Man's morality

[Angrboda]

Maybe you ought to stick with what works.

I at least have that option.

[Drich]

So you pitched your tent of god answers in an atheist campsite because people who CHOSE to visit an atheist website are choosing to find god.

Not all, but some. I am here for the one or two of you who don't believe because christianity as you understand it simply does not make sense, and have questions that organized religion have deem blasphmous or too hertical to answer.

YOU ARE ONE BIG WALKING TALKIN CONTRADICTION DRICH......but what would one expect from a bible connoisseur.

What I do may seem contradictory if you assume I am here with the same goals as typical bible teacher.

Your here to try and be one of the bestest slimiest christian apologists you can be.....which won't be much.

Oh and by the bye....Apophenia handed you your ass for a hat in that thread she linked.

Aprophenia..............your my HERO.


.

It happens way more than I like, but at the same time if her best revelant example was a year ago, an honest person would seriously question how well she is really doing.

I am almost at 4000 posts in about 2 years time, and in everything that was said in all of that time 1 revelant instance comes up? It's not like I post like Minnie does where the bulk of what I say are one liners or personal insults. Most of my work goes in depth to what is being discussed, and it is rare that i do not go line by line to disassemble and answer each point of contention. In all of that alpo brings up one point.
If that's the case then know alpo, your my hero too.

---

You guys really do not understand or simply do not know how to approach or argue what I am saying do you?

In the Righteousness God offers us through attonement, we are no longer bound by our works to define our 'morality.' Which make your whole arguement invalid.

Do you want to try again, or conceed that 'we' have the better deal?

No -- I understand that construct and how it is intended to function. I'ts not that I don't "get it" -- it's just that it's wrong. You magical goo-goo-fuck in the sky is imaginary. Your stupid book is a pile of shit and hold no weight in contemporary society.

I fully comprehend your system. In a nutshell -- pray to Skweezuz or go to hell. It's just wrong and too stupid to be taken seriously.

Case closed.

Ah... And now we know how many licks it take to get to the center of the Godless p's toosie pop. It's like this crap is preprogramed into all of you, it's just some of you will hold out and discuss the topic a little longer than others, but in the end you all default to name calling and move to dismiss what you can not refute. Maybe next time.

[Angrboda]

It happens way more than I like, but at the same time if her best revelant example was a year ago, an honest person would seriously question how well she is really doing.

You have no head for logic, Drich. That I brought up a specific instance does not in itself imply that is the only instance I could reference, nor that you have made an insignificant amount of mistakes in that time. Regarding the "not doing well" comment, the leader board is clearly visible to all, and anyone can verify that I am regularly on at least two, if not three of the four columns. And despite us both being well known and deeply religious theists, I have three times the rep per post as you. Next time you feel like blowing somebody's horn, you might pick someone whose horn is more worth blowing than your own. Drich, all you are is a douche bag with a head full of swiss cheese and a hand that is consistently found holding your own dick.

[Godlesspanther]

Some things can be rejected out of hand on the basis that they are too stupid to be believable. Religions are exactly that.

I'm not religious because I see no point in believing or pretending to belive stuff that is too stupid, too childish, and too absurd to be believable.

Case closed.

[Drich]

You have no head for logic, Drich. That I brought up a specific instance does not in itself imply that is the only instance I could reference, nor that you have made an insignificant amount of mistakes in that time. Regarding the "not doing well" comment, the leader board is clearly visible to all, and anyone can verify that I am regularly on at least two, if not three of the four columns. And despite us both being well known and deeply religious theists, I have three times the rep per post as you. Next time you feel like blowing somebody's horn, you might pick someone whose horn is more worth blowing than your own. Drich, all you are is a douche bag with a head full of swiss cheese and a hand that is consistently found holding your own dick.

you have 3 times the reps as I do on AN ATHEIST FORUM?!?! Really? you don't say? Since my logic is what is in question here maybe you can help me out a little. Could it be possiable that your 'likeablity' has something to do with your personal beliefs being somewhat benign to what atheists believe and it still allows you to be critical to Christianity in general?

Or do you contend that your populatity points have nothing to do with your ablity to pander to the crowd, and is based on something else like gender or looks?

Oh, and since we are comparing apples:
apophenia (67) - Last updated 22nd March 2013, 05:17

Positive (+1): Knowledgable and friendly. And an able debater.

I guess this means you have since changed your mind?

[Foxaèr]

[Angrboda]

Or do you contend that your populatity points have nothing to do with your ablity to pander to the crowd, and is based on something else like gender or looks?

Awwww... Darrr..... Poor unappreciated Drich.

Oh, and since we are comparing apples:
apophenia (67) - Last updated 22nd March 2013, 05:17

Positive (+1): Knowledgable and friendly. And an able debater.

I guess this means you have since changed your mind?

It has not. Do note, however, that competent logician or interpreter of texts is nowhere implied there. Once again, your swiss cheese for brains fails you in logic.

You are fairly knowledgable about what you have chosen to make your own. You are generally friendly excepting when, as now, your faults are revealed, and then you turn ugly, tu quoque'ish, and egotistical. You remain a capable and able debater.

[Darkstar]

Also, you response seems to imply that god made his standard impossible to follow on purpose.

No, Adam followed for some time. It's just because we have been born unto sin, we are no longer able to meet that standard.

I never really understood how people can be born with original sin (and just that one in particular), but I guess that's probably irrelevant.

And, if I might speculate a bit, not merely impossible because no one would be good enough to follow it, but impossible because it is flawed.

Finish your thought, Flawed how?

I bolded part of your post to demonstrate this. Even when it is obviously right to make an exception to a rule, god won't allow for it.

So? You already said you will always fall short of god's standard too, so why is this relevant?

Because without absolutes one is subject to the Mob's mentality.

One cannot have absolutes. I mean, you can, you'll just be wrong whenever an exception to the rule should be made.

And why is this bad?

No accountablity, No truth, which literally means anything can go. A soceity like this can even justify the slaughter of millions of babies every year, and still feel they have the 'moral high ground.'

And before someone invokes Godwin's law, the Jews did not agree that their being killed was moral. Of course, a community could agree that people outside their community be mistreated and still be internally consistent, but that's a whole other can of worms.

No same can just a little deeper into said can. Put your philosphy aside and look at what History tells us has happened in this very instance. All a soceity has to do is dehumanize a certain portion of the population and all of their human rights are now forfeit.

Then they're just living by a cruel double-standard. They are clearly breaking the golden rule, unless they themselves would want to be dehumanized.[/quote]

It happened with the Jews in Germany and it happens with unwanted babies in our current culture. all 'we' had to do is strip them of thier humanity, and relable them a fetus which is latin for baby or offspring, but because we changed the meaning of this foreign word to mean a collection of cells somehow the baby is no longer human, and can be killed upto and including the birthing process.

I did not think that a baby could be aborted at birth. Only a very small portion of abortions are late term. Regardless, one could ask "If I were a fetus, how would I feel if people decided to abort me?" Well, you wouldn't feel anything, you wouldn't think anything, you wouldn't even be aware of your own existence.

Don't get me wrong, I can see where you're coming from (on this particular issue). It would be better to try to prevent the pregnancy in the first place rather than have an abortion (which is why I don't understand why the church won't just cut its losses and allow birth control). I have to ask, though, how far back do we go? If we call a fetus, which has no self-awareness and is not conscious a person, should we go back another step and call the egg a person? How about the sperm? If abortion is an abomination, then why does god allow miscarriages (rhetorical)?

Called it.

I did that with my dad one time. While he was asleep I taped a foot ball game I had already watched and when he woke played it off as a live game, and then proceeded to 'call' every major play before it happened.

In the end he figured it out. the lesson? it's only 'calling it' if you have no way of predicting the outcome.

Wow, I can't believe this just happened! It never even occurred to me that you would assume I read ahead first! (I really didn't read ahead but I don't know how this didn't occur to me)

Or, you know, human empathy. The golden rule is a pretty good moral yardstick in most cases.

Only when compareing apples to apples or humans to humans. All it takes (as history has shown) is a little propaganda, from the majority and any group can be dehumanized, and slated for mass murder.

That, then, is not a failure of the golden rule itself, but a failure of people to adhere to it.

[Drich]

Or do you contend that your populatity points have nothing to do with your ablity to pander to the crowd, and is based on something else like gender or looks?

Awwww... Darrr..... Poor unappreciated Drich.

Oh, and since we are comparing apples:
apophenia (67) - Last updated 22nd March 2013, 05:17

Positive (+1): Knowledgable and friendly. And an able debater.

I guess this means you have since changed your mind?

It has not. Do note, however, that competent logician or interpreter of texts is nowhere implied there. Once again, your swiss cheese for brains fails you in logic.

You are fairly knowledgable about what you have chosen to make your own. You are generally friendly excepting when, as now, your faults are revealed, and then you turn ugly, tu quoque'ish, and egotistical. You remain a capable and able debater.

I bare no malice or ill will on anything being discussed, here with you. I simply go where my 'swiss cheese logic' takes me. You guys or rather you specifically tend to lead with your strongest bit-o-evidence. (which maybe why you are so caught off gaurd when I lead with truth, but maybe not my best example of it.) When one is taught to think and do things the way you do, it may seem illogical to think or do things anyother way. The 'otherway' is what I specialize in.

The reason I bare no malice or ill will towards you for bring up my 'weaknesses' is because the simple preception of weakness by an opponet is not a weakness at all. It can be an asset if one is inclined to use it as such. So truthfully if you feel the need to seed your peers minds with the Idea that I am anything less that what I am, then by all means continue on.

Because if I seem more approachable even through what you have identified as faulty logic, then perhaps a question get asked, or a principle get challenged, or a doctrine gets discussed that would not have been discussed otherwise. And the true cost? just alittle pride. I think that is a fair deal.

[Angrboda]

You guys or rather you specifically tend to lead with your strongest bit-o-evidence. (which maybe why you are so caught off gaurd when I lead with truth, but maybe not my best example of it.) When one is taught to think and do things the way you do, it may seem illogical to think or do things anyother way. The 'otherway' is what I specialize in.

This is your own specific conceit which I simply pay no mind. If you believe this, then you have chosen to willingly, gullibly, believe the lies that your own mind tells you. As both a long time student of Sun Tzu, Asian martial and non-martial philosophies, as well as a student of the nature of psychology and cognitive bias, I realize all too well the emptiness and self-congratulatory nature of such excuses. The goddess will not permit me such sophistic self-comforts. She demands that I deliver, whether I experience it as pleasant or not. That you settle for less tells you all you need to know about the difference in our reputations.