(June 27, 2023 at 12:00 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote:

(June 27, 2023 at 11:48 am)R-Farmer Wrote: I am speaking or myself. That is why I said, "I contend that all forms of morality are relative."

I'm going to chalk this one up to a language comprehension problem.  Speaking for yourself and your god, you could only contend that your morality and your gods morality were relative - though I don't think even that would be accurate - particularly given your most recent responses.

Again from our last discussion what you deem as 'God's morality' is not morality at all but righteousness. As morality is man's ever changing standard not God's. So when speaking of a moral standard I can only speak for myself. meaning what I see as right and wrong may not be what god sees as right and wrong.

Quote:You espouse a worldview where you would claim to believe even what you know to be false.

I never said I knew my understanding of how the whole Ark narrative played out was false. I said it did not matter to me if it was right or wrong. Meaning whether I am right or whether I am wrong about the ark, it does not change what I believe. I consider my egg baby mammal theory a plausible way for all of this to have gone down IF in fact the ark was indeed a wooden boat facing a global flood..

You are claiming I am knowing spreading disinformation to try and put people off the true story. Not the case. as we truly do not know if the story is meant to be taken at face value, if this was a local flood or a global one. 

When asked to represent scripture my exegesis is defined by the parameters of the story. Meaning I can't tell people that the ark was a space ship. If giving a biblical account it was a wooden ship made from worm wood.. What is worm wood? we don't know. so will it break my faith to fine out worm wood was a stone or some sort of alloy? No. No more than it would if I found out it was made from cedar or some extinct tree that did not grow back after the flood.

My beliefs are fluid, but contained with in the parameters of scripture.

Quote:  Where there is no obligation to tell the truth, not even about your god,

that is a disingenuous assessment. My obligation to the truth is to God.

Quote:because there is no moral standard, only a transactional interaction.  You say things because you want something.  God, you hope, is cool with this.

If you go back to post 183 I clearly say:

Quote:And if you took say, eggs and baby animals instead of full grown adults? If eggs were taken that would represent all avian reptiles and amphibians which would take up a fraction of the space and eliminate the need to feed them. (that's 3/4s of every class of creature on the planet.) Then if you took baby mammals all you would need is a large source of milk and that would also take up a fraction of the space and reduce the needs for most of the food.

That said the story of the ark is not a logistical tale of how one man saved the world from an angry God, but how God used and helped one man save the world from a level of sin it had never seen before or have seen since.

Me telling you guys that the are is not a logistic tale... is me telling you what I am sharing is not meant to be taken as if it were written in stone. The ark narrative was never meant to be seen or understood as a way one man defied God and saved the world from him as if the things Noah did had any meaning by itself.

The central truth behind the Flood narrative is about How God used the faith of one man to save all of creation from an evil the world had never seen before or since.

You've already crossed the "alien spaceship" rubicon. That's pretty much the end for your ark bit as far as I'm concerned.

You must mean gods godness, again, as there is no such thing as right, in fact, for there to be any righteousness, according to you. Stop bickering with me. Tell me that I've got you all wrong or got you all right, and then at least we can have an honest discussion about whatever it is you really believe. I think you believe in a purely transactional amoral worldview.

alien spaceship is vastly more plausible than the flood and the ark because it actually doesn’t intrinsically violate any known laws of natural science.

Where as the story of the flood implicitly, one way or another, violates a whole array of them.

UFOlogists would be no more than innocently misguided enthusiasts compared to the level 10 ignorant morons that populate the flood myth community

(June 27, 2023 at 12:05 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: If moral dicta from God are relative, why should I be punished for disobeying them?

Moral dicta only represent 1/3 of God's total law. the other 2/3 have no intrinsic moral value at all. (how and when to wash hands, wearing blended fabrics, being circumcised 8 days after one is born (male) how to sacrifice animals, which days to take off, how to spend those days off, what food to eat or not eat. etc etc. None o which have any moral value what so ever.

The only reason to follow god's law is if you want to be apart of his covenant. Which in the OT amounted to Health, wealth long life and a piece of the promised land. IF and only if you were born a jew. Now the stakes are high in that eternal life is on the table, which is open to everyone.

If you do not want to be apart of this new covenant/contract, then you just live your life as you wish under the master/lord we were all born slaves to. Our 'punishment' if you want to call it that is the result of our master (satan) who is the ruler of this world and everyone in it (unless we repent and elect to serve and worship god) will be judged by God fall and all of those belonging to him with be cast into hell with him.

So it is less about a moral imperative as this is not the deciding factor of who is and who is not saved. but to whom we align ourselves with. as two men could live an equally good or equally debauched life, and the one who aligns himself with God will be saved and the other even if he was a better person morally than the guy who was saved, will still goto hell.

This is why I identify sin as being more like a virus. As it does not matter what you did to contract the virus, if you haven't been vaccinated by the blood of christ, you being infected will not be allowed to enter the quarantine of heaven

Quote: I live what I consider to be a moral existence - I don’t tell hurtful lies, I don’t cheat on my taxes, I go to great lengths to treat other people fairly. Why should God’s view of morality take precedence over mine?

Boru

I have no doubt you are a truly good 100% moral man.
but if the point is about who is and who is not vaccinated, what does good, have to do with who enters the quarantine of heaven and who does not?

So, yet again, a purely transactional and completely amoral worldview?

(June 27, 2023 at 12:06 pm)Anomalocaris Wrote: He is a character who delights in showing off how slippery for his god he thinks he is by falling on his own ass with each and every utterance.   He is just like Drich.    I maintain he is a sock for Drich.

So Rich is your boggie man? or is this like a Robert Paulson thing.. that if you die while in fight club you become Robert Paulson/If you offer a non stock christian explanation you have a hard time reconciling the christian become "slippery drich's socks?'

If you want... I can be your boogie man. IF Not then maybe you could slack off the need to own every subject and maybe just wind back the need to try and humiliate everyone who doesn't think like you do to the point they want to run from here screaming, and maybe we can all just get along and have civil discourse. As I did not come here trying to best anyone.

I lurked around this forum for a while before joining. even now if you honestly look there is very little forum activity here. I'm not saying this is an atheistfourms org thing, but rather this whole format is dying. I don't think the younger generations were taught how to think for themselves or to even care about what they believe so long as it fits the prevailing political and social narratives. (meaning there are no need for a public square if everyone is programmed to think the same way)

which is  the whole point of these forums. They are a modern take on what use to be the town square where ideas go to be explored and fleshed out.

But How is that possible if you run off all but a hand full of people, who all think the same way and do not challenge each other in any meaningful way.

If it makes you feel any better I will dial back my involvement and let you have all your angry atheist comments and just speak to the topical stuff at hand. 

Unless you want me to be this "slippery sock wearing boggie man"  

even then I suspect this takes alot of energy to walk daily in slippery socks.. So maybe I can be your own personal boggie man and just be myself to everyone else.

(June 27, 2023 at 12:58 pm)Fake Messiah Wrote:

(June 27, 2023 at 9:33 am)R-Farmer Wrote: There is a tweet Joe rogan made that kicked off this whole thing. The how, and why he went down this rabbit hole of a world wide flood. (according to the article that cites and screen shots the actual tweet Rogan made.)

Oh, so it's not a podcast anymore but a tweet that proved the flood.

(June 27, 2023 at 10:50 am)Anomalocaris Wrote: If R-farmer is not the one and the same as the one time resident case study in theistic social and intellectual maladjustment Drich, then R-farmer must have won the exact same lotteries of confident ignorance, ridiculous pretension, moronic overreach, and pitiful propensity to tell bullshit personal sob stories out of confusion between sympathy and credence as Drich.

You might be right. I also wanted to say he might be Drich because he is blaming the popular culture.

(June 27, 2023 at 1:16 pm)arewethereyet Wrote: Are you half Mexican or Cuban?

Mexican and or cuban is not a race of people. those are nationalities. you could be the product of a black Mexican and a black cuban and still be 100% black person. I am 1/2 white and 1/2 asian.

(June 27, 2023 at 3:36 pm)R-Farmer Wrote:

(June 27, 2023 at 12:06 pm)Anomalocaris Wrote: He is a character who delights in showing off how slippery for his god he thinks he is by falling on his own ass with each and every utterance.   He is just like Drich.    I maintain he is a sock for Drich.

So Rich is your boggie man? or is this like a Robert Paulson thing.. that if you die while in fight club you become Robert Paulson/If you offer a non stock christian explanation you have a hard time reconciling the christian become "slippery drich's socks?'

If you want... I can be your boogie man. IF Not then maybe you could slack off the need to own every subject and maybe just wind back the need to try and humiliate everyone who doesn't think like you do to the point they want to run from here screaming, and maybe we can all just get along and have civil discourse. As I did not come here trying to best anyone.

I lurked around this forum for a while before joining. even now if you honestly look there is very little forum activity here. I'm not saying this is an atheistfourms org thing, but rather this whole format is dying. I don't think the younger generations were taught how to think for themselves or to even care about what they believe so long as it fits the prevailing political and social narratives. (meaning there are no need for a public square if everyone is programmed to think the same way)

which is  the whole point of these forums. They are a modern take on what use to be the town square where ideas go to be explored and fleshed out.

But How is that possible if you run off all but a hand full of people, who all think the same way and do not challenge each other in any meaningful way.

If it makes you feel any better I will dial back my involvement and let you have all your angry atheist comments and just speak to the topical stuff at hand. 

Unless you want me to be this "slippery sock wearing boggie man"    

even then I suspect this takes alot of energy to walk daily in slippery socks.. So maybe I can be your own personal boggie man and just be myself to everyone else.

you think far too ludicrously highly of yourself if you think the likes of you can be anyone’s bogeyman, let along mine.

But seriously, on the scale of being disgracefully programmed by others to think a certain way,  being programmed in the 21st century by ignoramuses dead since the bronze age to think in a way that embodies the full measure of the ignorances of that primitive age is rather more disgracefully discreditable than most other places on that scale, don’t you think?

(June 27, 2023 at 3:43 pm)R-Farmer Wrote:

(June 27, 2023 at 1:16 pm)arewethereyet Wrote: Are you half Mexican or Cuban?

Mexican and or cuban is not a race of people. those are nationalities. you could be the product of a black Mexican and a black cuban and still be 100% black person. I am 1/2 white and 1/2 asian.

So you don't consider Asians to be white? That might explain the dragon lady references.