To Robby Pants (late responce)
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
30-07-2015, 06:08 PM
RE: To Robby Pants (late responce)
(30-07-2015 06:02 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(28-07-2015 01:01 PM)Alla Wrote:  My God Who is Yahweh never said that He is Creator of all. He said that He is Creator of earth and heaven and all that is in them. But He never said how big heaven is. So, my preachy is not heresy. The Bible proves these words of mine as true statements.

The Bible is not evidence, it is a bunch of claims so it proves nothing.
What does it have to do with what I said?
I only said that there is no claim in the Bible that God created everything.

English is my second language.
I AM DEPLORABLE AND IRREDEEMABLE
SHE PERSISTED WE RESISTED
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-07-2015, 06:14 PM
RE: To Robby Pants (late responce)
(30-07-2015 06:08 PM)Alla Wrote:  
(30-07-2015 06:02 PM)Chas Wrote:  The Bible is not evidence, it is a bunch of claims so it proves nothing.
What does it have to do with what I said?
I only said that there is no claim in the Bible that God created everything.

I see - you are not claiming the Bible proves anything, just that what it says is consistent with your claim.

However, the Genesis account is understood by most to mean creation of everything.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-07-2015, 06:30 PM
RE: To Robby Pants (late responce)
(30-07-2015 06:14 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(30-07-2015 06:08 PM)Alla Wrote:  What does it have to do with what I said?
I only said that there is no claim in the Bible that God created everything.

I see - you are not claiming the Bible proves anything, just that what it says is consistent with your claim.

However, the Genesis account is understood by most to mean creation of everything.
I do not know why it is understood this way. I do not see a word in the Bible that God Yahweh created everything.

English is my second language.
I AM DEPLORABLE AND IRREDEEMABLE
SHE PERSISTED WE RESISTED
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-07-2015, 07:34 PM
RE: To Robby Pants (late responce)
(30-07-2015 06:30 PM)Alla Wrote:  
(30-07-2015 06:14 PM)Chas Wrote:  I see - you are not claiming the Bible proves anything, just that what it says is consistent with your claim.

However, the Genesis account is understood by most to mean creation of everything.
I do not know why it is understood this way. I do not see a word in the Bible that God Yahweh created everything.

Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
Genesis 1:3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.
Genesis 1:14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness.

And so on, and so forth. This pretty much implies everything. Earth, sun, moon, stars, ...

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
30-07-2015, 07:46 PM
RE: To Robby Pants (late responce)
@Chas

If the Book of Genesis indeed claim to explain how the universe was created, it’s good to mention that this «universe» is so different from the real ones that even Tolkien fictional genesis of our planet is more scientifically accurate. At least in his version, there is the notion of continental drift and geothermic forces. The Bible is so wrong on this subject, that it can indeed be hard to understand what the hell did God created on those six days. It's even more ridiculous to think that God created the Earth and Sun, than the entire cosmos, since we know a lot more about the formation of stars and planets than about the formation of our universe. No matter how you look at it, the Bible is just mythology given too much importance.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-07-2015, 07:50 PM
RE: To Robby Pants (late responce)
(30-07-2015 07:46 PM)epronovost Wrote:  @Chas

If the Book of Genesis indeed claim to explain how the universe was created, it’s good to mention that this «universe» is so different from the real ones that even Tolkien fictional genesis of our planet is more scientifically accurate. At least in his version, there is the notion of continental drift and geothermic forces. The Bible is so wrong on this subject, that it can indeed be hard to understand what the hell did God created on those six days. It's even more ridiculous to think that God created the Earth and Sun, than the entire cosmos, since we know a lot more about the formation of stars and planets than about the formation of our universe. No matter how you look at it, the Bible is just mythology given too much importance.

My post was in response to Alla. I am not promoting Genesis. Facepalm

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-07-2015, 03:33 AM (This post was last modified: 31-07-2015 03:38 AM by Dark Phoenix.)
To Alla
So, a couple of comments here. As capable as you guys are, I can't resist the Mormon ones. Especially with somebody like Alla, who is exhibit A time and time again for classic Mormon ideas, phrases, and examples of well understood mental manipulation techniques.

The notion that god is bound by higher eternal laws, which if violated would strip him of his title, is an excellent example of why Mormonism fails to address the question of origins. Rather than providing an answer to the infinite regress of gods creating gods, they embrace it as an explanation in and of itself. An eternity of god beings, all of the same god "species", can no more "create" us than a father "creates" his children. It isn't a matter of design and assembly, but of nature. This is the opposite of Occam's Razor because it relies upon a literally infinite set of complex supernatural explanations, which even then cannot be even considered as an explanation of origins. If god's can create one another infinitely, there is no reason the universe could not have simply existed eternally, thus requiring no original explanation. Notice how Alla's best explanation of where "Eternal Laws" come from is "I guess from nowhere."

Consider also the idea that in order to experience and understand moral good, it is necessary for moral evil to exist. Therefore the destruction of evil in the universe would rob us of the good as well causing morality to collapse into the neutrality of relativism. I find this line of argument particularly frustrating because it is so hypocritical. If they believe evil is only evil because there is good to compare it to, and vice versa, it seems to me that the Mormons are already admitting that their morality was never objective to begin with. Under such a system of ethics one must accept that even the best moral actions have no inherent value of their own, but are only relatively good by comparison to every negative alternative. Is there anything more morally relative than that?

It is certainly true that a child confronted with Algebra at an inappropriately young age will be hopelessly confused. However, when was the last time such a child was told their faith in the validity of Algebra is absolutely necessary for their immediate welfare? Indeed, that all his or her life's struggles and joys will hinge, not on the legitimate evidence that Algebra is valid, but on that faith from childhood days of ignorance? When was the last such child denied entrance into 9th grade Algebra 1? The true message of this apologetic might be that Mormons wish to raise a flock of ignorant children who are never permitted to mature beyond a child's simple faith into legitimate knowledge. I suppose the irony of the argument is that in insisting humanity is to puny and intellectually stunted to understand the ways of god, the leaders and apologists of the church ought to explain how it is their supposed understanding could be any better, especially with them speaking with the authority of god and all that. It might not be the blind leading the blind, but the ignorant child who trusted the wrong person teaching adults how to preserve their inner ignorant child and call it a virtue.

It is definitely worth noting that when Alla admits that the bible is full of errors and nonsensical stories that she is engaging in a common Mormon apologetic. You see, according to the articles of faith for the Mormons they "believe the bible to be the word of god as far as it is translated correctly." This weasel statement makes it easy for them to cherry pick with impunity the verses which support their wack-job theology while dismissing anything theologically inconvenient or contradictory as "translated incorrectly". The tactic is usually followed up by affirmations of the perfection of The Book of Mormon as compared to the flawed bible. Perhaps the most devastating individual fact I ever faced as a believer was that The Book of Mormon is itself mired in contradictions, and most especially blatant, embarrassing, childish, plagiarism. It contains entire sections of Bible passages, especially Isaiah, which contain the identical translation errors present in the version of the KJ translations available to Joseph Smith and his family. Just for extra credit, it also contains revolting racism, divinely endorsed atrocities, and the demeaning and abusive treatment of women.

Like so many Mormons, Alla loves to repeat phrases like "The fullness of joy" as though they meant anything outside of the specific context of her church. This is an excellent example of why Mormons are so often considered a dangerous cult by outsiders. This re-defining of common words into unique phrases with specific Mormon meanings is actually a psychological tactic commonly used by cults to influence their victims. In this way the cult leader(s) literally redefine the world for their followers, manipulating their perspectives, hopes, joys, and fears. Consider how invested she is in the idea of a future transcendent state of joy. Whatever her original view of how potentially happy she could be, she is no convinced that only the stupid or mentally sick could turn down this mystical promised emotional bliss.

There exists in LDS circles a frenzy of materials, written and otherwise, attesting to the supposed ultra-happiness of a life dedicated to the church. They claim to be the only people capable of unprecedented enjoyment in marriage, sex, family life, at work, and in recreation. These incredible claims are often expressed in a devaluation of non-believers and non-members. Just as with the way words and phrases are redefined to fit the cult's agenda, another psychological tactic is at play here. Playing up the claims, and playing down the fulfillment of other lifestyles as lacking absolutely essential elements is an effective means to manipulate people's doubts and hopes. Perfectly healthy normal people can begin to fear they might be inadequate or empty. Like all cults, the impossible promises require obedience, money, and a lifetime commitment, otherwise no nirvana or ultra-success for you.

Of course, she has all the tedious markers of your average fundamentalist. Her skepticism, although present and functional, is calibrated to only information which does not come from within her cult, regardless of the actual content or its evidence. Case in point, an infinite eternity of unknown and undefined supernatural beings seems a flawless idea to her, while historical facts about the founder of her cult are suspect. Question her about the validity of her beliefs and you can expect a circle jerk on the subject of faith as a supposed path to "Knowledge", yet question the quality of Joseph Smith's character and faith is not enough, she needs traditional evidence. For anyone who is interested, Richard Lyman Bushman, a well educated believing Mormon, wrote a wonderful biography of Joseph Smith called "Rough Stone Rolling". Although not as direct and critical as the famous "No Man Knows My History" he admits the truth of the very facts Alla is skeptical of. I rest my case with the word of a respectable LDS scholar who has every reason to lie or manipulate facts, but chose to tell the truth.

Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of a spiritless situation. The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness.

-Karl Marx
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Dark Phoenix's post
31-07-2015, 03:52 AM
RE: To Robby Pants (late responce)
(30-07-2015 07:50 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(30-07-2015 07:46 PM)epronovost Wrote:  @Chas

If the Book of Genesis indeed claim to explain how the universe was created, it’s good to mention that this «universe» is so different from the real ones that even Tolkien fictional genesis of our planet is more scientifically accurate. At least in his version, there is the notion of continental drift and geothermic forces. The Bible is so wrong on this subject, that it can indeed be hard to understand what the hell did God created on those six days. It's even more ridiculous to think that God created the Earth and Sun, than the entire cosmos, since we know a lot more about the formation of stars and planets than about the formation of our universe. No matter how you look at it, the Bible is just mythology given too much importance.

My post was in response to Alla. I am not promoting Genesis. Facepalm

Don't lie, silly creationist. It just makes you even less credible.

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
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
31-07-2015, 03:54 AM
RE: To Robby Pants (late responce)
(31-07-2015 03:33 AM)Dark Phoenix Wrote:  For anyone who is interested, Richard Lyman Bushman, a well educated believing Mormon, wrote a wonderful biography of Joseph Smith called "Rough Stone Rolling". Although not as direct and critical as the famous "No Man Knows My History" he admits the truth of the very facts Alla is skeptical of. I rest my case with the word of a respectable LDS scholar who has every reason to lie or manipulate facts, but chose to tell the truth.

Did he remain a Mormon?

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
31-07-2015, 04:47 AM
RE: To Robby Pants (late responce)
(27-07-2015 11:01 PM)Alla Wrote:  
(27-07-2015 10:59 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  Do you though?
I do, I do Yes

I pronounce you man and wife.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: