1.
What would give you a better book report grade? Reading the book, or just keeping the book closed and having someone, who only skimmed through the book, tell you what they think the story is about?

2.
A farmer walks out into his yard, and finds his cat torn to pieces. Angered, he looks around to see who or what could have done this. He soon finds his blood-and-fur covered dog chasing after another cat. The farmer grabs the dog, spanks him, then throws him into the kennel for a week as punishment.

A second farmer is sitting on his back porch cleaning his shot gun. His cat comes frantically running around the house. His dog is in hot pursuit. Right in front of the farmer, the dog catches the cat and begins tearing it to pieces. The farmer watches the entire skirmish, but stays sitting on the porch, cleaning his gun. Once the dog is done, the farmer says "I'm gonna punish you for that later!" Then he keeps wiping his gun while the dog runs off looking for another cat.

Which farmer was more right?

1. Depends on the teacher grading the report, and possibly the salesmanship of the writer.

2. The second farmer. The first punished a dog for being a dog. The second only hinted at it.

(September 9, 2013 at 2:58 pm)Beta Ray Bill Wrote: 1.
What would give you a better book report grade? Reading the book, or just keeping the book closed and having someone, who only skimmed through the book, tell you what they think the story is about?

2.
A farmer walks out into his yard, and finds his cat torn to pieces. Angered, he looks around to see who or what could have done this. He soon finds his blood-and-fur covered dog chasing after another cat. The farmer grabs the dog, spanks him, then throws him into the kennel for a week as punishment.

A second farmer is sitting on his back porch cleaning his shot gun. His cat comes frantically running around the house. His dog is in hot pursuit. Right in front of the farmer, the dog catches the cat and begins tearing it to pieces. The farmer watches the entire skirmish, but stays sitting on the porch, cleaning his gun. Once the dog is done, the farmer says "I'm gonna punish you for that later!" Then he keeps wiping his gun while the dog runs off looking for another cat.

Which farmer was more right?

It depends on the farmer, the culture the farmer is in, How cats are viewed, how Dog's are viewed, and most importantly the reason for the farmers actions.

You are describing a senerio that explains nothing, let alone tied your little senerio to God in any way shape or form. your trying to make a blind appeal to emotion.

(September 9, 2013 at 4:22 pm)Drich Wrote:

(September 9, 2013 at 2:58 pm)Beta Ray Bill Wrote: 1.
What would give you a better book report grade? Reading the book, or just keeping the book closed and having someone, who only skimmed through the book, tell you what they think the story is about?

2.
A farmer walks out into his yard, and finds his cat torn to pieces. Angered, he looks around to see who or what could have done this. He soon finds his blood-and-fur covered dog chasing after another cat. The farmer grabs the dog, spanks him, then throws him into the kennel for a week as punishment.

A second farmer is sitting on his back porch cleaning his shot gun. His cat comes frantically running around the house. His dog is in hot pursuit. Right in front of the farmer, the dog catches the cat and begins tearing it to pieces. The farmer watches the entire skirmish, but stays sitting on the porch, cleaning his gun. Once the dog is done, the farmer says "I'm gonna punish you for that later!" Then he keeps wiping his gun while the dog runs off looking for another cat.

Which farmer was more right?

It depends on the farmer, the culture the farmer is in, How cats are viewed, how Dog's are viewed, and most importantly the reason for the farmers actions.

You are describing a senerio that explains nothing, let alone tied your little senerio to God in any way shape or form. your trying to make a blind appeal to emotion.

It's a metaphor, guys. If I need to describe what everything means in it, you're just not getting the point, nor do I think you can.

Let me be more clear:

For the book, it's obvious. Studying the way the world works gives far more accurate answers than just going by blind faith. Is research and science always right? Of course not. That can be proven. But so can the fallacy of faith. That can be proven, too, and has been, numerous times. Christians just close their minds to those proofs. It's the only way they can be right. And they call atheists Relativists? Read through this forum for examples of Christian fallacy.

God knows every sin that ever was and ever will be, and he has the power to stop every one. He's the farmer sitting on the patio with his shotgun. But the vast majority of the time the crimes and atrocities happen with no interference by a God (some are stopped by human rescue or just dumb luck). And if we go by Christian understanding, the criminals will get what's coming to them in the afterlife. WTF? An omnipotent, omniscient, omni-everything being could have stopped the crime from happening in the here and now? And yet he doesn't? Is that love or justice?

No, that's just brutal INDIFFERENCE. And if it's some sort of plan of God's, I might as well go out and kill somebody, because it would be what God planned, so it's okay to do.

Non-secular morality is fantasy bullshit. Crimes need to be dealt with in the here and now, not saved for the afterlife. It's simple logic. Why can't you guys see that? There is no current love from a supreme being in this world. Murders far outnumber heroic rescues and escapes. And if that's a god's plan for the universe, then it's obvious that WE JUST DON'T MATTER TO HIM.

Why? Because he just doesn't frickin' exist, that's why. =P

What's with the 'you guys' statement?

(September 9, 2013 at 2:58 pm)Beta Ray Bill Wrote: 1.
What would give you a better book report grade? Reading the book, or just keeping the book closed and having someone, who only skimmed through the book, tell you what they think the story is about?

2.
A farmer walks out into his yard, and finds his cat torn to pieces. Angered, he looks around to see who or what could have done this. He soon finds his blood-and-fur covered dog chasing after another cat. The farmer grabs the dog, spanks him, then throws him into the kennel for a week as punishment.

A second farmer is sitting on his back porch cleaning his shot gun. His cat comes frantically running around the house. His dog is in hot pursuit. Right in front of the farmer, the dog catches the cat and begins tearing it to pieces. The farmer watches the entire skirmish, but stays sitting on the porch, cleaning his gun. Once the dog is done, the farmer says "I'm gonna punish you for that later!" Then he keeps wiping his gun while the dog runs off looking for another cat.

Which farmer was more right?

- POSTED BEFORE I READ THE SPOILER - (so, not a bad guess)

1. This would all depend on your book report writing/reciting skill. I'm guessing this is a metaphor for religious or other kinds of preaching and as I've said the content of the book is not usually as important as the effectiveness of the preaching of the interpretation. Which is why Christianity, for example, has over 41,000 different denominations at last estimate.

2. The first farmer acts out punishment based on circumstantial evidence only, the second witnesses the deed and promises to visit the punishment at a later date, leaving the dog to carry out further deeds in the meantime. They are both inherently weak positions.

A metaphor for the Abrahamic tradition of delayed judgement? Possibly, where is this all leading?

Or is it the trinity... god the farmer, the gun and the growly ghost.


MM

---

(September 9, 2013 at 5:21 pm)Beta Ray Bill Wrote:

(September 9, 2013 at 4:22 pm)Drich Wrote: It depends on the farmer, the culture the farmer is in, How cats are viewed, how Dog's are viewed, and most importantly the reason for the farmers actions.

You are describing a senerio that explains nothing, let alone tied your little senerio to God in any way shape or form. your trying to make a blind appeal to emotion.

It's a metaphor, guys. If I need to describe what everything means in it, you're just not getting the point, nor do I think you can.

Let me be more clear:

For the book, it's obvious. Studying the way the world works gives far more accurate answers than just going by blind faith. Is research and science always right? Of course not. That can be proven. But so can the fallacy of faith. That can be proven, too, and has been, numerous times. Christians just close their minds to those proofs. It's the only way they can be right. And they call atheists Relativists? Read through this forum for examples of Christian fallacy.

God knows every sin that ever was and ever will be, and he has the power to stop every one. He's the farmer sitting on the patio with his shotgun. But the vast majority of the time the crimes and atrocities happen with no interference by a God (some are stopped by human rescue or just dumb luck). And if we go by Christian understanding, the criminals will get what's coming to them in the afterlife. WTF? An omnipotent, omniscient, omni-everything being could have stopped the crime from happening in the here and now? And yet he doesn't? Is that love or justice?

No, that's just brutal INDIFFERENCE. And if it's some sort of plan of God's, I might as well go out and kill somebody, because it would be what God planned, so it's okay to do.

Non-secular morality is fantasy bullshit. Crimes need to be dealt with in the here and now, not saved for the afterlife. It's simple logic. Why can't you guys see that? There is no current love from a supreme being in this world. Murders far outnumber heroic rescues and escapes. And if that's a god's plan for the universe, then it's obvious that WE JUST DON'T MATTER TO HIM.

Why? Because he just doesn't frickin' exist, that's why. =P

There are other gods to the Abrahamic gods with different dogmas, this may only address some of the issues with Abrahamic religions, even so, abstracting these concepts and presenting them as reduced metaphors is not really useful to any debate.

MM

(September 9, 2013 at 5:33 pm)ManMachine Wrote: There are other gods to the Abrahamic gods with different dogmas, this may only address some of the issues with Abrahamic religions, even so, abstracting these concepts and presenting them as reduced metaphors is not really useful to any debate.

MM

I'm not looking to define the entire religion. I am looking or a couple answers to a couple of concepts. Saying that there are other factors that need to be acknowledged is just avoiding the question, IMO. You could ask "Was the person telling the story mentally handicapped, or what language was the story written in?" and an infinite number of, frankly, irrelevant factors. Just focus on the question I asked and stop trying to make it more confusing than it really is. Just address the ONE idea. As for the farmer metaphor, you could ask "Was it the farmer's birthday, or was the gun even loaded?" but again, that's just avoiding the direct question.

I asked two simple questions, but nobody wants to address the questions as they were given; they are trying to modify the questions so that they can say I was too simplistic or weak. I disagree. It's just like with an analytical or a faithful look at the Bible. Christians always beat around the bush, warping the simple questions so that they can claim they aren't legitimate.

Just answer the questions, don't try to change what they mean. It's not that hard, just scary to some.

(September 9, 2013 at 2:58 pm)Beta Ray Bill Wrote: 1.
What would give you a better book report grade? Reading the book, or just keeping the book closed and having someone, who only skimmed through the book, tell you what they think the story is about?

C. Keep the book closed and find a nerd who did read it to write the report for me.

(September 9, 2013 at 2:58 pm)Beta Ray Bill Wrote: Which farmer was more right?

Both.

(September 9, 2013 at 5:29 pm)Captain Colostomy Wrote: What's with the 'you guys' statement?

I either mean black people in general or everyone who thinks in a way consistant with the text being discussed. You have to look to the context of the passage to now for sure.

---

(September 9, 2013 at 6:05 pm)Maelstrom Wrote:

(September 9, 2013 at 2:58 pm)Beta Ray Bill Wrote: 1.
What would give you a better book report grade? Reading the book, or just keeping the book closed and having someone, who only skimmed through the book, tell you what they think the story is about?

C. Keep the book closed and find a nerd who did read it to write the report for me.

Maybe that is why Mr. Hand would let you goto the Ridgemont High Prom.

(September 9, 2013 at 2:58 pm)Beta Ray Bill Wrote: 1.
What would give you a better book report grade? Reading the book, or just keeping the book closed and having someone, who only skimmed through the book, tell you what they think the story is about?

Whiskey tango...are you pointing out that atheists should read the Bible before commenting on it?