whywontgodhealamputees.com

Main Discussion Zone => General Religious Discussion => Topic started by: median on November 17, 2013, 11:57:30 AM

Title: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: median on November 17, 2013, 11:57:30 AM
This question is for Christians. Would you ever (for any reason at all) torture your children with fire in the basement? Would you ever burn their skin from head to toe while listening to their screams of horror? Is there any reason, whatsoever, that you think this action would be justified for you to perform on your own children? Just picture yourself performing these actions in your mind. Please answer honestly.

[Note: If you do not have children please assume for this discussion that you do]

Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement? YES or NO.

Once you have answered this, then please answer why or why not.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on November 17, 2013, 12:07:54 PM
Christians can't do that, median. Only God can because he is the Creator and Supreme King.

Since God is infinite, any sin against Him deserves infinite punishment.

Since humans are not infinite, sins against us don't merit infinite punishment.

This is Christianity 101, median.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: median on November 17, 2013, 12:24:14 PM
Christians can't do that, median. Only God can because he is the Creator and Supreme King.

Since God is infinite, any sin against Him deserves infinite punishment.

Since humans are not infinite, sins against us don't merit infinite punishment.

This is Christianity 101, median.


So then you admit that God's 'nature' is not the standard of morality?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Aaron123 on November 17, 2013, 12:45:29 PM
Christians can't do that, median. Only God can because he is the Creator and Supreme King.

Since God is infinite, any sin against Him deserves infinite punishment.

Since humans are not infinite, sins against us don't merit infinite punishment.

This is Christianity 101, median.


How can finite creatures warrant infinite punishment?

It would take a special kind of cruelty and pettiness to deliver infinite punishment.  Yet somehow, this is the action of an 'all-loving' god.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Ron Jeremy on November 17, 2013, 01:07:51 PM

Since God is infinite, any sin against Him deserves infinite punishment.


That makes as much sense as 'Since god is purple, any sin against him deserves purple punishment'.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: wheels5894 on November 17, 2013, 01:09:58 PM
Christians can't do that, median. Only God can because he is the Creator and Supreme King.

Since God is infinite, any sin against Him deserves infinite punishment.

Since humans are not infinite, sins against us don't merit infinite punishment.

This is Christianity 101, median.

Problems -

According to William Lane Craig, a guy who ought ot know about these things, infinties cannot exist. Thus, the start of your explanation fils to work.

I understood, though, that your god was also keen to forgive. Now let's ask you a similar question - suppoosing your children has manged to burn down your house, would you fogive them? Would you do it without asking for apologies, deprivation of nice things or trips out?

Jesus managed to forgive sins on the spot so, appearing before god a person could be cleansed by god of all sins and forgiven - if god wanted to - but does he? Why would he want a fiery place to torture people for ever for say - committing adultery, being gay (as god made the person of course) and so on?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: One Above All on November 17, 2013, 01:11:04 PM

Since God is infinite, any sin against Him deserves infinite punishment.


That makes as much sense as 'Since god is purple, any sin against him deserves purple punishment'.

Great; now you've given him two arguments.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on November 17, 2013, 01:16:45 PM
How can finite creatures warrant infinite punishment?

It would take a special kind of cruelty and pettiness to deliver infinite punishment.  Yet somehow, this is the action of an 'all-loving' god.

Please tell us what you mean by "love" and how you define it.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Ron Jeremy on November 17, 2013, 01:23:06 PM

Since God is infinite, any sin against Him deserves infinite punishment.


That makes as much sense as 'Since god is purple, any sin against him deserves purple punishment'.

Great; now you've given him two arguments.

Hmm,...'Since god is infinitely merciful and just, any sin against him deserves an infinitely merciful and just punishment'. How's that?!
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: G-Roll on November 17, 2013, 01:26:31 PM
Christians can't do that, median. Only God can because he is the Creator and Supreme King.

Since God is infinite, any sin against Him deserves infinite punishment.

Since humans are not infinite, sins against us don't merit infinite punishment.

This is Christianity 101, median.

Brought to you by the cult that would destroy the world and everyone in it to bring their benevolent god back.

The benevolent god that has destroyed the world once before.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on November 17, 2013, 01:34:52 PM
Christians can't do that, median. Only God can because he is the Creator and Supreme King.

Since God is infinite, any sin against Him deserves infinite punishment.

Since humans are not infinite, sins against us don't merit infinite punishment.

This is Christianity 101, median.

Brought to you by the cult that would destroy the world and everyone in it to bring their benevolent god back.

The benevolent god that has destroyed the world once before.

Did you know that some parents kick their children out of the house if they refuse to listen to them?

"My house, my rules. If you don't like it, then leave."
Is the parent evil and wrong?
Would you prefer the parent spoil the children and let them do anything they want?

Suppose a parent has a son who refuses to get a job.
Should the parents kick the son out or let him keep living there mooching off the parents?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Ron Jeremy on November 17, 2013, 01:39:55 PM
I hear this from Christians a lot during these sort of debates; "But a parent can allow their child to make mistakes.." and "But a parent is allowed to punish their child."

Punish - yes. Torture for eternity - no.

The morals of Christians are so twisted by this poisonous religion that they are unable to see the difference between the two.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: G-Roll on November 17, 2013, 01:45:02 PM
My house, my rules. If you don't like it, then leave."
Is the parent evil and wrong?
Yes.

Quote
Would you prefer the parent spoil the children and let them do anything they want?
As opposed to putting them on the street with nothing? Yes.

Quote
Suppose a parent has a son who refuses to get a job.
Should the parents kick the son out or let him keep living there mooching off the parents?
Are we talking about a grown adult or a teen?

And in what way is your god not throwing his children or creation not just out of the house, but into eternal damnation? I fully understand the actual children of your god are Christian and your god could care less about me because I am not Christian. Yet in your opinion was I created by your god and am I not one of his children? Just that one ungrateful kid that he will burn in the basement.... forever.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: jaimehlers on November 17, 2013, 01:48:14 PM
I get the distinct feeling that this is yet another subject skeptic really hasn't given much thought to.  How many is this now?  I've lost count.

Leaving aside the sophistry about "transgressing against infinity deserves an infinite punishment", the simple fact of the matter is that a finite being, such as a human, cannot receive an infinite punishment.  Christians try to get around this by claiming that the soul is eternal, but they have no proof whatsoever of this.  They haven't even proven that there is such a thing as the soul, even though if it were distinct from the human body, there'd be something we could detect.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on November 17, 2013, 02:05:07 PM
My house, my rules. If you don't like it, then leave."
Is the parent evil and wrong?
Yes.

Quote
Would you prefer the parent spoil the children and let them do anything they want?
As opposed to putting them on the street with nothing? Yes.

Quote
Suppose a parent has a son who refuses to get a job.
Should the parents kick the son out or let him keep living there mooching off the parents?
Are we talking about a grown adult or a teen?

And in what way is your god not throwing his children or creation not just out of the house, but into eternal damnation? I fully understand the actual children of your god are Christian and your god could care less about me because I am not Christian. Yet in your opinion was I created by your god and am I not one of his children? Just that one ungrateful kid that he will burn in the basement.... forever.

This is a subject that I am flabbergasted by.

You atheists would seriously just let your grown children stay in the house if they refused to get a job?

Where's the incentive for them to work then? lol

Telling your children, "I know you are 25 years old now, but since you are refusing to get a job, that's fine. I would never kick you out. You're too important to me." This hypothetical parent has just given his children a free license to mooch off of them forever.

How is that good?

 Imagine him telling his friends, "My dad isn't making me work and he's not kicking me out! I have such an awesome life!"

Compare that to a parent who says, "if you don't have a job by the time you're 25, you're out of here." This child would shape up real quick!
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: G-Roll on November 17, 2013, 02:22:19 PM
Telling your children, "I know you are 25 years old now...

I am "Flabbergasted" by your dishonesty.

I am not even going to bother reading the rest of your post because I see no point in having a conversation with a dishonest person.
It’s a pitty because I was curious as to what your response would be. Imagine my disappointment...
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: G-Roll on November 17, 2013, 02:25:13 PM
Are we talking about a grown adult or a teen?

In case you can't figure out why you are dishonest I even asked if we are talking about children (you said the word children) or grown adults. But no you want to label a 25 year old as a child?

done.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: nogodsforme on November 17, 2013, 03:14:39 PM
According to this eternal punishment deal, we all deserve it from the time we exit the womb. Nobody is innocent, see, because we inherit our sin nature from our ancestors through the magic of genetics that does not really exist because there was no evolution.

So you could be 5 or 25 and the loving parent is still justified in kicking you to the curb or burning you in the basement. Nice.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Aaron123 on November 17, 2013, 03:15:15 PM
Please tell us what you mean by "love" and how you define it.

It is christians that claims god is "all-loving".

It is I that want to know what is meant by "love" and how they're defining it.  I'm pretty sure that most definition of love do not include "will punish for eternity".  Yet, they allow for an "all-loving" god to do just that.  Nonsense.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: median on November 17, 2013, 05:20:27 PM

Did you know that some parents kick their children out of the house if they refuse to listen to them?

"My house, my rules. If you don't like it, then leave."
Is the parent evil and wrong?
Would you prefer the parent spoil the children and let them do anything they want?

Suppose a parent has a son who refuses to get a job.
Should the parents kick the son out or let him keep living there mooching off the parents?

False Analogy there.

Suppose a parent has a son, who refuses to obey or get a job. Should the parents lock him in the basement and torture him with gasoline and fire?? You won't get around this. See, you can't have your cake and eat it too. It works both ways. Either the "my house my rules" goes (and then its A-OK for the parents to torture the child with gasoline and fire) or it is not OK. Which is it?

Can you stop this hypocrisy and get honest?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: median on November 17, 2013, 05:30:02 PM
This is a subject that I am flabbergasted by.

You atheists would seriously just let your grown children stay in the house if they refused to get a job?

Where's the incentive for them to work then? lol

Telling your children, "I know you are 25 years old now, but since you are refusing to get a job, that's fine. I would never kick you out. You're too important to me." This hypothetical parent has just given his children a free license to mooch off of them forever.

How is that good?

Imagine him telling his friends, "My dad isn't making me work and he's not kicking me out! I have such an awesome life!"

Compare that to a parent who says, "if you don't have a job by the time you're 25, you're out of here." This child would shape up real quick!

Do not even attempt for one second to talk to us about hypocrisy - since your position is filled with it (both intellectually and morally). When you attempt to apply different standards of evidence (when it suits your view), and attempt irrational arguments in an attempt to avoid refutation (only a second later trying to point out fallacies in other people's arguments), the hypocrisy is all yours.

Now again, regarding my initial response to you above, please respond.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Quesi on November 17, 2013, 06:13:18 PM
This is a subject that I am flabbergasted by.

You atheists would seriously just let your grown children stay in the house if they refused to get a job?

Where's the incentive for them to work then? lol

Telling your children, "I know you are 25 years old now, but since you are refusing to get a job, that's fine. I would never kick you out. You're too important to me." This hypothetical parent has just given his children a free license to mooch off of them forever.

How is that good?

 Imagine him telling his friends, "My dad isn't making me work and he's not kicking me out! I have such an awesome life!"

Compare that to a parent who says, "if you don't have a job by the time you're 25, you're out of here." This child would shape up real quick!

Golly.  You know, my atheist parents never kicked me out.  And there are a few reasons for that.

First of all, they loved me and respected me, and my well-being was paramount to them.

Secondly, they had instilled in me, from early childhood, a love of learning, and a love of accomplishment.  I grew up watching them enjoying their challenging careers, and I fantasized about the rewarding career I would have one day.  And then I pursued education and opportunities that led me to that rewarding career.  They also fulfilled my financial "needs" as a teenager.  But I always earned my fun money, working in the local mall.  And I always understood that my personal budget would some day include not only fun stuff, but my basic needs. 

And thirdly, I finished my undergrad in a different era.  I got a job that I loved within a couple of months of graduation.  And before that, I did some random jobs, and a little freelance journalism.  It was a sort of scary time.  For months, I didn't earn enough money to pay my basic bills, even though they were modest.  My parents helped me out a bit.  But I found a good job fairly quickly.

And years later, when I returned from three years of living and working with Central American refugees living in Mexico, I arrived in the US broke.  I moved in with mom and dad, and was lucky enough to get a job that paid fairly well.  Saved up, and started grad school.  And within a couple of years, the job that had started out as a part time gig while I was in grad school, turned into an opportunity for me to create and build a program for immigrants and refugees here in NYC.  And I'm still there. 

Today's young people graduate in a very different work environment.  Not many people graduate and find a job that will pay their bills within a couple of months.  A lot of young people graduate from college, and have no choice but to return to their parents' homes.

I hope my daughter comes of age in a different economy.  She is bright and driven, and has many innate skills.  I hope she gets a fabulous education, and I hope that she is able to settle into a career that she finds rewarding. 

But as an atheist mom, second generation, I hope to inspire my daughter to strive and accomplish.  I imagine her as an astrophysicist, but she could go into biology as well.  Or engineering.  Right now, at age 7, she says she wants to be an entomologist.  Or a chess teacher.  She loves her chess teacher. She has a strong scientific mind, but also a very artistic, creative mind.  I don't think that she will go into the human services, like I did.  I make sure she knows about the lives of the women she knows.  The architects and the lawyers and the waitresses and the professors and the data entry clerks and the retail employees.  What kinds of skills, education, personality, makes someone successful in their work?  Who loves their jobs?  Who is proud of their accomplishments?   Who is satisfied?  Who is frustrated?  And why?   


If I do my job as a parent well, I will not every have to "make her work."  I hope to inspire her to work.  As my parents inspired me.  To contribute to society. To create something.  To discover something.  To make a difference.  I want her to make a good living.  And I hope that she will never be greedy.  That she will never feel entitled.  That she will understand that none of us live in a silo, and that everything we do impacts on the world around us.  That she will take pride in her accomplishments, and that she will treat everyone around her with respect.   

I hope she pursues a career that she loves.  But if she decides to work as a night clerk at a parking garage so that she can use her free time to paint pictures of wild ducks, I will be thrilled that she is pursing her love of duck painting, and that she has created a life for herself in which that is possible.  I love her.  And I want her to be happy.   

But if she finds herself trying to enter a job market like the one that young people are facing today, and if she is struggling, then she is welcome in my home as long into adulthood as she needs to be here. 

That is just a small portrait of my atheist values.  Second generation atheist values. 


 
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: jaimehlers on November 17, 2013, 06:46:44 PM
I don't think anyone here besides skeptic assumed that atheists would let their children live with them forever.  I wish I could say I was surprised by his strawman, but I know how he works now.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: median on November 17, 2013, 06:53:47 PM
I don't think anyone here besides skeptic assumed that atheists would let their children live with them forever.  I wish I could say I was surprised by his strawman, but I know how he works now.

I actually think it's hilarious that he attempts to use this example b/c many families throughout history have lived with each other (i.e. - on the same land) their whole lives and saw absolutely nothing wrong with it. Yet, his argument is a complete red-herring as well since we are talking about whether torture is moral, and what is the 'ultimate standard' of what is considered moral. Clearly septic didn't want to answer my first response to him.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: nogodsforme on November 17, 2013, 06:54:08 PM
^^^Exactly. He moves the goalposts so fast, you can hear the sonic boom.   

In most cultures, many young people never "move out" because that would be seen as abandoning the family. They are needed at home, whether they are earning money or not, because there are other people to look after. It is such a strangely US Puritan idea that people are basically lazy sinners who have to be threatened with homelessness and starvation or else they will do nothing with their lives.

Most of the US homeless kids I have known were sexually abused, severely depressed, and/or gay, not the stereotypical lazy bums. Almost all were thrown out by parents who saw themselves as upstanding, loving Christians.  The majority of the kids eventually got their lives together, but it was not pretty. And it cost society many thousands of dollars in taxes to try to fix the mess those upstanding Christians created by abusing and then abandoning their children. Some never got on their feet.[1]
 
If a 25 year old is unemployed, not in school and not at least helping out around the house, I would suspect substance abuse or depression, or both. Kicking them out into the street only hands the problem off onto society, ie the police and social services. It may come to that eventually, but I would not say that throwing a disobedient kid out is the best response of a "loving parent".

But that is what god did to Adam and Eve, so what do I know?
 1. I am thinking of one young man who tried very hard to overcome child abuse and abandonment. After living on the streets from age 14 on, and shoplifting to survive, he managed to get his GED and find work. But he is destroying himself with alcohol, even as we speak.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 17, 2013, 07:30:17 PM


Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement? YES or NO.

No.


Once you have answered this, then please answer why or why not.

Because that would be horrible. I don't want to do anything horrible to my children.

Also, very few Australian houses have basements.

Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 17, 2013, 07:44:02 PM



If I do my job as a parent well, I will not every have to "make her work."  I hope to inspire her to work.  As my parents inspired me.  To contribute to society. To create something.  To discover something.  To make a difference.  I want her to make a good living.  And I hope that she will never be greedy.  That she will never feel entitled.  That she will understand that none of us live in a silo, and that everything we do impacts on the world around us.  That she will take pride in her accomplishments, and that she will treat everyone around her with respect.   

 

I'm sure the vast majority of parents want that. And usually they can achieve that, as parents. However, somethimes the best parents can have children that for whattever reason simply refuse to listen or learn, and insist on being selfish.

You didn't really address Skeptic's question, did you? You essentially dismissed the perfectly legitimate scenario he raised and chose to instead discuss your own experiences and hopes. Whilst commendable, they are not relevant to the question.

How would you react, as a parent, to a child that insisted on playing no useful part in society and was determined to live in comfort through your efforts only? Would you allow it? Or would there be an ultimatum of sorts, at some point?


Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on November 17, 2013, 07:50:41 PM
Christians can't do that, median. Only God can because he is the Creator and Supreme King.

Since God is infinite, any sin against Him deserves infinite punishment.

Since humans are not infinite, sins against us don't merit infinite punishment.

This is Christianity 101, median.
Not with the "get out of Hell" Jesus card. You can be as evil as you wish as long as in your final act you accept Jesus into your heart,heaven baby
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on November 17, 2013, 07:53:18 PM
Christians can't do that, median. Only God can because he is the Creator and Supreme King.

Since God is infinite, any sin against Him deserves infinite punishment.

Since humans are not infinite, sins against us don't merit infinite punishment.

This is Christianity 101, median.

Brought to you by the cult that would destroy the world and everyone in it to bring their benevolent god back.

The benevolent god that has destroyed the world once before.

Did you know that some parents kick their children out of the house if they refuse to listen to them?

"My house, my rules. If you don't like it, then leave."
Is the parent evil and wrong?
Would you prefer the parent spoil the children and let them do anything they want?

Suppose a parent has a son who refuses to get a job.
Should the parents kick the son out or let him keep living there mooching off the parents?
According to the Bible they should KILL the unruly child
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Antidote on November 17, 2013, 07:58:54 PM
I've had to struggle most of my life, everything I have I've had to work hard to earn. Right now I'm unemployed in a bad job market, and working on getting back into school. A large portion of what I know I've had to struggle through and learn myself.

My hope is that if I do have kids they will never have to struggle the way I've had to, I was born into a rather poor family, and my dad worked his a$$ off to become middle class finally earning ~70k a year. Would I ever torture my children with fire in the basement? Hell no, I don't want them to experience a fraction of the struggles I've had to.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 17, 2013, 08:09:44 PM
I've had to struggle most of my life, everything I have I've had to work hard to earn. Right now I'm unemployed in a bad job market, and working on getting back into school. A large portion of what I know I've had to struggle through and learn myself.


And how do you think you'd deal with children who laughed in the face of your hard work and effort, refused to follow your example and showed a willingness to have you support them completely for as long as you were willing?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Antidote on November 17, 2013, 08:10:56 PM
I've had to struggle most of my life, everything I have I've had to work hard to earn. Right now I'm unemployed in a bad job market, and working on getting back into school. A large portion of what I know I've had to struggle through and learn myself.


And how do you think you'd deal with children who laughed in the face of your hard work and effort, refused to follow your example and showed a willingness to have you support them completely for as long as you were willing?

That's not the point, and I don't know the answer, and I'm not equipped to answer it at the moment anyway. I'm not a parent.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Quesi on November 17, 2013, 08:14:57 PM



If I do my job as a parent well, I will not every have to "make her work."  I hope to inspire her to work.  As my parents inspired me.  To contribute to society. To create something.  To discover something.  To make a difference.  I want her to make a good living.  And I hope that she will never be greedy.  That she will never feel entitled.  That she will understand that none of us live in a silo, and that everything we do impacts on the world around us.  That she will take pride in her accomplishments, and that she will treat everyone around her with respect.   

 

I'm sure the vast majority of parents want that. And usually they can achieve that, as parents. However, somethimes the best parents can have children that for whattever reason simply refuse to listen or learn, and insist on being selfish.

You didn't really address Skeptic's question, did you? You essentially dismissed the perfectly legitimate scenario he raised and chose to instead discuss your own experiences and hopes. Whilst commendable, they are not relevant to the question.

How would you react, as a parent, to a child that insisted on playing no useful part in society and was determined to live in comfort through your efforts only? Would you allow it? Or would there be an ultimatum of sorts, at some point?

First of all, thank you to everyone who was gracious enough not to point out my numerous typos. 

MM - I really think that nogodsforme addressed that question when she said: 


If a 25 year old is unemployed, not in school and not at least helping out around the house, I would suspect substance abuse or depression, or both. Kicking them out into the street only hands the problem off onto society, ie the police and social services. It may come to that eventually, but I would not say that throwing a disobedient kid out is the best response of a "loving parent".

But that is what god did to Adam and Eve, so what do I know?

There are certainly substance abusers and depressed people, and people with other serious social, physical or mental issues who stay in their parents' homes.  If this were my daughter's case, I would support her, and try and seek help. 

I would hope that I would see the signs early.  I might.  I might not.  But I certainly would not wake up one day and notice that she was 25 and still sleeping til noon and watching tv all day while emptying out the refrigerator. 

My personal fears are of another nature.  I'm an older mom.  Quite a bit older than the parents of my daughter's peers.  I've had a couple of health issues recently, and I find myself fearing that if I became sick, she would not prance off to college, but stay  home and take care of me.  That is not what I want for her. 
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 17, 2013, 08:28:58 PM
@ Quesi ^^. That's all well and good, but it seems to me you are avoiding the question by refusing to see it as a possibility. Are you (you also NGFM) of the opinion that laziness is always (or very close to always) indicative of depression or another mental health problem? Is it possible that some children are just lazy bastards exploiting their parents love and care?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Aaron123 on November 17, 2013, 08:29:25 PM
According to the Bible they should KILL the unruly child

Indeed.

Deuteronomy 21: 18-21
If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:  Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;  And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.  And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Antidote on November 17, 2013, 08:31:46 PM
That's all well and good, but it seems to me you are avoiding the question by refusing to see it as a possibility. Are you (you also NGFM) of the opinion that laziness is always (or very close to always) indicative of depression or another mental health problem? Is it possible that some children are just lazy bastards exploiting their parents love and care?
Who is this directed to?
If it is to me, I've explained why I'm unable to answer; I'm not equipped to answer it honestly. If I answer it now it's just conjecture and not indicative of my real reaction if such a thing were to happen.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 17, 2013, 08:33:07 PM
I've had to struggle most of my life, everything I have I've had to work hard to earn. Right now I'm unemployed in a bad job market, and working on getting back into school. A large portion of what I know I've had to struggle through and learn myself.


And how do you think you'd deal with children who laughed in the face of your hard work and effort, refused to follow your example and showed a willingness to have you support them completely for as long as you were willing?

That's not the point, and I don't know the answer, and I'm not equipped to answer it at the moment anyway. I'm not a parent.

Well, yes it is the point because it is the question asked by Skeptic. If you don't know the anser, you should say so up front before commenting further.

It's like being asked "How much do you like donuts"? and responding with a discussion on how much you're looking forward to chocolate later.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 17, 2013, 08:34:09 PM
That's all well and good, but it seems to me you are avoiding the question by refusing to see it as a possibility. Are you (you also NGFM) of the opinion that laziness is always (or very close to always) indicative of depression or another mental health problem? Is it possible that some children are just lazy bastards exploiting their parents love and care?
Who is this directed to?
If it is to me, I've explained why I'm unable to answer; I'm not equipped to answer it honestly. If I answer it now it's just conjecture and not indicative of my real reaction if such a thing were to happen.

Quesi. I made it clearer now.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Antidote on November 17, 2013, 08:35:43 PM
Well, yes it is the point because it is the question asked by Skeptic. If you don't know the anser, you should say so up front before commenting further.

It's like being asked "How much do you like donuts"? and responding with a discussion on how much you're looking forward to chocolate later.

Except I wasn't answering Skeptic, therefore expecting me to address every point of a question I don't even know about won't help you.
And I DID say I didn't know the answer, to your question.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 17, 2013, 08:40:46 PM
Well, yes it is the point because it is the question asked by Skeptic. If you don't know the anser, you should say so up front before commenting further.

It's like being asked "How much do you like donuts"? and responding with a discussion on how much you're looking forward to chocolate later.

Except I wasn't answering Skeptic, therefore expecting me to address every point of a question I don't even know about won't help you.
And I DID say I didn't know the answer, to your question.

Your initial post in this thread made the most sense to me in light of the question Skeptic asked about dealing with children who refused to work. If that is incorrect then I apologise and withdraw my comments.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 17, 2013, 08:43:22 PM
According to the Bible they should KILL the unruly child

Indeed.

Deuteronomy 21: 18-21
If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:  Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;  And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.  And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.

News flash: We aren't ancient Israelites.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Antidote on November 17, 2013, 08:43:34 PM
Your initial post in this thread made the most sense to me in light of the question Skeptic asked about dealing with children who refused to work. If that is incorrect then I apologise and withdraw my comments.

Thank you, I wasn't even aware he had posed such a question, I quickly read the first page, specifically the OP, and saw Quesi's post towards the end.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Antidote on November 17, 2013, 08:46:12 PM
According to the Bible they should KILL the unruly child

Indeed.

Deuteronomy 21: 18-21
If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:  Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;  And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.  And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.


News flash: We aren't ancient Israelites.

No one claimed that, however it is the position of some theists that the Bible is the inerrant word of god, therefore this passage should be taken seriously. Most Atheists[1] think it's all hogwash, but the bible gives us plenty of ammo against silly theist arguments. It's proof that even "biblical literalists"  don't even know their own bible
 1. Can't say all, there are some weird ones out there
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 17, 2013, 08:50:40 PM


No one claimed that, however it is the position of some theists that the Bible is the inerrant word of god, therefore this passage should be taken seriously.

Of course it should be taken seriously. It's no trivial thing. But taking it seriously does not mean it can be applied out of context. Context matters, whether it suits your favourite arguments or not, and pointing out the context of a biblical passage is not an attempt at avoiding anything - it is an attempt at honesty and truth.

To use this passage as some sort of argument that modern day parents should stone their disobedient children is intellectually retarded in the biggest way.

Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Antidote on November 17, 2013, 08:55:36 PM
To use this passage as some sort of argument that modern day parents should stone their disobedient children is intellectually retarded in the biggest way.

That's the point, that's what the post was about, to point out how ridiculous the bible is. Actually read it, cover to cover, especially the Old Testament, it's packed full of stuff like that. One of the primary reasons I don't take it seriously, I only own a bible because my mother bought me one when I was 8 and still going to church.[1]

EDIT:
The bible endorses:
1) Slavery
2) Rape
3) Murder
4) Genocide
5) Incest
6) Patricide
7) Matricide
8 ) Infanticide
etc
The list goes on, and that's JUST the Old Testament.
 1. no I wasn't religious then
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: jaimehlers on November 17, 2013, 09:01:10 PM
You didn't really address Skeptic's question, did you? You essentially dismissed the perfectly legitimate scenario he raised and chose to instead discuss your own experiences and hopes. Whilst commendable, they are not relevant to the question.
Skeptic's questions were misleading, and his response to the one person who tried to answer them was a huge strawman.  He acted as if G-Roll's comments were indicative of all atheists, rather than of just G-Roll.  You should note that he went from talking about how some parents would kick their children out if they didn't obey the rules (the implication being that he was talking about actual children) to talking about how he didn't understand how atheists could let their grown children live with them if they refused to get a job.

This is something skeptic does quite a bit - responds to a point one way in one post, and a different way in a different post.  He's as slippery as an eel when it comes to trying to pin what he's talking about down.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Antidote on November 17, 2013, 09:05:41 PM
You didn't really address Skeptic's question, did you? You essentially dismissed the perfectly legitimate scenario he raised and chose to instead discuss your own experiences and hopes. Whilst commendable, they are not relevant to the question.
Skeptic's questions were misleading, and his response to the one person who tried to answer them was a huge strawman.  He acted as if G-Roll's comments were indicative of all atheists, rather than of just G-Roll.  You should note that he went from talking about how some parents would kick their children out if they didn't obey the rules (the implication being that he was talking about actual children) to talking about how he didn't understand how atheists could let their grown children live with them if they refused to get a job.

This is something skeptic does quite a bit - responds to a point one way in one post, and a different way in a different post.  He's as slippery as an eel when it comes to trying to pin what he's talking about down.

Essentially there was no real answer? Good thing I wasn't addressing it then, that wouldn't have been fun.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Astreja on November 17, 2013, 09:19:26 PM
Christians can't do that, median. Only God can because he is the Creator and Supreme King.

No, your god is a bully.  "Might makes right" is not a morality worth following.

Quote
Since God is infinite, any sin against Him deserves infinite punishment.

You have this completely and utterly ass-backwards, Skeptic.  The vast scope of an "infinite" being -- omnipotent and/or omnipresent and/or eternal -- suggests that it cannot be harmed by mortals unless it wants to be harmed (in which case, the "sinner" is actually doing its will and is off the hook).  Thus, all "sins" are not infinite, but infinitesimal.

Quote
Since humans are not infinite, sins against us don't merit infinite punishment.

I have news for you, young man:  There is nothing that merits infinite punishment.  Ever.  There are no exceptions to this rule, be one a god or be one a mortal.

To drive this point home once and for all, perhaps you should meditate on this:

Imagine that someone whom you love dearly has offended your god in some way.  Your beloved has been sentenced to eternal punishment.  In your imagination, spend one hour a day watching the torture of this person, without flinching or turning away.  Look at the wounds.  Listen to his or her scream for mercy, and listen for the utter silence and indifference of your god.

