Total posts: 5,875
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
So the bible does NOT have a verse that says "thou shalt not own slaves,"
Sure it does. The bible even gives the death penalty for owning or selling slaves. That your militant atheism forces you to be obtuse does not change the truth.
but it DOES have a verse that instructs slaves to obey their masters.
Of course. The bible tells Christians to be respectful and truthful to all authority figures.
What you quoted is your bias making you interpret the bible in a way in which you like, not you looking at what the bible actually SAYS.
Lol. Five verses? Condemning slavery, calling it evil? Saying not to do it? Telling Christians not to return runaway slaves to their slavery? Do you care about your integrity?
You can simply say "I"m sorry, got that one wrong, stepped in it a little, what I meant to say is there are many places in the bible that can be interpreted as anti-slavery, though the language could be clearer."
I could, but honesty and truth matter to me.
You're like Messi if half of his goals were own goals and the other half flew into the stands rather than the net.
And you're like the guy who denies its a goal because Messi used his head.
We can agree to disagree Ludo, but your case is ludicrous. And this is why though millions upon millions have read these passages, including slaves themselves, very few hold the position you do.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
Does the bible actually say "Thou shalt not own slaves" in the text somewhere?
Yes.
Where?
Everywhere. Here are a few.
Deuteronomy 24:7 "If someone is caught kidnapping a fellow Israelite and treating or selling them as a slave, the kidnapper must die. You must purge the evil from among you."
Exodus 21:16 “Anyone who kidnaps someone is to be put to death, whether the victim has been sold or is still in the kidnapper’s possession.
Deuteronomy 23:15 "If a slave has taken refuge with you, do not hand them over to their master."
16 Let them live among you wherever they like and in whatever town they choose. Do not oppress them.
Leviticus 25:39 “If any of your fellow Israelites become poor and sell themselves to you, do not make them work as slaves."
And as for the verse in your post, this verse explains it.
Timothy 6:1 "All who are under the yoke of slavery should consider their masters worthy of full respect, so that God’s name and our teaching may not be slandered."
1 Corinthians 7:21 "Were you a slave when you were called? Don’t let it trouble you—although if you can gain your freedom, do so."
It is clear that the bible condemns slavery.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
There is no such thing as "the Christian God." God Himself has no religion.
But sorry, I will not go into it with you because I have too much experience. I know now that your question is like when a racist asks for evidence that blacks are as smart as whites.
They aren't asking for evidence but an excuse to tell you why they disagree. I don't care whether you believe in God or not. I just oppose stupid things.
Someone else may be interested in converting you.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
I am assuming...
Good that you know you are assuming.
that if a passage of a book which is being used as a moral pronouncement
What the book is being used for might be different from the authors intent in writing the book.
states that you can own people as property that it means you can own people as property.
But that is not what it says. That is what you assume it says because you are American who finds it almost impossible to think of slavery in a non old american south way.
Today we talk of owning and selling atheletes. I bet you aren't confused when you read that a soccer player has been sold.
There are even verses that say when a debt is bought, the person should not be made a slave.
I will thank you not to put words in my mouth.
This isn't the first time we've talked secmer. You have never shown a contradiction in the bible. You have shown contradictions between your assumptions and the Bible. But I don't care about those.
I consider owning people as property to be immoral regardless of who does the owning.
Our debate is not about what you consider to be immoral, but whether the bible condones slavery. Your opinion is immaterial.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
Both are in. Both are in the bible.
Christianity is a nonviolent religion. Slaves are not encouraged to harm their masters. The verse is not condoning slavery but telling Christians that obedience to God is superior value to freedom.
It is this philosophy that MLK used to defeat slavery in America.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
So because there are more than one question you couldn't answer one?Oh, and one question at a time.
You made a point, I showed it to be illogical. You dodged your own point and started blabbering about Noah's flood.
Post #14 is still there, and the question you dodged are still there. Dodge or answer, my point will stand, the requirements you place on the bible are illogical and unfair.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
Correct. Pointless.his goal is to have a discussion constructing strawman arguments would not appear to be efficacious as it does not require an answer but instead provides a faulty one. In other words he may as well be talking to himself.
By contrast I do not know how a question will be answered until you answer it. This invites conversation.
No, it only invites another question from you. And if it is a never ending series of questions, no point can be reached. There is no point, other than asking another question. It is Pointless.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
I'm eating sweet potato chips. Mrs. Ethan sprinkles them with lemon zest and paprika. Delicious.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
The Greek root word it is from means "same". The English word "homo" means,
A homosexual man. Check the dictionary if you doubt it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
What the bible prescribes in the passage you have quoted is that you can buy (non Jewish) people whom you will then own as property which can be passed down to your descendants as inheritance.
Untrue. You buy their service. You buy their debt. You can pass down that service debt. You assume they are buying the person. Why? Jews did not believe humans could own another human.
There are other passages which concerning the ownership of people including the more temporary ownership of (Jewish) people,
Untrue. Besotted by the legacy of American slavery, you have a tendency to see everything through the lens of slavery.
The passages concern the ownership of a dept, not a person.
...guidelines on how severe a beating you are permitted to administer to the people you own.
No sir. People indebted to you. There were no police or jails back then. Justice was local. So the law was not how severe a beating you were permitted to administer, but how severe you were NOT permitted to administer to people you did NOT own.
Why would a man be punished for beating his property if he owned the slave? Think.
If these pronouncements are contradictory to some other passages in the bible...
Untrue. And you have never shown a contradiction. You simply assume the passages are about owning people and then claim they contradict other passages.
...but I find the practice of owning others to be immoral regardless of the label being applied to the practice.
Which is why you want to place your own label on it. It is not owning people.
There are verses that say only God can own people, verses that call owning or selling people an abomination, verses that admonish the Israeli to banish the evil that is slavery from among them, verses that say the penalty for slavery is death.
You ignore all of this, because you wish to hang on to your bias. Your worldview is built upon anti-theism, your view on slavery in the bible is formed by your bias, not what the bible actually says.
Created:
Posted in:
Evolution missed all the talking animals on YouTube too.I see no mention of a talking snake in evolution.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
I said nothing about your grammar. But maybe the reason religion makes no sense to you may be because of you and not religion.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Seth
Well we know that in order for the noah flood myth to be true it would require 3 times the amount of water on an in the Earth.
The Earth's mantle holds an ocean of water.
To see if the transition zone really is a deep reservoir for water, researchers conducted experiments on water-rich ringwoodite, analyzed seismic waves travelling through the mantle beneath the United States, and studied numerical models. They discovered that downward-flowing mantle material is melting as it crosses the boundary between the transition zone and the lower mantle layer.
"If we are seeing this melting, then there has to be this water in the transition zone," said Brandon Schmandt, a seismologist at the University of New Mexico and co-author of the new study published today (June 12) in the journal Science. "The transition zone can hold a lot of water, and could potentially have the same amount of H2O [water] as all the world's oceans." (Melting is a way of getting rid of water, which is unstable under conditions in Earth's lower mantle, the researchers said.)
Gen 7:11 - In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.
...in order for the noah flood myth to be true...
Hmmmm.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
Regardless of theism or atheism, you sure seem to have packed enough stupid into that post.
-The bible contradicts it's self.
ITSELF is one word.
so if they are preying to do God's will
PRAYING is appealing to a deity. PREYING is what a cheetah does to a gazelle.
Agnostics and atheists get prosecuted worse in religious countries than devout Christians do in secular countries.
PROSECUTED is normally a legal term, do you mean atheists and agnostics commit more crime and therefore are defendants in court cases more? Or do you mean PERSECUTED?
I love when people get on others about how stupid they are in posts rife with spelling errors and misused language. It happens every single time.
+1
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
Lol!!
That was probably the most shameless dodge I've ever seen.
This from the guy who fashions himself a logic teacher. Hilarious.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Seth
Like homo and phobia?Two contradictory words used together is an oxymoron, the title is an oxymoron.
Created:
Posted in:
Sorry. I thought this thread was about theists saying stupid things.
But neither of you are theists.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Seth
No that's @ethang5
OK Cletus, why are you sending your insipid posts to Ethang5?
I didn't.
Then you need to alert Mike, cause your clunkers are coming to me.
Why do you call yourself Cletus.
It may have something to do with your poor reading comprehension, or your low IQ, or both.
Now, as for who Cletus is, do you have a mirror handy?
So now your mirror is Cletus.
Why would you have my mirror? But if you look into a mirror, you might see Cletus. I say "might" because there's a chance your delusion affects your vision.
You seem quite confused about names.
That I'm sure is due to your poor reading comprehension. You haven't a clue whom you're addressing your silly posts to, but you think someone else is confused.
