bornagainathiest Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 Just now, end3 said: No, the definition say collective....the serpent was part of the collective. Posted just now 3 minutes ago, bornagainathiest said: No. One serpent does not constitute a culture. An influence, but not a culture. No, the definition say collective....the serpent was part of the collective. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Cite your definition please, End. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest end3 Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 2 minutes ago, bornagainathiest said: Posted just now 3 minutes ago, bornagainathiest said: No. One serpent does not constitute a culture. An influence, but not a culture. No, the definition say collective....the serpent was part of the collective. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Cite your definition please, End. cul·ture ˈkəlCHər/ noun noun: culture 1. the arts and other manifestations of human intellectual achievement regarded collectively. "20th century popular culture" synonyms: the arts, the humanities, intellectual achievement; More literature, music, painting, philosophy, the performing arts "exposing their children to culture" a refined understanding or appreciation of this. "men of culture" synonyms: intellectual/artistic awareness, education, cultivation, enlightenment, discernment, discrimination, good taste, taste, refinement, polish, sophistication "a man of culture" the customs, arts, social institutions, and achievements of a particular nation, people, or other social group. plural noun: cultures "Caribbean culture" synonyms: civilization, society, way of life, lifestyle; More customs, traditions, heritage, habits, ways, mores, values "Afro-Caribbean culture" the attitudes and behavior characteristic of a particular social group. "the emerging drug culture" 2. Biology the cultivation of bacteria, tissue cells, etc., in an artificial medium containing nutrients. "the cells proliferate readily in culture" a preparation of cells obtained from a culture. "the bacterium was isolated in two blood cultures" the cultivation of plants. "this variety of lettuce is popular for its ease of culture" synonyms: cultivation, farming; More agriculture, husbandry, agronomy "the culture of crops" verb Biology verb: culture; 3rd person present: cultures; past tense: cultured; past participle: cultured; gerund or present participle: culturing 1. maintain (tissue cells, bacteria, etc.) in conditions suitable for growth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornagainathiest Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 3rd person present? Is that it? So by your logic, God is a culture too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest end3 Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 3 minutes ago, bornagainathiest said: 3rd person present? Is that it? So by your logic, God is a culture too? If there was a collective BAA, God was part of the collective. God would not be human, but the story touts that he was present and communicated. The snake was not human, but the story said he was able to communicate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornagainathiest Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 5 minutes ago, end3 said: If there was a collective BAA, God was part of the collective. God would not be human, but the story touts that he was present and communicated. The snake was not human, but the story said he was able to communicate. You're not answering my questions, End. You haven't answered these yet. Why not? Well, why? If you'll never make the connections you want, why not just go with what you started this thread with... the facts? Don't just lean towards them - but embrace them and stop floundering around in a bottomless quagmire of questions and assumptions? The facts not to your taste? And you haven't answered my questions about the definition you cited. 3rd person present? Is that it? So by your logic, God is a culture too? But instead you've presented me with an... 'If' ... so you're now veering off into speculation. Before you speculate, please stay focused and answer my questions. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest end3 Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 1 minute ago, bornagainathiest said: You're not answering my questions, End. You haven't answered these yet. Why not? Well, why? If you'll never make the connections you want, why not just go with what you started this thread with... the facts? Don't just lean towards them - but embrace them and stop floundering around in a bottomless quagmire of questions and assumptions? The facts not to your taste? And you haven't answered my questions about the definition you cited. 3rd person present? Is that it? So by your logic, God is a culture too? But instead you've presented me with an... 'If' ... so you're now veering off into speculation. Before you speculate, please stay focused and answer my questions. Thanks. Let me back up before we go down this you are not answering my questions path again. Essentially facts and mechanisms brought us to this point......certainly directed facts and mechanisms could have brought us to a different point. Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted July 20, 2017 Super Moderator Share Posted July 20, 2017 Every fucking thing is fucking subjective, which fucking means fucking righteousness is fucking also fucking subjective. This is fucking why we fucking can't fucking place any fucking confidence in fucking righteousness like we fucking can in fucking facts. Un-fucking-less you fucking subscribe to the fucking idea of fucking objective fucking morality. This fucking can of fucking worms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest end3 Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 9 minutes ago, TheRedneckProfessor said: Every fucking thing is fucking subjective, which fucking means fucking righteousness is fucking also fucking subjective. This is fucking why we fucking can't fucking place any fucking confidence in fucking righteousness like we fucking can in fucking facts. Un-fucking-less you fucking subscribe to the fucking idea of fucking objective fucking morality. This fucking can of fucking worms. I was hoping you would fucking show up....I need your knowledge base for the discussion. If you could just back us up genetically to the beginning and correlate that with behavior, we would be done here. Otherwise, fucking neener neener. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornagainathiest Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 1 hour ago, end3 said: Let me back up before we go down this you are not answering my questions path again. Essentially facts and mechanisms brought us to this point......certainly directed facts and mechanisms could have brought us to a different point. Thoughts? No. I disagree, End. Facts did not do that. Today we are going through yet another of your unfocused sessions of unbridled assumptions and speculations. Not because of any facts, but because there is something within you that compels you to visit and revisit that same old ideas, over and over and over again. You don't start from any factual basis, you don't seek out any facts and don't end up with any facts. All that happens is that your same old, tired mix of Biblical myths, dictionary definitions, tenuous correlations, what if's and leaps of faith get stirred up, raked over and re-raked over, ad nauseam. Today it's about mechanisms and righteousness and the absolute. Before today it's been... Genetics and original sin. Grace and relationships. Mechanisms by which generational sin accumulates in our DNA. Grace vs original sin. Epigenetics and original sin. Mechanisms and evidence for sin. Morality, mortality and sin. Neurological research and original sin. Pathways to better relationships via grace. Absolute morality vs genetic sin. Correlations between original sin and grace. Possible mechanisms for genetic morality. Etc. etc. etc. Just rearrange the same themes and same words in different ways. You've been locked into this hopelessly unproductive cycle for years and imho you'll stay here unless you really do start getting some facts, End. But you rarely take any notice of what I write, so I'm out of this thread and I'll let my alter ego have the last word. [Bridge] SPOCK: Spock to Sickbay. Have you completed the autopsy on Watkins, Doctor? M'BENGA [OC]: Yes, we have, Mister Spock. SPOCK: Was the cause of his death the same as that which killed the transporter officer? [McCoy's office] M'BENGA: Well, the pattern of cellular disruption was the same, but as to the cause, well your guess is as good as mine. [Bridge] SPOCK: My guess, Doctor, would be valueless. I suggest we refrain from guessing and find some facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator florduh Posted July 20, 2017 Super Moderator Share Posted July 20, 2017 A magic talking snake, a magic invisible man in the sky, a man made from dirt and a woman made from a rib. Now, THAT'S a society!!! I can't fathom how that is a viable mechanism for the 7.5 billion diverse people we have today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest end3 Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 The point BAA, as the facts arise, they point to the assumptions.... and the allegory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest end3 Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 Impressive list though.... you've been keeping better track of me than me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest end3 Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 9 minutes ago, florduh said: A magic talking snake, a magic invisible man in the sky, a man made from dirt and a woman made from a rib. Now, THAT'S a society!!! I can't fathom how that is a viable mechanism for the 7.5 billion diverse people we have today. Right, our own self willed mechanisms are dividing us right before our eyes and you choose not to see it yet fight whole heartedly for the cure being the same mechanism, but still won't follow the instructions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rounin Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 There are many moral philosophies, of which Christianity is just one (set of related interpretations). I'm not very impressed by the sometimes-overly-selfless-sometimes-overly-hostile philosophy proposed by Christianity. I think it bizarre to let people strike me on the cheek or take my shirt when they feel like it, and I certainly don't think it moral to cast people into furnaces of fire where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth. I find moral philosophies based on human nature and self-interest to be much more beneficial. Morality has evolved to keep us alive, as proposed by Richard Dawkins and many others. But supposing we overlook that and propose for the sake of discussion that Christianity is the objectively right moral philosophy, and that no competing philosophy can be objectively right, without the authority of God acting as arbiter. However, in order to decide that God is just and the arbiter of moral truth, we already have to use our own judgement. Whatever thought process we went through to arrive at the view that Christian morals are just; If that thought process was wrong, then Christian morality may also be wrong. So in the end it all comes down to ourselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator florduh Posted July 20, 2017 Super Moderator Share Posted July 20, 2017 38 minutes ago, end3 said: Right, our own self willed mechanisms are dividing us right before our eyes and you choose not to see it yet fight whole heartedly for the cure being the same mechanism, but still won't follow the instructions. Are you serious? There are few, if any, things more divisive to humanity than the Bible. Perhaps we should look elsewhere for a universal code of ethics. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midniterider Posted July 21, 2017 Share Posted July 21, 2017 4 hours ago, end3 said: Specifically, the transgender stuff. Some of it you can ignore, some of it I don't think you can. What originally prompted my thoughts were our conversations about Adam.....if Adam and Eve would have followed some set of rules, i.e. facts, would there be disease, mental illness, birth defects, etc. So my mind then went to is there a path, a mechanism...or was there a mechanism, a path that if followed would have not lead to our existence now. I guess if they hadn't eaten the apple we wouldnt be here. (In the Christian way of thinking). I really think shit just happens and is somewhat random. From Florduh's assertion about Oneness, disease, mental illness, the Dallas Cowboys, etc are not really the unwanted results of unrighteous living, but part of the perfection and variety of life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornagainathiest Posted July 21, 2017 Share Posted July 21, 2017 3 hours ago, end3 said: The point BAA, as the facts arise, they point to the assumptions.... and the allegory. The point, my dear End3, is that you believe by faith that they do these things. The facts themselves do not. You just believe that they do. On their own they don''t. Yet, when shown that they don't, you persistently and consistently defy, deny and and oppose this fact. You persistently and consistently see connections and correlations, where none exist. You are predisposed to believe what you want and predisposed to oppose and defy the facts. You are the perfect storm of belief and defiance working together against the facts. (Holy ****! Why am I even writing this?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest end3 Posted July 21, 2017 Share Posted July 21, 2017 3 hours ago, bornagainathiest said: No. I disagree, End. Facts did not do that. Today we are going through yet another of your unfocused sessions of unbridled assumptions and speculations. Not because of any facts, but because there is something within you that compels you to visit and revisit that same old ideas, over and over and over again. You don't start from any factual basis, you don't seek out any facts and don't end up with any facts. All that happens is that your same old, tired mix of Biblical myths, dictionary definitions, tenuous correlations, what if's and leaps of faith get stirred up, raked over and re-raked over, ad nauseam. Today it's about mechanisms and righteousness and the absolute. Before today it's been... Genetics and original sin. Grace and relationships. Mechanisms by which generational sin accumulates in our DNA. Grace vs original sin. Epigenetics and original sin. Mechanisms and evidence for sin. Morality, mortality and sin. Neurological research and original sin. Pathways to better relationships via grace. Absolute morality vs genetic sin. Correlations between original sin and grace. Possible mechanisms for genetic morality. Etc. etc. etc. Just rearrange the same themes and same words in different ways. You've been locked into this hopelessly unproductive cycle for years and imho you'll stay here unless you really do start getting some facts, End. But you rarely take any notice of what I write, so I'm out of this thread and I'll let my alter ego have the last word. [Bridge] SPOCK: Spock to Sickbay. Have you completed the autopsy on Watkins, Doctor? M'BENGA [OC]: Yes, we have, Mister Spock. SPOCK: Was the cause of his death the same as that which killed the transporter officer? [McCoy's office] M'BENGA: Well, the pattern of cellular disruption was the same, but as to the cause, well your guess is as good as mine. [Bridge] SPOCK: My guess, Doctor, would be valueless. I suggest we refrain from guessing and find some facts. Actually if we ignore a religious aspect, then yes, facts brought us to this point and facts will continue to move us down some path. Given that, we have brought ourselves to this point through a particular string of behaviors. I am simply asserting that if the behaviors were within certain boundaries, the outcome would not be the same. You would have to be obtuse to believe anything else. Also adding, as we have discussed before, that the Bible alludes to several of these ongoing discoveries. The moderator here says the Bible is wonderfully divisive....and the Bible says that as well. We have already mentioned the longevity issue. There is the sins of the father, epigenetic correlation, and on and on. You know, we are understanding much more about the environment and having a fit because we will "kill" it if we don't change our behaviors, and yet the Bible is asserting the exact same damn thing with humanity, yet it is not worthy of consideration. And when you get challenged on it, then you start making fun......God, Adam, Eve and a talking snake walked into bar..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornagainathiest Posted July 21, 2017 Share Posted July 21, 2017 3 hours ago, end3 said: Impressive list though.... you've been keeping better track of me than me... Recognize it, do you? That's interesting. The impressive list is just a word salad I made up on the hoof. That tell you anything significant? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest end3 Posted July 21, 2017 Share Posted July 21, 2017 4 minutes ago, bornagainathiest said: The point, my dear End3, is that you believe by faith that they do these things. The facts themselves do not. You just believe that they do. On their own they don''t. Yet, when shown that they don't, you persistently and consistently defy, deny and and oppose this fact. You persistently and consistently see connections and correlations, where none exist. You are predisposed to believe what you want and predisposed to oppose and defy the facts. You are the perfect storm of belief and defiance working together against the facts. (Holy ****! Why am I even writing this?) yeah, the facts DO point to these things....how many times have we had the epigenetic conversation? That's not accepted fact now? You are actually going to deny this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornagainathiest Posted July 21, 2017 Share Posted July 21, 2017 1 minute ago, end3 said: Actually if we ignore a religious aspect, then yes, facts brought us to this point and facts will continue to move us down some path. Given that, we have brought ourselves to this point through a particular string of behaviors. I am simply asserting that if the behaviors were within certain boundaries, the outcome would not be the same. You would have to be obtuse to believe anything else. Also adding, as we have discussed before, that the Bible alludes to several of these ongoing discoveries. The moderator here says the Bible is wonderfully divisive....and the Bible says that as well. We have already mentioned the longevity issue. There is the sins of the father, epigenetic correlation, and on and on. You know, we are understanding much more about the environment and having a fit because we will "kill" it if we don't change our behaviors, and yet the Bible is asserting the exact same damn thing with humanity, yet it is not worthy of consideration. And when you get challenged on it, then you start making fun......God, Adam, Eve and a talking snake walked into bar..... That's your faith and your defiant opposition disorder talking, End. (Again.) And once again... No, the facts did not bring us to this point. Your faith is doing all the bringing here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest end3 Posted July 21, 2017 Share Posted July 21, 2017 3 minutes ago, bornagainathiest said: That's your faith and your defiant opposition disorder talking, End. (Again.) And once again... No, the facts did not bring us to this point. Your faith is doing all the bringing here. No, it's all chemistry and physics BAA.....ALL of it disregarding anything supernatural. ALL of history....EVERY last drop. No faith to it. And now you are a doctor? Just answer honestly about the genetic research. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornagainathiest Posted July 21, 2017 Share Posted July 21, 2017 2 minutes ago, end3 said: yeah, the facts DO point to these things....how many times have we had the epigenetic conversation? That's not accepted fact now? You are actually going to deny this? No, they don't. Your religious faith is making the false connection between the Bible and epigenetics. Epigenetics exists but YOU make the connection. This is your faith talking again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest end3 Posted July 21, 2017 Share Posted July 21, 2017 3 minutes ago, bornagainathiest said: No, they don't. Your religious faith is making the false connection between the Bible and epigenetics. Epigenetics exists but YOU make the connection. This is your faith talking again. So you are going to say that the behavior of my father has not directly affected me and generations to come AFTER the research is confident that this is the case, and then not apply that to the same statement in the Bible? Really? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornagainathiest Posted July 21, 2017 Share Posted July 21, 2017 4 minutes ago, end3 said: No, it's all chemistry and physics BAA.....ALL of it disregarding anything supernatural. ALL of history....EVERY last drop. No faith to it. And now you are a doctor? Just answer honestly about the genetic research. I have done. Science is agnostic regarding any religion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now