Home » General Discussions » Heated Discussions and Debates » Questions I would like to pose to athiests
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Questions I would like to pose to athiests [message #445898 is a reply to message #445881] |
Mon, 18 April 2011 13:26   |
 |
MUDKIPS
Messages: 214
Registered: August 2007
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
| shippo wrote on Sun, 17 April 2011 18:25 |
basicly I believe the Bible is 100% fact and that it is what we are to live our lives by. tradition or other sorces are not to be accepted in place of the Bible.
|
Exactly what I was hoping for.
The vast majority of the bible, and christian religion, is not remotely christian.
During the 4th, 5th and 6th centuries when Christianity became prominent, there was a need for it to be defined. In a number of councils (most famously the council of Nicaea) various elements of bible literature and rites were being decided on.
One major issue was the split between Aristotelean and Platonic philosophy: Which one would christianity follow?
Aristotelean philosophy meant following a certain set of rules based mainly on virtues, that would provide a system to base your actions on, and judge them by.
Platonic philsophy meant following exalted ideals. Inattainable perfect goals and states of being, that one should strive for their whole life.
The most fervent follower of the Platonic line (and one of the "founding fathers" of it) was Augustinus, and it's his system of beliefs that was adapted in christianity. What does this mean? Basically, a load of bishops sat down, and decided what was and was not to be put in the bible. Some gospels were removed, others were altered (this is all on paper)
(cant be arsed to type the rest now, ill continue later)
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Questions I would like to pose to athiests [message #445923 is a reply to message #442568] |
Tue, 19 April 2011 01:22 |
|
MUDKIPS
Messages: 214
Registered: August 2007
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
Alright, time to resume my post.
Basically, what was really being decided was, what was more important: worshipping an ideal, or practicing an ideal? The decision was obviously made to worship the ideal. This was very problematic, although people at the time did not realise it.
The original jewish faith that christianity is based on evolved from and among the various polytheistic religions in the fertile crescent and around, heavily influenced by Assyrian and Babylonian religions, which in turn were influenced by Sumerian religions.
These were very focused on worshipping the king as an agent of the gods, who was given the tools to build cities, empires, you name it. This was a religion that was very much based on action, and deeds, through a system of beliefs that was reinforced with rituals and religious tablets all over the land. For instance, seals were stamped with godly symbols, and if any thief would break them he would call the wrath of that particular god upon himself.
Judaism evolved to be a monotheistic mirror of this kind of religion; based on an ideal of a promised land in which the people shall live according to the laws laid down by their god.
Jesus of Nazareth, someone other than him, or maybe the same man who went by a different line, wanted to distantiate himself from the promised land ideal, and focus more on the "good life" aspect of Judaism, ie, if everyone follows the rules and lives by these loving ideals, we might have a good world.
So, instead of following the original Aristotelean ideals of Jesus, a Platonic way of thinking was adapted. This meant more focus on the worship and belief, rather than actual acts. This meant that instead of making an effort for a more virtuous and better world, more effort was made to make people believe. This in time led to the persecution of heretics (that are now considered saints in some of the more orthodox christian ways) and the enforcement of silly doctrines, based on superstition. A lot of adaptations were made to the bible to reinforce this new way of thinking about christianity, so many that if you compare original greek manuscripts to say, a 7th century bible, you'd think they were from two completely different religions.
What is my "problem" with this? Let's have a look at the differences: Jews are known for their entrepeneurship, ingenuity and perseverence. They thrive in difficult environments (like in the early medieval ghettos in italy, or during the roman occupation where a whole new form of judaism was born) and through all their hardships have still survived.
Christians are no longer known for their compassion, which is what the original focus of christianity was. Instead they are known for their unrelenting quest to convert everyone (inquisitions, burning of heretics, conversion attempts of indians), corruption, arrogance and in modern days, pedophile priests.
(again, cant be arsed to continue, maybe later today)
|
|
|
|
| Re: Questions I would like to pose to athiests [message #445924 is a reply to message #445910] |
Tue, 19 April 2011 02:30 |
 |
Spoony
Messages: 3915
Registered: January 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars)
Tactics & Strategies Moderator |
|
|
| shippo wrote on Mon, 18 April 2011 20:10 |
Abiogenesis is an interesting subject. I think that if they could get this to work we could do a lot of things with this for the benefit of the medical field. However keep in mind that they still can't get a living cell yet and that's with them knowing what they are trying to create. With evolution, it is random. So trying to create something as complicated as a living cell randomly, that's preaty difficult.
|
Sure. But according to what you've said so far, the origin of life is however this god of yours came into being; you haven't yet said how you think that happened. If you find it difficult to believe that a single cell could arise, I'm not sure why you find it easier to account for an enormously powerful and super-intelligent entity instead.
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
why do you think that?
|
Well I haven't found any thing to prove it not being 100% accurate.
|
that's a really bizarre way to reason.
firstly there are a whole lot of books in the bible, written by different authors - in most cases, almost nothing is known about those authors. and which books were included in the bible and which weren't (lots of them were rejected) was decided by a group of bickering politicians and religious leaders well over a thousand years ago, but hundreds of years after Jesus and thousands of years after Moses (if there was such person as either). if you want to say you trust this bickering group of men, at least some of whom clearly had vested interests in the question, to decide which books were "inspired by God" and which were not, go ahead - you're then left with the question of proving there's a god at all, then that these books really were inspired by that god, then that this god is right all the time.
instead you seem to be taking the position of swallowing this 1000-page book in its entirety until someone can point out a flaw.
well, OK then. two things. you said a few posts ago that you not only think it's 100% accurate, but that we should live our lives by it and reject other sources in favour of the Bible. OK then. i'll take one point about the supposed 'truth' of the books and one point about the way we should live our lives.
truth first. who was Joseph's father? two of the gospels give entirely different answers to this question. (joseph referring to jesus's father, not the technicolor dreamcoat guy in Genesis)
now, on the way we should live. here's a question: what should we as a society do when a man commits the crime of rape against a woman? what should the laws be?
i say the man should be put in prison for a long time, and the woman should have counselling available if she wants it.
the bible says the victim is forced to marry her attacker.
which of these two is better? or do you have a better idea than either?
i say that if that really did come from a god, he has no fucking idea.
Unleash the Renerageâ„¢
Renedrama [ren-i-drah-muh]
- noun
1. the inevitable criticism one receives after doing something awful
|
|
|
|
| Re: Questions I would like to pose to athiests [message #445954 is a reply to message #442568] |
Tue, 19 April 2011 15:44 |
 |
shippo
Messages: 65
Registered: August 2009
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
| Spoony wrote on Tue, 19 April 2011 02:30 |
Sure. But according to what you've said so far, the origin of life is however this god of yours came into being; you haven't yet said how you think that happened. If you find it difficult to believe that a single cell could arise, I'm not sure why you find it easier to account for an enormously powerful and super-intelligent entity instead.
|
we as christians believe that he has always existed, and that he is outside the time line of us here one earth, so He has existed past, present and future.. (I can explain and go more indeepth with this if you like)
| Quote: |
truth first. who was Joseph's father? two of the gospels give entirely different answers to this question. (joseph referring to jesus's father, not the technicolor dreamcoat guy in Genesis)
|
Well I'm no Biblical schollar, but I will try to answere both questions as best I can.
from what I have learned and read most biblical scholors belive that one line was purly the male or Joseph's line the other was Marry's and the part where it says son of, probably ment son-in-law of, which would make sence, because even now it is not uncommon to be refered to as son or father for in-laws.
| Quote: |
now, on the way we should live. here's a question: what should we as a society do when a man commits the crime of rape against a woman? what should the laws be?
i say the man should be put in prison for a long time, and the woman should have counselling available if she wants it.
the bible says the victim is forced to marry her attacker.
which of these two is better? or do you have a better idea than either?
|
Well I'm no Sociologest, but you have to keep in mind that they have a much different culture than ours. Alos keep in mind that the attacker would be put to death if she was married. But as far as the question you put forth I don't know enough about the Middle eastern culture and values to make an honest opinion on it. 
@MUDKIPS interesting stuff. I see your still typing though so i'll wait untill your done.
[Updated on: Tue, 19 April 2011 15:48] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: Questions I would like to pose to athiests [message #445963 is a reply to message #445954] |
Tue, 19 April 2011 18:54 |
|
Spoony
Messages: 3915
Registered: January 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars)
Tactics & Strategies Moderator |
|
|
| shippo wrote on Tue, 19 April 2011 15:44 |
we as christians believe that he has always existed, and that he is outside the time line of us here one earth, so He has existed past, present and future.. (I can explain and go more indeepth with this if you like)
|
i think you'd better, because you're making an enormous claim here. what do you have to back up such a huge assertion, much much much bigger than anything any scientist says about the origin of life?
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
truth first. who was Joseph's father? two of the gospels give entirely different answers to this question. (joseph referring to jesus's father, not the technicolor dreamcoat guy in Genesis)
|
Well I'm no Biblical schollar, but I will try to answere both questions as best I can.
from what I have learned and read most biblical scholors belive that one line was purly the male or Joseph's line the other was Marry's and the part where it says son of, probably ment son-in-law of, which would make sence, because even now it is not uncommon to be refered to as son or father for in-laws.
|
yeah, "biblical scholar" is a phrase you'll hear whenever someone tries to get around the fact that something the bible says is either obviously wrong or morally appalling. another is "theology".
what a biblical scholar or a theologian will never tell you is "yeah, that's wrong, i dunno why he wrote that"
| Quote: |
Well I'm no Sociologest, but you have to keep in mind that they have a much different culture than ours. Alos keep in mind that the attacker would be put to death if she was married. But as far as the question you put forth I don't know enough about the Middle eastern culture and values to make an honest opinion on it.
|
Firstly, what makes you think this only instructs those people at that time and place? The commandment is not repudiated later in the book. God gave you this rule and He has not repealed it.
Secondly, the point about whether the attacker was married shows you what's going on here; it's a culture where women are seen as property, and this is hardly the only thing in the bible which shows that. If she's married then raping her is a terrible offence - not because of any consideration of the woman as a human being, but because you're using another man's property. If she's not married then you can just rape her, pay off her dad and you've bought yourself a wife, if "wife" is the right word... "sex slave" is probably nearer the mark.
I'm going to repeat the original assertion just to see if I can get the reaction such a monstrous thing deserves. If a man rapes a woman, they have to get married. The victim of a violent sexual assault is then forced to spend the rest of her life married to the scum who violated her. Anyone of normal moral sensibilities ought to "have an opinion" on it without needing to research the culture; this alone tells you all you need to know about the culture. And remember, this law is coming to you from this god of yours. Go ask your mother or your sister's opinion on it, if you dare. Stand up in church next time you're there and say there's a law in the Bible we as a society are not following. Write to your congressman about it, maybe.
Unleash the Renerageâ„¢
Renedrama [ren-i-drah-muh]
- noun
1. the inevitable criticism one receives after doing something awful
[Updated on: Tue, 19 April 2011 18:56] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: Questions I would like to pose to athiests [message #445981 is a reply to message #445963] |
Wed, 20 April 2011 05:25 |
|
shippo
Messages: 65
Registered: August 2009
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
We believe that God has always exsisted. He created the world and univers. Like The Theory of Evolution, we have no scientific(impearial) evidence of how the world/univers began, but it is what we believe, just like your belief.
| Quote: |
yeah, "biblical scholar" is a phrase you'll hear whenever someone tries to get around the fact that something the bible says is either obviously wrong or morally appalling. another is "theology".
what a biblical scholar or a theologian will never tell you is "yeah, that's wrong, i dunno why he wrote that"
|
Would it help you if I just removed the biblical scholar part? I always thought a biblical scholar was a person who studied the Bible and it's authenticity.
| Quote: |
Firstly, what makes you think this only instructs those people at that time and place?
|
This is found in Leviticus wich is made up of laws and rules to govern the Isrealite's society.
If you don't mind me asking what (in your opinnion) makes moral values right?
[Updated on: Wed, 20 April 2011 05:27] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: Questions I would like to pose to athiests [message #445982 is a reply to message #445981] |
Wed, 20 April 2011 06:42 |
|
Spoony
Messages: 3915
Registered: January 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars)
Tactics & Strategies Moderator |
|
|
| shippo wrote on Wed, 20 April 2011 05:25 |
We believe that God has always exsisted. He created the world and univers. Like The Theory of Evolution, we have no scientific(impearial) evidence of how the world/univers began, but it is what we believe, just like your belief.
|
oh dear. i thought we'd already cleared up the fact that evolution doesn't attempt to explain the origin of the "world and universe". evolution is a theory and a fact that explains a biological process whereby living things develop over time (very very long periods of time, of course), and there's actually quite a lot of evidence for it. the fossil record, the record of molecular biology, the genome project... the fact it's been physically observed, the fact that like a good theory it makes predictions which have borne out, etc.
please free yourself of the "just like your belief" idea. a few posts ago you said that you thought everything in the bible was 100% true, and later you said this was because nobody had found anything to suggest otherwise. this is nothing at all like the way scientists approach darwin's theory.
but i'm glad to hear you say you have no evidence for creationism. most creationists aren't that honest.
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
yeah, "biblical scholar" is a phrase you'll hear whenever someone tries to get around the fact that something the bible says is either obviously wrong or morally appalling. another is "theology".
what a biblical scholar or a theologian will never tell you is "yeah, that's wrong, i dunno why he wrote that"
|
Would it help you if I just removed the biblical scholar part? I always thought a biblical scholar was a person who studied the Bible and it's authenticity.
|
if someone studied the bible and its authenticity and came up with conclusions unflattering to christianity and/or judaism, would you consider him/her to be a biblical scholar?
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
Firstly, what makes you think this only instructs those people at that time and place?
|
This is found in Leviticus wich is made up of laws and rules to govern the Isrealite's society.
|
deutoronomy actually, though that's a forgivable error. those two books are pretty similar in terms of barbarism.
well, if you think these laws - sick, disgusting, unjust laws that strip human beings of their dignity - only apply to one particular group of people, do you think the same about the rest of the old testament? the ten commandments, for example? and you said earlier that you didn't know much about the culture at the time. well, the laws are coming from god, aren't they? if it's as brutal and unjust a society as it sounds, you have your god to thank for it; his laws reinforce the appalling state of affairs.
| Quote: |
If you don't mind me asking what (in your opinnion) makes moral values right?
|
you're still talking about the law that says a rape victim must marry her attacker, are you? someone has to explain to you what's wrong with that?
Unleash the Renerageâ„¢
Renedrama [ren-i-drah-muh]
- noun
1. the inevitable criticism one receives after doing something awful
|
|
|
|
| Re: Questions I would like to pose to athiests [message #445990 is a reply to message #445982] |
Wed, 20 April 2011 16:55 |
|
shippo
Messages: 65
Registered: August 2009
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
(question refrased)
Creationists believe: in the begining was God, and he created the univers, our world, ect.
as Evolutionists what do you believe was the begining of the univers? (I'm going somewere with this)
| Quote: |
if someone studied the bible and its authenticity and came up with conclusions unflattering to christianity and/or judaism, would you consider him/her to be a biblical scholar?
|
Yes
if a scientist studied biology and came up with conclusions unflattering to The Theory of Evolution you would still consider him/her to be a "valid" scientist right?
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
Firstly, what makes you think this only instructs those people at that time and place?
|
This is found in Leviticus wich is made up of laws and rules to govern the Isrealite's society.
|
deutoronomy actually, though that's a forgivable error. those two books are pretty similar in terms of barbarism.
well, if you think these laws - sick, disgusting, unjust laws that strip human beings of their dignity - only apply to one particular group of people, do you think the same about the rest of the old testament? the ten commandments, for example? and you said earlier that you didn't know much about the culture at the time. well, the laws are coming from god, aren't they? if it's as brutal and unjust a society as it sounds, you have your god to thank for it; his laws reinforce the appalling state of affairs.
|
I was talking with my mom (she likes to study the Bible indeepth)
she was saying that back then in those times, the culture had arranged marrages, and the men were the head of the house hold and were required to work and provide for their house holds, make all decisions, and were generaly responsible for them. the law in Dureronomy was more of a protection for the woman and a punishment for the man. back then the concept of marrage was way different than what it has become today. the man was forced to pay the father 50 sheckls (large sum) and he had to marry her and was forced to take care of and provide for here as long as he lived.
Do you know who the Jews for Jesus are? if you don't they are jews who have become christians but they know all the history and culture of the jews and the old testament. they also answer question people have about things, like this question you gave. if you like I can im the email address of one of them to you.
| Quote: |
If you don't mind me asking what (in your opinnion) makes moral values right?
|
I'm asking about them in general in your opinion why do you believe your morals or values are right? what is your basis for saying your morals are "good" and other things are "bad"?
|
|
|
|
| Re: Questions I would like to pose to athiests [message #445992 is a reply to message #445990] |
Wed, 20 April 2011 18:26 |
|
Spoony
Messages: 3915
Registered: January 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars)
Tactics & Strategies Moderator |
|
|
| shippo wrote on Wed, 20 April 2011 16:55 |
(question refrased)
Creationists believe: in the begining was God, and he created the univers, our world, ect.
|
you've said you have no evidence for this, so if you want to assert that some entity did create the universe, it's an enormous jump from there to saying you know the first thing about that entity (using the word "he", for example)
| Quote: |
as Evolutionists what do you believe was the begining of the univers? (I'm going somewere with this)
|
i don't have the faintest idea, but at least i won't pretend i do.
| Quote: |
Yes
if a scientist studied biology and came up with conclusions unflattering to The Theory of Evolution you would still consider him/her to be a "valid" scientist right?
|
of course.
| Quote: |
I was talking with my mom (she likes to study the Bible indeepth)
she was saying that back then in those times, the culture had arranged marrages, and the men were the head of the house hold and were required to work and provide for their house holds, make all decisions, and were generaly responsible for them. the law in Dureronomy was more of a protection for the woman and a punishment for the man.
|
i expect if you had told her that the verse came from the Quran rather than the bible, her response would not be so polite.
forcing the victim of a violent sexual assault to marry her attacker is for her protection? no, putting the bastard in prison would be for her protection, and the protection of other women. punishment for the man? no, it's barely a punishment at all; it effectively means that a man can pick a wife just by raping her. it's a punishment for the woman. that's literally what it is. it is a punishment for the victim of a violent sexual assault; it makes her situation even worse. without any regard for what she wants for her future, whether she wants to get married at all or if she likes some other man, she's forced to marry a violent sexual predator.
| Quote: |
back then the concept of marrage was way different than what it has become today. the man was forced to pay the father 50 sheckls (large sum) and he had to marry her and was forced to take care of and provide for here as long as he lived.
|
the concept of marriage certainly is different. the bible approves of polygamy, for example; and it clearly views women as something like the property of men. think about that when you say the rapist has to look after her; you might as well say he's got to look after his livestock.
| Quote: |
Do you know who the Jews for Jesus are? if you don't they are jews who have become christians but they know all the history and culture of the jews and the old testament. they also answer question people have about things, like this question you gave. if you like I can im the email address of one of them to you.
|
whatever. christianity may have made a bad choice in deciding to keep the barbarism and brutality of the Old Testament when establishing itself as a religion.
can i press you for an answer about the ten commandments? you said the rape law is only for the israelites, doesn't that apply to the ten commandments then?
| Quote: |
I'm asking about them in general in your opinion why do you believe your morals or values are right? what is your basis for saying your morals are "good" and other things are "bad"
|
i'd rather stay specific than go general if it's all the same with you. we were talking about a law that says the victim of a violent sexual assault has to marry her attacker, which adds to the trauma of the crime by destroying her future. i've unequivocally condemned this as primitive barbarism; you've defended it. i don't think i'm the one with the explaining to do.
Unleash the Renerageâ„¢
Renedrama [ren-i-drah-muh]
- noun
1. the inevitable criticism one receives after doing something awful
|
|
|
|
| Re: Questions I would like to pose to athiests [message #445997 is a reply to message #445992] |
Wed, 20 April 2011 20:57 |
|
shippo
Messages: 65
Registered: August 2009
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
as Evolutionists what do you believe was the begining of the univers? (I'm going somewere with this)
|
i don't have the faintest idea, but at least i won't pretend i do.
|
you believe in Evolution but you have no idea how it happend. so doesn't that mean you believe this on faith?
| Quote: |
forcing the victim of a violent sexual assault to marry her attacker is for her protection? no, putting the bastard in prison would be for her protection, and the protection of other women. punishment for the man? no, it's barely a punishment at all; it effectively means that a man can pick a wife just by raping her. it's a punishment for the woman. that's literally what it is. it is a punishment for the victim of a violent sexual assault; it makes her situation even worse. without any regard for what she wants for her future, whether she wants to get married at all or if she likes some other man, she's forced to marry a violent sexual predator.
|
Like I have said before you are looking at this with the western culture in mind. this is Midle Eastern culture.
it's like the Europeans when they came to the Americas and were trying to trade and buy land from the Native Americans who had no concept of land ownership. Then they get mad at them for trespassing on THEIR land.
Even Jesus commented on this concept in Mark 10:2-6 on divorce.
2 Some Pharisees approached Him to test Him. They asked, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?" 3 He replied to them, "What did Moses command you?"
4 They said, "Moses permitted us to write divorce papers and send her away."
5 But Jesus told them, "He wrote this commandment for you because of the hardness of your hearts.
6 But from the beginning of creation God made them male and female.
7 For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife,
8 and the two will become one flesh. So they are no longer two, but one flesh.
9 Therefore what God has joined together, man must not separate."
God does not aprove of divorce yet he alowed it and gave ruels to govern it. God does not aprove of rape but He puts ruels in place for that too.
You keep gripeing about "I don't think its fair" or "that's not right" WHY is it right or wrong? what is your basis for saying this? And it beter not be, because laws or society says so. because in 1939 Nazi German society said it was fine to murder 3 million people, 1831 the American government said it was fine to take thousands of acers of Indian land and relocate the polulation, in 1949 China's society thought it was fair to take everyone's wealth, rich or poor and "redistribute" it.
| Quote: |
can i press you for an answer about the ten commandments? you said the rape law is only for the israelites, doesn't that apply to the ten commandments then?
|
I would be happy to answer it, but I think it would be best to finish the others first.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Questions I would like to pose to athiests [message #446000 is a reply to message #445997] |
Wed, 20 April 2011 21:47 |
|
Spoony
Messages: 3915
Registered: January 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars)
Tactics & Strategies Moderator |
|
|
| shippo wrote on Wed, 20 April 2011 20:57 |
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
as Evolutionists what do you believe was the begining of the univers? (I'm going somewere with this)
|
i don't have the faintest idea, but at least i won't pretend i do.
|
you believe in Evolution but you have no idea how it happend. so doesn't that mean you believe this on faith?
|
this is getting ridiculous, shippo. how many times have i told you that evolution does not attempt to explain the origin of the universe or the world? it covers living things. it does not say anything about planets and such.
as for "believe in evolution" and "evolutionists", are you trying to make it sound like the theory of evolution is equivalent to a religion? and no, faith is believing stuff without evidence, and there's an overwhelming amount of evidence for evolution.
| Quote: |
Like I have said before you are looking at this with the western culture in mind. this is Midle Eastern culture.
|
yes, i'm looking at it from the perspective of someone who views women as human beings, you're talking about a culture that doesn't. spare me your moral relativism, i'm right and the barbarians who wrote your holy book were wrong. modern secular western culture is better than the barbarism of the middle east a few thousand years ago. and please don't humiliate yourself by asking why, have more self-respect than that.
| Quote: |
God does not aprove of divorce yet he alowed it and gave ruels to govern it. God does not aprove of rape but He puts ruels in place for that too.
|
I don't approve of rape, which is why I suggested a different rule: the offender is put in prison for a long time, and counselling made available to the victim. by contrast, the bible's rules punish the victim and come pretty close to rewarding the offender? rules which take a traumatized victim of a violent sexual assault and make it so much worse for her by destroying her future, forcing her to marry her attacker. if you think a god came up with that, what a complete retard he is. he has no idea, NO IDEA of right and wrong. any person on the street could come up with a better law on rape than the idiot who wrote deuteronomy.
i don't think that came from a god, i think it was written and conceived by men, and since it clearly favours men my position seems a bit safer. there's no mystery. it was a barbaric culture and these barbarians wanted to make it easier to behave the way they liked, treating women as their property... so yeah, make laws they liked and say a god said so. of course.
as for "god does not approve of rape", that's not a safe assertion at all. even if we didn't have this rule on rape which punishes the victim and in a sense rewards the offender, perhaps you also wanna look at deuteronomy 20:10, samuel 12:11-14, deuteronomy 21:10-14, zechariah 14:1-2, numbers 31:7-18, judges 21:10-24... some of these are very enthusiastically in favour of rape.
| Quote: |
You keep gripeing about "I don't think its fair" or "that's not right" WHY is it right or wrong? what is your basis for saying this? And it beter not be, because laws or society says so. because in 1939 Nazi German society said it was fine to murder 3 million people, 1831 the American government said it was fine to take thousands of acers of Indian land and relocate the polulation, in 1949 China's society thought it was fair to take everyone's wealth, rich or poor and "redistribute" it.
|
again, it's really funny that you think i'm the one with the explaining to do. maybe you should ask why this god of yours punishes rape victims.
as for the ridiculous examples you degraded yourself by citing, that's easy. ask a European Jew if it was right to murder them for being the wrong religion. do you want to be murdered for being the wrong religion? no? then that's easy. don't murder someone else for being the wrong religion. hooray, we've learned that murdering people for not being the right religion is morally wrong, but it's very alarming that you didn't seem to know that already. if you are raped, do you want to be further punished by being forced to marry your attacker? do you mind the idea of your future being destroyed so you can be the plaything of a violent sex offender? if not, why not?
what a stupid question. no, worse than stupid... insulting. what a shining example of the damage religion can do to a person's mind.
Unleash the Renerageâ„¢
Renedrama [ren-i-drah-muh]
- noun
1. the inevitable criticism one receives after doing something awful
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Questions I would like to pose to athiests [message #446014 is a reply to message #446000] |
Thu, 21 April 2011 05:17 |
|
shippo
Messages: 65
Registered: August 2009
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
| Spoony wrote on Wed, 20 April 2011 21:47 |
| shippo wrote on Wed, 20 April 2011 20:57 |
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
as Evolutionists what do you believe was the begining of the univers? (I'm going somewere with this)
|
i don't have the faintest idea, but at least i won't pretend i do.
|
you believe in Evolution but you have no idea how it happend. so doesn't that mean you believe this on faith?
|
this is getting ridiculous, shippo. how many times have i told you that evolution does not attempt to explain the origin of the universe or the world? it covers living things. it does not say anything about planets and such.
|
The Theory does and that is what I was talking about. But it's ok I should have stated that more clearly above.
You said there is overwhelming evidence in support of evolution, the process, and not the theory I assume. Are you talking about macro evolution (process of one specie evolving into another) or micro evolution (process of smaller changes within the same specie)? I define specie as a group of animals that look similar and can reproduce like (dogs and wolves I group them under the dog specie).
| Quote: |
as for "god does not approve of rape", that's not a safe assertion at all. even if we didn't have this rule on rape which punishes the victim and in a sense rewards the offender, perhaps you also wanna look at deuteronomy 20:10, samuel 12:11-14, deuteronomy 21:10-14, zechariah 14:1-2, numbers 31:7-18, judges 21:10-24... some of these are very enthusiastically in favour of rape.
|
Those are very poor examples. Most of them are prophecies about the Israelites being attacked and plundered. Judges 21:10-24 is the only one that even comes close and even in that one God never commanded any of it.
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
You keep gripeing about "I don't think its fair" or "that's not right" WHY is it right or wrong? what is your basis for saying this? And it beter not be, because laws or society says so. because in 1939 Nazi German society said it was fine to murder 3 million people, 1831 the American government said it was fine to take thousands of acers of Indian land and relocate the polulation, in 1949 China's society thought it was fair to take everyone's wealth, rich or poor and "redistribute" it.
|
again, it's really funny that you think i'm the one with the explaining to do. maybe you should ask why this god of yours punishes rape victims.
as for the ridiculous examples you degraded yourself by citing, that's easy. ask a European Jew if it was right to murder them for being the wrong religion. do you want to be murdered for being the wrong religion? no? then that's easy. don't murder someone else for being the wrong religion. hooray, we've learned that murdering people for not being the right religion is morally wrong, but it's very alarming that you didn't seem to know that already. if you are raped, do you want to be further punished by being forced to marry your attacker? do you mind the idea of your future being destroyed so you can be the plaything of a violent sex offender? if not, why not?
what a stupid question. no, worse than stupid... insulting. what a shining example of the damage religion can do to a person's mind.
|
What a nice way to beat about the bush. I asked one simple question: what is the basis of your moral values (why is it right or worng). You have avoided it 3 times. If you don't want to answer it, just say so but please don't keep avoiding it.
You don't have to reply but attest think about this, if you don't have God telling you what is morally right or wrong, who then decides what is?
@ Herr Surth lol sorry, spelling was my worst subject in school. I have used spell check so now it should be easier to read.
[Updated on: Thu, 21 April 2011 05:24] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: Questions I would like to pose to athiests [message #446017 is a reply to message #446014] |
Thu, 21 April 2011 06:55 |
|
Spoony
Messages: 3915
Registered: January 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars)
Tactics & Strategies Moderator |
|
|
please don't lie and say i avoided the question, as insulting and degrading a question as it was (seriously, i can't believe i've just had to explain to someone why murdering the jewish population of europe was wrong) - any idiot can see i answered it.
and for the record, it was never me who had the explaining to do in terms of morality; my moral sense, while not perfect, is obviously superior to yours and MASSIVELY superior to whoever conceived your holy books. i would ask where you get your sense of right and wrong from, but i'm not persuaded you have one.
Unleash the Renerageâ„¢
Renedrama [ren-i-drah-muh]
- noun
1. the inevitable criticism one receives after doing something awful
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Questions I would like to pose to athiests [message #446059 is a reply to message #446052] |
Fri, 22 April 2011 01:01 |
|
Spoony
Messages: 3915
Registered: January 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars)
Tactics & Strategies Moderator |
|
|
| shippo wrote on Thu, 21 April 2011 21:34 |
I used those 3 examples to prove that moral values based on just society alone is subject to the whims of man.
|
and i proved you don't need to base moral values on the majority or who's in power, you just need to ask one person who'll be the victim of what you're talking about.
does anyone want to be murdered for being the wrong religion? no? then don't be the one doing the murdering. do you want to be a slave? then don't be a slave-holder.
design the rules of society as if you didn't know whereabouts in that society you would be. for example, say slavery is wrong because you don't know whether you might be a slave or not.
| Quote: |
If man decides what is right or wrong, then we have no moral absolutes and hence nothing to say what is right or wrong.
|
good lord, see what i said before about how much damage religion can do. it's completely shredded your moral sensibilities.
firstly, you seem to define a "moral absolute" as a moral idea that was decided by something non-human. well, suppose the ideas in your bible really did come from a god, though they look like they came from men - primitive, barbaric men at that. doesn't mean that god has any fucking clue about how to run a civilised society. see the rape rule - this god has NO FUCKING CLUE. his moral ideas are TERRIBLE. get that word, shippo - TERRIBLE. if your god's moral ideas are "absolute", they're absolutely awful.
secondly, if there really was no such thing as a moral absolute, it would in no way follow that there was "nothing to say" on right and wrong. maybe your preacher has been telling you otherwise, but he wasn't telling you for your own good, just like whoever told you the absurd ideas about evolution didn't want you to be educated on the subject.
thirdly, your argument destroys itself. if you think humans can't decide right and wrong, then you can't decide who can decide right and wrong for you either. see? you have such a low opinion of humanity that we have "nothing to say" on morality; then how do you know this god of yours is good?
Unleash the Renerageâ„¢
Renedrama [ren-i-drah-muh]
- noun
1. the inevitable criticism one receives after doing something awful
[Updated on: Fri, 22 April 2011 01:20] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Questions I would like to pose to athiests [message #446068 is a reply to message #446065] |
Fri, 22 April 2011 05:17 |
|
Spoony
Messages: 3915
Registered: January 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars)
Tactics & Strategies Moderator |
|
|
| shippo wrote on Fri, 22 April 2011 04:30 |
So in your opinion, you say that moral, values and absolutes come from one's opinion of how one would wish to be treated?
ex. someone steals my car from me. I don't like it. so I don't think stealing is a good thing.
|
it's a good start, and it's miles and miles and miles better than the crap you read in the bible.
and no, surth, i don't think he's mentally deficient, i think he's been indoctrinated.
Unleash the Renerageâ„¢
Renedrama [ren-i-drah-muh]
- noun
1. the inevitable criticism one receives after doing something awful
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sat Nov 16 13:15:28 MST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02165 seconds
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