Sure Cletus.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Seth
A little less dodging might help you too.
So Darwin's On The Origin of Species is not about evolution? What is it about? Do you know?
Many people have contributed to the ToE.
Sure, but who is credited with being the father of the theory? Do you know Cletus?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
I have a strong feeling you are disgusted
I've been getting the same vibe!
I mean, what sort of noob comes on to the board already obsessed with me?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Thank you sir. Very few understand what either of us do, but that is the price of greatness.
Be well.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Seth
keep referring to Cletus and there is no Ethan anywhere.
Sure there is. Let me remind you. See the arrow at the top left of your last post? That is who you've chosen to send your post to. That's Ethan.
The question you skipped is, why did you address your post to Ethan if you think I'm Cletus, Cletus?
Now, as for who Cletus is, do you have a mirror handy?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
Questions are not directly comparable to claims
True. But I was comparing the M.O.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Seth
So Darwin's On The Origin of Species is not about evolution? What is it about?
Darwin is credited as the father of the theory of evolution, when did he come up with it?
Who do you think came up with the theory of evolution if not Darwin?
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
The same as for any ancient history book.What is your litmus test (Uniform Standard Of Evidence) to determine if "biblical history" is accurate?
You now suddenly want to jump to another topic? Shall we settle the first?
It is ridiculous to demand that any work of literature must be all literal or all figurative.
That is simply not rational.
Plus you skip over my questions and ask additional ones of your own? Do you want a dialogue or are you only interested in grilling someone?
How come logic escapes you whenever you're asked a question?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
Ol' Sal doesn't do challenging. He does strawmaning, and then insisting his "argument" is researched and supported.
Over and over. Sort of like your never ending questions.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
An interesting reference there, to the connection between Theism, obsession and compulsion. "Theism and other mental issues".LOL.
Have you ever been a theist? I ask because I wanted to know if it feels anything like your obsession with me.
So, is there a connection?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Willows
@Salixes
..."because of evil and stupidity we still have religion".
And trolls who spam themselves. Let's not forget those.
True,...
Now that we're on the subject, how are you able to have two active accounts and spam yourself?
...but let's just turn the focus away from you for a while and look at the issue here.
That would be a first for you. But isn't the issue here things we still have because of evil and stupidity?
Are not trolls who spam themselves evil and stupid? Oh wait! You don't want to talk about your weird conversations with yourself between your two accounts!
I reckon there's something to the concept of dividing religion into two distinct areas, the ones who control and the ones who are controlled.
Certainly does raise some pertinent questions. What do you reckon?
So who's the controlled and who's the controller among Salixes and Willows?
But, my bad Sal. Am I butting in between you and Willows? Errr.....you and Salixes? The topic is evil and stupidity, you carry on, I'll see myself out.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Seth
Why is your name Cletus?
The question is, why did you address your post to Ethan if you think I'm Cletus, Cletus?
Lol!
Weren't you the one bragging that he knew how the board works? See the arrow at the top left of your last post? that is who you've chosen to send your post to. You're welcome.
Now once again, do you have anything intelligent to say on the thread's topic? Or will you just keep posting silliness?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Salixes
You said you used to be a theist. That really supports your full-frontal lobotomy claim.
I didn't say anything.....I wrote something.
Because what I conveyyyyed to yeeeew in faaaaact was that I used to geeeewww to Church yeeewww seeeee.
by saying that I am a theisssst simply because I said I used to geeewww to Church earns you a right old clip over the ears.
Like you said, full-frontal lobotomy. Again your post supports your claim. You told us you use to be a "devoted" Christian.
That is the term atheists use to convince Christians they were really, really, once Christians. There were all so devoted!
I haven't a clue why you think your old posts of you lying that you were once a Christian will be difficult to find.
Anyway, when I told you that you were never a Christian, you got miffed and pulled out the "no true scotsman" fallacy on me. (was in atheist vogue back then)
So we'll split it down the middle. Some people require a full-frontal lobotomy to stop being a theist, others get it to address other mental issues like obsession and compulsion.
That way, you didn't lie, then or now.
Created:
-->
@Vader
Its easy. Several threads are literally the same, with the same title (ex. Are Theist Deluded?) And the same OP.
I was just under the apparently mistaken impression that no one could possess two accounts, even if one of the accounts was inactive.
Watching compulsion is like watching a train wreck in slow motion.
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
He does. Of course.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Salixes
You said you used to be a theist. That really supports your full-frontal lobotomy claim....nothing short of a full-frontal lobotomy would ever change the mind of a theist.
Created:
-->
@drafterman
@Barney
@Vader
@Dr.Franklin
...though he's mightily fighting his compulsion now, it is not controllable and he will lose. It's only a matter of time.
I called it!
Is Spam Still Against the CoC Since Virt Took Over?
My only interest is if they are the same users then one of the accounts needs to be disabled to comply with alternate account rules. - Drafterman, Post # 61
But isn't having multiple accounts in itself a violation?
Since the old account isn't in active use and they don't appear to have been perma banned, I don't see an issue. - Drafterman, Post # 68
The old account is active. Can users have multiple accounts if only one is active at a time?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Seth
Because you're unoriginal and its funny to see you repeat my accusations to me.Why are you stalking me?
Now, ask why is my name Seth. Go ahead, it might fool the same person your stalking question did.
Lol.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
...so I thought I'd give it a go myself.
But why? If I jumped off a bridge, would you do so too?
Your fixation on me is really unhealthy Abdul.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Salixes
Dude, you've been banned from every moderated site you've ever joined. What good advice can you give?My best advice is...
How to successfully spam yourself?
Lol!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
Good point.....people like you too who think they have the answers yet on questioning you find that you can't make sense of life other than manufacturing meaning in what would be a meaningless universe from an atheistic perspective.
+1
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Willows
..."because of evil and stupidity we still have religion".
And trolls who spam themselves. Let's not forget those.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Because of his compulsion, I knew it would be almost impossible for him to not post a thread for a whole month.
The funny thing is, he's posting to himself. Hilarious. But I'm in favor of treating this as a disease rather than a CoC violation.
The guy literally cannot help it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
And the wheel in the sky keeps on turning...
Thanks fauxlaw.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
No sir. Your logic is shoddy. Watch.
(EITHER) the bible must be taken totally literally....
Why? The bible contains history. No sane logical person assumes it must be totally figurative
(OR) the bible must be taken totally figuratively
Ditto. The bible contains songs. Who thinks song are always completely literal?
(ELSE) you must provide some rigorous (non-subjective) framework to explain exactly WHEN you believe the bible must be taken literally and when you believe it must be taken figuratively (otherwise your framework is purely subjective and therefore logically incoherent).
Absolute nonsense. Did Camu give a framework to explain exactly WHEN he believe his work was to be taken literally and when it was to be taken figuratively?
Did Churchill? Your expectation is ludicrous. Even if we do not know which parts of a work are figurative and which parts are literal, it is none-the-less irrational to assume it must be taken all literally OR all figuratively.
..purely subjective and therefore logically incoherent.
Purely subjective does not equal logically incoherent.
...you must provide some rigorous (non-subjective) framework to explain...
No. School is enough. Notice that works of literature don't come with rigorous, non-subjective, frameworks to explain when they are literal and when they are figurative.
This is just an ad hoc illogical burden you slap onto the bible. Have you read Lord of the Flies? The Old Man and the Sea? The Grapes of Wrath? Did you have a rigorous, non-subjective, framework to explain when they were literal and when they were figurative?
I'm going to guess you can't answer why either.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
other supplies."specifics unnecessary.
No, they are not.
I'm prepared
Its your life, your family, and your property. No blame from me.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Seth
Lol. You're speaking for the world now?...neither the world nor I cares about your narcissism.
If you really didn't care Cletus, you wouldn't be stalking me.
You're a dime a dozen on the net.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Seth
Try as you might, your incompetence is your fault.
Your irrational militant anti-theism hampers your ability to think clearly. If you dislike me so much, stop posting to me.
But if you can't handle your bile, I can. You can't get me banned or even angry. I will squeeze the last drop of lolz out of you if you allow me to.
That is how its gonna be Cletus. Deal with it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dynasty
Don't worry about the threads title, the rest of us understand it.
Perhaps someone will find a reason to change your mind if you told us the basic beliefs of a theistic evolutionist and how it differs from a basic evolutionist or a basic theist.
Created:
Posted in:
There is also evidence of what is known as a God gene called vestalker monotopic transpammer 2 (VMOT2), which predisposes humans towards spiritual or mystical delusions of "saving" religious people or "exposing" religious people.
So, it could be that some people are just born to panic buy.
Oh, and become religious trolls.
Created: