Reply With Quote
Pretty much.
So why single out RG? I've never seen him claim to be wonderful.
I've seen xmas claim to be a decent person though. I've also seen very angry posts from him.
probably not, we all seem to be pretty flawed.
Pretty much.
So why single out RG? I've never seen him claim to be wonderful.
I've seen xmas claim to be a decent person though. I've also seen very angry posts from him.
I think I fixed both links for you in my posts, but just in case here they are again.
http://www.science20.com/writer_on_t..._a_joke-139982
http://www.str.org/blog/how-christia...e#.U_d37KONq71
Last edited by xmas1997; 08-22-2014 at 12:07 PM.
xmas never directed an angry outburst at me.
The article seems to focus on poor suppositions. Hank writes about an"affinity for the unknown", which humans seem to possess, yet conflates this with a belief in supernatural without one shred of work behind this.
That the article breaks down into metaphysics absolutely writes it off as a source of anything approaching instrumental rationality. When we venture into the world of epistemological metaphysics, then the rational debate is over as the framework cannot support instrumental rationality.
To perform a touchdown dance upon anything drawn from epistemological rationality is ludicrous for a mul ude of reasons. But in the world of methaphysics, reasons are irrelative.
That would be easier to believe, if you had not ignored all the posts I gave you concerning the rats.
You, like so many others, really don't care what is true.
That much is obvious.
I would claim to be a generally decent human being. I try. Not perfect, by any stretch, but I do take ethics fairly seriously.
I would also claim to be morally superior to bible God, but that isn't a very high bar to clear.
I will also freely admit that I do get pissed occasionally. Lying tends to do that.
So many lie when it comes to debates like this, it is almost second nature so much that they don't even notice when they are doing it.
(edit-additional thought)
Snakeboy's "you are pretending this question doesn't exist" schtick falls into that category.
He asked a question, then when he didn't get the answer he wanted, lied about not getting an answer at all.
That is the kind of dishonesty I am talking about. Once someone is not only willing to ignore what you say, but lie to your face about what you said, that is pretty much time to revoke their "attention from you" card.
So you point out all the occasions that religion has dictated ethics and reacted angrily to anyone violates those ethics yet you've set your own rigid ethics and react angrily to anyone who violates those ethics in your eyes. Pot meet kettle.
What question do you think I was asking you?
Aren't you being a bit harsh?
And being judgmental concerning all of Christianity?
Plus you are taking only a partial Biblical worldview and applying it to all of Christianity as if we all believe this way.
I can assure you that most of Christianity does not take the bible LITERALLY, which is what you are doing in your critiques.
From what I have read in the past of some of your beliefs and of your wife's beliefs, it is hard to know which side of the fence you are on.
I thought you were more intelligent than that and could differentiate the differences of the denominations.
The VAST majority of Christianity does not interpret the bible literally and the bible isn't even dogma to them, but rather various doctrines particular to certain sects.
And as you said, there are many books of God.
What you are doing is reacting like the typical unhappy hostile unreasonable atheists here on ST.
Blake likes to lie a lot and over exaggerate in order to appease his fragile ego. To me, it is the epitome of stupidity to get over emotional on a sports message board, I did that already arguing with SBM about Pop and all it did was make me look and feel like a fool.
I learned my lesson quickly and never made it again.
I do get frustrated with certain posters and especially the trolls on here and tell them to go off, but frustration is a of a lot different than being "angry" at them because I have nothing against them, they are what they are, trolls.
I give respect where respect is due and never attack or insult until I am insulted first, plus I always try to give the benefit of the doubt.
And you are a decent respectful poster IMHO with insights that I might not have and can learn from.
By the way, what I just wrote to snakeboy also applies to you.
I understand your criticism of the article, it is somewhat the same as mine.
I am glad you seem to have a working knowledge of metaphysics however, that helps.
I am glad I was finally able to share the article with you though because as we all know, there are kernels of truth in most everything.
Correct. I cannot.
No one else can either.
Yet people argue to the death on something that no one can define.
Sounds like lunacy doesn't it?
Welcome to the lunatic world - run by lunatics - as I have stated since day 1.
I'm not reading any of your garbage. When you can from your own opinion on the Bible without getting your info/beliefs from evilbible.com then I will discuss the Bible with you.
I used to report on here, although blake will spin his usual lie that I am complaining, that this site is a microcosmic sampling of the macrocosmic world, but I need to amend that description.
This site is an aberration of the outside world tbqh.
No other site that I know of on the internet, nor anything in the outside world, comes even close to having the inanity this one does.
I think that is part of it's appeal, it is one of an interesting and bizarre social aberration.
I don't need to argue anything. I make no claims about "God", other than to say I see no evidence for such a thing.
I will point out flaws in others reasoning though. That is fun.
Rob, you do realize that "discussing" the Bible is not their intention, don't you?
All they really want is an excuse to get all their years and years of frustrations with life out and attributing it to being the fault of God and or the Bible, when the real truth is that it is all of their own doing, and they need a scapegoat other than themselves.
It won't matter. You'll claim "wrong" regardless.
It would be wonderful if atheist assholes go to , bible thumpers get buried in the ground and just rot, and all the genuinely good people who live their lives based on humane morals get whatever they want from an afterlife (or non afterlife).
LOL "rigid standard of ethics"
Is the mass slaughter of children evil?
It is an easy question to answer, for those with even the most basic standards of ethics.
^ another lieRob, you do realize that "discussing" the Bible is not their intention, don't you?
All they really want is an excuse to get all their years and years of frustrations with life out and attributing it to being that fault of God and the Bible, when the real truth is that it is all of their own doing, and they need a scapegoat other than themselves.
How does someone get what they want from a non-afterlife
More importantly, even if you don't want to have your nose rubbed in the dog , you should ask yourself:
"why should I have to lie so hard to defend my faith"?
^Case in point^.
Still can't get over what a predictable puppet you are and that you were fooled into posting your troll posts in threads designed just for you trolls to make classic fools of yourself.
Perhaps an individual is fine with just being buried and not having their soul or conscience live on in an afterlife. So by not being subjected to one when they die, they are getting what they wanted.
Glad to read an objective but mildly ironic point of view for a change.
Blake will love having the worms and maggots crawl all through him, probably fantasizes about it everyday.
I went back and re-read till I found it.
"Why do we exist"
Because the universe happened. It happened in such a way as to cause life to arise, as improbable things will do, given enough time and space.
As I noted before, you are attempting to fit in "God" into the gaps in our knowledge, i.e. the argument from ignorance.
What you are driving at, ultimately, is "what caused the universe".
To be honest: I don't know.
The problem with asserting "God caused it", is that it involves problems of infinite regression, and even more unsupported assertions.
Again, an argument from ignorance.
You have inserted your favorite fairy story, as humans have always done, into the gaps in what is known. e.g. "What causes the sun to rise?" "A magic man in a flaming chariot".
As for my "outburst":
GMAFB.
I realize you are probably from a generation of cell-phone text addled intellectual midgets who generally have problems stringing together coherent, correctly-spelled sentences, but I assure you, there are people out there who can, and do, communicate through writing.
Communication of multiple, or complex ideas requires something your lazy ass can't do.
I don't think you have put together a post with more than a few sentences the entire time you have been here.
No wonder you think anything that might challenge the attention span of a pre-schooler is an "outburst".
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions