Neverlandrut Posted June 9, 2014 Share Posted June 9, 2014 End is like a Christian Joker. He just enjoys the chaos he can cause. He's not in the least bit interested in making an intelligible argument. He's only interstred stiring up an atheist hornet nest, no matter how irrelevant his points are. I'm all for constructive debate. I'm happy to concider the opposing side's point of view if they can coherently support their beliefs, but this guy has not done so. I've heard much better arguments for god, End, from much better debaters than you and am still not impressed. All you are doing is using every dishonest, shifty, dodgy tactic in the book to shut down the argument instead of actually engaging in real debate and addressing people's points with coherent responses. The claims you're making make no sense, and your "evidence" for it does not support them.You are certainly free stop participating. I don't remember you ever making a coherent point anyhow. Then your memory sucks ass, or you have no idea what a coherent point is. Yet another example of *poke poke poke.* If your goal is to get people to quit participating, you may well accomplish that. But that will not mean that anything you said was valid. Just annoying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeThinkerNZ Posted June 9, 2014 Share Posted June 9, 2014 it's amazing what's happening right now. It's like watching someone in deep denial trying to tie anything together. OK Roz, let's take it step by step. Certain behaviors defined as sin? Yes or no. Let me assure you Roz before we start, you will lose this one. Sin is a fictional construct. You can't get off first base. Not per the definition of sin ma'am. What definition of sin. I don't recognise one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest end3 Posted June 9, 2014 Share Posted June 9, 2014 Neverland. fwiw, to give you and I a sincere try, ask a question please and I will spit out the truth as I see it with no intentional bias. Will that work for you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roz Posted June 9, 2014 Author Share Posted June 9, 2014 My definition of sin is that it is what is arbitrarily written in your book to keep the sheep in line. Just like muslims have different definitions of sin than you. Just like SDAs have a different definition of sin than you. I believe in secular morality, in that above all do no harm, or choose the thing that is least harmful and most beneficial for society. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest end3 Posted June 9, 2014 Share Posted June 9, 2014 it's amazing what's happening right now. It's like watching someone in deep denial trying to tie anything together. OK Roz, let's take it step by step. Certain behaviors defined as sin? Yes or no. Let me assure you Roz before we start, you will lose this one. Sin is a fictional construct. You can't get off first base. Not per the definition of sin ma'am. What definition of sin. I don't recognise one. Webster's does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neverlandrut Posted June 9, 2014 Share Posted June 9, 2014 it's amazing what's happening right now. It's like watching someone in deep denial trying to tie anything together.OK Roz, let's take it step by step. Certain behaviors defined as sin? Yes or no. Let me assure you Roz before we start, you will lose this one. Sin is a fictional construct. You can't get off first base.Not per the definition of sin ma'am. What a great set up for a tautology, and a circular argument! I'm interests to see where this one goes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest end3 Posted June 9, 2014 Share Posted June 9, 2014 My definition of sin is that it is what is arbitrarily written in your book to keep the sheep in line. Just like muslims have different definitions of sin than you. Just like SDAs have a different definition of sin than you. I believe in secular morality, in that above all do no harm, or choose the thing that is least harmful and most beneficial for society. Thanks, that's a start. The point is that you don't really know what will be least harmful and beneficial for society. Beneficial for society would imply that you are somewhat omniscient. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roz Posted June 9, 2014 Author Share Posted June 9, 2014 You advocated the killing of children because your god ordered you to. How is this any different than what muslims do? They use the same thing to justify killing. They claim allah wills it. You claim god wills it. Then you cite papers do not ever claim that genetic predispositions were the justification of the bible god's orders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midniterider Posted June 9, 2014 Share Posted June 9, 2014 Facts are facts folks....looks like y'all are screwed on this one. But I don't expect any of you quitters to take responsibility. God creates whole races of people with bad DNA so he can kill them before they harm society because they have bad DNA. Check. Got it. Makes sense. So I was watching 60 Minutes....all the college shootings....most are attributed to schizophrenia.....a genetic thing? Killing is death, death is the debil. The debil is the fallen world, What is disease? Schizophrenia is genetic. I agree. Disease is when people are not functioning well in society due to some physical, emotional, or mental problem. I dont really believe in the devil or fallen worlds. Now if you want to anthropomorphize the fallen world as the devil or present God as the group of people that performed ethnic cleansing (per God's command) in the bible , then enjoy. :-) I just dont understand worshiping a God concept like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdelsolray Posted June 9, 2014 Share Posted June 9, 2014 No wonder his wife left him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roz Posted June 9, 2014 Author Share Posted June 9, 2014 I don't, that's why secular morality is debated, continually. It is continually debated, forged, strengthened. It is evolving. Your morality is whatever god told you to do, you would do it. How is this any different than the muslims? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roz Posted June 9, 2014 Author Share Posted June 9, 2014 No wonder his wife left him. I'm beginning to see that she was right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neverlandrut Posted June 9, 2014 Share Posted June 9, 2014 Neverland. fwiw, to give you and I a sincere try, ask a question please and I will spit out the truth as I see it with no intentional bias. Will that work for you? Sure. Question: Why do you believe in god? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neverlandrut Posted June 9, 2014 Share Posted June 9, 2014 My definition of sin is that it is what is arbitrarily written in your book to keep the sheep in line. Just like muslims have different definitions of sin than you. Just like SDAs have a different definition of sin than you. I believe in secular morality, in that above all do no harm, or choose the thing that is least harmful and most beneficial for society. Thanks, that's a start. The point is that you don't really know what will be least harmful and beneficial for society. Beneficial for society would imply that you are somewhat omniscient. Now that's a coherent point. True, we don't have absolute knowledge of all the potential comsequences of our actions. But we still have to make decisions the best way we know how, with the knowledge we do have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest end3 Posted June 9, 2014 Share Posted June 9, 2014 No wonder his wife left him. Outside the lines S. Hell has a special place for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest end3 Posted June 9, 2014 Share Posted June 9, 2014 Going to bed folks....this has turned a bit ugly. good night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roz Posted June 9, 2014 Author Share Posted June 9, 2014 Let's talk about secular morality. No, we're not omniscient However, we can objectively see that certain actions are beneficial to society as a whole We can see that certain actions harm members of society There's lots of middle ground, give and take, that's why we have political parties for one. How ought we to govern is an important debate With religion, it is 'thus says the lord.' Which lord again? How do you know that your lord is the one? How do you know that he hasn't told others his will? To kill children? How do you know? The answer is, you don't. This is the christian/muslim/religionist stance. They fool themselves into thinking that they know because their god knows, when in reality the god they know is only their own imaginary friend. This is why there's millions of different religions, and not a single one has ever contributed to the betterment of society as much as science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roz Posted June 9, 2014 Author Share Posted June 9, 2014 No wonder his wife left him. Outside the lines S. Hell has a special place for you. Hmmmm. Threatening someone for saying an off the cuff remark. Yep, that's religion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xtify Posted June 9, 2014 Share Posted June 9, 2014 No wonder his wife left him. Outside the lines S. Hell has a special place for you. It's a bit uncalled for and a bit harsh. But so is threatening eternal torment for making a rude remark, especially when you believe it really exists. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midniterider Posted June 9, 2014 Share Posted June 9, 2014 My definition of sin is that it is what is arbitrarily written in your book to keep the sheep in line. Just like muslims have different definitions of sin than you. Just like SDAs have a different definition of sin than you. I believe in secular morality, in that above all do no harm, or choose the thing that is least harmful and most beneficial for society. Thanks, that's a start. The point is that you don't really know what will be least harmful and beneficial for society. Beneficial for society would imply that you are somewhat omniscient. After thousands of years of experience under our belts humanity does have some successful ideas of what's really bad and what's really good for society. But in an extreme black and white sense, you're right. No, we are not omniscient. But we're not idiots either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ironhorse Posted June 9, 2014 Share Posted June 9, 2014 Let's talk about secular morality. No, we're not omniscient However, we can objectively see that certain actions are beneficial to society as a whole We can see that certain actions harm members of society There's lots of middle ground, give and take, that's why we have political parties for one. How ought we to govern is an important debate With religion, it is 'thus says the lord.' Which lord again? How do you know that your lord is the one? How do you know that he hasn't told others his will? To kill children? How do you know? The answer is, you don't. This is the christian/muslim/religionist stance. They fool themselves into thinking that they know because their god knows, when in reality the god they know is only their own imaginary friend. This is why there's millions of different religions, and not a single one has ever contributed to the betterment of society as much as science. "This is why there's millions of different religions, and not a single one ever contributed to the betterment of society as science." Are you saying that the Christian faith had zero influence on the rise of science in history? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeThinkerNZ Posted June 9, 2014 Share Posted June 9, 2014 it's amazing what's happening right now. It's like watching someone in deep denial trying to tie anything together. OK Roz, let's take it step by step. Certain behaviors defined as sin? Yes or no. Let me assure you Roz before we start, you will lose this one. Sin is a fictional construct. You can't get off first base. Not per the definition of sin ma'am. What definition of sin. I don't recognise one. Webster's does. Webster's defines all kinds of fictional constructs. Try again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeThinkerNZ Posted June 9, 2014 Share Posted June 9, 2014 My definition of sin is that it is what is arbitrarily written in your book to keep the sheep in line. Just like muslims have different definitions of sin than you. Just like SDAs have a different definition of sin than you. I believe in secular morality, in that above all do no harm, or choose the thing that is least harmful and most beneficial for society. Thanks, that's a start. The point is that you don't really know what will be least harmful and beneficial for society. Beneficial for society would imply that you are somewhat omniscient. The bible doesn't exactly promote what would be least harmful and most beneficial for society. (Unless, I guess, you're talking about the (leading men in the) patriarchal tribal society of the near eastern communities that wrote it. It was probably beneficial for them. Not for women, children and other tribes.) But to say it provides any kind of morality for contemporary society is ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midniterider Posted June 9, 2014 Share Posted June 9, 2014 Tag team! End tags IH and leaves the ring. :-) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeThinkerNZ Posted June 9, 2014 Share Posted June 9, 2014 Let's talk about secular morality. No, we're not omniscient However, we can objectively see that certain actions are beneficial to society as a whole We can see that certain actions harm members of society There's lots of middle ground, give and take, that's why we have political parties for one. How ought we to govern is an important debate With religion, it is 'thus says the lord.' Which lord again? How do you know that your lord is the one? How do you know that he hasn't told others his will? To kill children? How do you know? The answer is, you don't. This is the christian/muslim/religionist stance. They fool themselves into thinking that they know because their god knows, when in reality the god they know is only their own imaginary friend. This is why there's millions of different religions, and not a single one has ever contributed to the betterment of society as much as science. "This is why there's millions of different religions, and not a single one ever contributed to the betterment of society as science." Are you saying that the Christian faith had zero influence on the rise of science in history? Look what happened in the dark ages. Compare that to the enlightenment era. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts