Religion & Morality

[YoungJRNY]

Religion is the greatest and most egregious con that has ever been perpetrated upon humanity.

It's not hard to understand how, during the ages of scienctific ignorance, people had to invent some supernatural reason and meaning when nothing they knew of could explain nature.

But those days are long passed. Now, when knowledge is available to us and we know that the "church" has over the years manipulated the dogma to suit it's greedly, meglomaniacal purposes, besides being an absurdity, religion should be a crime. It has conned people out of more billions of dollars than Bernie Madoff costed more millions of lives than any despotic dictator.

As long as religion is alive and well, so will be ignorance and hatred.

Oh please, give it a rest.

To this day, I cannot understand why atheists do not have the ability to leave the religious debates alone and allow those of faith
to live their lives as how they see fit.

Lmao, so untrue. It's actually the complete opposite. It's people of religion who get offended when they hear someone doesn't believe in God, only because it isn't the "politically correct" thing to do."

I've seen people of religion drop everything they would ever stand for within the touch of God and completely turn vicious in a debate against someone who doesn't believe OR is even remotely skeptical. I mean, it gets to the point to where the religious threatens ones life and tells another human being they will burn for eternity while atheist's sit there calm and collected in their theories.

You'd think it would be the other way around, the atheist's being rude and mean but man, as soon as a person of God hears those words, look out. It gets nasty then they'll force the "name of God" on that "poor and tortured soul" for not believing. Seen it 100 times over. In my experience anyhow. It's people of religion who acts more fruity than anybody else.

I find your stance interesting in light of the fact that Superman, a character essentially modelled on Jesus Christ, is your favorite comics character. Vewwy, vewwy intewesting.

UUUUUUUUUUUUUMM, the ONLY thing Jesus and Superman have in common is that they are made up characters. MADE- UP! Superman is a damn comic-book character, every 'super-hero' was created to give entertainment and fantasy in the midst to get away from real-world reality, just like any other thing our fantasy hobbies consist of. I assure you I don't run around town claiming Superman is GOD (although I wouldn't doubt I could start a cult and make people believe in it givin' how gullible human beings can be.)

Another thing is that Superman's original model, the Golden Age Superman, was HARDLY anything of Jesus Christ. In fact, Superman was an absolute asshole and used fear in criminals (yes, Superman was the first vigilante on the streets that the character BATMAN came about.)

Superman was turned into the "God" we know today over time of different writers over the several decades, so he was changed over-time, KIND of like the Bible itself (old testament, new testament,) so I guess that makes TWO things in common.

Oh and for the record, the creator of Superman, Joe Shuster and Jerry Siegel, were JEWS!

[conversationpc]

When was the last time you actually answered a argument with something else than a question? The lack of religion wasn't the motivation behind their actions. Atheism in communism is just an effect of the fact that there's only room for one omnipotent power in their country, and that's the government and their head of state. As well as it being somewhat of a dividing factor according to the communists - the government control the people, not the church. Communism is ugly, no doubt about it. But get your facts straight.

Atheism in those forementioned governments was critical to their controlling the masses, in the same way that some have used religion to control their own masses. Those facts are straighter than an arrow.

[conversationpc]

UUUUUUUUUUUUUMM, the ONLY thing Jesus and Superman have in common is that they are made up characters. MADE- UP!

Jesus is a made-up character? Really? Try telling that to even most non-Christian historians. There's far more evidence that Jesus was a real person than many other accepted historical figures in antiquity.

[YoungJRNY]

Haha, historians, right. There's no sign or trace that Jesus Christ ever existed (because, well, you know, he rose from the dead, right?) The dude walked on water and turned water into whine, let alone heal the sick. Sounds like a good comic book to me

[Behshad]

Haha, historians, right. There's no sign or trace that Jesus Christ ever existed (because, well, you know, he rose from the dead, right?) The dude walked on water and turned water into whine, let alone heal the sick. Sounds like a good comic book to me

Smokin weed isnt really good for your braincells, bro ! Im not a religious person, but denying the fact that Jesus existed is like denying that Perry ever sang!

[conversationpc]

Haha, historians, right. There's no sign or trace that Jesus Christ ever existed (because, well, you know, he rose from the dead, right?) The dude walked on water and turned water into whine, let alone heal the sick. Sounds like a good comic book to me

Dude, put aside the miracles, rising from the dead, etc. You completely ignored my statement that even non-Christian historians believe Jesus actually existed. There are even atheist historians who believe he existed. That other stuff is interesting to argue about but, come on. You're as nutty as you claim Christians are if you can't even acknowledge that he is a true historical figure.

[parfait]

When was the last time you actually answered a argument with something else than a question? The lack of religion wasn't the motivation behind their actions. Atheism in communism is just an effect of the fact that there's only room for one omnipotent power in their country, and that's the government and their head of state. As well as it being somewhat of a dividing factor according to the communists - the government control the people, not the church. Communism is ugly, no doubt about it. But get your facts straight.

Atheism in those forementioned governments was critical to their controlling the masses, in the same way that some have used religion to control their own masses. Those facts are straighter than an arrow.

Please provide proof of this.

[YoungJRNY]

Haha, historians, right. There's no sign or trace that Jesus Christ ever existed (because, well, you know, he rose from the dead, right?) The dude walked on water and turned water into whine, let alone heal the sick. Sounds like a good comic book to me

Smokin weed isnt really good for your braincells, bro ! Im not a religious person, but denying the fact that Jesus existed is like denying that Perry ever sang!

There's a slim chance a person of Jesus ever did exist, I'll give you that. Maybe a person of the nature did exist in some compacity or another in terms of concept but I don't believe such a man possessed the power to part the 7 seas with his mind The only historic people can go by in terms of Jesus Christ is those church, 3-d and cool looking glass that has Jesus carved in them. Talk about a cool acid trip

[Behshad]

Haha, historians, right. There's no sign or trace that Jesus Christ ever existed (because, well, you know, he rose from the dead, right?) The dude walked on water and turned water into whine, let alone heal the sick. Sounds like a good comic book to me

Smokin weed isnt really good for your braincells, bro ! Im not a religious person, but denying the fact that Jesus existed is like denying that Perry ever sang!

There's a slim chance a person of Jesus ever did exist, I'll give you that. Maybe a person of the nature did exist in some compacity or another in terms of concept but I don't believe such a man possessed the power to part the 7 seas with his mind The only historic people can go by in terms of Jesus Christ is those church, 3-d and cool looking glass that has Jesus carved in them. Talk about a cool acid trip

I know you enjoy your weed, but dont overdo it please ! Stay away from the acid though

[YoungJRNY]

Haha, historians, right. There's no sign or trace that Jesus Christ ever existed (because, well, you know, he rose from the dead, right?) The dude walked on water and turned water into whine, let alone heal the sick. Sounds like a good comic book to me

Smokin weed isnt really good for your braincells, bro ! Im not a religious person, but denying the fact that Jesus existed is like denying that Perry ever sang!

Again, I'm not ruling out that a person ever existed in concept that claimed he was the "son of God." I don't know, I was never born in such an existence of the unknown but if we can sculpt up dinosaur fragments and life-sized bones from milenia ago and not one bone fragment or any sort of remains of Jesus's body then I'll forever be on the fence, sorry, it's logic.

[YoungJRNY]

Haha, historians, right. There's no sign or trace that Jesus Christ ever existed (because, well, you know, he rose from the dead, right?) The dude walked on water and turned water into whine, let alone heal the sick. Sounds like a good comic book to me

Smokin weed isnt really good for your braincells, bro ! Im not a religious person, but denying the fact that Jesus existed is like denying that Perry ever sang!

There's a slim chance a person of Jesus ever did exist, I'll give you that. Maybe a person of the nature did exist in some compacity or another in terms of concept but I don't believe such a man possessed the power to part the 7 seas with his mind The only historic people can go by in terms of Jesus Christ is those church, 3-d and cool looking glass that has Jesus carved in them. Talk about a cool acid trip

I know you enjoy your weed, but dont overdo it please ! Stay away from the acid though

I don't smoke weed, but It's all coming together. Jesus DID look like a hippie in the imagination of us human beings. MYSTERY CONCLUDED!

[conversationpc]

When was the last time you actually answered a argument with something else than a question? The lack of religion wasn't the motivation behind their actions. Atheism in communism is just an effect of the fact that there's only room for one omnipotent power in their country, and that's the government and their head of state. As well as it being somewhat of a dividing factor according to the communists - the government control the people, not the church. Communism is ugly, no doubt about it. But get your facts straight.

Atheism in those forementioned governments was critical to their controlling the masses, in the same way that some have used religion to control their own masses. Those facts are straighter than an arrow.

Please provide proof of this.

Ummm...Is it not historical fact that religion was largely outlawed in Communist Russia, China, etc., to the point where it was illegal to be a Bible-believing, born again Christian? To this day, it's illegal to even bring a Bible into China. I know of people who've had to smuggle them in. You can't tell me that the subjugation of religion in the name of atheism as an attempt to control the masses isn't and hasn't been part of the plan.

Anyway...

Soviet Union
POLICY TOWARD NATIONALITIES AND RELIGIONS IN PRACTICE

Soviet policy toward religion has been based on the ideology of Marxism-Leninism (see Glossary), which has made atheism the official doctrine of the Soviet Union. Marxism-Leninism has consistently advocated the control, suppression, and, ultimately, the elimination of religious beliefs. In the 1920s and 1930s, such organizations as the League of the Militant Godless ridiculed all religions and harassed believers. Propagation of atheism in schools has been another consistent policy. The regime's efforts to eradicate religion in the Soviet Union, however, have varied over the years with respect to particular religions and have been affected by higher state interests.

Soviet officials closely identified religion with nationality. The implementation of policy toward a particular religion, therefore, has generally depended on the regime's perception of the bond between that religion and the nationality practicing it, the size of the religious community, the degree of allegiance of the religion to outside authority, and the nationality's willingness to subordinate itself to political authority. Thus the smaller the religious community and the closer it identified with a particular nationality, the more restrictive were the regime's policies, especially if in addition it recognized a foreign religious authority such as the pope.

[Greg]

Lmao, so untrue. It's actually the complete opposite. It's people of religion who get offended when they hear someone doesn't believe in God, only because it isn't the "politically correct" thing to do."

I've seen people of religion drop everything they would ever stand for within the touch of God and completely turn vicious in a debate against someone who doesn't believe OR is even remotely skeptical. I mean, it gets to the point to where the religious threatens ones life and tells another human being they will burn for eternity while atheist's sit there calm and collected in their theories.

You'd think it would be the other way around, the atheist's being rude and mean but man, as soon as a person of God hears those words, look out. It gets nasty then they'll force the "name of God" on that "poor and tortured soul" for not believing. Seen it 100 times over. In my experience anyhow. It's people of religion who acts more fruity than anybody else.

Completely untrue? LOL! Always remember this, it takes two sides to fill an argument. Both sides have been debating religion, BOTH SIDES, for years. I am sure you probably have witnessed some on the religious side get nasty in these debates, but I have witnessed just as much nastiness from the atheists as well. Thinking the bitterness, nastiness, and heated discussions are all one-sided is, well, quite frankly irresponsible to assume. And your last line of your post is very antagonistic "It's people of religion who acts more fruity than anybody else" - and then you want to question why you would get a heated response. You can't honestly be serious? In this day and age where the "cool" thing to be is to be liberal and accepting of all people, I sure don't see a lot of that. And, don't point fingers, because everybody is guilty of that to a certain degree.

So many times in these debates, one side or the other has to cross the line into attacking the other's character. The question I ask is, what does anyone really get out of these debates? I see it all as pointless. As matter of fact, I see it as very sad. Look, agree to disagree (and this is a general statement to everyone) be a man and show some respect even if you all don't agree or don't understand. I don't personally agree with atheism or understand how anyone could never believe in God, but I accept the fact that there are people out there like this and aside from putting them on my prayer list, there isn't much *I* can do about it. I don't go around calling them evil, devil-worshipers, fruity, unintelligent, etc.. things I know that would cause them to dislike me and be hurt. I *do* see a lot of this in these debates, and it's sad.

I am more than sure that there are truly those who are nonreligious that are genuine with their questions on religion and ask them because they truly want to learn more about it. But, I am equally sure that there those nonreligious who ask them to bait people into arguments and to try their best to "debunk" those religious beliefs. Those of faith do take this stuff personal, because their faith is something very personal. So, trying to tear someone's belief system completely up for reasons, I cannot understand, and then complain because that person gets offended by it and responds in a heated battle of words is pointless. Maybe I can equate it to this example: It's like pinning someone down and punching them in the face repeatedly and then questioning why that person would be hurt by the experience. Nobody deserves that. Everybody deserves to live their life the way they wish to live it and if they choose to change their lives, then they also should have that right as well. I'm not saying people should never question religion, but if people are unwilling to question it without having to throw in some under-handed dig at the other side, then they have no business in such debate anyway.

[parfait]

When was the last time you actually answered a argument with something else than a question? The lack of religion wasn't the motivation behind their actions. Atheism in communism is just an effect of the fact that there's only room for one omnipotent power in their country, and that's the government and their head of state. As well as it being somewhat of a dividing factor according to the communists - the government control the people, not the church. Communism is ugly, no doubt about it. But get your facts straight.

Atheism in those forementioned governments was critical to their controlling the masses, in the same way that some have used religion to control their own masses. Those facts are straighter than an arrow.

Please provide proof of this.

Ummm...Is it not historical fact that religion was largely outlawed in Communist Russia, China, etc., to the point where it was illegal to be a Bible-believing, born again Christian? To this day, it's illegal to even bring a Bible into China. I know of people who've had to smuggle them in. You can't tell me that the subjugation of religion in the name of atheism as an attempt to control the masses isn't and hasn't been part of the plan.

Anyway...

Soviet Union
POLICY TOWARD NATIONALITIES AND RELIGIONS IN PRACTICE

Soviet policy toward religion has been based on the ideology of Marxism-Leninism (see Glossary), which has made atheism the official doctrine of the Soviet Union. Marxism-Leninism has consistently advocated the control, suppression, and, ultimately, the elimination of religious beliefs. In the 1920s and 1930s, such organizations as the League of the Militant Godless ridiculed all religions and harassed believers. Propagation of atheism in schools has been another consistent policy. The regime's efforts to eradicate religion in the Soviet Union, however, have varied over the years with respect to particular religions and have been affected by higher state interests.

Soviet officials closely identified religion with nationality. The implementation of policy toward a particular religion, therefore, has generally depended on the regime's perception of the bond between that religion and the nationality practicing it, the size of the religious community, the degree of allegiance of the religion to outside authority, and the nationality's willingness to subordinate itself to political authority. Thus the smaller the religious community and the closer it identified with a particular nationality, the more restrictive were the regime's policies, especially if in addition it recognized a foreign religious authority such as the pope.

You still don't prove anything besides what's already stated. Atheism was never the motivation behind the murders. The Bolsheviks never killed anyone because of atheism. Atheism, meaning no religion, was however required to have a completely totalitarian and all-encompassing state. Sure subjugating the religious was a part of a greater plan, but that was never the subject. You said atheism had killed millions, and pointed to communism. That is, as shown above; a simple misconception.

The bible ban in China you talk of, is utter bullshit. China has the world's second-largest evangelical Christian population in the world, just behind the US. The numbers range from 3-10 % which is Christian in China. Check your facts next time.

[verslibre]

Haha, historians, right. There's no sign or trace that Jesus Christ ever existed

Actually, you are wrong.

Extrabiblical accounts of Yeshua in the writings of Tacitus, Pliny The Younger and The Talmud all point to a real person.

[verslibre]

UUUUUUUUUUUUUMM, the ONLY thing Jesus and Superman have in common is that they are made up characters. MADE- UP! Superman is a damn comic-book character, every 'super-hero' was created to give entertainment and fantasy in the midst to get away from real-world reality, just like any other thing our fantasy hobbies consist of. I assure you I don't run around town claiming Superman is GOD (although I wouldn't doubt I could start a cult and make people believe in it givin' how gullible human beings can be.)

Another thing is that Superman's original model, the Golden Age Superman, was HARDLY anything of Jesus Christ. In fact, Superman was an absolute asshole and used fear in criminals (yes, Superman was the first vigilante on the streets that the character BATMAN came about.)

The bald character in "Reign Of The Super-Men" is NOT the same Superman. They took "Superman" out of that title, envisioned a hunky guy like a well-known actor of the time, and they wanted the character to be an icon of justice and all things good. The "God-like" aspect of Superman is quite prevalent, down to their use of the suffix "-el" in "Kal-el," i.e. "of God."

And no, the Batman really WAS a vigilante, down to even packing heat in his early days. But he had the cowl, the cape and the whole shebang.

And you wonder why I frequently refer to Superman as "vanilla"!

[artist4perry]

Haha, historians, right. There's no sign or trace that Jesus Christ ever existed (because, well, you know, he rose from the dead, right?) The dude walked on water and turned water into whine, let alone heal the sick. Sounds like a good comic book to me

Smokin weed isnt really good for your braincells, bro ! Im not a religious person, but denying the fact that Jesus existed is like denying that Perry ever sang!

There's a slim chance a person of Jesus ever did exist, I'll give you that. Maybe a person of the nature did exist in some compacity or another in terms of concept but I don't believe such a man possessed the power to part the 7 seas with his mind The only historic people can go by in terms of Jesus Christ is those church, 3-d and cool looking glass that has Jesus carved in them. Talk about a cool acid trip

Jesus never parted the 7 seas. The only sea parted was during the time of Moses and it was I think the Red sea, God did that. And there is historical references to his existence, most historians don't deny that. As I told you I don't have a problem with someone not believing in God. I have more of a problem with folks who feel it is there duty to do away with my rights to believe in God, or to call people names and get hateful because they believe. Seriously I am not camped out on your doorsteps with pamphlets telling you repent or go to Hell! I don't think that converts anyone, and I don't like it when other religions do to me. Not every religion believes in ramming God down people's throats.

[YoungJRNY]

UUUUUUUUUUUUUMM, the ONLY thing Jesus and Superman have in common is that they are made up characters. MADE- UP! Superman is a damn comic-book character, every 'super-hero' was created to give entertainment and fantasy in the midst to get away from real-world reality, just like any other thing our fantasy hobbies consist of. I assure you I don't run around town claiming Superman is GOD (although I wouldn't doubt I could start a cult and make people believe in it givin' how gullible human beings can be.)

Another thing is that Superman's original model, the Golden Age Superman, was HARDLY anything of Jesus Christ. In fact, Superman was an absolute asshole and used fear in criminals (yes, Superman was the first vigilante on the streets that the character BATMAN came about.)

The bald character in "Reign Of The Super-Men" is NOT the same Superman. They took "Superman" out of that title, envisioned a hunky guy like a well-known actor of the time, and they wanted the character to be an icon of justice and all things good. The "God-like" aspect of Superman is quite prevalent, down to their use of the suffix "-el" in "Kal-el," i.e. "of God."

And no, the Batman really WAS a vigilante, down to even packing heat in his early days. But he had the cowl, the cape and the whole shebang.

And you wonder why I frequently refer to Superman as "vanilla"!

No, I'm not talking about the "Reign of the Super-Men" where the the character was evil and the first attempt as any 'Superman' story.

I'm talking 1938 Superman.

Superman was first created as just that, Superman, not Kal-EL. He was actually Kal-L (Earth One Superman, known to be the 1938, vigilante Superman and the original.)

It wasn't until later on down the road to where writers made him out to be a God-like character over time, mainly stemming from the ridiculous Silver Age were Superman curled planets.

The original Superman was a vigilante and inspired the use of Batman fighting for nothing but what was right for Justice so yes, the concept of vigilante was none other than Superman.





"Kal-L" was the first Batman and he didn't mind getting his hands dirty. Fortunately, DC is going back to this in the new52 dcU.

But anyway, back to the religious, getting nowhere thread.

[YoungJRNY]

As I told you I don't have a problem with someone not believing in God. I have more of a problem with folks who feel it is there duty to do away with my rights to believe in God, or to call people names and get hateful because they believe.

You are seriously delusional into thinking people on opposite ends of the spectrum who are very passionate about their beliefs to actually have a mature conversation, sit there, sip there tea with their pinky finger up in the air and sing love songs.

Seriously, all talks of religion, on both sides of the coin, doesn't end too pretty. That's why I steer away from everything religion because it brings nothing but the WORST out in people who have a different opinion and belief. Like I said, I'm a happy person until some Bible-pusher tells me to think twice on what I want to believe in and where I'm going to go when I die. I know you're not like this, but unfortunately, it's the way it works no matter how knowledgeable one might be in their stance against something that will NEVER, EVER be proven.

There's two sides, no between. You either believe or you don't in my eyes and there's no right or wrong. I happen to believe it's all a crock of shit but that's not against one's who do believe. I can care less as long as I know what I believe. If people see Jesus in their spaghetti-o's, great. More power to them.

[artist4perry]

Religion, Superman, Atheism! This site has everything! LOL

There are folks on both sides of the coin that are just jerks. They cannot deal with anyone not believing like they do, and ridicule and say awful things about the other side. Seriously there are good people who are atheists, and good people who believe in God.

To call someone stupid for not believing what you do is a childish playground put down. There are very intelligent people that believe for both religion and atheism. Since neither can be proved without a shadow of a doubt, I don't see why you cannot show tolerance and allow everyone their own way of thinking.

To say all Christians kill because in history some church killed, and that was one religion in particular, is ridiculous. That would be like saying all red dogs kill because one red dog killed someone. It would have been purported by the people of that time and religion, that does not mean all religions are violent. Do all Muslims kill Christians? NO! I am friends with a peaceful Muslim.

I think people who want to do harm to others use any excuse they can to hurt others. For that matter Atheists have killed people using different reasons to hate as well. I get so tired of that worn out excuse to hate all people of religion. How many Christian uprisings and murders have you had in present day? Most Christian religions are passive.

I find many people here who are not Christians to be charming, nice, and I would sit down and eat with them and hang out with them anytime. If you would dislike someone over what they believe, what does that say about you?

[artist4perry]

As I told you I don't have a problem with someone not believing in God. I have more of a problem with folks who feel it is there duty to do away with my rights to believe in God, or to call people names and get hateful because they believe.

You are seriously delusional into thinking people on opposite ends of the spectrum who are very passionate about their beliefs to actually have a mature conversation, sit there, sip there tea with their pinky finger up in the air and sing love songs.

Seriously, all talks of religion, on both sides of the coin, doesn't end too pretty. That's why I steer away from everything religion because it brings nothing but the WORST out in people who have a different opinion and belief. Like I said, I'm a happy person until some Bible-pusher tells me to think twice on what I want to believe in and where I'm going to go when I die. I know you're not like this, but unfortunately, it's the way it works no matter how knowledgeable one might be in their stance against something that will NEVER, EVER be proven.

There's two sides, no between. You either believe or you don't in my eyes and there's no right or wrong. I happen to believe it's all a crock of shit but that's not against one's who do believe. I can care less as long as I know what I believe. If people see Jesus in their spaghetti-o's, great. More power to them.

I have been able to sit and talk to people of opposite thoughts and had quite interesting debates. Most of them are too mature to revert to childish name calling. It was a debate of thoughts, not disrespect.

[YoungJRNY]

As I told you I don't have a problem with someone not believing in God. I have more of a problem with folks who feel it is there duty to do away with my rights to believe in God, or to call people names and get hateful because they believe.

You are seriously delusional into thinking people on opposite ends of the spectrum who are very passionate about their beliefs to actually have a mature conversation, sit there, sip there tea with their pinky finger up in the air and sing love songs.

Seriously, all talks of religion, on both sides of the coin, doesn't end too pretty. That's why I steer away from everything religion because it brings nothing but the WORST out in people who have a different opinion and belief. Like I said, I'm a happy person until some Bible-pusher tells me to think twice on what I want to believe in and where I'm going to go when I die. I know you're not like this, but unfortunately, it's the way it works no matter how knowledgeable one might be in their stance against something that will NEVER, EVER be proven.

There's two sides, no between. You either believe or you don't in my eyes and there's no right or wrong. I happen to believe it's all a crock of shit but that's not against one's who do believe. I can care less as long as I know what I believe. If people see Jesus in their spaghetti-o's, great. More power to them.

I have been able to sit and talk to people of opposite thoughts and had quite interesting debates. Most of them are too mature to revert to childish name calling. It was a debate of thoughts, not disrespect.

Consider yourself one of the lucky ones I can only speak from experience. I never get into this stuff because it just causes bad blood. You don't have to resort to name calling for it to turn ugly. My girlfriend is hardcore Christian and I've seen things turn ugly out of nowhere because it's a temperament conversation. Not everybody has such respectful conversations about the debate. Ask anyone and it'll probably start off respectful and then head downhill from there. That's why it's not allowed to be talked about in certain portions of the world, like school. Whenever I hear something going awry, I simply remove myself from the conversation. Not worth it.

[verslibre]

Superman was first created as just that, Superman, not Kal-EL. He was actually Kal-L

"-L" or "-el," I think it's clear enough what Siegel's & Shuster's intentions were. I'm not familiar with it being anything other than "Kal-el." Even if you're going by John Byrne's reboot in 1986, his name was Kal-el before that. All the retconning that has gone on over the years has generated some confusion. The Superman from Action Comics #1 and Superman #1 came to be regarded as the Earth-2 Superman, and his now-official "first" appearance is recorded as JLA #73, which came out in 1960! He was nearly as powerful as the Earth-1 Superman, the one everybody recognizes, whose first "appearance" is now recorded as Superman #46. That's why Crisis On Infinite Earths was such a great series, it was done to straighten out what had been cultivated over the thirty years before it.

[YoungJRNY]

"-L" or "-el," I think it's clear enough what Siegel's & Shuster's intentions were. I'm not familiar with it being anything other than "Kal-el." Even if you're going by John Byrne's reboot in 1986, his name was Kal-el before tha.t

Not sure how the story is verbatim, but I believe a member of one of the creators family had a serious ill-ness or was either murdered or died of some disease, not exactly sure without looking it up. They had a dream about a Superman coming to the rescue with powers that exceeded that of a mortal man so that was the intention of Superman, a man powerful enough to make a difference and a hero there to help justice.

Kal-L is the Earth Two Superman, or the original Superman of 1938, one that Siegel and Shuster created, who were Jews.

However, Superman was one of the few exceptions; his stories had been published without interruption since his debut in 1938's Action Comics #1. This caused a continuity problem, specifically that Superman was simultaneously a member of the Justice Society of America on Earth-Two and also member of the Justice League of America on Earth-One. It was eventually established that there were two Supermen.[1] The "current", Silver Age Superman was Kal-El from Earth-One, while the Golden Age Superman was Kal-L from Earth-Two. Two different Superman in different era's.

Superman wasn't intended to be a Jesus like character. Writers from their respected times just made him stronger and stronger, due to the era of the Silver-Age and that's where it took off from there.

[verslibre]

Pretty much what I said with regard to the retcon to distinguish between the Earth-1 and Earth-2 Supermen. Like I said, he was Kal-el when I was a kid.

[majik]

Buddha's teaching may be summed up in one sentence... There is No Self.
That was his realisation, out of that grew the Buddhist religion and now millions of Buddhists are on a path to achieve what Buddha said was already the fact.

Another realised being named Jesus preached.... Deny the Self.
Later he was crucified for claiming to be One with God ( God=Being) meaning no personal Self.

The worst cult ever perpetuated on humanity is The Cult Of Me. Every belief system is attached to that illusion and look at the situation the world is in today. The members of this cult have so much invested in it that they are comfortably numb living the illusion. Its all about me! me! me!

[majik]

Haha, historians, right. There's no sign or trace that Jesus Christ ever existed (because, well, you know, he rose from the dead, right?) The dude walked on water and turned water into whine, let alone heal the sick. Sounds like a good comic book to me

Dude, put aside the miracles, rising from the dead, etc. You completely ignored my statement that even non-Christian historians believe Jesus actually existed. There are even atheist historians who believe he existed. That other stuff is interesting to argue about but, come on. You're as nutty as you claim Christians are if you can't even acknowledge that he is a true historical figure.

Man you just blotted out the corner stone of 2,000 years of Christianity in one foul swoop with this sentence wtf.

[verslibre]

Not to be anal, but it's "one fell swoop," not foul.

[majik]

Not to be anal, but it's "one fell swoop," not foul.

'tis my accent, either way same difference, there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

[conversationpc]

You still don't prove anything besides what's already stated. Atheism was never the motivation behind the murders. The Bolsheviks never killed anyone because of atheism. Atheism, meaning no religion, was however required to have a completely totalitarian and all-encompassing state. Sure subjugating the religious was a part of a greater plan, but that was never the subject. You said atheism had killed millions, and pointed to communism. That is, as shown above; a simple misconception.

Bullcrap...The evidence for it is just as strong as any baloney evidence you've managed to put out about religion killing millions of people.

The bible ban in China you talk of, is utter bullshit. China has the world's second-largest evangelical Christian population in the world, just behind the US. The numbers range from 3-10 % which is Christian in China. Check your facts next time.

I'm well aware of the Christian population in China. That doesn't mask the fact that the Bible is banned there. Nice try. Come a little stronger to the hoop next time because, so far, your attempts on the basket are being denied.