Christians vs metalheads in FB flame war

RE: Genuine Satanists

It might have been that way in the early 90s with the handful of nutters who committed murder or burned down beautiful old churches, but you're more likely to find people into Nietzsche now which has far more in common with your La Vey Satanists. After all what is more anti-Christian than the belief that we aren't all equal nor is there a god.

Define "good".

"Their targets are also a famous bunch of w*nkers, play-acting believers in an even less coherent worldview not even propped up by good intentions like the commandments."

The Satanists I've met (ok so most of them were from one small group with their own specific ideas) have had a more liberal, open-hearted and open-minded set of ethics than your average human. They just like doing what they want to do, and tend to do it whether society thinks it acceptable or not (largely because they've taken the time to evaluate the effect of their actions). It is precisely because their interests are some way from the mainstream that they understand the currency of suffering, and don't feel the need to add more of it to the world. And that includes a bit of pomp and ceremony. Because, you know, dressing-up games are fun.

Judge not, lest ye be the kind of individual who thinks drinking over-priced beer by the tard-load of a Friday night, or spazzing out to who won the football, or group-fondling matt-black plastic at Computer Con is the height of entertainment.

And I rather like science, so don't thumb me down for being a Believer. You really wouldn't have a clue what I know or believe or hold to be somehow and somewhat valid (where "valid", in case you hadn't noticed, is pretty much a function of a long series of value judgements and is a long way from any sort of "truth").

And on the subject of incoherent world views: Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity.

@foo_bar_baz

"The bible isn't a technical manual."

Actually, in a way, it is. It's a carefully compiled set of codices, designed to confuse the un-educated.

"Only unthinking fundamentalists"

Careful, you'll get yourself lynched ...

"and trolls like yourself would read it literally."

Who is trolling? I read the silly thing when I was about eight years old ... and questioned the shaman "in charge" over what I saw as logical errors. I was promptly banished to a lifetime of care-free Sundays. Oh darn.

"But congrats, you managed to read about 5 pages of the Bible"

I've read it cover to cover, actually. Not only in English, but in the original Aramaic, Koin Greek, and Latin. Can you say the same?

"and you gained 10 troll points for the achievement "Found a Contradiction in the Bible". You probably think you're the first to find one."

Who is trolling? The Bible is full of errors. Always has been, always will be. This is a fact. Commentarding on this fact isn't trolling, it's (potentially) educational.

"http://www.evilbible.com/Biblical%20Contradictions.htm"

Who said anything about "evil"? Aren't you quick to draw conclusions ...

"Quick tip before bible-baiting Christians"

You really don't get it, do you?

"the next time: use the New Testament instead."

Can do. Did Matthew, Luke, or John get the last words of Jesus right? Why did Mark decline to comment? As a result, can any of the four Gospels be considered useful insight into the day-to-day life of Jesus, at least from the point of view of the proverbial "thinking man"?

"The Old Testament is about as relevant to Christian beliefs as The Silmarillion is to LOTR. See, Jesus (you know, Christ as in Christianity) doesn't feature until the New Testament, so his teachings are kinda absent in Genesis."

Oh. I see. You're re-writing the book in your own image ... and using pulp-fiction to justify your belief. Can you understand why this is a problem, from a logical point of view? On the bright side, you're probably helping to keep your local shaman warm, dry & in kibble. Someone has to, I guess. Carry on.

For most Christians today...

"The Old Testament is about as relevant to Christian beliefs as The Silmarillion is to LOTR."

Various church councils of the first millennium disagreed with you on that point and I'm not aware of any major church that has kicked the OT out of the canon. Jesus may not feature, but Christianity is not Jesus-worship. (Well, your flavour might be...)

Practice skepticism

The more that someone appeals to evilbible.com the more they discredit themselves as evilbible.com is saturated with fallacies of every sort and has been discredited: here is some of the evidence with a true and honest skeptic will take the time to consider:

http://www.truefreethinker.com/evilbiblecom

As opposed to ...

... Christianity's "convert or die".

I'm with the OP on this one.

re Crusades

> No. The Crusades were staged (initially, at least) in an effort to roll

> back Islamic military conquests in the Levant, which had subjected

> the population to Islamic rule (where non-Muslims had the choice

> to convert or pay heavy 'infidel' taxes.)

Read a real history book, dimwit.

Four hundred years is a long time to wait to 'roll back' conquests.

The Crusaders were a lot less tolerant of other religions than the Muslims.

And the tax is the equivalent of the 2.5% Muslims have to pay for the poor - so it evens the field rather than discriminates against non-Muslims.