Conflicting statements in the bible

[Statler Waldorf]

Well, at least you admit that you are locked into religion's grip. Doesn't help your argument, but at least it's "intellectually honest".

There’s no reason to abandon a logically sound position.

Sure, I'm making a conscious choice to respond to you right now, just as you will make a conscious choice whether to respond to me.

That’s not a proof, that’s an assertion. How do you know you are making a conscious choice freely?

I admit that I have made no attempt, up to this point, to thoroughly explain Calvanism.

I was not talking about a thorough explanation; I was talking about your misrepresentation of Calvinism up to this point in time.

The fact is, the vast majority of Christians are not Calvanists, so it's rarely relevant in any of these discussions.

The vast majority of theologians are Calvinists though.

In fact, around here, it's just with you, as far as I can tell.

There are a couple of us on here, but I am not sure why you think that’s relevant.

Who's we and what do you believe? Can I assume by your use of the word we you mean 'all' Christians? Or is there some undefined subset of Christians with which you more closely associate with theoligically? Why is this distinction important?

Yes, I am a Reformed Christian, and the distinction is very important.

Because, in another thread you reduced the argument to a definition of 'atheism', which had fuck all to do with the original argument.

Surely you’re not talking about the thread that was totally about what the term atheism properly meant are you? I sure hope not!

I am saying that a moral code that justifies genocide is not logical; it reflects the sort of tribal thinking that human societies have followed in the past, and which I think humanity is working to overcome today. It's one reason that I think mankind developed morals all on his own: moral codes of the past justified actions that more and more people today would reject as cruel and irrational. I think that tribalism slows the development of moral codes because it gives us a reason to segregate ourselves based on criteria (ethnic origin, skin color, language, religious belief) that shouldn't be a barrier to finding common ground.

You’re going to have to be a bit more specific because I am not aware of what is necessarily illogical about genocide. I mean if the goal is to get rid of a particular group of people, then how is killing that group of people illogical? I am not following that my friend. You also said that morals develop, what do they develop towards? This is very interesting, thanks for the patience.