If I were responsible for coming up with a list of things to do on behalf of a rape victim, forcing the rapist to pay her father for damaging his property and then marry her would not make the list. Then again, I am a moral person, unlike Yahweh.
I really wish there were a way to screen posts for intellectually dishonest arguments and keep them off of threads.
I apologize to anyone who is come here for an interesting conversation only to find it repeatedly interrupted by vapid musings of someone who doesn't seem to grasp the subject of the conversation.
Opinion, this is a picture of a blue sky. Now, watch. Someone will find something to argue about. Because that's the real issue here. Disagreeing with me. It's certainly not the subject of the thread.
4. You have the ability to instantaneously kill someone by turning him into a pillar of salt. On whom do you demonstrate this ability?
A. A couple in the process of fatally torturing their 3-year-old son.
B. A modern day pedophile.
C. Cain, a split second before he makes Abel the first murder victim.
D. A woman fleeing her burning home who takes a look back to watch everything she knows going up in flames.
E. Hitler.
F. No one. You demonstrate this horrifying ability on no one.
Anyone interested in an actual conversation will note the above examples,
What did the woman looking back represent psychologically?
What did the story of Cain and Abel symbolize?
(or you can insist that the stories are to be understood as literal, then make accusations at Yahweh for being a douche based on literal reading, then insist he doesn't exist anyway and offer solutions to your fabricated problems . . . any attempt to ground the conversation in reality is off topic)
Suppose the cited stories are symbolic, rather than literal. If we lose sight of what they symbolize because we subscribe to an evolving God hypothesis, they would no longer have meaningful, consistent value.
If the stories are symbolic and not literal then we are not talking about the Yahweh character as portrayed in the Bible, and any extrapolations from that perspective are off topic.
If the stories are symbolic and not literal then we are not talking about the Yahweh character as portrayed in the Bible, and any extrapolations from that perspective are off topic.
Suppose the cited stories are symbolic, rather than literal. If we lose sight of what they symbolize because we subscribe to an evolving God hypothesis, they would no longer have meaningful, consistent value.
Definitions should change because understanding changes in a good discussion. You haven't done anything to clarify your position. I think others have pointed that out.
This an ex rapist-worship cult site. Among other things.
There's some need to compare moralities here?
Probably safe in assuming the thread is some sort of good humor demonstration. A joke.
Would anyone follow such a guy? No, they'd never admit they would. And if they did follow him, and found out what he did, they'd stop following IMMEDIATELY. Hypothetically.
Opinion, this is a picture of a blue sky. Now, watch. Someone will find something to argue about. Because that's the real issue here. Disagreeing with me. It's certainly not the subject of the thread.
If you disagree that exercising freedom of religion should be punishable by death by stoning, you are more moral than Yahweh.
If you disagree with killing an entire town, men, women, children, and pets, because someone in that town -- or, hell, the entire town -- converted to a different religion, you are more moral than Yahweh.
And that's what was said here?
1 hour ago, Bolshevik said:
Right, to exist is to disagree.
The previous article I posted on this said, paraphrasing, we disagree with each others morality. Each of us thinks ourselves more moral than everyone else.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
266
38
32
188
Popular Days
Aug 7
50
Aug 8
46
Aug 2
42
Aug 1
33
Top Posters In This Topic
Raf 266 posts
waysider 38 posts
TrustAndObey 32 posts
Bolshevik 188 posts
Popular Days
Aug 7 2017
50 posts
Aug 8 2017
46 posts
Aug 2 2017
42 posts
Aug 1 2017
33 posts
Popular Posts
DontWorryBeHappy
Raf.......YES! And so are you! TY!
TrustAndObey
I can understand where you are coming from Raf. However, if you honestly are inviting a discussion on these topics, could you be clear on what you consider is dodging. Because, to myself, you make it
TLC
It's not just people that say it. Scripture itself says that God is good. But simply equating morality to that which is "good" and attributing the cause (or source) of it to the law (and then equati
Posted Images
Bolshevik
I gotcha now.
I agree you wouldn't do those.
But that wouldn't make you more moral.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
I really wish there were a way to screen posts for intellectually dishonest arguments and keep them off of threads.
I apologize to anyone who is come here for an interesting conversation only to find it repeatedly interrupted by vapid musings of someone who doesn't seem to grasp the subject of the conversation.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Opinion, this is a picture of a blue sky. Now, watch. Someone will find something to argue about. Because that's the real issue here. Disagreeing with me. It's certainly not the subject of the thread.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Anyone interested in an actual conversation will note the above examples,
What did the woman looking back represent psychologically?
What did the story of Cain and Abel symbolize?
(or you can insist that the stories are to be understood as literal, then make accusations at Yahweh for being a douche based on literal reading, then insist he doesn't exist anyway and offer solutions to your fabricated problems . . . any attempt to ground the conversation in reality is off topic)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Suppose the cited stories are symbolic, rather than literal. If we lose sight of what they symbolize because we subscribe to an evolving God hypothesis, they would no longer have meaningful, consistent value.
Edited by waysiderspelling
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
If the stories are symbolic and not literal then we are not talking about the Yahweh character as portrayed in the Bible, and any extrapolations from that perspective are off topic.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
What does that even mean?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
("evolving God" is Raf's term.)
I'm not sure what you mean by this.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Waaaaaah! How can I win the argument if I'm not allowed to change definitions in the middle of the debate? Waaaaah!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Definitions should change because understanding changes in a good discussion. You haven't done anything to clarify your position. I think others have pointed that out.
This an ex rapist-worship cult site. Among other things.
There's some need to compare moralities here?
Probably safe in assuming the thread is some sort of good humor demonstration. A joke.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
"Are you more moral than Yahweh?"
"No! He's just as bad as we are!"
"Um.. Ok. Thanks."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
So we are talking about Yahweh.
God of the OT.
Yahweh hardens peoples hearts.
Kinda implies lack of free will then?
Since he never changes, he is the same today.
God is evil. Because he doesn't allow free will.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
(And don't say anything about free will!!)
I just did.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Not necessarily talking determinism, as much as God gets in there and decides your thinking.
That's f'd up.
Like spurts and the wedge thing in LCM world.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
So, assuming the OT God is there, we don't have a real will
which means our morality is not a choice, at least in some instances
but since he doesn't exist . . . we wouldn't do that killing for picking up sticks, hypothetically
So we are comparing ourselves to a fictional character. Are you more moral than the Green Goblin?
The Green Goblin is a terrible example to put forth. He can't exist. Not today. None of us can relate.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
So how to make "Are you more moral than Yahweh?" into a logical question?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Are you more moral than VPW?
Now we're comparing real people to real people.
Would anyone follow such a guy? No, they'd never admit they would. And if they did follow him, and found out what he did, they'd stop following IMMEDIATELY. Hypothetically.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Did VPW kill people for picking up sticks?
No. So he was more moral than a fictional character.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
So, since the opening post assumes we can compare moralities,
we should be able to construct a comparison chart.
Maybe list everyone on GSC, who are more moral than Yahweh, and rank them by morality.
Maybe a system of points to assign relative moralities to every individual?
This should inspire low scorers to pick it up a little
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Right, to exist is to disagree.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
And that's what was said here?
The previous article I posted on this said, paraphrasing, we disagree with each others morality. Each of us thinks ourselves more moral than everyone else.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/most-people-consider-themselves-to-be-morally-superior/
So we could just remove the Old Testament then because I think that might be the confusion (see I disagreed again)
Ah, so by definition, we can't, are unable, to think of ourselves as less moral?
(am I any closer?)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
no
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Flowchart:
Yahweh says don't pick up sticks or you get stoned to death ----> I disagree with that concept -----> I am therefore more moral than Yahweh
What more should be added to this flow chart?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.