Do we prevent somebody being hurt by superstition or faith by rejecting and challenging those things? 

Is it mistaken to support organised religion in membership or donations?

If people do good because they are human, not because God prompts them then is it right to risk giving God any credit when they alone own their good?

 


WAS JESUS TOO ACCEPTING OF HONOUR KILLING?  WHY DID HE NOT TEAR THE LAWS OUT OF HIS BIBLE AND BURN THEM?

In the Old Testament, we read how God laid down that certain sinners such as homosexuals were to be stoned to death. Jesus if he is this God, as he supposedly claimed to be, is responsible. Christians who say that God had no choice but to command the executions cannot tell us why he had no choice. They only guess that. Also, even if he had no choice did it really have to be done by stoning? That was ultra-cruel. It is a lie too that the rules were civil rules. They were religious rules and to be enforced by religion. If the laws were really civil rules they would be more detailed and read like legislation. And Israel was a wandering tribe not a state at the time the rules were given.
 
John Loftus writes in The Case Against Miracles, "Joseph's dream is used in Gospel of Matthew's narrative to help explain why Mary was not put to death for dishonouring him because of adultery."  The story says that Joseph decided she deserved to be stoned to death but decided to divorce her quietly so that the authorities would not kill her.  It calls him a righteous man agreeing that he had a dilemma and either option was okay.  Loftus says that one option was honour killing.  "Honour killings were justified in both the Old and New Testaments.  Jesus even agreed with the Mosaic Law (Exodus 21:17; Leviticus 20:9) against his opponents on behalf of honour killings of children who dishonoured their parents (Mark 7:8-13).  The tale of the woman caught in adultery, where Jesus exposes the hypocrisy of her accusers, doesn't change what Jesus thinks of the law either (John 8; Matthew 5:18."  Clearly the point Jesus made in this case was that hypocrisy was going to be the subject not the woman's capital crime of adultery.  The text cannot be used against capital punishment.  It is not about that.  It is about the hypocrites not the woman.


It is odd that making a saint of Jack the Ripper is unthinkable for Christians when they make saints of Moses who was a mass-murderer and of St Paul. And they make a God of the man that condoned murders that surpassed anything the Ripper ever did.