|
Your getting GBS in our D&D, and unlike Reese's Cups it is not delicious. Anyway:Kyrie eleison posted:Yes, like Abraham, out of obedience to God, and trusting in his Will; and like with Abraham, God would never require evil from me, only the evidence that my loyalty is so great that I would be willing to commit evil for His sake. Except for that time when it totally happened to Jephthah. Also a slew of other blatantly immoral actions. Also the Catholic Church is a criminal organization that protects numerous known pedophiles from being prosecuted and no amount of good that they ever do will outweigh that. -EDIT- Christ, I misread 11 pages as being only 1. 
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2014 00:19
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 11:24 |
|
|
Periodiko posted:You say this like it isn't a meaningful criticism, but "doing a very bad job" at a charitable cause to the point where you cause unnecessary suffering to the people involved is pretty dire, especially when you're receiving millions of dollars in funding from international sources. Charities are perfectly valid targets for criticism, and gross mismanagement of a charity can reasonably be called an immoral act. It cannot be overstated that her charities were not simply mismanaged because of incompetency but were intentionally designed not to cure people and kept very little in the way of strong painkillers of any kind if they kept them at all because she and her organization viewed suffering as a way to come closer to God. And yet this view did not stop her from using her money and immense influence to seek the help and quality care of numerous top doctors in the US, Europe, and India. She was an unequivocally evil woman. -EDIT- I am 100% sure that I am, in fact, much smarter than Abe Lincoln. Who What Now fucked around with this message at 00:58 on Nov 18, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2014 00:50
|
|
|
Nessus posted:I think recent history demonstrates adequately that an avowedly irreligious state is just as capable of torturing and killing the heretic as any religious state. What? Unless I missed something those governments weren't committing those atrocities while screaming "God is dead!" and the churches were targeted not because of an aversion to God per se but because churches represented a rival for power and the cults of personality. Unless you aren't talking about Soviet Russia and such and instead mean some super obscure event I never heard of.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2014 00:55
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Do you have strong evidence that Lincoln was an atheist, rather than the Deist so many other Americans of his time were, given that his personal letters disclaim belief in organized religion rather than in spirituality as a whole? Do you recognize that Lincoln is one example, and that you can present hundreds of highly intelligent people who had religious convictions who work just as well for pointing out how arrogant claiming to be smarter than all religious people because of your atheism is? I wouldn't say that I'm smarter than all those people because I'm an atheist, but because I have a much better quality education than they could have ever dreamed of because I live in a more advanced society. -EDIT- Only in regard to historical figures, obviously. I would never claim to be smarter than someone working for NASA just because they believe in God.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2014 01:01
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Oh, you're smarter than James Clerk Maxwell, eh? Concerning electromagnetism and his field of study? I doubt it. Overall? Probably. -EDIT- Nessus posted:I'm speaking more generally and metaphorically of 'intolerance of dissident beliefs to the point of imprisonment and torture'. While the Soviet Union eased up a whole hell of a lot, they did not completely stop, and various other states had similar unpleasantnesses. But did they do those thing because they were atheistic or secular? Because of not it would be super disingenuous to compare the two things.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2014 01:06
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Does the USSR classifying dissidents as mentally ill count as punishing (secular) heresy? How about the USA (officially secular) torturing Chelsea Manning, debating over whether to assassinate Julian Assange and Edward Snowden, etc. No, it doesn't, because they didn't/aren't doing those things specifically because they do not believe in a god but because their targets represent a threat to their power.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2014 01:13
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Have you been following the discussion at all, or are you just playing a ridiculous semantical trick where "orthodoxy", "heresy", "dogma", etc. are suddenly only applicable to religion rather than words derived from religious jargon? It's a completely fair criticism if the claim is that having an atheistic view or a secular government was a direct cause of those things. E: Nessus posted:Do you think the various inquisitions and so forth were rooted in just deciding one day, with no consideration for political, economic, or other reasons, to go "Hm, you know what we need to do now? Torture the heretic and expropriate his lands!" I believe that religion played a slightly larger role than "none at all" which, although it was not the primary consideration, is an important distinction.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2014 01:20
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Nobody said that at any point. Go talk to imaginary friends and enemies elsewhere, please. Then it's a pretty meaningless criticism to bring up in the first place and Nessus' point is an irrelevant one. E: My Imaginary GF posted:It all comes back to whether law is rooted in divine or human authority, doesn't it? Hence why America is a secular nation, and Russia is not: In America, law is rooted in divine authority, while in Russia, law is rooted in human authority. All law is rooted in human authority. That you can convince people otherwise is a totally separate matter.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2014 01:23
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Atheists are those who don't organize their primary community identifier around a religious association. In America, due to the collapse of community following desegregation within the trends towards suburbanization, atheism has taken on an anti-social moniker of identity. I'm pretty sure not believing in gods factors in there somewhere.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2014 01:50
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:This I gotta hear In that Miltank knows nothing about either of them. Then again he doesn't know anything about his own religion either, sooooo...
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2014 15:25
|
|
|
BrandorKP posted:This what passes for atheism. What do you mean "passes for"? The only thing required to be an atheist is not believing in a god or gods. There is no other criteria or some sort of ideological purity test beyond that one thing. She can revere reason or whatever else so long as it isn't specifically a god. And don't give me any of that redefining god to mean anything held with respect bullshit either. E: Reread your post and adjusted my point a bit. Who What Now fucked around with this message at 17:07 on Nov 18, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2014 17:04
|
|
|
Technogeek posted:Comic books seem like a better equivalent. poo poo, you have just as many arguments about which stories actually happened and which have been retconned away as metaphorical/fear toxin-induced hallucinations. Anime is just Japanese comic books that are moving.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2014 17:07
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:You atheists all secretly believe in God though, you just choose to worship Satan but won't admit it. But you all have the same atheist Bible that Stalin, Pol Pot, uh Al Capone, Attila the Hun, the Pope*, and Brigham Young followed when they ate Christian babies. Nah, Brandor thinks that God (Logos) is a set of magic words (Logos) and concepts (Logos) and his definition(Logos) of these words (Logos) and concepts (Logos) is so uselessly broad that literally everything someone (Logos) likes is their God (Logos) and also his God (Logos) and the ultimate God (Logos). I don't think he's concerned about Satan except concerning some peoples concept (Logos) of Satan (Logos).
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2014 17:15
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:.....what? This warrants further explanation. I wasn't kidding when I said Brandor uses a very broad definition of "god".
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2014 17:53
|
|
|
Ninjasaurus posted:So I guess everyone but me figured it out right away (I've never seen the OP before) but still took the bait for 14 pages. Well done. Boredom makes fools of us all.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2014 18:20
|
|
|
BrandorKP posted:That praxeology business came from somewhere. Being the religious equivalent of libertarianism is not something to be proud of, you know.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2014 18:39
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Now you're beginning to understand how America is a Judeo-Christian nation, SedanChair. Good for you, I'm glad for you. America is only Judeo-Christian because Hitler ruined calling one's nation just regular Christian.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2014 20:14
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Yes, Hitler was the ultimate outcome of having a purely christian nation. Hence you have to return to Judaic values of law originating from divine providence in order to avoid future hitlers. No, you just pretend not to hate Jews while giving money to Israel. See: Republican policy for the last four decades.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2014 20:22
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Sure, sometimes I thought "I should just be a Catholic, that's where modern values all come from anyway." Then I saw what kind of positions it puts you in. Can't I just be a Jesuit? You can be anything you want if you just believe in yourself.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2014 23:02
|
|
|
BrandorKP posted:Let's make this easy and straight forward. Hold on now, you're making a critical error. You're talking about two very wide-spread groups, and yet your pigeonholing atheism into one incredibly narrow interpretation while leaving the opposite Christian position as being as diverse as possible. You're making a common Category Error. Your definition of atheism is far too narrow and your definition of Christianity is far too broad in this instance. And the rest of your posts ignore this egregious error. You need to hold theism and atheism to the same standrads if you're going to compare them. Otherwise don't bother.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2014 19:08
|
|
|
 Brandor do you believe that you have solved the problem of Solipsism? And if so, is your answer simply "Logos"? I feel like this may be a sticking point for why you and I have such difficulty communicating.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2014 23:01
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Torah is closest man can get to replicating heaven on earth. Then heaven sucks sweaty taint.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2014 19:50
|
|
|
Mr. Wiggles posted:I don't think you "get" heaven. Please, by all means, "enlighten" me.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2014 20:18
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Quite simply, Heaven is a place on Earth. Jackson County, Missouri?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2014 21:07
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:You going for an As I Lay Dying reference or a Sound and the Fury? Mormonism reference.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2014 21:42
|
|
|
Rodatose posted:Is it oppression if there isn't any perception of oppression? Unequivocally yes. Oppression is oppression, it's frikken' tautological for chrissakes. How is this even a question?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2014 14:18
|
|
|
Miltank posted:Just think about it logically. If God wasn't God, then he would just be a god and some other god would be God who would be truth. But since God is truth we know that God, (not a god) is God. How much god could a god-God god if a god-God could god God?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2014 16:44
|
|
|
Miltank posted:God has divinely elected that newts can grow back their tails, yes. And he divinely elected to have the Loa Loa feed upon the eyes of starving African children. I think it's pretty clear that God is the greatest force of evil and the devil a champion of goodness who was punished for trying to help and protect mankind.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2014 17:34
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:None of that is biblical. ha-Satan is even more of an enemy of humanity than YHVH in Biblical terms, and the beasts in the Apocalypse of John are hardly friendly to mankind. Even in conventional Christian theology, Satan is hardly capable of being interpreted as benevolent. Giving him a Promethean role requires inventing your own religion. God created and controls all evil acts, thus all injustices are directly his fault and responsibility. Satan in not culpable for his actions, only God can be.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2014 18:04
|
|
|
Imagine that there are two people, let's call them Steve and Jeff. And let's say that Steve starts a train rolling on tracks down a hill which have a fork at the bottom of the hill, and Jeff can control whether the train will take the left or right path on the tracks. On the left side of the tracks is 100 innocent newborn babies that will be killed by the train, and on the right side is absolutely nothing and if the train goes down that path then not only are all the babies saved but also world hunger will be solved and we will enter into a post-scarcity utopia. If Jeff chooses to allow the train to go down the left path is he not equally to blame for the deaths of the babies as Steve or at the very least partially responsible? Well it doesn't matter whether or not you believe Jeff is guilty because God isn't anything like that scenario. God both starts the train and ensures that there is only one track filled with infinite babies and also he set the train on fire and filled it with infinite puppies he wanted to see burn to death while on a train that was running over babies.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2014 18:18
|
|
|
Miltank posted:Luckily, the world has already been redeemed by the death of Christ. Redemption cannot come from a source of pure evil. The world has no need to be redeemed, only to be freed from the machinations of a tyrant.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2014 18:44
|
|
|
Mr. Wiggles posted:You're on the right path. But if God created and controls all, and God is good, then does that mean all acts which are evil are ultimately not in fact evil? God isn't good, God is unarguably evil. I thought I made that abundantly clear.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2014 18:47
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:God is neither 'good' nor 'evil.' God is god; you're doing a disservice to god to assign morality to divine action. You're doing a disservice to me by saying I can't judge God or ascribe morality to his actions.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2014 18:49
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:You're an idolator, so you have fewer laws that apply to you. Also lol, who the gently caress are you to judge god? I'm someone who is infinitely more moral than God. Who the gently caress are you to tell me I can't? -EDIT- Sakarja posted:But that's the point. How and by what moral standard could you possibly judge God? With my own standard. And as for how I pretty clearly typed it out with my hands.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2014 18:52
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:I'm the boot of your imagination, forever stomping upon your face. You do a disservice to athiests by showing the need to oppress their judgments. Religion isn't about god, its about the community that organizes to worship god, and you judge that community when you judge god. So, who the gently caress are you to judge others' community without presenting a viable alternative? You're living in the viable alternative. Any nation that isn't a theocracy is the viable alternative and we've had them basically forever. And, again, I'm the guy who's better than God.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2014 18:58
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:
Nope, sure don't. Did it serve that purpose? Absolutely. Is it literally the only thing that can or could have done so? Nope.  Don't hate the player, hate the game, scrublord.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2014 19:04
|
|
|
Sakarja posted:Why should God, or anyone else, care about your Quote me where I said God or anyone else should care. Whether or not people care has absolutely no bearing on the fact that I'm better than God. quote:And by your own reasoning, He's the one in control when you claim to be better than Him. Your atheism is just one of His evil acts, if I understand you correctly. This is true, yes. quote:I disagree. Most of the time the problem is that atheists judge God as if He was at once real and fake. They acknowledge His "crimes" but ignore everything else. This approach is obviously absurd. Either you acknowledge God's existence, in which case you have no right and no standard by wich to judge Him; or you deny God's existence in which case the morality of his actions is a non-issue, nonsense, even. That's retarded. I can judge Darth Vader as being evil even though he isn't real. And you also seem to be confusing the ability to judge with having that judgement respected. Those are two wildly different things, sport.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2014 19:40
|
|
|
Hodgepodge posted:Uh, being omnipotent, God is both good and evil. I mean seriously, I did my Taoism spiel right before this stupid argument. I don't accept that anything can be both itself and its own negation. A cannot simultaneously be both A and not-A. I also don't care what morality God subscribes to because it's an evil morality and I especially don't accept that anything is beyond my ability to judge.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2014 19:54
|
|
|
Are we swimming in excavated Jewish corpses or something?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2014 20:47
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 11:24 |
|
|
Black Bones posted:did you learn nothing from Obi-wan I really don't see what Tusken Raiders walking in single file to hide their numbers has to do with anything.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2014 21:00
|
|