Apples and Oranges
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
25-04-2012, 09:53 AM (This post was last modified: 25-04-2012 10:08 AM by morondog.)
RE: Apples and Oranges
Noah's Ark?

I recall a lot of "but this was mistranslated" stuff going on there.

Theological arguing if ever I saw it.

And we kinda agreed that the flood was a non-theological argument, from the point of view, it should have left non-theological evidence.

And yes, you came along and said local flood etc etc. But a *lot* of your argument there was based on "the Hebrew for this is X" etc, not on "where is the evidence of this flood".

Bullshit huh?
I have to say that on your own ground you're pretty damn near unbeatable. Sure *if* I take the Bible as a priori true (for the purposes of say a theological argument) then you're well grounded.

Ah right. I read your analogy now.

Insect people = Christians...

...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
25-04-2012, 10:35 AM
RE: Apples and Oranges
(25-04-2012 09:28 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  (9) Because I had a radical conversation.
Translation:
You experienced an intense emotional reaction to something you were thinking about and decided to attribute it to a made up Christian deity instead of recognizing the true source was in your own biology.

It was just a fucking apple man, we're sorry okay? Please stop the madness Laugh out load
~Izel
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-04-2012, 10:55 AM
RE: Apples and Oranges
On the surface, it may seem that most of us argue just to stroke our own egos and for hubristic confirmation, but that is not how it is for me. I'm sure I am not alone in this matter either.

I DO NOT ever debate a theist in attempt to convince the theist of my position. If they take away positives from it, then that's absolutely wonderful. I debate to hear their side of the subject. This view differs greatly from theist to theist at times. These are what I love to hear/read.

In cases where I debate the atypical theist, I do it for the audience. The two of us are not the only ones reading these Internet debates. There's no telling how many fence-sitters are out there. If even one finds my views convincing, it was worth it. It's in this breath that I can say I am contributing to the education of the reader. I'm sure the theist side feels the same way as me here. Win-win.

I also debate to keep my own mind sharp. It constantly keeps the information in my head. I learn things, make mistakes, learn from said mistakes, do further research, wash, rinse, masturbate... done.

No ego involved. Just a cycle of education on both subjects.

“We are all connected; To each other, biologically. To the earth, chemically. To the rest of the universe atomically.”

-Neil deGrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes NoahsFarce's post
25-04-2012, 11:23 AM
RE: Apples and Oranges
@morondog

The Noah's Ark thing was about it not being true based on what the Bible said - that there wasn't enough water in the world to cover the entire Earth.

I argued against that with that the original Hebrew said.

So, yes, it was a theological argument because it was rooted in what the Bible said, and the argument against it was based on perceived inaccuracies in the Bible which could serve as a debasing of Christianity if proved false. I showed how it wasn't false because of the ambiguity of the Hebrew, and how it might suggest that it was regional.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-04-2012, 11:34 AM
RE: Apples and Oranges
(25-04-2012 09:28 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(24-04-2012 04:04 PM)wtfbbq Wrote:  (8) And why do you have faith in the Christian God?
(9) Because I had a radical conversation.
I hope you aren't jesting with me at this point, because I don't really understand (9), and I said earlier that leaving these things untouched is what lead to the misunderstanding. Luckily patience is the way of the Sith. I mean the Jedi. Eh, either works.

(10) how does a radical conversation cause you to have faith in the Christian God?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-04-2012, 11:42 AM
RE: Apples and Oranges
(25-04-2012 10:55 AM)NoahsFarce Wrote:  On the surface, it may seem that most of us argue just to stroke our own egos and for hubristic confirmation, but that is not how it is for me. I'm sure I am not alone in this matter either.

I DO NOT ever debate a theist in attempt to convince the theist of my position. If they take away positives from it, then that's absolutely wonderful. I debate to hear their side of the subject. This view differs greatly from theist to theist at times. These are what I love to hear/read.

In cases where I debate the atypical theist, I do it for the audience. The two of us are not the only ones reading these Internet debates. There's no telling how many fence-sitters are out there. If even one finds my views convincing, it was worth it. It's in this breath that I can say I am contributing to the education of the reader. I'm sure the theist side feels the same way as me here. Win-win.

I also debate to keep my own mind sharp. It constantly keeps the information in my head. I learn things, make mistakes, learn from said mistakes, do further research, wash, rinse, masturbate... done.

No ego involved. Just a cycle of education on both subjects.


More and more, I also have become aware of how many "fence sitters" there probably really are out there, reading our stuff. It's one of the reasons I always try to put extra documentation, and references, into anything serious I post.

The Noah's Ark myth, (story) was an appropriation/importation of one of many flood myths, floating around in the ancient Near East. The one the final editors of Genesis picked, was the Sumerian Epic of Gilgamesh.

Read Tablet 11. It's perfectly obvious where they got it.

http://www.ancienttexts.org/library/mesopotamian/gilgamesh/


Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-04-2012, 11:58 AM
RE: Apples and Oranges
KC... Apologies. I suck today. Just generally feeling grouchy. You got a right to feel a bit peeved that I had a go at you, and I kinda said what I did about the whole always going back to the Bible without thinking. It's true that I get that feeling but I'm not sure, upon reflection, if that's not just me using a stereotype subconsciously. Anyway I went running so I'm more chilled now. You're still wrong about Noah's Ark Wink
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-04-2012, 12:13 PM
RE: Apples and Oranges
(25-04-2012 11:58 AM)morondog Wrote:  KC... Apologies. I suck today. Just generally feeling grouchy. You got a right to feel a bit peeved that I had a go at you, and I kinda said what I did about the whole always going back to the Bible without thinking. It's true that I get that feeling but I'm not sure, upon reflection, if that's not just me using a stereotype subconsciously. Anyway I went running so I'm more chilled now. You're still wrong about Noah's Ark Wink
Nah, not peeved Smile

Don't worry, I don't piss off easily. I was just digging my heels in about it being a theological argument.

And, I would be wrong about the Ark from a world view, but from a theological Christian view, I have a strong case.

Of course, to all of you, it's a load of crap and a simple story, but that's not what we're arguing now is it? Wink

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-04-2012, 12:40 PM
RE: Apples and Oranges
(25-04-2012 12:13 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  Of course, to all of you, it's a load of crap and a simple story, but that's not what we're arguing now is it? Wink
Probably best to let sleeping threads lie, but that *was* what I was arguing Tongue
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-04-2012, 12:51 PM
RE: Apples and Oranges
(25-04-2012 12:40 PM)morondog Wrote:  
(25-04-2012 12:13 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  Of course, to all of you, it's a load of crap and a simple story, but that's not what we're arguing now is it? Wink
Probably best to let sleeping threads lie, but that *was* what I was arguing Tongue
I understand. But, you were saying that what I was arguing was non-theological.

It's just two different types of arguments. If I'm arguing something that's based in theology, I will use theological sources. If I'm arguing theological topics and the argument is against theology, I will not use theological sources.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: