Reply With Quote
What a re .
There's a unique type of anger going on with RZ. It's not natural to hate something that much.
Why such hatred towards God? Are you upset he allowed your dad to ass- you when you were young, tbh?A perfect being doesn't need any pleasure. He's perfect. He doesn't lack anything. Failure number one by you.
No, it isn't. If God constantly needs validation, he lacks self-esteem. A perfect being doesn't need worship. A perfect being doesn't give a what non-perfect beings say.
No, this is an argument about logic. Why would one purposefully cause conflict where there is no conflict? God didn't have to put the fruit there, but he chose to for no reason.
Because he put the fruit there and caused the conflict in the first place?
No, God put the cookies there for no reason. The cookies were not to be eaten ever. The only reason they existed was as a temptation. My mom would never bake a batch of cookies just so she can tell me that I should never eat them. Your analogy falls flat completely.
lol. God didn't reveal himself to me. Period. It's not up for debate. You trying to rationalize his complete failure to convince me that he exists, is quite amusing, though. God has an infinite amount of power, so the fact that only a third of humanity believes in him, shows how much of a spectacular failure he is.
No, it's the book saying it. I have passages supporting my position.
No, I didn't.
Even if that is true, it's still slavery.
Link? I said that it was still slavery. Your pathetic attempts to rationalize slavery don't change the fact that it's slavery.
Still slavery, asshole, regardless of whether it is the same extent or not.
And the Hebrew slavery is still forcing people to work for their masters. It's slavery, asshole. Stop rationalizing it.
How Westboro of you
Dunno. God seemed to set precedent of hate with a giant butthurt flood.
they aren't listening to me so I'll kill them
Of course you don't. That's because my comment had nothing to do with you.
As a philosopher? I am flattered by your faith in me, despite having never to have met me in person. But I highly doubt it.
True.
Calvin wasn't even a philosopher, he was "just" a whistle blower. None of his statements were unique to himself, great swaths of Europe thought exactly as he did. You could more accurately think of him like a Lenny Bruce type than someone to whom you could apply the word "philosopher."
The problem is that I didn't. I just said "see above", which really is the answer.
I don't get it. I thought your issue was with Christianity in general, not with my thoughts. Why would you care about my thoughts? And you never asked me about unruly children in the past, I don't believe. Your questions have been predominantly about slavery, with rape and murder questions afterwards.
No, you are changing the goal post. I first said slavery in the biblical terms is different from those of modern slavery, of which you rejected and claimed I have little knowledge about my own beliefs. Now you are saying that slavery, no matter in what form, is wrong. I am not here to argue with you what your moral standards are. If you feel a prisoner or war or someone in debt is better off being killed, which was the case prior to the biblical laws, rather than termed a slave with a whole lot of rights, then you are free to feel that way. I am not here to argue with you on that point.
My boss can freely term me a slave, but give me all the legal rights. It's demeaning because of what the term slavery entails in modern times, but it would not be the same as modern slavery.
Except in biblical days, it did. Your response further illustrates your inability to have a grasp of reality of society norms during biblical times, and tried to apply modern day norms at rights in a different era.
Just as capital punishment is a form of murder by the strictest sense.
How did you know? How did my response show I didn't know what hypocrisy means? You have already been shown that your ability to understand what I understand about my beliefs to be sketchy at best, and I would welcome how you would show me how I don't know what hypocrisy means.
It does. Your response is illogical and horribly illustrated.
It is logical to expect to get reasonable answers about religion on a basketball forum? This is about as illogical as it gets.
Please show.
Except I had been talking about slavery all along. I am unsure now that the slavery definitions have been clarified, and you acknowledging that biblical slavery is different from modern slavery, you are changing the goal post to your own moral definitions, and now to "kill unruly children".
Explain how. You seem to have some difficulty in grasping that you are not the moral standards of the world, and that neither I, or an entire religion, as to subscribe to your answers. Especially when you have shown that you have questionable at ude, motives, and logical thinking skills.
Sand people? What is that supposed to mean? While it is obvious you were trolling all along, this is just getting too obvious.
He did. People just didn't listen.
Sure:A perfect being doesn't need any pleasure. He's perfect. He doesn't lack anything. Failure number one by you.[/quotes]
Says who? Are you a perfect being? If not, how would you know what a perfect being need or not need something. In fact, why was it need, and not want? Why is it logical to "want to ask a question", while it is not logical for God to "want to create people"?
Requiring worship != needs validation. You constantly have these huge jumps in logic.
Since when did he purposefully cause conflict? Did the presence of Spurstalk create conflict by being an avenue for you to vent your anger towards Christianity, or was it you who created the conflict?
See above.
The cookies were there for the reasons that were not explicitly written in the Bible. This does not mean that there were no reasons for it. It just means the reasons for the presence of the cookies had absolutely nothing to do with faith or salvation.
Why is it not for debate. God never tried to convince you He exists, and he never said he would use his infinite power to force people to believe Him. Again, another irrational assumption you have made. And you have made plenty in this thread.
But you just said you believing. Which one is it? You seem to have issues expressing your thoughts that are consistent with your own high standards.
To quote you directly "I'm not misinterpreting anything. I believe that the phrases mean what they mean. I don't read a ty book to convince myself that things don't mean what they clearly mean."
It's astounding that you, at one point of clarity in your life, realize that the interpretation of a phrase is not absolute.
Yes it did. An absolute statement of not misinterpreting a something does not require believe. It either is or is not, because is absolute. The phrase "I believe" is not absolute, and is up for personal interpretation.
So have you finally admitted that biblical slavery is different from modern day slavery?
Link? I said that it was still slavery. Your pathetic attempts to rationalize slavery don't change the fact that it's slavery.
Except that this is exactly the case, the issue lies in semantics.
So are you acknowledging that biblical slavery is not the same as modern slavery?
Prisoners of war and people in debt should be killed off like in ancient times before biblical laws. Is that what you are implying?
How can you read Exodus 21 and miss.
We can talk about the meaning of the word that was interpreted as 'servant.'
Whoops more New Testament.
Or people could just read Thomas Pain's Common Sense. He kinda covers all this.
Sure but the key to dealing with Christians of convenience is to quote the relevant verses. Not just the stuff they were fed in Sunday school and from the pulpit. They won't give a about Paine quotes. I was raised as a fundamental literalist. They glossed over the slavery stuff but I got the full on "the law Of Moses" and "the law is eternal" stuff from the Jesus my entire childhood.
Then I learned about combustion, surface tension and meiosis. is absurd and obviously contrived.
You're putting to great a value on the ability to philosophize.
Agreed.True.
the fact that God condones man owning another man is enough to legitimately call the Bible bull .
but what's awesome is that the bull doesn't stop there.
It was a sarcastic "dunno".
but of course you didn't know that.
It was a sarcastic "of course you don't."
And my comment still had nothing to do with you.
I never implied it had anything to do with me.
No sarcasm.
Oh ok. So you quoted me and provided a response that had nothing to do with my quote.
Got it. Keep up the good work.
That last part was sarcasm.
non believers still typing with conviction and dedication about a God they don't believe in???
hai guys
hows everybody doing?
Doing good. Just hangin out talking basketball. I heard your picture got posted and outed you as a 6'0" 320lb Jew.
Yup. Im a fat Jew named Andrew. I made it rhyme to sound more catchy and draw attention away from the utter humiliation FkLA unleashed on me.
I'm studying for the last final I'll ever have as an undergraduate tbh, howeva it's the 400 level maf class I need for my minor so there's no way I can cheese my way through it like most business classes
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
