Job 5-7

[wolfpurplemoon]

Job is now a very broken man, despite his friends continuing to praise God in his presence.

Job says that no man shall come up from his grave once buried there, which to me means that there is no afterlife.

Comments

[jaronsjournal.livejournal.com]

There is nothing unhealthy about Christianity of the sort that is based on the Bible. It teaches men to love each other, to treat their wives and children with love, and to care about the truth. It does not make men horrible people.

[voodooskeleton.livejournal.com]

Amazingly, atheists do not need this book to love each other. Fancy that.
And regardless of what you think your book teaches, christianity has manufactured way more closed minded cold-hearted people than it has people full of love. You are worshipping Yahweh, who is a war god. Not a god of love.

[jaronsjournal.livejournal.com]

In my own life, the people I knew who were the most loving were people who believed the Bible and actually obeyed it. The others were the kind who acted loving when they felt like it, and acted treacherously when they decided they were tired of loving. All I can do is realte my own experiences.

Secondly, there are plenty of people who call themselves Christians who don't really follow the Bible. The Catholic Church of the middle ages was not based totally on the Bible, so I don't think you can blame some of their unfortunate acts on real Christianity. To be called Christian, it has to be in line with what Christ and his apostles taught in the New Testament.

Yahweh can go to war when he needs to, but He never does that before giving the human a fair chance. And he WANTS you be saved.

[jaronsjournal.livejournal.com]

By the way, heres the links to the story about the woman I mention who gave her life so her unborn baby could live...

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,325458,00.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-510308/Mother-sacrificed-life-refusing-cancer-treatment-premature-baby-live.html

[samus-aran.livejournal.com]

what's your point in sharing this? That all women should be willing to happily give up their own lives to purchase a 50% chance of survival for their fetus?

I am not one to fault a woman for her reproductive choices but let's look at the situation here; 2 children are now without a parent, and their father has lost his wife. If what she wanted most occurs, it will be 3 children without their mom, and him without her help raising them. She was willing to put them through all of this in exchange for the 50/50 gamble that the poor fetus could actually survive without her (at 14 weeks premature) and spend his first few months in an incubator and being at high risk for brain damage and other issues associated with early birth. My heart goes out to the family and I'm sure the intentions were all very good, but ... well, I am afraid that I don't agree that what she did was especially noble or good... but it was her choice, and I do support her right to make it.

[jaronsjournal.livejournal.com]

I'm sure the man could re-marry, or do whatever he needed to do for his children to have a mother figure. I find it odd that atheists would find 2 parent families important, all of a sudden, in this particular situation. Often they make it seem like the idea that having a father and a mother is an old, outdated idea whose time has passed.

Second, I disagree with the notion the brain damaged babies should just be done away with as if it's our duty to make sure no brain damaged babies get to experience life. This is example of one of my highest suspicions about atheism, that those who are weak will be discarded at the convenience of one who is stronger.

I think most people who are offended by this article are simply put to shame by the fact that she gave up her very life willingly, while many have abortions when it's not their lives, but simple irresponsible convenience they want.

[maru-mari.livejournal.com]

Parenting is hard to do alone. The more adults involved in parenting, the better off the child. The sex of the adults involved doesn't matter (according to controlled studies), but this family was broken by her decision in that the parent those existing children came to know was taken from them at an early age.

The christian ideology that women are just birthcaves, sex-slaves, submissive housewives and otherwise disposable is deplorable. I hope you know it is this view that you are promoting here. I feel sorry for any woman you may end up partnered to. How sad for her to be worth less to you than the potential-child within her (and the nothing it is without her).

[jaronsjournal.livejournal.com]

The christian ideology that women are just birthcaves, sex-slaves, submissive housewives and otherwise disposable is deplorable. I hope you know it is this view that you are promoting here.

What you describe is not the Christian ideology. The New Testament tells husbands to love their wives, and to be faithful to them. My grandfather was a Christian, and treated his wife with utmost respect. He never cursed at her, never beat her, and even sided with her in family disputes where frankly I thought she was wrong.

On the other hand, some non-Christian people I have known would probably say the same stuff you said above, pretending to care about women, yet they yell and curse at their wives, and dump them for prettier models when they decide they want to. If they criticise the Bible, it's not because they truly care about women.

(By the way, I am not saying that YOU are only pretending to care about women. I'm sure you do care. But many indeed only pretend. And your ideas about Chistian ideology are just plain wrong.)

[voodooskeleton.livejournal.com]

Abuse isn't exclusively cursing and beating and siding with her. You can ask my christian mother who almost killed herself because of my christian father's emotional abuse that in no way involves cursing or beating or siding with her, and she refuses to leave him because the bible tells her not to. You don't have to be a wife-beater to promote the view that you are promoting, which is the view maru_mari described. Amazingly, I've seen more abusive husbands in christian relationships than I have in non-christian relationships. How many non-christians do you know?

[voodooskeleton.livejournal.com]

Also the old testament does speak about beating your wife and children, and I've already mentioned what the new testament says about following the old testament.

[voodooskeleton.livejournal.com]

You have to reply to me if you want me to see the things you post, otherwise I don't get e-mail notifications for them. Grandma can't see you when you wave into the phone, sweety!

And do you really think that Faux News and the Daily Fail are good, unbiased sources of information? Because if you do, you are severely deluded.

[voodooskeleton.livejournal.com]

I can't remember where I've read this, so it's just my word against yours, but its been statistically proven that the majority of people who are in north american prisons claim to have a belief in god. It's also been statistically proven that the majority of people in jail have lower IQs than the general population, but I digress.
god does not want me to be saved because god does not exist.
Lets say for the sake of argument that he does exist though. god is omnipotent and omniscient. Since we are assuming god is real in this conversation, let us further assume that hell is real, and is more-or-less as it is believed to exist by the majority of contemporary christians: a terrible place of eternal torment, and one which, in order to avoid it, one needs to be a christian and undergo certain practices and such (which vary widely from one denomination to another, and so we’ll leave that open within this dialogue). Moreover, god is generally considered "good", in a fairly conventional way; well-intentioned and benevolent. He is believed, by most christians, to basically want people not to go to hell, but allows them the freedom to choose their own choices in life, which can lead them wherever it will. Assuming all of this, god knows me better than I know myself, and knows what sorts of situations I would need to be exposed to in order that I might be able to believe that he exists. Furthermore, given his unlimited power and knowledge, he knows a presumably infinite number of scenarios in which I would come to believe in him. Let us call this set of scenarios “Set A”. Any and all scenarios in which I would not ultimately come to believe in him, become a christian and thus avoid hell can therefore be called “Set B.” So far, in my life, I have only been exposed to scenarios from Set B. A common christian line of thinking on this topic might produce the idea that I have in fact been exposed to many situations which MIGHT have convinced me, but I have so far chosen not to be convinced (“free will”). I would argue, however, that given god’s precise and unwaveringly-correct knowledge, however, he would know that any such situation ultimately would not convince me, which places them firmly in Set B. God, in this scenario, could at any point in my life up to this point, have exposed me to any of the scenarios in Set A. He has not done so, however, in that I have yet to be persuaded. he furthermore knows (again, with absolute certainty and clarity) that everything I’ve been exposed to thus far exists within Set B. He has not allowed any of the scenarios in Set A to have taken place, and taken no action to cause any of them to take place. Given this, it must be assumed that he either does not wish for me to believe in him, or is merely indifferent. If i were to die tomorrow, never having been exposed to any of the scenarios in Set A, I would – by our earlier assumptions – go to hell and be punished forever for not believing and not becoming a christian (whatever that may entail). I would in short be subjected to eternal and inescapable torture for not having been exposed to any of the events in Set A. An omniscient god would know that one of the events in Set A needs to take place in order for this to be avoided. If such a god decides that my lifetime should pass without any of the events in Set A to take place, he is deciding that I should go to hell, as surely as a man who sees a child wandering blindly into traffic and chooses not to stop that child is deciding that that child should die.

[voodooskeleton.livejournal.com]

Certainly, there is the matter of free will; allowing that child to make the uninformed decision which would lead to its own death, but where is the morality in deciding that not warning that child in a way it would understand and be able to act upon is the right thing to do? Where, more to the point, is the morality in deciding that I should go on to hell without receiving a warning in a way that I would find persuasive, when delivering that warning in a way that I would find persuasive is well within the knowledge and power of god? Now, in this scenario, every individual person has their own personal Set A and Set B. I would make the case that in this scenario, moreover, every single person who has ever died without becoming a christian has gone their lives without any of the events in their own personal Set A’s taking place. In each of their cases, god knew what would persuade them and took no steps to allow any of those persuasive events to take place. To that extent, he decided that each and every one of them ought to go to hell, when he knew with absolute certainty and clarity what would have been required in order for that not to take place, and did not allow that thing to occur. Returning for a moment to the topic of choice and free will: even if we assume that belief is a matter of choice (which I am by no means convinced of), and that you can simply choose to believe one thing or another, this does nothing to alter this matter: an omniscient god would know in advance what I would choose in any given scenario (and never be mistaken or surprised by my choices), and so, if there are certain situations in which I would choose to believe in him, these would still fall within Set A, and the rest, naturally, within Set B. The matter of whether belief is a product of choice or not is irrelevant in this consideration, and thus the question of respecting free will and allowing people to make their own mistakes (which are also traits commonly ascribed to god) does not enter into it.
You could also argue that god has continually shown me situations from Set A, but satan has gotten in the way and scewed them to appear as situations from Set B. But is god not more powerful than the devil? If he isn’t, then there are two gods. If he is then why not win the struggle if he is all loving? Does the devil help god design humans with hate and rage in our hearts and god put in emotions like love and jealousy from his own image? We have free will but we still succumb to the devil’s will? Why not design us to be resistant to the devil’s will? god’s will is good, the devil’s will is evil. We apparently do not have our own free will, we are the puppets of two different gods with matching powers.
You could again argue that I just need to talk to god, and he will reveal himself. I have talked to god. I have prayed to god. This wasn't even after I stopped believing in god. This was at the very end of my "relationship" with god. I had major doubts and I NEEDED god to show himself in order for me to keep believing. But there was no answer.
And you only mentioned the new testament this time? What about the old testament? Jesus orders Christians to follow the Law of Moses in the Old Testament: "Do not think that I [Jesus] have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke or a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. (Matthew 5:17-18)" It is quite clear from these verses from the New Testament that Jesus peace be upon him did honor the Old Testament and did say that every single "letter" of it has to be honored, followed and fulfilled.
Its funny though, the new testament doesn't mention anything against homosexuality, yet a lot of "loving, tolerant" christians are both against homosexuality because the bible says so, but also claim to only subscribe to the new testament faith.

[jaronsjournal.livejournal.com]

The New Testament DOES mention homosexuality, several times. Here are two of those passages below:

1 Corinthians 6:9-11 "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God."

Romans 1:24-27 "For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles. Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen. Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion."

There may be more passages, but those are 2 I found.

[jaronsjournal.livejournal.com]

First, Jesus didn't do away with the OT. He was the fulfillment of the OT. Now that Jesus has fulfilled the Law, there are some laws that we no longer are required to follow, as the book of Acts says in the passage that deals with the Jerusalem council. Laws such as eating of certain foods, circumcision, etc, are not required for Gentile Christians.

Second, there is a passage in Romans that deals with what may happen to people who never heard the gospel of Jesus Christ. Romans 2:12-16 I think. Basically ,it says that people who had never heard of God still served him by their honest desire to do what was right, and by following the conscience God gave them. God does not send people to hell for unfair reasons. The thing is, I don't believe a lot people are as blind to the truth as they pretend. Surely they see the pain in the world that comes from disobeying the Bible, yet they ridicule me for pointing it out. I don't get the feeling they are truly looking for the truth when they act like they can't see what is obvious. I do believe that if one does honestly search for God, He will show himself to the person.

[voodooskeleton.livejournal.com]

Another funny thing, the bible doesn't mention when life begins. If you don't agree with abortion, then fine, don't get one, but its absolutely fucked in the head to think that a grown woman's life and choices are less worthy than that of a zygote. Abortion's are still going to occur whether you or jesus agrees with them, and whether or not they are legal. Wouldn't you rather have the practice of abortion be safe for the recepient, rather than with a rusty coathanger behind the 7/11? Abortion is a tough decision for most women, and it is completely disrespectful to undermine that decision. Abortion is not a form of birth control. Not everyone who gets an abortion is a raging slut who can't keep her legs closed, going "oops! I've gotten pregnant once again! Better schedule another appointment down at the abortion clinic!"
As much as I would like to think I'd be able to take care of a baby if I were to accidentally get knocked up while committing the dirty, immoral act of (god forbid) making love to my boyfriend, despite all precautions taken, the fact of the matter is, I make ten dollars an hour working part time at a video store, which we all know is not a stable business, and I am barely stable enough to take care of myself with that kind of income. Also, because of a pre-existing condition, I would be physically unable to work during the last two terms of my pregnancy, and would have to stop taking my meds (putting me in excruciating pain for the last 2 terms), and then I also wouldn't be able to work again at least until the child would be in school again. I know for a fact my boyfriend wouldn't be making enough to pay off his mortgage and take care of a wife and child. Is this the kind of life a child should be raised in? Or even carried to term in? I can't afford all of the healthy foods pregnancy demands of a woman, I can't even afford to take time off for most of that pregnancy, which my health demands. Is this really a good environment for a zygote? And lets say I could carry the baby to term without jeopardizing both mine and the baby's health. Sure I could give it up for adoption. But the last thing this already overpopulated world need is another person who suffers from mental illness and abandonment issues from being raised in an overpopulated orphanage. Not every child gets adopted and has a happy life, and not every child who does get adopted gets treated like a child should. I don't see you adopting any children.
Contrary to what you might believe, nobody is special. Nobody is a unique snowflake. You know what makes me wet, Jaron? To quote Tim Minchin, "I am a tiny, insignificant, ignorant lump of carbon. I have one life, and it is short and unimportant," and the world keeps on turning no matter how many people have abortions, and it doesn't hurt anyone but the woman who chooses to get one.
Hey, you know what would be great? Since you're deciding to be a "true" christian, and follow the bible's word exactly, lets just abolish all abortion clinics, round up every woman who has had sex outside of wedlock including victims of rape (since all women who commit this heinous act outside of wedlock are filthy sluts who can't control themselves and can't keep their legs shut), and stone them to death. Just like the bible tells us to do! Certainly this is what a true christian would do!

[jaronsjournal.livejournal.com]

Jesus spared a prostitute from stoning, telling to her to go and sin no more. He didn't stone her, but he did call her former lifestyle "sin." We don't stone promiscuous women today either, nor should we. We do, however tell the truth about the wrongness of the sin.

All these potential problems that you speak of, should you get pregnant, are proof that Bible is correct in forbidding premarital sex. I would suggest you don't have sex until you are married and can deal with the consequences of sex.

But, I don't believe you'd be in as dire straits as you say. If you got pregnant, you could find help in raising and caring for the baby if you really wanted. There are Christians everywhere who would be delighted to help someone like you out in such a situation. The government would even probably give you money. There is no excuse for abortion in this type of situation.

Second, this coat hanger thing is a nice scare tactic people like to use. But even using a coat hanger would be wrong choice. And whatever deaths that happened from a stupid coat hanger abortion would never be equal to the thousands that die every day by legalized abortion.

[jaronsjournal.livejournal.com]

The Bible does indicate that life begins before birth. It talks about how the baby John humped for joy in the womb when he heard Mary arriving to visit Elizabeth. There are other passages. But even scientists will tell you the fetus is indeed alive.

[voodooskeleton.livejournal.com]

Again you have to respond to MY comments in order for me to notice them right away. I'm not going to go back in the thread each time to see what other complete shit you've spewed forth from your fingertips.
I'm going to assume you meant 'jumped' for joy, even though 'humped' for joy is deliciously hilarious. First off, you'd have to really grasp at straws to believe the bible, the same book that says the moon emits its own light, is an accurate depiction of how things work. Regardless, if this is the only part in the bible that suggest life begins before birth, it doesn't really make the case to be so avidly against abortion because of your religion.
First of all, where life begins is merely an opinion, not scientific fact. There are probably even more pro-choice scientists than there are pro-life scientists, because they realize that not every human is a special and unique snowflake, and they don't believe god wills it. Secodly, the zygote or fetus or whatever you choose to call it is completely dependent on the mother. If the mother dies, the chances of a fetus surviving, especially in the early stages, is slim to none. Same goes for if the fetus is taken out of the mother prematurely. This really doesn't sound like the fetus has its own life.

[jaronsjournal.livejournal.com]

A 2 year old cannot live long without help from its mother or some other human. Would you say the 2 year old is not alive?

The unborn baby kicks in the womb, of its own choice and power. How can you say its not alive?

[voodooskeleton.livejournal.com]

anybody else could raise a two year old. a fetus on the other hand cannot leave the mother's insides and still survive (except for the rare occasion). you really are slow.

[voodooskeleton.livejournal.com]

So out of that whole three part rant, the only thing you can come back with is 'homosexuality is a sin and abortion is wrong'? Are you slow?
Regardless of what Jesus did with the prostitute, the bible is still very clear on what should be done with adulterous women. The bible is not at all clear about abortion.
My boyfriend and I are not married because we choose not to be married. Getting married isn't going to magically fix our financial problems, if anything it would make it worse, and it most certainly is not going to cure my health problems.
Even if my financial problems were magically fixed, pregnancy. could. still. kill. me. because. of. my. health. problems. you. ignornant. fuck.
And these christians that would be willing to help me? Are these the same christians who completely wrote me off because of my disbelief in your magical invisible sky daddy?
"And whatever deaths that happened from a stupid coat hanger abortion would never be equal to the thousands that die every day by legalized abortion." And you are a completely twisted individual for thinking this is an okay thing to say.
Would you care to respond to the rest of my rant that I took so much time to construct or you, regardless of whether abortion is right or wrong?