Good point. Genuine science corrects itself via the Scientific Method. Religious faith cannot change, only be reinterpreted, because to actually change the root of it means it was wrong, and a wrong religion is a false religion, and not one person who genuinely believes in their religion considers it false.
That's a fine distinction, but about as meaningful as "I didn't kill him, I only fired the gun. The bullet killed him." So good people are people who perform good actions, and bad people are people who perform bad actions.
Do you even read what we write here? I was talking about good and bad people/actions, and that religion is just one of many justifications used by people who do bad things. Timelord was then talking about the quality of the justifications (sound/good or unsound/bad reason), which I wasn't talking about.
Ok, fine. People who do stuff justify their actions. Religion is only one of many ways to justify your stuff. And people would still do the same stuff without religion. Are we done talking besides the point?
The problem is that everything can be abused. Religion is only one way to control the masses. The Nazis created their own form of religion, based on a false understanding of genetics, long-existing prejudice und general dissatisfaction in the population. For the "average" suicide bomber in the Middle East, faith is just the tip of the iceberg to make the last step. They blow themselves up because of hatred against their enemies, that's the root of their devotion. Muhammad Atta & Co were well educated people, and they probably didn't believe in the 72 virgins fairy tale one bit. They believed in their mission, and that's already enough. It's a simplified statement, meaning if someone is ready to kill for his God, he would also be ready to kill without religious influence; if someone takes care for elderly in the name of God, he would also take care of them without religious influence. If you don't think actions like murder can be labeled bad and actions like taking care of others can be labeled good, well then so be it. It doesn't matter that these terms are subjective. It is - again - besides the point, which is that blaming religion for everything is wrong. We are of course running in circles now, as I've been saying the same thing over and over again to you.
Jesus also told people to stop sinning and turn from evil. He also told His followers to tell the Good News that everyone can be saved and to do so means turning from their sin. This was His main message. What you mentioned is only a part of what He said.
how can i sin when i don't believe in the concept? going to hell isn't a threat that means anything to me. i do good things because i want to, not out of some obligation to a mystical being. even if i wanted to believe i couldn't because i my brain doesn't do 'faith'.
But he also made it clear that it isn't up to us to judge another for their sins while we have sins of our own.
The idea that you can call someone out for their sin if it's not the same sin as yours. It's a very literal interpretation of the speck and plank parable Jesus spoke of in the book of Matthew.
Good thing nobody is doing that, then. Really, how many times are you going to repeat that bold-faced lie, hoping nobody would notice?
Actually it's completely accurate. Tend to the log in your own eye Judge not lest ye be judged let he who is without sin
He also told his followers to sell all their possessions and give the money to the poor. Have you done that yet? Have you actually read the Bible or just had a preacher tell it to you? I've read it and I've read your posts over the years, the Biblical Jesus wouldn't be a fan of your actions. You're a sinner if you accept his teachings and have absolutely no right to say anything about the sins of anyone else. He didn't say let he with a different sin cast the first stone.