LB70145's forum posts

#1 Edited by LB70145 (190 posts) - - Show Bio

@patrat18 said:

Anybody else loving the new Ghost rider??

I sure am! Can't wait for every issue.

#2 Edited by LB70145 (190 posts) - - Show Bio

@king_saturn: Whoa whoa, I wasn't agreeing with any of what I said or saying that God mandated any of that. Heck, I was not even claiming anything I said was fact. I was just offering a perspective on some of the rules you had mentioned with a few bonus ones. I am just saying from a certain perspective, the reasoning I listed off could very well be why those rules were to be followed. Also remember that people have written, translated, and edited holy scripture for thousands of years. Who knows who imposed what and for what reason. The important thing to remember is that people wrote, translated, and edited these writings. God didn't send the Quran, Torah, Vedas, or the bible via lightning bolt the way we see them today. Though this method would have probably ended with less faith-based bloodshed.

Also, a lot of what I listed off are just the greatest hits of what people use to discredit religious teachings and/or God. I know you didn't mention cattle or mediums, I was more or less piggybacking off your comment to talk about these subjects. Nothing personal, I just saw the subject matter and wished to build on top of it. Most of the reasoning for the rules in Leviticus are so the Israelites didn't conform to foreign cultures and practices, or mess up certain practices and get themselves killed. Or at least, that is what many bible historians and anthropologists believe according to research. Yeah it might suck from your perspective to not eat pork or shellfish, not wear mixed textiles, etc. But like I said, the rules were for survival and cultural preservation in their time. I certainly don't think those rules are needed now. And from what I can tell the sale of pork, lobster, and polyester are in no danger of going down anytime soon due to divine punishment. Also, I did say that the punishments were extreme because it increased the likelihood of people following the rules if the word of God was not good enough. I did not say that they were logical, let alone reasonable. In ancient times, you wanted people to follow a rule? You threaten life and limb.

And hey, I totally understand how you don't see God as merciful for letting his kid die or needing anybody killed to get a message across. I am not going to argue against you on it either because what I said is just my understanding. The great (possibly not so great) thing about religious teachings is that everyone can have their take on it. And like I said before, all that human intervention in the composition of many holy writings definitely plays into that. My main point in that paragraph was that tons of people embrace the message of that sacrifice, whether it was by understanding similar to mine or not. I could discuss it more by message if you wanted or continue here as well.

I also wanted to apologize if you saw my initial comment as combative or dismissive of what you said. I was honestly just adding to the discussion. Not seeking attention or argument. This thread is really cool to read through because of the multitude of stories and beliefs people have. I just wanted to add my take.

#3 Posted by LB70145 (190 posts) - - Show Bio

GOD ( Yahweh ) in the Bible is Mean as Heck... I would have been Mad as hell to be an Israelite living under all those strict ass laws they had back then... You Can't Eat Shrimp or Lobster ? You gotta stone people for being Gay ? You gotta stone people for thinking about worship other Gods ? Wearing mixed fabrics is an abomination ? Yeah, GOD was Mean as heck and apparently stayed Mean even into the New Testament where he basically had his own Son killed... as if The Creator of the Universe couldn't actually forgive sins without someone dying. So much for his Omnipotence.

Leviticus (and arguably other sections of the bible) is basically a "how to survive in a desert environment" section to the extreme. Think about it. Don't eat shellfish is a pretty good rule when a majority of people back then would have stored this kind of food improperly. They would have gotten sick and died if they ate bad shellfish. Leviticus 19:19 reads, "You are to keep My statutes. You shall not breed together two kinds of your cattle; you shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed, nor wear a garment upon you of two kinds of material mixed together." This basically just told people to keep cattle pure bred, don't mix up crops because the crop yields will be messed up, and garments made with mixed material are more trouble than they are worth. Granted, by today's standards these rules are ridiculous but you have to see it from the perspective of a desert dwelling population that lived thousands of years ago.

Lightning round...

Tolerating homosexuality meant a portion of the population with no offspring to contribute to society. Worshiping other gods means people could develop political divisions based on faith. Tattoos mean the possibility of getting an infection. Don't go to fortune tellers or mediums because they are ripping you off. Don't eat pork because back then (hell I am pretty sure some people still do it) pigs were often fed fecal matter, garbage, and who knows what else.

And how do you get people to follow these rules? Make the rules come from a divine being and make the punishment for disobeying said rules completely awful. Long story short, a lot of rules in the bible are based on the cultures and religious practices of that time. A lot of slippery slope logic yes, but their main concern was survival and maintaining a functioning community. But again, by today's standards the rules are unnecessary. The bible does not work very well as a living document, it needs footnotes to be understood at its fullest. However, I don't think people will like the idea of having to read a document that is 3 times the size of a regular bible in order to truly know their faith.

As for God not saving his son, Jesus wanted to make a statement on several levels. He wanted his sacrifice to demonstrate his commitment to his holy father and his faith. He wanted to show that even in his last moments of life, he could forgive all that was done to him. He wanted to show people how far he was willing to go for those who would even wish his death. His death was the ultimate action for his faith, himself, and others. How can one preach forgiveness if he does not offer himself before his naysayers and face death? How can one preach forgiveness if he does not have anyone to forgive? Extreme yes, but you cannot argue against its efficacy. There is a reason that Christianity is a majority in world. It's one heck of a message.

#4 Posted by LB70145 (190 posts) - - Show Bio

@rd189 said:

Eh, It;s good and bad.

I'm pretty sure the average guy going to church isn't a gay bashing, abortion hating douchebag, but his preacher might be.

The muslim preacher is a fairly nice guy, but the guy who goes to his mosque is also a terrorist.

People do dumb shit in the name of faith. People also do dumb shit in the name of opposing faith.

Atheists are angry, angry people, that can't ever let anyone be happy, and are, of course, 100% right about everything.

I'm Agnostic, I don't think anyone can really know the whole truth. I wish people would just get along, instead of punching eachother in the face over dumb shit like this:

"God isn't real bro"

"God is real bro"

Thank you. Seriously, whatever you believe in I think we can all agree on several things. Don't be a dick, don't generalize, and arguing is just a massive waste of time.

Some really cool posts in this thread.

#5 Posted by LB70145 (190 posts) - - Show Bio

I never understand why the make new characters when they're nothing wrong with the old ones.Where the hell is Danny Ketch?

You can read Blaze in the Thunderbolts and I felt that Ketch was ruined by the whole Zadkiel thing. That said, I like where this new book is going.

#6 Posted by LB70145 (190 posts) - - Show Bio

@w0nd said:

@lb70145 said:

@mxyzptlk_cv said:

Why so pessimistic guys? This looks real interesting from the plot synopsis I just read...I will definitely give it a try...

It is a combination of most of these characters being drastically changed unnecessarily and the other half of these characters are so new no one really caring about them.

It just makes me sad that Hazmat, Nico, and Chase are being dragged into this. Nico and Chase especially, they don't even want to be part of the superhero community. Hazmat I can kind of understand but half her angst is taken care of now that she doesn't need to wear her containment suit. Cammi being brought in is kind of random, but I guess they needed a bad ass normal. Seriously, that is one obscure character to bring into this.

However, I do find Deathlocket, Anachronism, and Bloodstone interesting.

does it seem like chase and nico are part of the super hero community? Super powered but not super hero. Theyve been runaways orphans put in a battle arena and who knows what now. i just wish they filled in the gap at the end of runaways

If they are actively joining this revenge venture, they are really going against their established personalities and motives. Nico and Chase are team mom and dad respectively for the Runaways. That being said, are they just abandoning Karolina, Molly, and Klara? Are going to put their lives at risk for... why would they even risk their lives for this? They don't have much of a stake in this mission. Granted they were used and some people they knew were hurt (in one case killed), but I don't think that is motivation enough to undertake such a dangerous mission. Personally, I just don't see them joining this team. I also find the premise of this story highly problematic. If I had just survived the ordeal that these kids just went through, the last thing I would want to do is go on a dangerous/risky revenge mission. Not to mention, taking revenge on Arcade is not going to get their old lives back.


The Runaways have been in comic limbo for too long. I really hope someone chooses to pick them up and soon.

#7 Posted by LB70145 (190 posts) - - Show Bio

Why so pessimistic guys? This looks real interesting from the plot synopsis I just read...I will definitely give it a try...

It is a combination of most of these characters being drastically changed unnecessarily and the other half of these characters are so new no one really caring about them.

It just makes me sad that Hazmat, Nico, and Chase are being dragged into this. Nico and Chase especially, they don't even want to be part of the superhero community. Hazmat I can kind of understand but half her angst is taken care of now that she doesn't need to wear her containment suit. Cammi being brought in is kind of random, but I guess they needed a bad ass normal. Seriously, that is one obscure character to bring into this.

However, I do find Deathlocket, Anachronism, and Bloodstone interesting.

#8 Posted by LB70145 (190 posts) - - Show Bio

Good, one less thing for them to screw up.

#9 Posted by LB70145 (190 posts) - - Show Bio

Holy... alright then. This is really awesome! Thanks @k4tzm4n for the selection.

I will try to contribute more to these battles. It was quite fun coming up with a scenario.

#10 Posted by LB70145 (190 posts) - - Show Bio

@blacklegraph: Funny thought I just had, the way you describe Faora, she is like Predator and if you don't have any means to defend yourself she won't attack you. But yeah I see what you mean. This fight to me is very close, but I think Thor still comes out on top. It would not be an all out slaughter one way or another.