Excavating The Empty Tomb

[Pandas United]

I understand what you're saying. The problem is, as a selfish creature (hypothetical situation), I look at evolved altruistic traits as null and void. There's no stopping someone that has a different genetic make-up of what feels morally right or wrong. You can't tell a child rapist that what he's doing is morally wrong if it feels natural and "OK" to him. If all we're going by is evolved morals and ethics, then anything goes. Like I said, no objective compass.

Of course you can play the, "that's why we have society" card. But that still doesn't the answer the question of what is good and what is bad. Merely opinions.

[The Grand Nudger]

I understand what you're saying. The problem is, as a selfish creature (hypothetical situation), I look at evolved altruistic traits as null and void.

You won't hear much disagreement from me on that count.

There's no stopping someone that has a different genetic make-up of what feels morally right or wrong.

Of course there is, hopefully it won;t have to come to "stopping them" - but that does happen.

You can't tell a child rapist that what he's doing is morally wrong if it feels natural and "OK" to him.

Of course you can, and perhaps- if he's a sufficiently lucent child rapist- you could draw a valid negative parallel by comparison and agreement. Thing is....I bet he'd still be "a child rapist".

If all we're going by is evolved morals and ethics, then anything goes. Like I said, no objective compass.

That's ridiculous, anything goes so long as we're going by "anything goes" - which is not what our evolved morality appears to be comprised of. Neither you nor I - nor the child rapist- has any objective moral compass...our results from our varying compasses differ (though you and I are less likely to deviate from each other than we are from the child rapist - I'd wager)-but at least two out of three of us manage to be "moral" - and we have a way to deal with the third.

Of course you can play the, "that's why we have society" card. But that still doesn't the answer the question of what is good and what is bad. Merely opinions.

Meh, why would I need to play any card bud- is this a game? "Merely" opinions, that's what you have-that's what I have, and that's okay. I still don't see the problem? I mean, we'd both have a problem if someone else had a moral fact and you and I were sitting here with our opinions - and we'd have to address that when it happened. In the meantime, we seem to be doing okay.

[DeistPaladin]

Is this what people are like on this forum? If so, I think I may have made a mistake in coming here. I'm looking for substantive dialogue, not these cheap shot remarks that add nothing to the conversation.

You'll just have to forgive us if we tire of having the same conversation over and over, only to have a new Christian come along and say, "Hi, what do you all think of this argument for Jesus..." and the exact same canned drivel ensues. And everyone groans, facepalms and thinks "not this crap again".

If you want thoughtful discussion on the historicity of Jesus and the Gospel tale, you might peruse this debate between me and one of the faithful. Feel free to chime in if you can find what your brother in Christ missed. I'll even offer to restart the debate if you think you can do a better job.

And then you start into the old canard about "well, without Jesus we have no basis of morality and so anything goes". It may astonish you but we've already examined both the problems of theistic-based morality as well as how secular thinking provides a much simpler and clearer means to understand morality.

So rather than re-hash the same discussions, I'll simply save myself some time and point you to these threads. If you can do a better job at defending your views than your comrades in Christ, you are welcome to try.

Good luck.

[DeistPaladin]

As they are waists of time.

WASTES OF TIME

WASTES

WASTES is the verb.

WAIST is a noun.

Time does not have a body with a mid section that divides the legs and pelvic section from the upper body. Therefore, there is no such thing as a "waist of time".

Now go to the chalk board and write "it is a waste of time" 50 times.

[Tonus]

You know, DP, trying to get Drich to correct his spelling might just be a wa... sorry, I just can't. :x

[Drich]

Ok I find your sig complete irony since it is basically telling you to cherry pick. But funny how cherry picking is exactly what that book is telling you to do.

Now watch as I quote someone basically saying the same thing WITHOUT who did not use a bible to do so "Question with boldness even the existence of a god, for if there be one surely he would pay more homage to reason than to that of blindfolded fear" Care to guess who said that?

Or I could point out Socrates in "The Apology" who ALSO said questioning was good.

Plato's Allegory of the Cave also is metaphor to question. Although his flaw was that he didn't take into account needing a form of quality control such as a "control group" because he couldn't have back then known how scientifically important control groups were.

But all your bible quote is teaching you to do is cherry pick when the answers people object to allows you to avoid facing contradictions.

So the irony I see in your sig is exactly why you can reject some of the bible when what you really need to do is reject ALL OF IT.

That quote is exactly why you commit the mental gymnastics to justify clinging to that ancient comic book.

"Empty tomb" the story in the bible, but so are lots of fantastic and outright absurd stories such as plants being created as adult plants witout photosynthesis, the moon being a separate source of light, women being made from a man's rib.

So when we poke holes in the second most important super hero in that book which is supposed to be God too, I think it would be wise of you to scrap such a Swiss cheese piece of garbage and accept ALL of it as fiction.

But you are not going to have it both ways. Christianity did not invent the idea of questioning our evolution causes that. Your sig is why you can ignore WHY that video allows you to pretend to throw us a bone, then still justify clinging to a book of myth.

"I am not like the others" yep yes you are, just merely a watered down version.

In fact your sig probably is the most insidious verse because it allows you to ignore all the bad shit in that book precisely because it tells you to ignore it, which is not exactly what produces good results when we question.

The problem with your book of myth is that is is arbitrary and whatever you claim Christians have a patient on we know evolution proves that people outside your gang can and do the same type of good things all the time. That sig allows you to play self rightious and pretend you have the inside track on human morality.

We don't need your book and you don't either, you just think you do.

So you wanted me to watch the movie because you all were convinced it was Religious kryptonite, and when I did and did not fall before it in tears, but took the argument down to it core and took it apart you all reacted just like I said you would. You abandoned this crap movie for the next wave or retreat back to the good ole standby arguments (you apparently) thought you had to go back before Christ but even so. You guys are too predictable.

---

You know, DP, trying to get Drich to correct his spelling might just be a wa... sorry, I just can't. :x

It's the only thing he has over me, let him have it. It really not that big of a deal... To anyone but him and people like him..

[The Grand Nudger]

So you wanted me to watch the movie because you all were convinced it was Religious kryptonite, and when I did and did not fall before it in tears, but took the argument down to it core and took it apart

That's quite the imagination you have there Drich, what dream did you visit this world in?

[pocaracas]

I understand what you're saying. The problem is, as a selfish creature (hypothetical situation), I look at evolved altruistic traits as null and void. There's no stopping someone that has a different genetic make-up of what feels morally right or wrong. You can't tell a child rapist that what he's doing is morally wrong if it feels natural and "OK" to him. If all we're going by is evolved morals and ethics, then anything goes. Like I said, no objective compass.

Of course you can play the, "that's why we have society" card. But that still doesn't the answer the question of what is good and what is bad. Merely opinions.

Yes, psychopaths exist.
Our flawed reproduction method can yield flawed people who don't inherit all the traits required for the social life our species is "famous" for. The same happens in other social species... a few individuals can't stick to it and get shunned... the most likely outcome is that they fail to pass on those anti-social flawed genes.

And what is good and what is evil, then?
Golden rule? Silver rule?

[Brian37]

Ok I find your sig complete irony since it is basically telling you to cherry pick. But funny how cherry picking is exactly what that book is telling you to do.

Now watch as I quote someone basically saying the same thing WITHOUT who did not use a bible to do so "Question with boldness even the existence of a god, for if there be one surely he would pay more homage to reason than to that of blindfolded fear" Care to guess who said that?

Or I could point out Socrates in "The Apology" who ALSO said questioning was good.

Plato's Allegory of the Cave also is metaphor to question. Although his flaw was that he didn't take into account needing a form of quality control such as a "control group" because he couldn't have back then known how scientifically important control groups were.

But all your bible quote is teaching you to do is cherry pick when the answers people object to allows you to avoid facing contradictions.

So the irony I see in your sig is exactly why you can reject some of the bible when what you really need to do is reject ALL OF IT.

That quote is exactly why you commit the mental gymnastics to justify clinging to that ancient comic book.

"Empty tomb" the story in the bible, but so are lots of fantastic and outright absurd stories such as plants being created as adult plants witout photosynthesis, the moon being a separate source of light, women being made from a man's rib.

So when we poke holes in the second most important super hero in that book which is supposed to be God too, I think it would be wise of you to scrap such a Swiss cheese piece of garbage and accept ALL of it as fiction.

But you are not going to have it both ways. Christianity did not invent the idea of questioning our evolution causes that. Your sig is why you can ignore WHY that video allows you to pretend to throw us a bone, then still justify clinging to a book of myth.

"I am not like the others" yep yes you are, just merely a watered down version.

In fact your sig probably is the most insidious verse because it allows you to ignore all the bad shit in that book precisely because it tells you to ignore it, which is not exactly what produces good results when we question.

The problem with your book of myth is that is is arbitrary and whatever you claim Christians have a patient on we know evolution proves that people outside your gang can and do the same type of good things all the time. That sig allows you to play self rightious and pretend you have the inside track on human morality.

We don't need your book and you don't either, you just think you do.

So you wanted me to watch the movie because you all were convinced it was Religious kryptonite, and when I did and did not fall before it in tears, but took the argument down to it core and took it apart you all reacted just like I said you would. You abandoned this crap movie for the next wave or retreat back to the good ole standby arguments (you apparently) thought you had to go back before Christ but even so. You guys are too predictable.

---

You know, DP, trying to get Drich to correct his spelling might just be a wa... sorry, I just can't. :x

It's the only thing he has over me, let him have it. It really not that big of a deal... To anyone but him and people like him..

We don't have imaginary friends, you do. So sure we are "predictable" calling bullshit bullshit.

Human ignorance, meaning lack of scientific awareness, was around long before Jews started that splinter cult. The mistake the founders of Christianity made was no different than the ignorance of cave dwellers painting animal gods on cave walls.

Before you get to all the immoral claims and fantastic claims of your comic book, you still are starting with the naked assertion that thinking can happen without a material biological structure such as a brain.

Don't feel alone, humans will invent new gods and superstitions and people today are buying watered down si fi woo as well.

The two most important stories in your comic book are bullshit. Humans need two sets of DNA to manifest into a baby, thus making the virgin birth story bullshit. The "empty tomb" as written was to imply that a human being magically escaped death. So the natural explanation if such an event was "observed", the explanation was that it was a hoax, not that there is any record outside the bible of it ever happening.

If you go to a magic show and watch Penn and Teller make an elephant disappear on stage, are you stupid enough to actually believe they did that?

You merely have picked that comic book because you like the stories in it. But it has no scientific credibility, it's head character is an unmovable dictator, and acts like a spoiled sand lot brat who burns his army men in the sand box when he cant get them to do what he wants.

It is an irrelevant myth written by ignorant humans who had no clue of the nature of reality.

[Aractus]

He Min,

Min, can you tell me what the jist of the argument is so I don't have to watch the videos?

No, watch the videos. Are you afraid of learning something?


Most xtians are, btw.

Witness the brown stains on the pants of your confederates here.

How the fuck do I know that you learned anything if you are unable to communicate what you learned from the videos!?