Slavery Debate with Pastor
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
28-09-2016, 05:42 AM
RE: Slavery Debate with Pastor
(28-09-2016 04:44 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  There is a difference in noting that a thing isn't wholly one way or another, and claiming a thing is wholly unreliable.

We'll add "wholly unreliable" to "core scripture" and "effectual faith". It's funny to watch you try to weasel out of your self-contradictions "to some extent". Next you'll be chased by a monkey all around the mulberry bush.

Try producing some evidence that this god you appear to have made up actually exists outside of what's left of your mind.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like unfogged's post
28-09-2016, 10:55 AM
RE: Slavery Debate with Pastor
(28-09-2016 04:42 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  You say directly would be GOD communicating clearly in any form. What do you think I'm talking about? The conscience is direct and personal and irrefutable. It shouldn't be looked at from a reward/ punishment perspective. People should do what is right because it is the right thing to do, not out of fear or expectation.
I'm suggesting that God communicate in a way that we would all know what is right and wrong - done deal, nothing else to do in order to understand what is expected of us.

You are suggesting this is already imprinted in our conscience and is direct and irrefutable. However, according to you, understanding requires removing self which, I hope you will admit, is not always so easy. It also leaves open the possibility that we might think we succeeded in completely removing self when actually we didn't and therefore might err. This is NOT direct or clear. As for "irrefutable", I don't even know what that means in the context of this discussion.

(28-09-2016 04:42 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  You say GOD could do this in countless ways in which we wouldn't have to do anything... We would simply understand. I'm quite certain even an infant, not succumbing to the greed and the societal norms that negate the conscience, would understand that they know what is right, regardless of where they think that direction comes from, and they don't have to do anything in order to understand it. You say we would be free to choose our actions and not be robots.

Well that sounds to me like you just described exactly what I've been trying to explain.
An infant barely understands what food is. How could an infant possibly understand anything with the complexity of morals?

(28-09-2016 04:42 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  In terms of life support of another; one faced with such a decision would most likely have been near to the one on life support. And it may not become absolutely crystal clear with the removal of self from the equation, but nearly. Life is a good thing but what sort of life is that of a vegetative state? Is this individual brain dead (not exactly life). Are they in some way conscious? Are they actually suffering?

Most would no doubt consider their own burdens in making such a choice, like; if I keep them on support I will have to visit them and tend to them, or what expenses and sacrifices must I make in order to keep this person "alive"?

It was a good example, but still, the same criteria would work.
In the example I gave, there are many variables. For example, the exact nature of the medical condition, the degree of suffering, a sick person's own wishes (if they are able to express them), prior discussions if any about the person's wishes in similar circumstances, level of medical knowledge related to the person's condition, other medical options, other people involved in sharing the decision... the list goes on and on making such decisions extremely complex. Do you honestly think there even IS a "right" moral decision, let alone that all it takes is removing self and we would know what that is?

(28-09-2016 04:42 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  You speak of physical limitations as if they are imprisonments of the freedom of will. This simply isn't the case as through our intellect that was in some way allowed by GOD we have the capacities to fly, swim, travel in space, or whatever. These freedoms do not elude us, nor are our capacities unable to realize them in some form. It just isn't the same as having the freedom of thought being removed from our capacities. Indeed if these capacities of thought where taken away or never given then we surely wouldn't be as far as we are today technologically. Make no mistake; what you are hinting at is a form of slavery. I am thankful that we aren't forced to abide or even listen.
This is how people rationalize to make things fit that don't. Sorry, but I never said we couldn't use an airplane to fly. I said we can't fly - meaning without any assistive devices. Birds don't need an airplane to fly. People don't need anything extra to walk. But people can't fly just the way they are like birds can. I can not freely will myself right now to fly across the room or across the city.

(28-09-2016 04:42 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  One need not worry about the things you listed if they are in the right mind set. This life is but a blink of an eye. Living by what one knows is right also causes one not to worry about things like you listed. Not that these things won't happen, just that they wouldn't be worried about by those whom have relinquished want for self.
One need not worry? There are countless examples of situations with no obvious morally "right" action. For example, you see 2 people in life-threatening cirumstances. You can save either one, but doing so will make it too late to save the other. Which do you save? Or here is another commonly-known one:
A train is running down a track and there are 5 people tied to the track in its path. You could flip a switch, which will direct the train down a different track. Unfortunately, there is 1 person tied to that track. Should you flip the switch or do nothing? Doing nothing results in 5 deaths, but you had nothing (directly) to do with that. Flipping the switch saves 5 lives, but causes 1 life to be lost that wouldn't have been lost except due to your direct action. You see, I argue that there are no morally "right" decisions because there is no objective morality. Morality is rooted in society and evolution. It comes from the need to survive and from preserving the common good toward that end. There are many situations where the "best" or "most right" choice is far from clear because no available choice is a good one.

(28-09-2016 04:42 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  Lastly; if literally all where in tune to and abided by the selfless conscience then there would be no rape, murder, or theft.
Where do you get this concept from? I have never heard this taught by any religion (not that I know everything about every religion so I'm asking).

(28-09-2016 04:42 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  Sorry for the delay in getting back with you. I was exhausted last night, and your retorts require nearly my utmost attention.
No worries and no need to keep apologizing. I have little time to spend here so there are often delays with my replies as well. I understand.

I am not accountable to any God. I am accountable to myself - and not because I think I am God as some theists would try to assert - but because, no matter what actions I take, thoughts I think, or words I utter, I have to be able to live with myself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Impulse's post
28-09-2016, 04:32 PM
RE: Slavery Debate with Pastor
(28-09-2016 05:03 AM)morondog Wrote:  How do you know those men were rightly guided? You stated it so confidently. And yet your attempted answers have all been so shit, I can't understand how even you can believe them.

You've managed to directly contradict yourself within the space of two posts. Now you're attempting to save face by playing word games.

What the fuck does it even mean to say that someone was "rightly guided"? God whispered in their ear? And you magically know to whom God talks? Or maybe God whispers in *your* ear?

Time for the pops translator:

"Rightly guided" means -I pulled it out of my ass.

So how does pops know something is "Rightly guided"?

It came from his ass.

How does pops know something comes from "selfishness" and "greed"?

He didn't pull it out of HIS ass.

I believe there was once a time that we cared who's ass it was and why it was farting and I believe that time can come again!





Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like TheInquisition's post
28-09-2016, 05:38 PM
RE: Slavery Debate with Pastor
He has a conclusion and those parts of his silly little book that conform to that conclusion are rightly guided, those that do not conform to his conclusions are not rightly guided.

This has been his way of thinking since he got here months ago, it's nothing special or new.

When valour preys on reason, it eats the sword it fights with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like WhiskeyDebates's post
28-09-2016, 11:47 PM
RE: Slavery Debate with Pastor
(28-09-2016 05:38 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  He has a conclusion and those parts of his silly little book that conform to that conclusion are rightly guided, those that do not conform to his conclusions are not rightly guided.

This has been his way of thinking since he got here months ago, it's nothing special or new.

What I'm enjoying is rubbing his nose in it Smile Sooner or later he's gonna have to admit in his own words that all this nonsense is his own wishful thinking and has no grounding in reality.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like morondog's post
28-09-2016, 11:54 PM
RE: Slavery Debate with Pastor
(28-09-2016 11:47 PM)morondog Wrote:  
(28-09-2016 05:38 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  He has a conclusion and those parts of his silly little book that conform to that conclusion are rightly guided, those that do not conform to his conclusions are not rightly guided.

This has been his way of thinking since he got here months ago, it's nothing special or new.

What I'm enjoying is rubbing his nose in it Smile Sooner or later he's gonna have to admit in his own words that all this nonsense is his own wishful thinking and has no grounding in reality.


Every pops thread becomes an exercise in pops' own double-think. He has no critical thinking capabilities whatsoever, and self reflection is an utterly alien concept to him; despite his near incessant claims to the contrary.

The guy couldn't logic himself out of a wet paper bag.

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like EvolutionKills's post
02-10-2016, 10:57 AM
RE: Slavery Debate with Pastor
(28-09-2016 05:38 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  He has a conclusion and those parts of his silly little book that conform to that conclusion are rightly guided, those that do not conform to his conclusions are not rightly guided.

This has been his way of thinking since he got here months ago, it's nothing special or new.
What you would find if you ever chose to actually read what I have written without your own bias, is that it isn't a part of a singular book, but very nearly the whole of all of them I have read thus far. If that alone is yet refutable, then when coupled with the fact that it wholly coincides with what I know on an inner most level to be true via the selfless conscience and actual revelation makes it even more irritable.

Sure; any can say anything in refutation,but of what substance and truth is that refutation?

I'm in no way limiting these things to the utterly physical and readily observable.

Peace

Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-10-2016, 10:59 AM
RE: Slavery Debate with Pastor
(28-09-2016 11:47 PM)morondog Wrote:  
(28-09-2016 05:38 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  He has a conclusion and those parts of his silly little book that conform to that conclusion are rightly guided, those that do not conform to his conclusions are not rightly guided.

This has been his way of thinking since he got here months ago, it's nothing special or new.

What I'm enjoying is rubbing his nose in it Smile Sooner or later he's gonna have to admit in his own words that all this nonsense is his own wishful thinking and has no grounding in reality.
You seem to limit reality to the readily observable and explainable, yet we all know that reality is in no way limited to our man made definitions or explanations.

Peace

Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-10-2016, 11:00 AM
RE: Slavery Debate with Pastor
(28-09-2016 11:54 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(28-09-2016 11:47 PM)morondog Wrote:  What I'm enjoying is rubbing his nose in it Smile Sooner or later he's gonna have to admit in his own words that all this nonsense is his own wishful thinking and has no grounding in reality.


Every pops thread becomes an exercise in pops' own double-think. He has no critical thinking capabilities whatsoever, and self reflection is an utterly alien concept to him; despite his near incessant claims to the contrary.

The guy couldn't logic himself out of a wet paper bag.
Prove your claim.

Link a cognitive function test or logical capacities test of some sort.

Peace

Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-10-2016, 12:00 PM
RE: Slavery Debate with Pastor
(02-10-2016 10:57 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  What you would find if you ever chose to actually read what I have written without your own bias, is that it isn't a part of a singular book, but very nearly the whole of all of them I have read thus far. If that alone is yet refutable, then when coupled with the fact that it wholly coincides with what I know on an inner most level to be true via the selfless conscience and actual revelation makes it even more irritable.

Translation: I pick and choose the bits of what I read based on how well they agree with what I already believe. I ignore anything that doesn't match up with what I want it to say.

(02-10-2016 10:59 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  You seem to limit reality to the readily observable and explainable, yet we all know that reality is in no way limited to our man made definitions or explanations.

We are not talking about the limits of our explanations; we are talking about what is reasonable to believe and that requires evidence. You have none. You do not deal in reality, you deal in fantasy.

(02-10-2016 11:00 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  
(28-09-2016 11:54 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Every pops thread becomes an exercise in pops' own double-think. He has no critical thinking capabilities whatsoever, and self reflection is an utterly alien concept to him; despite his near incessant claims to the contrary.

The guy couldn't logic himself out of a wet paper bag.
Prove your claim.

Link a cognitive function test or logical capacities test of some sort.

The evidence is freely available by reviewing your posting history and is quite compelling. You need professional help.

Now provide evidence for any of your inane claims about the nature of this god of yours.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes unfogged's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: