07 Oct 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobieNothing really to do with an atheist state. So then what would you do if Jehovah asked you to kill or slay your enemies or His enemies?
i reconcile it because i am a human being with my own conscience, i hope that this is now clear, what it has to do with the idea of an atheist state i do not know.
Manny
07 Oct 10
Originally posted by menace71But he has not nor ever will. If he did i would have a crisis of conscience, for i do not like violence. Indeed i am not afraid to admit it, even though i understand and can even justify the reasons for it, that the wars of the Israelites leave me more than a little disconcerted.
Nothing really to do with an atheist state. So then what would you do if Jehovah asked you to kill or slay your enemies or His enemies?
Manny
07 Oct 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYeah, but hypothetically?
But he has not nor ever will. If he did i would have a crisis of conscience, for i do not like violence. Indeed i am not afraid to admit it, even though i understand and can even justify the reasons for it, that the wars of the Israelites leave me more than a little disconcerted.
Say in a parralel universe where the JWs had to fight or be destroyed, for example...
08 Oct 10
Enforcing an atheist state is an absurd idea. The important point is that religion should not interfere with policy ie. there should be a chinese wall between religion and politics. Beyond that, if people are stupid enough or sufficiently unquestioning to believe in religion, whichever it may be, then let them.
08 Oct 10
1 edit
Originally posted by karoly aczelits a hypothetical scenario and belongs in the realms of fiction, sowwy no comment until parallel universes are proven to exist.
If I were a lesser man I would say you were avoiding the question.
Clearly you are being REAL funny and need not answer the question based on that basis.
08 Oct 10
1 edit
Originally posted by scrumpymanjacki suggest, that you provide a basis for why adherence to a religious faith should be termed 'stupid', for as far as i can discern, no one has provided any reason as to why an atheistic approach should be preferred, thus making it equally as 'stupid', if i may borrow your term. I agree Albert King is a type of god, but not actually God himself.
Enforcing an atheist state is an absurd idea. The important point is that religion should not interfere with policy ie. there should be a chinese wall between religion and politics. Beyond that, if people are stupid enough or sufficiently unquestioning to believe in religion, whichever it may be, then let them.