Debate answers
Pages: 12
*sigh done fi I missed you you can still post your question
also I hope you do not dislike me after this :(
I am not trying to be rude
@chrisname
may as well start from the beggining
Not for no reason, but for what another Ape has.
@helios
Thanks for that but this is the internet as chrisname points out
No sorry I said christianity, however the Pentateuch are in the bible and christianity has its roots in the jewish culture(Jesus would have been a jew)
also have you seen the Aztecs? Mayans ? the Grecians were a little bit more civilized but they still had no true morals also I didn't say they were mindless merely had no morals.I do not believe the Bible will ever be forgotten.
Unknown place? poorly defined(thou shalt not kill doesn't get that much clearer)?What do you mean by "context-less"
@greywolf
Christianity was not born.Where do you get morals in atheism?Why would he be sadistic?
@ return0
Which parts do you question?
What inconsistencies !!!
@greywolf
It is not comedy
also I hope you do not dislike me after this :(
I am not trying to be rude
@chrisname
may as well start from the beggining
| Religion puts a huge block on free thinking; Wrong it says, "Thou shalt not kill" before that what morals did the world have?What morals does evolution have other than those of Christianity? Errrr... since when did Apes kill each other for no reason? Morals existed before religion. |
Not for no reason, but for what another Ape has.
@helios
| Neither of you is old enough to have given what you're talking about any kind of deep thought, and your half brain-dead arguments are pushing me closer and closer to the edge of insanity. |
Thanks for that but this is the internet as chrisname points out
| The Pentateuch was written around the fifth century BC. Are you suggesting all cultures before (and there were quite a few) consisted of mindless savages who killed each other with little consideration? That's an amazing theory. It gives a lot of insight into the construction of such great projects as the pyramid of Giza (finished around 2500 BC) and what it must have been like to build with all that chaos. Irony aside, I know three thousand years is a lot of time to consider, but try to remember the world existed before the Bible was written, and it will continue to exist long after it's forgotten. |
No sorry I said christianity, however the Pentateuch are in the bible and christianity has its roots in the jewish culture(Jesus would have been a jew)
also have you seen the Aztecs? Mayans ? the Grecians were a little bit more civilized but they still had no true morals also I didn't say they were mindless merely had no morals.I do not believe the Bible will ever be forgotten.
| I don't think "dying of bleeding" is in the same category as "after dying, somehow going to an unknown place at an unknown location whose existence I can't verify, for following or not a set of poorly defined, ambiguous, and context-less rules" |
Unknown place? poorly defined(thou shalt not kill doesn't get that much clearer)?What do you mean by "context-less"
@greywolf
| Religion was born out of fear and the lack of understanding. We live in a more enlightened age and the answer that religion gives just do not cut it anymore. One thing that I really despise about religious zealots is there insinuation (sometimes assertion) that without religion you have no morals, this is frankly bullshit. Now if you have not worked it out, I am an atheist. I do not believe there is a God or Gods and even if there was, it would be a cruel sadistic bastard of a God and not worthy of reverence |
Christianity was not born.Where do you get morals in atheism?Why would he be sadistic?
@ return0
| Even to this day I question most of the contents of the Bible... anyone that tells you not to is full of crap |
Which parts do you question?
| and have tons of inconsistencies, just as the Bible does. |
What inconsistencies !!!
@greywolf
| Yes, it is some of the best comedy I have every read |
It is not comedy
Essentially you've now created two threads to argue on.
You're missing the point of my comment. I'm not going into immense details because most on this forum won't know what I'm referring to, but just understand that there is MUCH MUCH more out there that should have been included in the modern Bible that was not, simply to control the masses. Therefore you should constantly question what you read. It does not mean you have no faith.
Why do you feel the need to "defend" yourself? It's acts like this that cause people to despise Christians. There's no reason the issue cannot be discussed, granted some comments were getting a bit out of hand.
| @ return0 Even to this day I question most of the contents of the Bible... anyone that tells you not to is full of crap Which parts do you question? |
You're missing the point of my comment. I'm not going into immense details because most on this forum won't know what I'm referring to, but just understand that there is MUCH MUCH more out there that should have been included in the modern Bible that was not, simply to control the masses. Therefore you should constantly question what you read. It does not mean you have no faith.
Why do you feel the need to "defend" yourself? It's acts like this that cause people to despise Christians. There's no reason the issue cannot be discussed, granted some comments were getting a bit out of hand.
No I want to move the other to this thread.
What has been left out?
I want to defend myself because I do not wish for me to look stupid
MUCH MUCH more out there that should have been included in the modern Bible that was not, simply to control the masses. Therefore you should constantly question what you read. It does not mean you have no faith. Why do you feel the need to "defend" yourself? It's acts like this that cause people to despise Christians. There's no reason the issue cannot be discussed, granted some comments were getting a bit out of hand. |
What has been left out?
I want to defend myself because I do not wish for me to look stupid
closed account (z05DSL3A)
The reason I opted out of the other thread is because I can only see the thread spiralling out of control and people getting offended. Moving to another thread is equally futile.
| Thanks for that but this is the internet as chrisname points out |
| No sorry I said christianity |
| also have you seen the Aztecs? Mayans ? |
| the Grecians were a little bit more civilized but they still had no true morals |
| also I didn't say they were mindless merely had no morals. |
| In its first, descriptive usage, morality means a code of conduct or belief concerning matters of what is moral or immoral (these words are commonly misplaced with right or wrong which are words of logic not morality). In its descriptive use, morals are arbitrarily and subjectively created by society, philosophy, religion, and/or individual conscience. |
An amoral society is an oxymoron. You can't have social cohesion without a set of implicit rules that tell the members what they are and what they aren't allowed to do.
Now, if you're saying that they had different morals than we do, well, that goes without saying. Morals change from society to society, and they have changed a lot since the dawn of civilization. Just to name two examples, slavery was acceptable until two or three hundred years ago, and racial segregation is still commonplace in some parts of the world. In the US it became unacceptable just a few decades ago.
| I do not believe the Bible will ever be forgotten. |
Even if that doesn't happen, we will sooner or later become extinct.
| Unknown place? |
| poorly defined(thou shalt not kill doesn't get that much clearer)?What do you mean by "context-less" |
These are all very important questions, which as far as I know, are not addressed.
| Where do you get morals in atheism? |
Last edited on
closed account (z05DSL3A)
| ...because I do not wish for me to look stupid |
you are failing there.
At this point I don't give a flying fuck about offending you, but as there are other reader of the forum that may get offended so I will not answer your questions.
Here's the thing DrChill... you're going about this discussion all wrong. If you are going to site doctrine you cannot provide vague references to things. You're on a development forum and developer brains work quite differently. Every single word you type will be analyzed and potentionally used against you. Whatever you're points may be, you need to be able to explain them in full and back them up. There is no use in attacking anothers beliefs or disagreement with Christian beliefs. Its this kind of attitude that has screwed up Christianity.
As an example:
Stating that the Bible is clear cut is completely insane... from the Old to the New Testament, much of the text is very cryptic. If you don't think so read many of Jesus' parables in the gospels... it takes a lot to understand them. Though shalt not kill may seem clear cut, but as helios points out the what ifs... In the old testament, the Israelites lead massacres of entire nations because God commanded it. There were also laws that allowed them to stone people to death. My point is that you cannot argue specific passages of the Bible without understanding other supporting text and the Bible is not supposed to cover every scenario. Religion cannot provide all the answers to everything.
helios is correct... but I wouldn't say they were forgetten because of lack of interest. The church made the decision to hide them which is precisely my problem with modern religion and why we can have these arguments now, everything has become corrupt. Texts fade from the public eye due to lack of education and controlling of the masses. If people don't know they exist or are told they hold no value... they disappear.
As an example:
| poorly defined(thou shalt not kill doesn't get that much clearer)?What do you mean by "context-less" |
| What if I have to kill to save myself? What if I have to kill one person to save ten? What if I see my father committing an atrocious crime? What if I have to steal to feed my family? What if I have to lie to protect someone? These are all very important questions, which as far as I know, are not addressed. |
Stating that the Bible is clear cut is completely insane... from the Old to the New Testament, much of the text is very cryptic. If you don't think so read many of Jesus' parables in the gospels... it takes a lot to understand them. Though shalt not kill may seem clear cut, but as helios points out the what ifs... In the old testament, the Israelites lead massacres of entire nations because God commanded it. There were also laws that allowed them to stone people to death. My point is that you cannot argue specific passages of the Bible without understanding other supporting text and the Bible is not supposed to cover every scenario. Religion cannot provide all the answers to everything.
| Several parts of it have already been forgotten. There used to be a few more gospels, for one. All books are eventually forgotten |
helios is correct... but I wouldn't say they were forgetten because of lack of interest. The church made the decision to hide them which is precisely my problem with modern religion and why we can have these arguments now, everything has become corrupt. Texts fade from the public eye due to lack of education and controlling of the masses. If people don't know they exist or are told they hold no value... they disappear.
| also have you seen the Aztecs? Mayans ? |
| Yes. Both very civilized cultures. |
The fact that they and the Incas never had guns, wheels, writing, currency or sea-worthy ships notwithstanding, they were still more civilized in other senses (benefits system, IIRC) than most of Europe. Obviously when the Spanish arrived they had no chance... they had guns.
Also I find it kind of ironic to ask Helios about the Aztecs and Mayans, when, being from South America (the Aztecs and Mayans were in Mexico mainly, but the Incas originated in Peru, which is very close to Argentina) himself, he almost certainly knows more of their history than you do.
| the Grecians were a little bit more civilized but they still had no true morals |
| You gotta be kidding me. The Greeks practically invented philosophy, including ethics, and they didn't have morals?. |
Again, that's an absolutely absurd statement. What of Pythagoras' theorem? He was Greek. Hippocratic Corpus (a bunch of medical books written by Hippocrates (a Greek)). The theory of the Four Humours, while ultimately wrong, lead people away from spiritual cures, and was invented by Aristotle, another Greek... Then there's Ptolemy:
| Claudius Ptolemaeus (Greek: Κλαύδιος Πτολεμαῖος Klaúdios Ptolemaîos; 90 – 168), known in English as Ptolemy (pronounced /ˈtɒləmɪ/), was a Roman citizen of Greek or Egyptian ancestry.[1] He was a mathematician, astronomer, geographer, astrologer and a poet of a single epigram in the Greek Anthology[2][3]. He lived in Egypt under the Roman Empire, and is believed to have been born in the town of Ptolemais Hermiou in the Thebaid. He died in Alexandria around AD 168.[4] |
Well would you look at that.
| Astronomy (from the Greek words astron (ἄστρον), "star" and -nomy from nomos (νόμος), "law") |
http://www.crystalinks.com/greekscience.html
| Thales of Miletus is regarded by many as the father of science; he was the first Greek philosopher to seek to explain the physical world in terms of natural rather than supernatural causes. |
Oh and, by the way, the Christians burned down the library of Alexandria which, IIRC, was one of the 7 wonders of the ancient world. If I'm wrong, then it was at least the biggest and definitely the most complete.
So, you know; I think the Greeks show more moral fibre than the Christians did.
| The Royal Library of Alexandria, or Ancient Library of Alexandria, in Alexandria, Egypt, was probably the largest, and certainly the most famous, of the libraries of the ancient world. It flourished under the patronage of the Ptolemaic dynasty and existed, and functioned as a major center of scholarship, at least until the time of Rome's conquest of Egypt, and probably for many centuries thereafter. Generally thought to have been founded at the beginning of the third century BC, the library was conceived and opened either during the reign of Ptolemy I Soter or during the reign of his son Ptolemy II. Plutarch (AD 46–120) wrote that during his visit to Alexandria in 48 BC, Julius Caesar accidentally burned the library down when he set fire to his own ships to frustrate Achillas' attempt to limit his ability to communicate by sea.[citation needed] According to Plutarch's account, this fire spread to the docks and then to the library. However, this version of events is not confirmed in contemporary accounts of Caesar's visit. In fact, it has been reasonably established that segments of its collection were partially destroyed on several occasions before and after the first century BC. The best known include the decree of the Coptic Christian Pope Theophilus of Alexandria in 391, who called for the destruction of the Serapeum, and the Muslim sacking of Alexandria in 642.[1] |
The only reason the Romans (who were Pagan at the time, by the way) defeated them was because they spent too little time on warfare. Same reason the Egyptians fell.
Last edited on
@grey wolf
Fine the debate has gone to far if that is how you feel.
however I answer helios's questions
1: Well you statement was derogatory as well
2: What about the Old Testament
3: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_sacrifice_in_Aztec_culture
4: Grecian Pederasty
5: Good point
6: Actualy no former parts of the biblt were not chosen because they were not believed to be .... real I guess is the word I am looking for though the actual word is canon; Nor do I believe it will be extinct either
7: a:I theorize it is in a different plane (just a theory); b:live a sin-less life; c: err.... I actualy haven't thought about that I don't really think you would want out of heaven; d:that is faith and reason
8: a:That would be self defence the next few actualy are good points I will attempt to ask my pastor (he is more knowledgeable than me); b:What if I have to steal to feed my family? was actualy answered in the bible ... I forgot the verse but it is something like this: no one hates a man if he steals if he is hungry but if he is cought he must pay 7 fold;
9: What I meant is that there are no real morals in atheism
Fine the debate has gone to far if that is how you feel.
however I answer helios's questions
1: Well you statement was derogatory as well
2: What about the Old Testament
3: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_sacrifice_in_Aztec_culture
4: Grecian Pederasty
5: Good point
6: Actualy no former parts of the biblt were not chosen because they were not believed to be .... real I guess is the word I am looking for though the actual word is canon; Nor do I believe it will be extinct either
7: a:I theorize it is in a different plane (just a theory); b:live a sin-less life; c: err.... I actualy haven't thought about that I don't really think you would want out of heaven; d:that is faith and reason
8: a:That would be self defence the next few actualy are good points I will attempt to ask my pastor (he is more knowledgeable than me); b:What if I have to steal to feed my family? was actualy answered in the bible ... I forgot the verse but it is something like this: no one hates a man if he steals if he is hungry but if he is cought he must pay 7 fold;
9: What I meant is that there are no real morals in atheism
Last edited on
| What I meant is that there are no real morals in atheism |
What? So you're saying I have no real morals? That's completely ridiculous. I know not to kill people, hurt people, whatever. I know I "shouldn't" do that. I just happen to "know" that if I did, I wouldn't be caught by nothing and sent to no-where to be punished by nothing's arch enemy (which doesn't make sense; why is Satan evil if he punishes the evil?) for doing something.
Here's an inconsistency in the Bible:
One of the seven sins is Envy.
"“Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me”
Hmmm....
Last edited on
| Also I find it kind of ironic to ask Helios about the Aztecs and Mayans, when, being from South America (the Aztecs and Mayans were in Mexico mainly, but the Incas originated in Peru, which is very close to Argentina) himself, he almost certainly knows more of their history than you do. |
Sorry I did not know you were I did not mean to pick you out or be racist :(
| I think the Greeks show more moral fibre than the Christians did. |
the greeks had pederasty likely more but I choose to go no further
@ chrisname
I do not agree with catholoscism so you can not blame me for the pope's actions
| Sorry I did not know you were I did not mean to pick you out or be racist :( |
That's not racism, I was merely suggesting it was ironic that you asked him. More coincidence, really.
| the greeks had pederasty likely more but I choose to go no further |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_sex_abuse_cases
Last edited on
@chrisname
actualy the answer is more simple than you would think, God can be envious simply because he is God and he made all (also that was in reference to worshiping other gods)
Here's an inconsistency in the Bible: One of the seven sins is Envy. "“Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me” Hmmm.... |
actualy the answer is more simple than you would think, God can be envious simply because he is God and he made all (also that was in reference to worshiping other gods)
Last edited on
I sometimes type code instead of quote too.
Anyway, it's still an inconsistency as far as I am concerned. But I no longer wish to partake in this discussion. Bye.
Anyway, it's still an inconsistency as far as I am concerned. But I no longer wish to partake in this discussion. Bye.
@chrisname
I AM NOT CATHOLIC!!!
(sorry I had to shout)
I do not follow their customs, obey there rules, or bow to their saints
I AM NOT CATHOLIC!!!
(sorry I had to shout)
I do not follow their customs, obey there rules, or bow to their saints
2. The Old Testament is mostly the Pentateuch. If you're going to argue, you should at least know what you're talking about.
3 & 4. Let's go over this again: different morality is not the same as no morality, okay? Sure, now we see those things as depraved, but in those cultures it was nothing to be outraged about.
6. Yeah, right. The removed gospels were unrealistic, as opposed to the ones about a carpenter that walks on water and changes the chemical composition of liquids.
As for extinction, Homo Sapiens is bound to disappear. We'll either evolve or die out. Saying it won't happen is like saying "I won't die if I really, really believe it!"
7.
Baseless assumptions.
That's not a source of information. You can't have faith in something you don't know about.
What was the reasoning that lead you to the conclusion that after you live a life without sin (with an arbitrary definition of "sin") your conscience will be transported to a different place, as opposed to just disappearing?
Your answer boils down to "I've been told there's a place somewhere which I go to after I die. I'll roll with it because it sounds nice and I have no way of disproving it".
Now, in case you don't remember where this trail of thought came from, your answer to chrisname ("people should do as they feel", more or less) was "someone with a cut should be left to bleed if he wants to".
Once again, "bleeding to death" is not on the same level as "the possibility of going someplace that I have no evidence it exists, after I die".
8. You didn't answer all of my questions.
Why isn't any of this in the original commandments? Why did it have to be added on later? If these really are the law as written by THE LORD GOD, all these details and exceptions should be mentioned. Or am I to believe there was a practical reason to leave them out?
9. Oh, there's no real morality in atheism. There's only make-believe morality. I'm curious about the difference between the two and what exactly this so-called fake morality is like. I also wonder why there's no statistically significant difference between number of crimes committed by atheist and by theists.
Oh, and for the record, I'm not an atheist, I'm a deist. I just enjoy punching holes into flawed arguments. Then again, this is like shooting fish in a barrel.
3 & 4. Let's go over this again: different morality is not the same as no morality, okay? Sure, now we see those things as depraved, but in those cultures it was nothing to be outraged about.
6. Yeah, right. The removed gospels were unrealistic, as opposed to the ones about a carpenter that walks on water and changes the chemical composition of liquids.
As for extinction, Homo Sapiens is bound to disappear. We'll either evolve or die out. Saying it won't happen is like saying "I won't die if I really, really believe it!"
7.
| a:I theorize it is in a different plane (just a theory); b:live a sin-less life; c: err.... I actualy haven't thought about that I don't really think you would want out of heaven; |
| faith |
| reason |
Your answer boils down to "I've been told there's a place somewhere which I go to after I die. I'll roll with it because it sounds nice and I have no way of disproving it".
Now, in case you don't remember where this trail of thought came from, your answer to chrisname ("people should do as they feel", more or less) was "someone with a cut should be left to bleed if he wants to".
Once again, "bleeding to death" is not on the same level as "the possibility of going someplace that I have no evidence it exists, after I die".
8. You didn't answer all of my questions.
Why isn't any of this in the original commandments? Why did it have to be added on later? If these really are the law as written by THE LORD GOD, all these details and exceptions should be mentioned. Or am I to believe there was a practical reason to leave them out?
9. Oh, there's no real morality in atheism. There's only make-believe morality. I'm curious about the difference between the two and what exactly this so-called fake morality is like. I also wonder why there's no statistically significant difference between number of crimes committed by atheist and by theists.
Oh, and for the record, I'm not an atheist, I'm a deist. I just enjoy punching holes into flawed arguments. Then again, this is like shooting fish in a barrel.
Last edited on
Pages: 12