truly model life would be to live blamelessly (impossible), then die knowing that there is no afterlife and all you have been doing is just to help the people on this earth who will come after you. :D

Actually they do. Great art, literature and architecture all come from secular as well as religious sources. Great democracies build monuments to themselves and their citizens create art to celebrate their societies.



One more statement before I go: I was referring to the religious contributions, not all contributions. You're stating that they could have been secular had there been no religion, I'm saying that it's irrelevant because, in reality, there was religion.

You've a TG, btw, Czardas.I've noticed. Responded.

You are not greater than me, rather you are just as wretched as I am. You are either a slave to God/good or a slave to Satan/evil. There is no neutrality here. You are not free, you are just deluding yourself into thinking so. We are all slaves in one sense and have no freedom. When you learn that there is no true freedom, then say that.

How can one be slaves to a creature one doesn't belive exists?

I've noticed. Responded.

Yay!

How can one be slaves to a creature one doesn't belive exists?

Apparently, we are, regarldess of whether or not we believe.

One more statement before I go: I was referring to the religious contributions, not all contributions. You're stating that they could have been secular had there been no religion, I'm saying that it's irrelevant because, in reality, there was religion.Religion gave us the Last Supper and the Holocaust, the Hagia Sophia and the Crusades. Like everything else, it has both a good and a bad side. As I said earlier.

That's why the very notion of Satan is un-Christian. He is all evil. That is impossible. Likewise an all-good God is also impossible, considering that every single thing created has both a good and a bad side to it. Perhaps we can say, if everything has both good and bad in it, is everything evil? According to you, it is.

Religion gave us the Last Supper and the Holocaust, the Hagia Sophia and the Crusades. Like everything else, it has both a good and a bad side. As I said earlier.

That's why the very notion of Satan is un-Christian. He is all evil. That is impossible. Likewise an all-good God is also impossible, considering that every single thing created has both a good and a bad side to it. Perhaps we can say, if everything has both good and bad in it, is everything evil? According to you, it is.

You left out Jesus Christ, Superstar *Shudders*

Religion gave us the Last Supper and the Holocaust, the Hagia Sophia and the Crusades. Like everything else, it has both a good and a bad side. As I said earlier.

That's why the very notion of Satan is un-Christian. He is all evil. That is impossible. Likewise an all-good God is also impossible, considering that every single thing created has both a good and a bad side to it. Perhaps we can say, if everything has both good and bad in it, is everything evil? According to you, it is.

the Holocaust had less to do with religion and more to do with nationality... the idea of a pure race vs a dirty one. Hitler didn't eradicate jews "in the name of god" but for the "master race". Just thought id reclarify that

Apparently, we are, regarldess of whether or not we believe.Yeah...whoever said her version of religion is the "true" one as opposed to everyone else's?

Religion is such a broad and encompassing subject that's it's impossible, at least for me, to decide whether or not its bad aspects outweigh its good ones, or vice versa. For some, the mindset, sense of community, and acts of other people of faith have brought nothing but peace and happiness, and even saved their lives. For others, however, it's done just the opposite. If you're to look at the concept of religious faith as the original poster has attempted to, it's the same situation as deciding whether or not cars are generally better or worse for society; they cause many deaths and injuries every second, as well as polluting the enviornment and making us all a whole lot poorer. On the other hand, is there a more fast and effective system of transportation available for the average citizen? Whatever your view point, cars and automobiles, as well as religions, are going to remain in existence, because a large amount of people simply need and depend on having them in their lives.

the Holocaust had less to do with religion and more to do with nationality... the idea of a pure race vs a dirty one. Hitler didn't eradicate jews "in the name of god" but for the "master race". Just thought id reclarify thatYeah, whatever.

Yeah...whoever said her version of religion is the "true" one as opposed to everyone else's?

A book. Which is what a lot of the other religions have. Therefore, we must eliminate all books. Or sit them all down in a Death Cage, and have them fight it out. My money's on the Bhagdva Ghita (sp?).

Actually, you're claim would be free from needing the burden of proof if you simply said "I don't know whether or not their is an afterlife". But you stated an absolute like I, therefore you also need to provide proof. As for the metaphysical stuff, read our thread on gap theory since I'm not explaining it again :p With that, I'm going to log off for a few hours while you read the thread, since I need a break.
My statement that there is no afterlife, in the absence of evidence, requires a little faith.

Your statement that there is an afterlife, in the absence of evidence, requires alot of faith.

Guess which one I'm more comfortable with?

A book. Which is what a lot of the other religions have. Therefore, we must eliminate all books. Or sit them all down in a Death Cage, and have them fight it out. My money's on the Bhagdva Ghita (sp?).Bhagavad Gita, fyi.

Yeah, although the Holy Book of Czardas has a fighting chance at it... ;)

modern law is based on the ideas founded by people who were themselves greatly religious, thus influenced by religion.. You need look no further then Supreme Court to see the eternal effect religion has had on our society. Im not speaking just of christianity either, but every religion, religion in general has crafted most rule of law world wide.

and while those same benifits COULD come from less divisive sources, the fact remains many of them did not. At the very least you must concede then that religions benifits and costs negate one another and reach equilibrium as all the costs produced by religion as well can be produced by those so called less divisive sources... (as democracy). This is no more evident then France, Germany, and now Iraq. Democracy with the exception of England has always been born from violence.


I will also add to this, that it is within humans perpencity to persue power that they corrupt all they touch, even the purest of ideals such as religion.
The fact remains that even if religion had never existed, each of the horrors and acheivements brought by religion would still be attained say one.

This one is the power of faith which I alluded to before. Without religion, what gives the impoverished hope ? The elements of war, violence, and greed would all still exist in the world without religion... and history has shown us, those without hope are often driven to violence themselves. While it is true some of these actually use religion as a conduit for which to focus their hopelessness and turn to violence, there are many more who use religion as comfort. Without it... I shudder to think where these people would be.

I will also add to this, that it is within humans perpencity to persue power that they corrupt all they touch, even the purest of ideals such as religion.
The fact remains that even if religion had never existed, each of the horrors and acheivements brought by religion would still be attained say one.

This one is the power of faith which I alluded to before. Without religion, what gives the impoverished hope ? The elements of war, violence, and greed would all still exist in the world without religion... and history has shown us, those without hope are often driven to violence themselves. While it is true some of these actually use religion as a conduit for which to focus their hopelessness and turn to violence, there are many more who use religion as comfort. Without it... I shudder to think where these people would be.Well, the primary purpose of religion was always comfort.

In addition to my first post, I'd also like to point out that religious faiths are just one of many tools utilized by corrupt people to facillitate terrible acts of oppression and violence. There are many other practices such as religion that have been used as outlets for violent behavior and allowed insecure, savage people to act out brutal acts on others in the name of "good." Religion has been the most noticeable outlet, yes, but the same sort of injustice brought on by it would have existed anyway -- it just would have been justified by a different means.

Bhagavad Gita, fyi.

Yeah, although the Holy Book of Czardas has a fighting chance at it... ;)

lol, I give myself points for being a couple letters off.

You have no book. Admit it, you're too lazy to write one.

Frankly, I think it's nonsense to claim your religion is the one true one. It doesn't work (obviously), and just makes you look insecure.

lol, I give myself points for being a couple letters off.

You have no book. Admit it, you're too lazy to write one.

Frankly, I think it's nonsense to claim your religion is the one true one. It doesn't work (obviously), and just makes you look insecure.I wrote a book, but it wasn't philosophy...it was science fiction. :p

And I don't claim my religion is the only true one. However, it is the only one where you get the added benefit of free jelly beans at every prayer meeting. :D

Well, the primary purpose of religion was always comfort.

thats why religions benifits will always outweight the negatives

I wrote a book, but it wasn't philosophy...it was science fiction. :p My comment still stands. :p

And I don't claim my religion is the only true one. However, it is the only one where you get the added benefit of free jelly beans at every prayer meeting. :D
I almost considered converting for that. Almost.

?

If "God" is perfect, then there is no need to doubt him? Correct?

Jesus believes completely and totally in God, right?




Why, on the cross, did Jesus cry out "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" Why, at the end, did he suddenly doubt if he completely and utterly had faith in God?

He was forsaken by God because He was beering the sins of the whole world so God turned his back on him. This must have caused him a lot of greif, being that he was God, incarnate.

This has got to be the ultimate (and most well-fed) troll.

"Is religion good or bad?". What a great question. 'Cause that one's going to be really simple to answer, has never been asked before, and is going to result in calm, measured and constructive discussion... Yeah. Nice one.

He was forsaken by God because He was beering the sins of the whole world so God turned his back on him. This must have caused him a lot of greif, being that he was God, incarnate.

Well, wouldn't that be some kind of major paradox? I mean, forsaking himself? Truly? I mean, I'm a Pagan, so I don't believe Jesus was "the" one and only son of God, or God Incarnate either, and Messiah simply means "annointed one" and there have been many of those. Cyrus the Persion was the Messiah for the Jews because he allowed them to leave Babylon, so Messiah isn't really that important, I think.. I do acknowledge that he may have...most probably existed, even though there is no proof. From what I read of his teachings, he was for abolishing the priesthood altogether and never wanted his teachings to become a religion.

I'll be quite honest with everyone...the fundementalist types that go on preaching how you have to accept Jesus and all that jazz really just strike me as mindless sheep, and well....last time I checked, I wasn't covered with fluffy wool.

He was forsaken by God because He was beering the sins of the whole world so God turned his back on him. This must have caused him a lot of greif, being that he was God, incarnate.That makes no sense.

That makes no sense.

My interpretation of what 'e said: God gave up on his son, 'cause his son took in all the world's sin, and became evil.

So..yeah. Wtf. I'm pretty sure a supposedly benevolent God wouldn't do that.

This has got to be the ultimate (and most well-fed) troll.

"Is religion good or bad?". What a great question. 'Cause that one's going to be really simple to answer, has never been asked before, and is going to result in calm, measured and constructive discussion... Yeah. Nice one.I prefer sarcasm that is not quite so biting. Hey, we've already spent 4 hours debating this. Don't rub it in. ;)

My interpretation of what 'e said: God gave up on his son, 'cause his son took in all the world's sin, and became evil.

So..yeah. Wtf. I'm pretty sure a supposedly benevolent God wouldn't do that.Yeah, especially the part about Jesus becoming evil...nowhere does it say that. It goes against all Christian beliefs. :p

Approaching 1,000 now, are you?

Christianity is a rip off of a bunch of old stories all the way back to Sumer. Jesus was completely human, his mom got knocked up by a Roman soldier or some crap, Josef took her in, and then had other kids by Mary. So Jesus had siblings, had relations with hot Mary Magdelene, and wasn't God.

Yeah, especially the part about Jesus becoming evil...nowhere does it say that. It goes against all Christian beliefs. :p

Approaching 1,000 now, are you?

Also, I don't think that you'd put your demigod son through hell on earth and try him constantly, and then abandon him at the moment he was created for.

And I just might be doing that. Amazing, ne?

Christianity is a rip off of a bunch of old stories all the way back to Sumer. Jesus was completely human, his mom got knocked up by a Roman soldier or some crap, Josef took her in, and then had other kids by Mary. So Jesus had siblings, had relations with hot Mary Magdelene, and wasn't God.

I believe that if he existed, that's what happened. However, those who agree with that are in the minority.

Also, I don't think that you'd put your demigod son through hell on earth and try him constantly, and then abandon him at the moment he was created for.I might, only b/c I'm evil.
Oh wait, that "you" didn't refer to me. Or did it?.. :confused:


You have a TG btw.

I might, only b/c I'm evil.
Oh wait, that "you" didn't refer to me. Or did it?.. :confused:


You have a TG btw.

lol, no, it didn't refer to you, as you're neither benevolent, or a deity. :p

Read and responded.

..Where's everyone else to debate this...? It's so quiet. ..Suspiciously quiet.

lol, no, it didn't refer to you, as you're neither benevolent, or a deity. :p

Read and responded.

..Where's everyone else to debate this...? It's so quiet. ..Suspiciously quiet.Neo-R left, so everyone else got sick of it with no real opposition. :rolleyes:

Sad how one person can dominate a debate.

Also, I don't think that you'd put your demigod son through hell on earth and try him constantly, and then abandon him at the moment he was created for.



Try picturing God as a vengeful, moody prankster with all the power to mess with people's heads. Now pretend he does not care about anyone or anything but what he wants when he wants it. Just for fun. :p

If a psychiatrist analyzed God, what kind of medication do you think they'd give him?

Neo-R left, so everyone else got sick of it with no real opposition. :rolleyes:

Sad how one person can dominate a debate.

True.

Try picturing God as a vengeful, moody prankster with all the power to mess with people's heads. Now pretend he does not care about anyone or anything but what he wants when he wants it. Just for fun. :p

If a psychiatrist analyzed God, what kind of medication do you think they'd give him?

Sounds like me, with a bunch of powers. I'd say Prozac, and Adderall, for starters. Maybe something for schitzophrenia too.

Edit: Sweet. I'm a pimp. *breaks out my yellow pimp suit and matching cane*

Yikes, God on prozac? That would push the armageddon forward by a few centuries! LOL

Sounds like me, with a bunch of powers. I'd say Prozac, and Adderall, for starters. Maybe something for schitzophrenia too.Lol, you take all those? Not surprised. :p

Edit: Sweet. I'm a pimp. *breaks out my yellow pimp suit and matching cane*Lmao @ the Jolt titles

Try picturing God as a vengeful, moody prankster with all the power to mess with people's heads. Now pretend he does not care about anyone or anything but what he wants when he wants it. Just for fun. :p

If a psychiatrist analyzed God, what kind of medication do you think they'd give him?

Whatever one it tells them to. Something tells me the make me a sandwhich joke becomes literal otherwise....

Lol, you take all those? Not surprised. :p

Lmao @ the Jolt titles

lol, no, I don't. But I figure God would. Would you really want to follow a deity who would be described as antisocial, narcissitic, nihilistic, and more, if they were mortal?

I know, isn't it awesome? *does the White Man Dance*

lol, no, I don't. But I figure God would. Would you really want to follow a deity who would be described as antisocial, narcissitic, nihilistic, and more, if they were mortal?Yeah.... me. :)


I know, isn't it awesome? *does the White Man Dance*And it gets better! **SPOILER ALERT** Next there's "ZX81 H4x0r0r", "CyberSheep Farmer", "CyberFruit Merchant", "Aimbot"...then you get to "Sp@mQueen Advisor" like me, "Possible SOF spammer", "AdminBots Boyfriend", "Cabbage Patch Girl", and my personal favorite, "Galaxian Warrior". I mean, what do they all mean? LOL!

:headbang: Thinking in the old dichotomy that religion is bad or good, does not in any way add any value...all things have a bad or good aspect, technology, democracy, progress, fashion, etc...the key i think is to ask...for what reason does religion exist? or what value do people find in religion as to its continued existence? it is after all only though agreement that people are able to congregate into the large national organisations (called governments) that we are able to get along...what do people get from religion, that science, government, democracy, progress, the ideals of individualism, that they cannot get anywhere else....
love to hear thoughts...
G from Ngati Porou. Aotearoa!

:headbang: Thinking in the old dichotomy that religion is bad or good, does not in any way add any value...all things have a bad or good aspect, technology, democracy, progress, fashion, etc...I've said that already a few times.

the key i think is to ask...for what reason does religion exist? or what value do people find in religion as to its continued existence?From religion they get security, a feeling that if something goes wrong, God will protect them — faith, that the world isn't so bad really if someone died for our sins — and hope, that death isn't just oblivion. Since these things affect them immediately, they are more important than the more distant concepts of genocide, holy war, murder in the name of God, etc. which do not affect them directly.

I've said that already a few times.

From religion they get security, a feeling that if something goes wrong, God will protect them — faith, that the world isn't so bad really if someone died for our sins — and hope, that death isn't just oblivion. Since these things affect them immediately, they are more important than the more distant concepts of genocide, holy war, murder in the name of God, etc. which do not affect them directly.

As I've said, I've got my own religion (am an Eccentric Pagan). I don't rely on any of the deities I follow for protection. I will ask for guidance, for them to help me open a path within myself to find my own inner strength, but really, it boils down to me, ultimately helping myself. I don't derive any significant sense of comfort or feeling of safety from this. More..enlightenment.

The answer should be yes, but due to the crazed zealots and fanatics *cough-evangelists* the answer is No. religion is bad in modern society.

I disagree, most Traditional Christians (Eastern orthodox or Catholic) View the world as screwed up because of original sin. IF one suffers it is because of original sin, and not neccecerily bad since Christ suffered and we can offer our suffering up to God. Whats wrong with hope? is oblivion really that much more enduring to the well being of a person than a belief in heaven.

I think religion and spiritually are great--when genuinely practiced. I see religion as a moral code both individually and socially. I accept and trust the word and traditions of Christ, but realize full well that there are cultural biases in the Bible and Catholic tradition. I believe in God, the Holy Trinity even transubstantiation for JC's sake. As far as the evils of organized religions, the secular powers that be use religion as an excuse for war. "Holy Wars" are never legitimate. I'll use Rasputin instead of current troubles with fundamentalist muslims as an example of an opportunist who evoked religion to get himself power. Unfortunately, people need to fill personal needs, an emtiness what have you, with something or someone and are blinded to reason. I'm an administrator at a Catholic school, volunteer with Meals on Wheels weekly, love my friends and family, don't judge or loathe others. I just do my best, trust God and love that I have free will. Great religious figures, whether Christian or not, Mother Theresa, Ghandi, Martin Luther King, etc did great things in God's name and others like them will continue to do great things. Evil exists, it's our duty to counter it. Fundamentalists are daft. Jesus Christ Himself wasn't even a fundamentalist.

Remember, we sinners deserve no mercy. The very fact that God allowed them the chance to turn from their ways before he destroyed them was intrisically merciful. Get past your own blind view of our righteousness and realize that we have none. We all are deserving of hellfire for our transgressions.

The definition of mercy is kindness when it is not deserved. By definition, it is impossible to not deserve mercy.