Was my response to theist too harsh?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
02-05-2016, 05:28 AM
RE: Was my response to theist too harsh?
(02-05-2016 04:46 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  
(02-05-2016 04:45 AM)Chas Wrote:  The facts entirely refute your absurd statement. Drinking Beverage
And here we see an example of someone being deluded.

Obviously you limit yourself and your perceptions to the material.
Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

Perception is material. You don't seem to understand reality well.

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
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
02-05-2016, 05:31 AM
RE: Was my response to theist too harsh?
(01-05-2016 08:55 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  
(01-05-2016 06:28 PM)unfogged Wrote:  Facepalm

Every time I think you can't say anything more stupid than you have you surprise me. You really do need serious help.


You quote a definition to support your position that doesn't support your position... you are even more irrational than I thought.

It is very simple...
Slavery is immoral.
The bible endorses slavery.
The bible promotes an immoral value.


Laugh out load irony is always funny

If this site isn't worth your time please feel free to stop spewing your nonsensical crap all over it.


Free clue: we don't care what's listed in scripture. There is no good reason to use scripture for anything other than inquiry into ancient history. Anything good in it is not good because it is in it and has to be judged independently.
What?

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

I'll try to help you understand:

The Bible contains some moral precepts that are admirable. Let's take "do unto others as you would have them do unto you." This principle is contained in many ethics systems and is defensible due to its social merits. One can argue effectively that following this rule (usually) has positive effects on a human community. That's how we independently judge if a rule in the Bible is good.

This rule does NOT gain any merit simply because it's written in the Bible. Why is that? Because the Bible also sanctions rape, genocide, slavery, etc., and also because the God character in the Bible is a mass murderer. The "good" rules are few and far between; the bulk of the rules/directives in the Bible are pointless (don't mix your fabrics! don't eat pork! women cover your hair in church!) or unethical (kill everyone in that village except for the virgins, you can rape them).

"It's in the Bible" is, therefore, not an argument for the moral truth of a Bible rule. You have to make that argument separately and use logic, social analysis, etc., to make your case.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like julep's post
02-05-2016, 05:36 AM
RE: Was my response to theist too harsh?
(02-05-2016 05:31 AM)julep Wrote:  
(01-05-2016 08:55 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  What?

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

I'll try to help you understand:

The Bible contains some moral precepts that are admirable. Let's take "do unto others as you would have them do unto you." This principle is contained in many ethics systems and is defensible due to its social merits. One can argue effectively that following this rule (usually) has positive effects on a human community. That's how we independently judge if a rule in the Bible is good.

This rule does NOT gain any merit simply because it's written in the Bible. Why is that? Because the Bible also sanctions rape, genocide, slavery, etc., and also because the God character in the Bible is a mass murderer. The "good" rules are few and far between; the bulk of the rules/directives in the Bible are pointless (don't mix your fabrics! don't eat pork! women cover your hair in church!) or unethical (kill everyone in that village except for the virgins, you can rape them).

"It's in the Bible" is, therefore, not an argument for the moral truth of a Bible rule. You have to make that argument separately and use logic, social analysis, etc., to make your case.

Or, to put it briefly, "In the Bible, the parts that are good are not original and the parts that are original are not good."

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
[+] 5 users Like Chas's post
02-05-2016, 06:02 AM (This post was last modified: 02-05-2016 06:07 AM by Banjo.)
RE: Was my response to theist too harsh?
(02-05-2016 04:46 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  
(02-05-2016 04:45 AM)Chas Wrote:  The facts entirely refute your absurd statement. Drinking Beverage
And here we see an example of someone being deluded.

Obviously you limit yourself and your perceptions to the material.
Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

So you say unity for good. Yet have the poor taste to stay away from the forum.

You are a selfish little cunt.

You should be banned for this. Enough is enough.

Admins. Do your job please. This little pissant is has shown himself a worthless member and has nothing of worth to add.

Kindly ban him and block his ip.

Pops you are an ignorant and worthless waste of space and we should not have to put up with it.

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Banjo's post
02-05-2016, 06:47 AM
RE: Was my response to theist too harsh?
I've seen paranoid schizophrenics with greater insight and a better grip on reality than this person. The views expressed are so extreme its hard not to think its a case of deliberate trolling. I don't hold out any hope of a ban, based on Heywood jablowme and call of the wild.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-05-2016, 07:09 AM
RE: Was my response to theist too harsh?
(30-04-2016 09:20 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  Poor diluted hypocrites.



Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

Oh, the irony.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-05-2016, 07:43 AM
RE: Was my response to theist too harsh?
(01-05-2016 10:53 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  
(30-04-2016 11:07 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  What do you get when you mix a kaboodle and a cazoodle? .... a clubuttle!!

Symbols, labels, and words used the way you convey them provide no manner of efficient communication for any purpose but trolling. You're mr. negativity always bringing bad and evil across all interactions you have with this manner of speaking.
Yes it was negative.

Like in kind to most posts directed at me, and as such obviously wrong and not beneficial to any.

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.
Simply recognize the self conceptual mind

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes ClydeLee's post
02-05-2016, 08:11 PM
RE: Was my response to theist too harsh?
(02-05-2016 05:28 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(02-05-2016 04:46 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  And here we see an example of someone being deluded.

Obviously you limit yourself and your perceptions to the material.
Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

Perception is material. You don't seem to understand reality well.
Sure buddy. Ones perceptions are material.

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-05-2016, 09:08 PM
RE: Was my response to theist too harsh?
(02-05-2016 08:11 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  
(02-05-2016 05:28 AM)Chas Wrote:  Perception is material. You don't seem to understand reality well.
Sure buddy. Ones perceptions are material.

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

Yes, they are. Perception occurs in the brain. The brain is material.

This is not difficult if you shed your imaginary bullshit and look at reality.

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
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
03-05-2016, 04:24 AM
RE: Was my response to theist too harsh?
(02-05-2016 09:08 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(02-05-2016 08:11 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  Sure buddy. Ones perceptions are material.

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

Yes, they are. Perception occurs in the brain. The brain is material.

This is not difficult if you shed your imaginary bullshit and look at reality.
Show that emotion is not both causal and the effect of chemical changes in the brain then say all I'd strictly material. The conscience and emotion are not material and are the most real things in existence. In fact absolutely nothing is strictly material at the sub atomic level.

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: