|
soutthpaw
Snowy Owl
Joined: May 01, 2012
Age: 42
Posts: 151
|
 Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 4:57 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| abacacus wrote: | | Joker wrote: | | abacacus wrote: | | Joker wrote: |
Id be careful that almost sounds like a attack towards me which is against the RULES |
Where's the attack? I am making a statement of fact. I'm not insulting you, I'm not belittling you, I'm stating the facts. |
To claim it is a fact you must have proof of your cliams which you don't  |
The bible has laws. It is stated in the bible that christians must follow those laws. You don't.
The only conclusion based off of those facts, is that you are not a christian. |
Oh boy another great signature line..  |
|
| Back to top |
|
soutthpaw
Snowy Owl
Joined: May 01, 2012
Age: 42
Posts: 151
|
| Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 5:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joker wrote: | | abacacus wrote: | | Joker wrote: | | abacacus wrote: | | Joker wrote: |
Id be careful that almost sounds like a attack towards me which is against the RULES |
Where's the attack? I am making a statement of fact. I'm not insulting you, I'm not belittling you, I'm stating the facts. |
To claim it is a fact you must have proof of your cliams which you don't |
The bible has laws. It is stated in the bible that christians must follow those laws. You don't.
The only conclusion based off of those facts, is that you are not a christian. |
Yes and I have stated those laws to you which I follow plenty of times now the laws of moses which are the laws christians are to follow. Moral of the story your opinon of me is very irrelevant. Every time you give me a question I will change the answer why because it's funny to me  |
Again he answered you question with using logic and reasoning and an easy to follow logical argument. It is not an opinion... again you cannot defend it so u create a totally pointless response that does not even challange the argument made.. which means its most likely correct if you cannot prove it incorrect. |
|
| Back to top |
|
shrox
Phoenix
Joined: Aug 12, 2011
Posts: 3254
Location: OK let's go.
|
| Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 5:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Questions? |
|
| Back to top |
|
AngelRho
Synclavier owner/operator
Joined: Jan 05, 2008
Posts: 3727
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile
|
| Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 6:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| soutthpaw wrote: | | which means its most likely correct if you cannot prove it incorrect. |
No, it is correct if it is correct. The INability to prove something incorrect has little to do with the likelihood of something being correct or not. It could be someone is unable to prove something simply because they don't know HOW to prove it. Not knowing HOW to prove something doesn't mean that the proof itself is impossible. |
|
| Back to top |
|
soutthpaw
Snowy Owl
Joined: May 01, 2012
Age: 42
Posts: 151
|
| Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 8:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| AngelRho wrote: | | soutthpaw wrote: | | which means its most likely correct if you cannot prove it incorrect. |
No, it is correct if it is correct. The INability to prove something incorrect has little to do with the likelihood of something being correct or not. It could be someone is unable to prove something simply because they don't know HOW to prove it. Not knowing HOW to prove something doesn't mean that the proof itself is impossible. |
You just described the definition of FAITH in not so specific terms. Also the likelyhood of it being correct or incorrect argument only works if there is equal lack of proof on both sides. this is the common argument for/against the existence of GOD or anything supernatural in nature.
The point is not being able to dispute the argument
_________________
AQ test =36: SQ test = 110: EQ test =8
Aspire quiz: Aspire score = 162; Neurotypical =42
RAADS=173 Total: Language= 10: social relatedness= 92: Sensory/motor= 37: Circumscribed interests=34 |
|
| Back to top |
|
AngelRho
Synclavier owner/operator
Joined: Jan 05, 2008
Posts: 3727
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile
|
| Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 11:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| soutthpaw wrote: | | AngelRho wrote: | | soutthpaw wrote: | | which means its most likely correct if you cannot prove it incorrect. |
No, it is correct if it is correct. The INability to prove something incorrect has little to do with the likelihood of something being correct or not. It could be someone is unable to prove something simply because they don't know HOW to prove it. Not knowing HOW to prove something doesn't mean that the proof itself is impossible. |
You just described the definition of FAITH in not so specific terms. Also the likelyhood of it being correct or incorrect argument only works if there is equal lack of proof on both sides. this is the common argument for/against the existence of GOD or anything supernatural in nature.
The point is not being able to dispute the argument |
I'm just making a general observation about logic that has nothing to do with religion specifically.
Here's an example: Is O.J. Simpson a murderer? The answer is that we don't know with absolute certainty. Maybe he is a murderer, maybe he is not. There is only one correct solution--either he killed her or he didn't. The prosecution made what many believed was a strong case against him, but in the end they were unable to convince a jury that he was guilty. We might say they were unable to "prove" Simpson guilty of murder.
But just because they were unable to prove it, that doesn't magically bring a murder victim back to life. Nor does it make Simpson not "not guilty" if he committed a crime.
A logical argument will be lost or won depending on who best knows how to attack or defend a position following strict rules that avoid reasoning pitfalls. I've seen many a Christian end up on the losing side for no better reason than simply not having all their facts straight. Another mistake I often see is attempting to respond to every single point the opponent raises without first considering whether it is worth responding to. And by that I mean not knowing things like red herrings, strawman arguments, burden of proof shifts, and ad hominem attacks. Once a person falls for a distraction, the argument inherently takes an illogical direction. That doesn't mean, for example, that someone making an argument in favor of the existence of God is wrong about whether God exists or not. It just means he is unable to prove the existence of God using a faulty line of reasoning. It is possible one could win an argument and still be wrong. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Evinceo
Deinonychus
Joined: Apr 14, 2012
Posts: 386
|
| Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 1:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| abacacus wrote: | Here's one:
Why is this amazingly bloodthirsty and blatantly psychopathic "god" so revered for demanding infants be killed, people be killed by having rocks thrown at them, people be burned alive, etc? |
It's all about context. In it's time, yeah, it was monstrous. The whole "rule of law" + "sane laws" thing was still being hammered out. In modern Judaism you need to consider that the crazy of ancient laws is mediated by the sanity of the Talmud-the ancient word isn't the last word. In modern day Christianity, it does not really matter, since most* Christians have no idea what's in the OT, and only use a few choice quotes of the NT. It's probably not fair to call Christians out on the bible-it might as well be a brick for all the value it's given. The problem stems from the constant use of out-of-context bible quotes by people with agendas, and the persistent refusal to go look them up and see where they are.
Nobody knows about the part where Moses is shown to be a war criminal in Numbers because nobody cares about Numbers.
(*Disclaimer: This only applies to every single christian I've ever met. Perhaps there are exceptions.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
AngelRho
Synclavier owner/operator
Joined: Jan 05, 2008
Posts: 3727
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile
|
| Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 7:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Evinceo wrote: | | abacacus wrote: | Here's one:
Why is this amazingly bloodthirsty and blatantly psychopathic "god" so revered for demanding infants be killed, people be killed by having rocks thrown at them, people be burned alive, etc? |
It's all about context. In it's time, yeah, it was monstrous. The whole "rule of law" + "sane laws" thing was still being hammered out. In modern Judaism you need to consider that the crazy of ancient laws is mediated by the sanity of the Talmud-the ancient word isn't the last word. In modern day Christianity, it does not really matter, since most* Christians have no idea what's in the OT, and only use a few choice quotes of the NT. It's probably not fair to call Christians out on the bible-it might as well be a brick for all the value it's given. The problem stems from the constant use of out-of-context bible quotes by people with agendas, and the persistent refusal to go look them up and see where they are.
Nobody knows about the part where Moses is shown to be a war criminal in Numbers because nobody cares about Numbers.
(*Disclaimer: This only applies to every single christian I've ever met. Perhaps there are exceptions.) |
Wow...absolutely right.
Incidentally, I enjoy reading the OT. The thing that stumps many of us Christians is that opponents such as atheists appear to know more about the Bible than we do, and it usually just boils down to the fact that Christians miss that the quotes being used against them are entirely out-of-context. Sure, the conquest of Canaan was brutal for those already living there. But given what life was like in the ancient world, OT law was remarkably fair and merciful. Something else to consider is that the people who were wiped out in Canaan were just those who were actually present. YHWH promised to "drive them out," meaning most likely many of the inhabitants fled ahead of the Israelite invasion and survived elsewhere. It's not like they didn't have a choice. OT law also provided options for those who were lucky enough to make peace with the Israelites. But the real beauty of OT is the high standard it sets for administering lex talionis justice. It is essentially the foundation for modern-day justice systems all over the western world.
The wisdom literature and songs of the OT are likewise beautiful works for anyone, and I don't care if you're Jewish, Christian, or just "spiritual."
I've given a lot of thought to studying Talmud, but I'm afraid that might not happen for a long time. For one, I'm not interested in converting to Judaism. I think I could gain an insight to the background of my own religion by understanding the tradition of the Jews in the formative years of the Christian church. I'm also attracted to the mental and spiritual exercise of meditating on the Law and understanding it. What worries me is being unable to find a Jew willing to spend the time with me in it when I'm not interested in giving up Christianity. There are numerous Bible commentaries out there besides Talmud that I'm afraid will have to suffice for me.  But I have considered Maimonides' Mishneh Torah. |
|
| Back to top |
|
abacacus
Rock 'N Roll Outlaw
Joined: Apr 16, 2007
Age: 21
Posts: 3323
|
| Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 1:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Evinceo wrote: |
It's all about context. In it's time, yeah, it was monstrous. The whole "rule of law" + "sane laws" thing was still being hammered out. In modern Judaism you need to consider that the crazy of ancient laws is mediated by the sanity of the Talmud-the ancient word isn't the last word. In modern day Christianity, it does not really matter, since most* Christians have no idea what's in the OT, and only use a few choice quotes of the NT. It's probably not fair to call Christians out on the bible-it might as well be a brick for all the value it's given. The problem stems from the constant use of out-of-context bible quotes by people with agendas, and the persistent refusal to go look them up and see where they are.
Nobody knows about the part where Moses is shown to be a war criminal in Numbers because nobody cares about Numbers.
(*Disclaimer: This only applies to every single christian I've ever met. Perhaps there are exceptions.) |
You described one of the reasons I call out christians so much. They can't even be assed to learn anything about their holy book but they expect to pass laws from it that everyone has to follow.
_________________
A shot gun blast into the face of deceit
You'll gain your just reward.
We'll not rest until the purge is complete
You will reap what you've sown. |
|
| Back to top |
|
abacacus
Rock 'N Roll Outlaw
Joined: Apr 16, 2007
Age: 21
Posts: 3323
|
| Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 1:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| AngelRho wrote: |
Wow...absolutely right.
Incidentally, I enjoy reading the OT. The thing that stumps many of us Christians is that opponents such as atheists appear to know more about the Bible than we do, and it usually just boils down to the fact that Christians miss that the quotes being used against them are entirely out-of-context. Sure, the conquest of Canaan was brutal for those already living there. But given what life was like in the ancient world, OT law was remarkably fair and merciful. Something else to consider is that the people who were wiped out in Canaan were just those who were actually present. YHWH promised to "drive them out," meaning most likely many of the inhabitants fled ahead of the Israelite invasion and survived elsewhere. It's not like they didn't have a choice. OT law also provided options for those who were lucky enough to make peace with the Israelites. But the real beauty of OT is the high standard it sets for administering lex talionis justice. It is essentially the foundation for modern-day justice systems all over the western world.
|
...fair and merciful. Now that's a laugh, calling ANYTHING in the bible fair and merciful. Do you already know why it's so funny or would you like me to explain?
Also, no the justice system of the modern world is NOT based on anything biblical. Every heard of freedom of religion? Not believing in god is a death sentence according to the bible. So is being gay. So is disrespecting your parents. Under biblical law, if a woman gets raped as a virgin, the rapist pays the father 50 sheckles and they are then forced to marry him. Learn what you're talking about before spouting such nonsense.
_________________
A shot gun blast into the face of deceit
You'll gain your just reward.
We'll not rest until the purge is complete
You will reap what you've sown. |
|
| Back to top |
|
AngelRho
Synclavier owner/operator
Joined: Jan 05, 2008
Posts: 3727
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile
|
| Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 2:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| abacacus wrote: | | AngelRho wrote: |
Wow...absolutely right.
Incidentally, I enjoy reading the OT. The thing that stumps many of us Christians is that opponents such as atheists appear to know more about the Bible than we do, and it usually just boils down to the fact that Christians miss that the quotes being used against them are entirely out-of-context. Sure, the conquest of Canaan was brutal for those already living there. But given what life was like in the ancient world, OT law was remarkably fair and merciful. Something else to consider is that the people who were wiped out in Canaan were just those who were actually present. YHWH promised to "drive them out," meaning most likely many of the inhabitants fled ahead of the Israelite invasion and survived elsewhere. It's not like they didn't have a choice. OT law also provided options for those who were lucky enough to make peace with the Israelites. But the real beauty of OT is the high standard it sets for administering lex talionis justice. It is essentially the foundation for modern-day justice systems all over the western world.
|
...fair and merciful. Now that's a laugh, calling ANYTHING in the bible fair and merciful. Do you already know why it's so funny or would you like me to explain?
Also, no the justice system of the modern world is NOT based on anything biblical. Every heard of freedom of religion? Not believing in god is a death sentence according to the bible. So is being gay. So is disrespecting your parents. Under biblical law, if a woman gets raped as a virgin, the rapist pays the father 50 sheckles and they are then forced to marry him. Learn what you're talking about before spouting such nonsense. |
And there's the archetypical anti-theist piping in. The thing is, it takes an open mind to be willing to understand that there might be cultural differences that lie in stark contrast to the world as we now know it. It's the absolute refusal of deaf ears to hear and closed minds to understand that makes even attempting some kind of response an utter waste of time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
abacacus
Rock 'N Roll Outlaw
Joined: Apr 16, 2007
Age: 21
Posts: 3323
|
| Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 3:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| AngelRho wrote: | | abacacus wrote: |
...fair and merciful. Now that's a laugh, calling ANYTHING in the bible fair and merciful. Do you already know why it's so funny or would you like me to explain?
Also, no the justice system of the modern world is NOT based on anything biblical. Every heard of freedom of religion? Not believing in god is a death sentence according to the bible. So is being gay. So is disrespecting your parents. Under biblical law, if a woman gets raped as a virgin, the rapist pays the father 50 sheckles and they are then forced to marry him. Learn what you're talking about before spouting such nonsense. |
And there's the archetypical anti-theist piping in. The thing is, it takes an open mind to be willing to understand that there might be cultural differences that lie in stark contrast to the world as we now know it. It's the absolute refusal of deaf ears to hear and closed minds to understand that makes even attempting some kind of response an utter waste of time. |
Cultural differences do not explain how being blamed for the sins of two people during the origin of the human race is fair. Cultural differences do not make it okay to kill people in barbaric ways. That's like saying we don't understand what was going on in peoples heads during the Rwandan genocide so we should just believe it was fair and merciful for people to get hacked apart in the streets with machetes, something your god would have been over joyed to see.
_________________
A shot gun blast into the face of deceit
You'll gain your just reward.
We'll not rest until the purge is complete
You will reap what you've sown. |
|
| Back to top |
|
AngelRho
Synclavier owner/operator
Joined: Jan 05, 2008
Posts: 3727
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile
|
| Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 4:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| abacacus wrote: | | AngelRho wrote: | | abacacus wrote: |
...fair and merciful. Now that's a laugh, calling ANYTHING in the bible fair and merciful. Do you already know why it's so funny or would you like me to explain?
Also, no the justice system of the modern world is NOT based on anything biblical. Every heard of freedom of religion? Not believing in god is a death sentence according to the bible. So is being gay. So is disrespecting your parents. Under biblical law, if a woman gets raped as a virgin, the rapist pays the father 50 sheckles and they are then forced to marry him. Learn what you're talking about before spouting such nonsense. |
And there's the archetypical anti-theist piping in. The thing is, it takes an open mind to be willing to understand that there might be cultural differences that lie in stark contrast to the world as we now know it. It's the absolute refusal of deaf ears to hear and closed minds to understand that makes even attempting some kind of response an utter waste of time. |
Cultural differences do not explain how being blamed for the sins of two people during the origin of the human race is fair. Cultural differences do not make it okay to kill people in barbaric ways. That's like saying we don't understand what was going on in peoples heads during the Rwandan genocide so we should just believe it was fair and merciful for people to get hacked apart in the streets with machetes, something your god would have been over joyed to see. |
Yes, but the problem is that you really aren't all that interested in any explanations. You're too preoccupied with hating Christians and rationalizing your hateful attitude by pulling your favorite Bible misquotes. You'll never even begin to understand what Jesus was all about if you can't release your grip on your own hateful prejudices. |
|
| Back to top |
|
LiendaBalla
Phoenix
![]()
Joined: Oct 24, 2007
Age: 34
Posts: 2857
|
| Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 4:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| AngelRho wrote: |
Yes, but the problem is that you really aren't all that interested in any explanations. You're too preoccupied with hating Christians and rationalizing your hateful attitude by pulling your favorite Bible misquotes. You'll never even begin to understand what Jesus was all about if you can't release your grip on your own hateful prejudices. |
Do you believe that the word "Atheist" and the word "Agnostic" are totally different from each other? I had a sudden curious urge to ask. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Evinceo
Deinonychus
Joined: Apr 14, 2012
Posts: 386
|
| Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 6:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Maybe it's best that we don't forget how horrible the past was, lest we idealize it and think that our current time is bad by comparison to some golden age that never existed.
| abacacus wrote: | | Under biblical law, if a woman gets raped as a virgin, the rapist pays the father 50 sheckles and they are then forced to marry him. Learn what you're talking about before spouting such nonsense. |
There is no "biblical law" as such-there are several legal codes, and plenty of stories that react to them. This is, again, a problem with context-people with a specific agenda will claim that "this quote proves that god hates x" or "see, biblical law says x, so we must ban it!" They obviously skipped the part in the NT where Jesus directly disobeyed the "law" that required him to stone someone, when challenged by people that it was in fact Mosaic law.
| AngelRho wrote: | But given what life was like in the ancient world, OT law was remarkably fair and merciful.
|
I would not go that far-they're as brutal as the cover of a metal album.
| AngelRho wrote: | YHWH promised to "drive them out," meaning most likely many of the inhabitants fled ahead of the Israelite invasion and survived elsewhere. It's not like they didn't have a choice.
|
Considering that they appear the same by almost any measure to archeology, how sure are you that the Canaanites where not absorbed by the Israelites (if not the other way around)? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