Do this for one hour every night at the same time, for 100 nights.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on November 17, 2013, 09:36:33 PM
According to the Bible they should KILL the unruly child

Indeed.

Deuteronomy 21: 18-21
If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:  Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;  And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.  And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.

News flash: We aren't ancient Israelites.
What does that even mean?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on November 17, 2013, 09:39:00 PM


No one claimed that, however it is the position of some theists that the Bible is the inerrant word of god, therefore this passage should be taken seriously.

Of course it should be taken seriously. It's no trivial thing. But taking it seriously does not mean it can be applied out of context. Context matters, whether it suits your favourite arguments or not, and pointing out the context of a biblical passage is not an attempt at avoiding anything - it is an attempt at honesty and truth.

To use this passage as some sort of argument that modern day parents should stone their disobedient children is intellectually retarded in the biggest way.
How,because MAN has declared it? God commands it,man has now declared it obsolete,so the word of God can be ignored if it turns out MAN has better judgement?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: nogodsforme on November 17, 2013, 09:42:00 PM
According to the Bible they should KILL the unruly child

Indeed.

Deuteronomy 21: 18-21
If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:  Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;  And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.  And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.

News flash: We aren't ancient Israelites.
What does that even mean?

It means that the parts of the bible that don't make sense, are too cruel, or seem stupid  because we have different cultural values--those don't apply to us.  &)

Why it would ever be okay for the people to kill unruly children, let a rapist pay the woman's father and walk, enslave other ethnic groups, massacre entire cities, etc, is still not clear.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Betelnut on November 17, 2013, 10:22:51 PM
I've had to struggle most of my life, everything I have I've had to work hard to earn. Right now I'm unemployed in a bad job market, and working on getting back into school. A large portion of what I know I've had to struggle through and learn myself.


And how do you think you'd deal with children who laughed in the face of your hard work and effort, refused to follow your example and showed a willingness to have you support them completely for as long as you were willing?

I agree with others that this is kind of beside the point.  The Bible god isn't punishing people for being kind of lazy.  He/it is punishing people who simply don't believe in him/it.  The unbeliever can be a very upstanding, moral, honest, hardworking, productive person but (according to the Bible) would still burn in a lake of fire.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on November 17, 2013, 10:28:33 PM
As men left the Stone Age god to become more progressive the rule of God did not progress. The rules of the Stone Age god one by one were abandoned. Men did not leave their god behind as they progressed as humanity, just his barbaric and vengeful rules.

 As a society progressed out of the Stone Age your god MM did not. His rules did not change just your view of them. The fact they were barbaric (the rules) and nonsensical you were forced to abandon them MM. You don't have to justify why you abandon the rules but the fact they were so barbaric in the first place
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Astreja on November 17, 2013, 11:02:05 PM
It means that the parts of the bible that don't make sense, are too cruel, or seem stupid  because we have different cultural values--those don't apply to us.  &)

That takes care of most of the Bible, then, because IMO most of it doesn't make sense, is too cruel or seems stupid.  I think we can get by with Matthew 25:35-40, most of Ecclesiastes, a few bits and pieces out of Proverbs, and that clever courtroom "Gotcha!" in the apocryphal Susanna (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susanna_(Book_of_Daniel)) chapter of the book of Daniel.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Boots on November 17, 2013, 11:05:30 PM
To use this passage as some sort of argument that modern day parents should stone their disobedient children is intellectually retarded in the biggest way.

How so?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 17, 2013, 11:10:39 PM
You didn't really address Skeptic's question, did you? You essentially dismissed the perfectly legitimate scenario he raised and chose to instead discuss your own experiences and hopes. Whilst commendable, they are not relevant to the question.
Skeptic's questions were misleading, and his response to the one person who tried to answer them was a huge strawman.  He acted as if G-Roll's comments were indicative of all atheists, rather than of just G-Roll.  You should note that he went from talking about how some parents would kick their children out if they didn't obey the rules (the implication being that he was talking about actual children) to talking about how he didn't understand how atheists could let their grown children live with them if they refused to get a job.

I reviewed the exchange, and to be fair I don't think Skeptic originally intended for his use of 'children' to be confined to those teenaged or younger - I think he meant it to refer more widely to offspring of any age. It appears he overlooked G-Roll's attempt to clarify the age bracket.

In any event, I think the point he is trying to make is clear enough: sometimes a parent might be forced, through a childs own actions, to take action that could appear unloving if viewed out of context.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 17, 2013, 11:15:47 PM
To use this passage as some sort of argument that modern day parents should stone their disobedient children is intellectually retarded in the biggest way.

That's the point, that's what the post was about, to point out how ridiculous the bible is. Actually read it, cover to cover, especially the Old Testament, it's packed full of stuff like that. One of the primary reasons I don't take it seriously, I only own a bible because my mother bought me one when I was 8 and still going to church.[1]

EDIT:
The bible endorses: includes various instances of
1) Slavery
2) Rape
3) Murder
4) Genocide
5) Incest
6) Patricide
7) Matricide
8 ) Infanticide
etc
The list goes on, and that's JUST the Old Testament.
 1. no I wasn't religious then

I have edited your quote to make it more accurate.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 17, 2013, 11:21:45 PM

I have news for you, young man:  There is nothing that merits infinite punishment.  Ever.  There are no exceptions to this rule, be one a god or be one a mortal.

Isn't that just your subjective opinion? If one was to disagree, what do you have in your defence of that statement other than you think nothing merits eternal punishment?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 17, 2013, 11:29:04 PM
According to the Bible they should KILL the unruly child

Indeed.

Deuteronomy 21: 18-21
If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:  Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;  And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.  And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.

News flash: We aren't ancient Israelites.
What does that even mean?

What it means, 12M, is that the commandment quoted was a commandment intended specifically for Israelites living in those times. Therefore, to cite it as an example of what the bible teaches parents to do today is incorrect, no matter how useful an exercise that might be for one hoping to argue that the bible is responsible for various modern acts of violence.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Antidote on November 17, 2013, 11:29:13 PM
To use this passage as some sort of argument that modern day parents should stone their disobedient children is intellectually retarded in the biggest way.

That's the point, that's what the post was about, to point out how ridiculous the bible is. Actually read it, cover to cover, especially the Old Testament, it's packed full of stuff like that. One of the primary reasons I don't take it seriously, I only own a bible because my mother bought me one when I was 8 and still going to church.[1]

EDIT:
The bible endorses: includes various instances of
1) Slavery
2) Rape
3) Murder
4) Genocide
5) Incest
6) Patricide
7) Matricide
8 ) Infanticide
etc
The list goes on, and that's JUST the Old Testament.
 1. no I wasn't religious then

I have edited your quote to make it more accurate.

No, you've edited my post to make it fit your interpretation. The bible demands a most of those things, and gives a way out of punishment for the rest, if that is not a form of endorsement then I don't know what is.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Antidote on November 17, 2013, 11:31:48 PM

I have news for you, young man:  There is nothing that merits infinite punishment.  Ever.  There are no exceptions to this rule, be one a god or be one a mortal.

Isn't that just your subjective opinion? If one was to disagree, what do you have in your defence of that statement other than you think nothing merits eternal punishment?
An infinite punishment for a finite crime is as cruel as it gets. THAT is the defense.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 17, 2013, 11:35:03 PM


No one claimed that, however it is the position of some theists that the Bible is the inerrant word of god, therefore this passage should be taken seriously.

Of course it should be taken seriously. It's no trivial thing. But taking it seriously does not mean it can be applied out of context. Context matters, whether it suits your favourite arguments or not, and pointing out the context of a biblical passage is not an attempt at avoiding anything - it is an attempt at honesty and truth.

To use this passage as some sort of argument that modern day parents should stone their disobedient children is intellectually retarded in the biggest way.
How,because MAN has declared it? God commands it,man has now declared it obsolete,so the word of God can be ignored if it turns out MAN has better judgement?

It has nothing to do with man usurping Gods commands. It has everything to do with determining who a command was intended for.

Can you present a reasoned argument to support the notion that the command in question was intended by God to apply outside of the Israelites living at the time the laws were given?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Antidote on November 17, 2013, 11:39:05 PM
It has nothing to do with man usurping Gods commands. It has everything to do with determining who a command was intended for.

Can you present a reasoned argument to support the notion that the command in question was intended by God to apply outside of the Israelites living at the time the laws were given?

Then we can discard 80% of the bible on that premise alone, as a large portion of the bible targets Israelites specifically. Thank you for giving us yet another way to discard the bible.

We can present a reasoned argument, but by your own admission it's unnecessary.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 17, 2013, 11:39:39 PM
According to the Bible they should KILL the unruly child

Indeed.

Deuteronomy 21: 18-21
If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:  Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;  And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.  And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.

News flash: We aren't ancient Israelites.
What does that even mean?

It means that the parts of the bible that don't make sense, are too cruel, or seem stupid  because we have different cultural values--those don't apply to us.  &)

No, it really doesn't. I know you're more than intelligent enough to understand context. Are you sure you give the weird and horrible OT passages honest appraisal with due consideration for textual and historical context?


Why it would ever be okay for the people to kill unruly children, let a rapist pay the woman's father and walk, enslave other ethnic groups, massacre entire cities, etc, is still not clear.

And it may never be entirely clear. However, biblical scholars offer some very reasoned explanations of all these difficult passages. Would you like me to find some relevant links?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Antidote on November 17, 2013, 11:43:20 PM

Why it would ever be okay for the people to kill unruly children, let a rapist pay the woman's father and walk, enslave other ethnic groups, massacre entire cities, etc, is still not clear.

And it may never be entirely clear. However, biblical scholars offer some very reasoned explanations of all these difficult passages. Would you like me to find some relevant links?

This only shows how weak your position really is, because all of those "biblical scholars" provide some very poor reasoning, and are usually based on a false premise which can be discarded out of hand.

Please provide links, I'd love to read them to make sure I'm correct, if I'm not, I'll retract what I've just said in this post.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on November 17, 2013, 11:46:18 PM
According to the Bible they should KILL the unruly child

Indeed.

Deuteronomy 21: 18-21
If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:  Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;  And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.  And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.

News flash: We aren't ancient Israelites.
What does that even mean?

What it means, 12M, is that the commandment quoted was a commandment intended specifically for Israelites living in those times. Therefore, to cite it as an example of what the bible teaches parents to do today is incorrect, no matter how useful an exercise that might be for one hoping to argue that the bible is responsible for various modern acts of violence.
So God inspired writings and the values therein can be abandoned as time passes,or are abandoned by CIVILIZED people? Which one is it? This has to be one of your least thought out responses. You say writings and the RULES in the Bible no longer apply to modern humanity but to a small number of what can now be considered cave people they were written "for"?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on November 17, 2013, 11:52:31 PM


No one claimed that, however it is the position of some theists that the Bible is the inerrant word of god, therefore this passage should be taken seriously.

Of course it should be taken seriously. It's no trivial thing. But taking it seriously does not mean it can be applied out of context. Context matters, whether it suits your favourite arguments or not, and pointing out the context of a biblical passage is not an attempt at avoiding anything - it is an attempt at honesty and truth.

To use this passage as some sort of argument that modern day parents should stone their disobedient children is intellectually retarded in the biggest way.
How,because MAN has declared it? God commands it,man has now declared it obsolete,so the word of God can be ignored if it turns out MAN has better judgement?

It has nothing to do with man usurping Gods commands. It has everything to do with determining who a command was intended for.

Can you present a reasoned argument to support the notion that the command in question was intended by God to apply outside of the Israelites living at the time the laws were given?
The WORD of God like God himself is unchanging,otherwise you could abandon the OT and the NT (which you HAVE)and the rules held within them. The opinion you HAVE is just that,because the rules can't be applied to a civil society. GOD has NOT changed his rule YOU have. Where is the THIRD testament telling you the rules no longer apply....The book of Mormon?

 A rule from God is a rule no matter who it was written for,like I said God did not change you did.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 17, 2013, 11:53:45 PM
And how do you think you'd deal with children who laughed in the face of your hard work and effort, refused to follow your example and showed a willingness to have you support them completely for as long as you were willing?



I agree with others that this is kind of beside the point. I believe it makes a valid point, as it demonstrates that it is possible to do everything within reason to help somebody and still have them throw it back in your face time after time.

I believe it makes a valid point, as it demonstrates that it is possible to do everything within reason to help somebody and still have them throw it back in your face time after time.
 


The Bible god isn't punishing people for being kind of lazy.  He/it is punishing people who simply don't believe in him/it.  The unbeliever can be a very upstanding, moral, honest, hardworking, productive person but (according to the Bible) would still burn in a lake of fire.

You have this wrong. Those who end up eternally separated from God (Spiritual death - Hell) are not there for not believing in God. They are there because they rejected the only possible way to be made right with God - Jesus.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 17, 2013, 11:56:15 PM
As men left the Stone Age god to become more progressive the rule of God did not progress. The rules of the Stone Age god one by one were abandoned. Men did not leave their god behind as they progressed as humanity, just his barbaric and vengeful rules.

 As a society progressed out of the Stone Age your god MM did not. His rules did not change just your view of them. The fact they were barbaric (the rules) and nonsensical you were forced to abandon them MM. You don't have to justify why you abandon the rules but the fact they were so barbaric in the first place

I flatly reject this. The role of Jesus in fulfilling the law is quite clear to me, even if it isn't to you.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on November 17, 2013, 11:56:37 PM
The Jesus card again.... does this mean God failed humanity the first few times he killed them off? or was it a convenient way to include ALL?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Antidote on November 17, 2013, 11:57:56 PM
As men left the Stone Age god to become more progressive the rule of God did not progress. The rules of the Stone Age god one by one were abandoned. Men did not leave their god behind as they progressed as humanity, just his barbaric and vengeful rules.

 As a society progressed out of the Stone Age your god MM did not. His rules did not change just your view of them. The fact they were barbaric (the rules) and nonsensical you were forced to abandon them MM. You don't have to justify why you abandon the rules but the fact they were so barbaric in the first place

I flatly reject this. The role of Jesus in fulfilling the law is quite clear to me, even if it isn't to you.
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. (NIV, Matthew 5:17–18)

Is this what you're referring to? If so, it's not exactly backing up your claims.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 17, 2013, 11:58:00 PM
To use this passage as some sort of argument that modern day parents should stone their disobedient children is intellectually retarded in the biggest way.

How so?

I think you'll find I have covered this in replies to other in this thraed. If you would like me to address it further, please let me know.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on November 17, 2013, 11:59:28 PM
As men left the Stone Age god to become more progressive the rule of God did not progress. The rules of the Stone Age god one by one were abandoned. Men did not leave their god behind as they progressed as humanity, just his barbaric and vengeful rules.

 As a society progressed out of the Stone Age your god MM did not. His rules did not change just your view of them. The fact they were barbaric (the rules) and nonsensical you were forced to abandon them MM. You don't have to justify why you abandon the rules but the fact they were so barbaric in the first place

I flatly reject this. The role of Jesus in fulfilling the law is quite clear to me, even if it isn't to you.
Who cares what YOU flatly reject.....Jesus was just a way for early "Christians" to include every other creed race or color in the punishment of "their" god.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Antidote on November 18, 2013, 12:03:02 AM
To use this passage as some sort of argument that modern day parents should stone their disobedient children is intellectually retarded in the biggest way.

How so?

I think you'll find I have covered this in replies to other in this thraed. If you would like me to address it further, please let me know.

When? I've looked through your posts but haven't found where you actually addressed this.
Please post a link.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on November 18, 2013, 12:07:48 AM
So what rules still apply and what rules are no longer valid? any?  A book written for stone people,like the God it was written about,was abandoned LONG ago,you sir are living proof MM. Any rule you feel no longer applies,magically no longer applies,and any rule you feel still applies,does. SPAG at its finest.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 18, 2013, 12:08:31 AM
To use this passage as some sort of argument that modern day parents should stone their disobedient children is intellectually retarded in the biggest way.

That's the point, that's what the post was about, to point out how ridiculous the bible is. Actually read it, cover to cover, especially the Old Testament, it's packed full of stuff like that. One of the primary reasons I don't take it seriously, I only own a bible because my mother bought me one when I was 8 and still going to church.[1]

EDIT:
The bible endorses: includes various instances of
1) Slavery
2) Rape
3) Murder
4) Genocide
5) Incest
6) Patricide
7) Matricide
8 ) Infanticide
etc
The list goes on, and that's JUST the Old Testament.
 1. no I wasn't religious then

I have edited your quote to make it more accurate.

No, you've edited my post to make it fit your interpretation. The bible demands a most of those things, and gives a way out of punishment for the rest, if that is not a form of endorsement then I don't know what is.

Bold mine. Demands them of who? If you think those things are demanded of anybody other than the original recipients of the laws, please explain to me why. Make a case for it.

Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 18, 2013, 12:09:59 AM

I have news for you, young man:  There is nothing that merits infinite punishment.  Ever.  There are no exceptions to this rule, be one a god or be one a mortal.

Isn't that just your subjective opinion? If one was to disagree, what do you have in your defence of that statement other than you think nothing merits eternal punishment?
An infinite punishment for a finite crime is as cruel as it gets. THAT is the defense.

What if someome disagreed with you? What do you have to defend your position, other than your opinion? That was the crux of my question. You seem to have overlooked it.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on November 18, 2013, 12:13:04 AM
MM why does Christianity apply to everybody and not just followers of the Christian God? You say so? Saying rules God set out only apply to the people it was written for,then Christians are the only ones it applies to now right?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 18, 2013, 12:14:47 AM
It has nothing to do with man usurping Gods commands. It has everything to do with determining who a command was intended for.

Can you present a reasoned argument to support the notion that the command in question was intended by God to apply outside of the Israelites living at the time the laws were given?

Then we can discard 80% of the bible on that premise alone, as a large portion of the bible targets Israelites specifically. Thank you for giving us yet another way to discard the bible.

We can present a reasoned argument, but by your own admission it's unnecessary.

You seem to have a very basic understanding of the bible. The OT laws are not intended to be followed any more, this is true. That does not mean it is possible to 'discard them', as in to ignore their existence. Their existence serves a very important purpose. Do you have any ideas on what that purpose might be?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on November 18, 2013, 12:14:54 AM

I have news for you, young man:  There is nothing that merits infinite punishment.  Ever.  There are no exceptions to this rule, be one a god or be one a mortal.

Isn't that just your subjective opinion? If one was to disagree, what do you have in your defence of that statement other than you think nothing merits eternal punishment?
An infinite punishment for a finite crime is as cruel as it gets. THAT is the defense.

What if someome disagreed with you? What do you have to defend your position, other than your opinion? That was the crux of my question. You seem to have overlooked it.
I can commit any crime I please as long as I come around to loving Jesus in the end,and I accept him.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Antidote on November 18, 2013, 12:15:53 AM

I have news for you, young man:  There is nothing that merits infinite punishment.  Ever.  There are no exceptions to this rule, be one a god or be one a mortal.

Isn't that just your subjective opinion? If one was to disagree, what do you have in your defence of that statement other than you think nothing merits eternal punishment?
An infinite punishment for a finite crime is as cruel as it gets. THAT is the defense.

What if someome disagreed with you? What do you have to defend your position, other than your opinion? That was the crux of my question. You seem to have overlooked it.
If they disagreed with me, that's fine. It just goes to show that it's inherently subjective, and any claims to objective morality is doomed to fail. Thus an infinite punishment for a finite crime is not only cruel, but pointless.

EDIT:
Also any claims of objective morality are defeated anyway, by the very loophole provided by biblegod: Jesus.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on November 18, 2013, 12:18:47 AM
It has nothing to do with man usurping Gods commands. It has everything to do with determining who a command was intended for.

Can you present a reasoned argument to support the notion that the command in question was intended by God to apply outside of the Israelites living at the time the laws were given?

Then we can discard 80% of the bible on that premise alone, as a large portion of the bible targets Israelites specifically. Thank you for giving us yet another way to discard the bible.

We can present a reasoned argument, but by your own admission it's unnecessary.

You seem to have a very basic understanding of the bible. The OT laws are not intended to be followed any more, this is true. That does not mean it is possible to 'discard them', as in to ignore their existence. Their existence serves a very important purpose. Do you have any ideas on what that purpose might be?
Can you back that up with passages? Every culture has lessons about life in stories or writings. They are pretty much clear and not nearly as violent or vulgar as God commands. This fact is the only reason they were not followed after men came out of the stone age.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on November 18, 2013, 12:29:44 AM
Antidote,Jesus excuses you from infinite punishment for a finite crime. This is why they can disobey the rules God has set out for them or the original people he was God for. Remember when you read the OT this particular god,out of a Pantheon of many gods chose these people. There is more than one god MM just can't admit it.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Antidote on November 18, 2013, 12:31:06 AM
Antidote,Jesus excuses you from infinite punishment for a finite crime. This is why they can disobey the rules God has set out for them or the original people he was God for. Remember when you read the OT this particular god out of a Pantheon of gods chose these people. There is more than one god MM just can't admit it.
True, there is that. Thanks for reminding me.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Aaron123 on November 18, 2013, 12:31:56 AM
You seem to have a very basic understanding of the bible. The OT laws are not intended to be followed any more, this is true. That does not mean it is possible to 'discard them', as in to ignore their existence. Their existence serves a very important purpose. Do you have any ideas on what that purpose might be?

The OT laws are not to be followed anymore.  I see.  Does that include the ten commandments?  They are OT laws as well.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Antidote on November 18, 2013, 12:33:38 AM
You seem to have a very basic understanding of the bible. The OT laws are not intended to be followed any more, this is true. That does not mean it is possible to 'discard them', as in to ignore their existence. Their existence serves a very important purpose. Do you have any ideas on what that purpose might be?

The OT laws are not to be followed anymore.  I see.  Does that include the ten commandments?  They are OT laws as well.
Isn't that passage about "man laying with man as one would lie with a woman" in the OT? Or am I mistaken.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on November 18, 2013, 12:38:10 AM
Guys,Guys,Guys..... only the Laws from the OT that MM feels apply,actually apply. Not the silly ones like cutting your hair or tattoo's or killing gays and unruly teens. The rest of the rules,they use the get out of hell free card that Jesus gave them

 How about it MM do all the rules of the OT only apply to the original people God intended it for? As you stated in an above post?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Antidote on November 18, 2013, 12:40:44 AM
Guys,Guys,Guys..... only the Laws from the OT that MM feels apply,actually apply. Not the silly ones like cutting your hair or tattoo's or killing gays and unruly teens. The rest of the rules,they use the get out of hell free card that Jesus gave them

 How about it MM do all the rules of the OT only apply to the original people God intended it for?
Isn't cherry picking fun?
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_ixTeMLqrHf8/ShW_rUkOb1I/AAAAAAAAAGM/54R54OVNRYQ/s1600/IMG_3179.JPG)
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Aaron123 on November 18, 2013, 12:48:07 AM
Isn't that passage about "man laying with man as one would lie with a woman" in the OT? Or am I mistaken.

Indeed.  (the brick testament is great for looking up these things)

Leviticus 18:22
Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination

Leviticus 20:13
If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.


Good thing then, that Jesus rendered those rules null and void.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on November 18, 2013, 12:48:19 AM
MM saying the OT laws only applied to the people he intended them for (his original followers,the Jews) can not be backed away from now.  How on earth do you now retract that statement?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on November 18, 2013, 12:51:14 AM
To use this passage as some sort of argument that modern day parents should stone their disobedient children is intellectually retarded in the biggest way.

That's the point, that's what the post was about, to point out how ridiculous the bible is. Actually read it, cover to cover, especially the Old Testament, it's packed full of stuff like that. One of the primary reasons I don't take it seriously, I only own a bible because my mother bought me one when I was 8 and still going to church.[1]

EDIT:
The bible endorses: includes various instances of
1) Slavery
2) Rape
3) Murder
4) Genocide
5) Incest
6) Patricide
7) Matricide
8 ) Infanticide
etc
The list goes on, and that's JUST the Old Testament.
 1. no I wasn't religious then

I have edited your quote to make it more accurate.

No, you've edited my post to make it fit your interpretation. The bible demands a most of those things, and gives a way out of punishment for the rest, if that is not a form of endorsement then I don't know what is.

Bold mine. Demands them of who? If you think those things are demanded of anybody other than the original recipients of the laws, please explain to me why. Make a case for it.
here it is in case you forgot
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Antidote on November 18, 2013, 12:55:24 AM
No, you've edited my post to make it fit your interpretation. The bible demands a most of those things, and gives a way out of punishment for the rest, if that is not a form of endorsement then I don't know what is.

Bold mine. Demands them of who? If you think those things are demanded of anybody other than the original recipients of the laws, please explain to me why. Make a case for it.

I flip that question and return it to you, why doesn't gods word apply to people equally? You've basically said that we can disregard the entire bible since it "doesn't apply to us."

But for the sake of honesty, here my case: If gods word does not apply equally, why abide by it at all? If you are able to cherry pick and only follow laws that you're comfortable with, why abide by them at all?

You've just killed your biblical morality inadvertently, how do you wish to recover it?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 18, 2013, 12:59:23 AM

Why it would ever be okay for the people to kill unruly children, let a rapist pay the woman's father and walk, enslave other ethnic groups, massacre entire cities, etc, is still not clear.

And it may never be entirely clear. However, biblical scholars offer some very reasoned explanations of all these difficult passages. Would you like me to find some relevant links?

This only shows how weak your position really is, because all of those "biblical scholars" provide some very poor reasoning, and are usually based on a false premise which can be discarded out of hand.

Please provide links, I'd love to read them to make sure I'm correct, if I'm not, I'll retract what I've just said in this post.


Why it would ever be okay for the people to kill unruly children, let a rapist pay the woman's father and walk, enslave other ethnic groups, massacre entire cities, etc, is still not clear.

And it may never be entirely clear. However, biblical scholars offer some very reasoned explanations of all these difficult passages. Would you like me to find some relevant links?

This only shows how weak your position really is, because all of those "biblical scholars" provide some very poor reasoning, and are usually based on a false premise which can be discarded out of hand.

Please provide links, I'd love to read them to make sure I'm correct, if I'm not, I'll retract what I've just said in this post.

Certainly. Lets look at the Deuteronomy 21 cited earlier in the thread:

https://bible.org/seriespage/deuteronomy-21



Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on November 18, 2013, 01:01:45 AM
So this only proves that BibleGod is interested in the Jews? or that over time the word of God was cleaned up and modernized?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 18, 2013, 01:05:24 AM
I can't post further today. And I may need to be selective in further responses. They're mounting up too quickly. I'll do what i can.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on November 18, 2013, 01:07:15 AM
I can't post further today. And I may need to be selective in further responses. They're mounting up too quickly. I'll do what i can.
You are screwed,is that what you are saying?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on November 18, 2013, 01:11:52 AM
Isn't that passage about "man laying with man as one would lie with a woman" in the OT? Or am I mistaken.

Indeed.  (the brick testament is great for looking up these things)

Leviticus 18:22
Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination

Leviticus 20:13
If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.


Good thing then, that Jesus rendered those rules null and void.
Null and void if you accept and love Jesus?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Aaron123 on November 18, 2013, 01:29:40 AM
Null and void if you accept and love Jesus?

Somehow, they became null and void when Jesus got hammered up,which was his plan all along.  We're suppose to accept and love him for taking down the rules that he himself established.  So... he made up a bunch of rules he intended to have a limited lifetime... and then didn't list which ones are still suppose to be in effect.  I still don't know if I'm allowed to boil a baby goat in its mother's milk.   :-\
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on November 18, 2013, 01:35:43 AM
It seems "Biblical knowledge" was all a bluff by the atheists.

The 10 commandments are followed today because Jesus summed them up by saying, "Love God with all your heart and love your neighbor as you love yourself." This is the summation of the 10 commandments.

Also, homosexuality is still a sin because Paul spoke against it and his writings are inspired by God. Ergo, homosexuality is still off the table.

You guys claim you used to be Christians and you are asking very basic questions!
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Aaron123 on November 18, 2013, 01:40:50 AM
It seems "Biblical knowledge" was all a bluff by the atheists.

The 10 commandments are followed today because Jesus summed them up by saying, "Love God with all your heart and love your neighbor as you love yourself." This is the summation of the 10 commandments.

The ten commandments says nothing about loving god, or loving others, at least, not without special conditions attached to them.

As a christian, you should know this.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on November 18, 2013, 01:45:11 AM
It seems "Biblical knowledge" was all a bluff by the atheists.

The 10 commandments are followed today because Jesus summed them up by saying, "Love God with all your heart and love your neighbor as you love yourself." This is the summation of the 10 commandments.

Also, homosexuality is still a sin because Paul spoke against it and his writings are inspired by God. Ergo, homosexuality is still off the table.

You guys claim you used to be Christians and you are asking very basic questions!
That has nothing to do with the 10......he was just preaching
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on November 18, 2013, 01:49:17 AM
The ten commandments says nothing about loving god, or loving others.

As a christian, you should know this.

I see I  have to break it down to the absolute "bare bones" to get the point across.

Commandments 1-4: All deal with loving God.

Commandment 5: Honor father and mother. This deals with loving others. You will honor your parents because you love them.

Commandment 6: Don't kill. This deals with loving others. You won't kill if you love someone.

Commandment 7: No adultery. This deals with loving others. You won't commit adultery if you love the person.

Commandment 8: Don't lie. This deals with loving others. You won't lie if you love others.

Commandments 9-10: Don't steal from your neighbor. This deals with loving others. You won't steal from them if you love them.

This is not rocket science.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Antidote on November 18, 2013, 01:49:21 AM
It seems "Biblical knowledge" was all a bluff by the atheists.

The 10 commandments are followed today because Jesus summed them up by saying, "Love God with all your heart and love your neighbor as you love yourself." This is the summation of the 10 commandments.

Also, homosexuality is still a sin because Paul spoke against it and his writings are inspired by God. Ergo, homosexuality is still off the table.

You guys claim you used to be Christians and you are asking very basic questions!
I never claimed to be christian, and the reason we are asking basic questions is because you can't seem to answer even them coherently.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Commandments#Enumeration_of_the_Ten_Commandments

http://www.godstenlaws.com/ten-commandments/#.Uom5CZxpzeM

I reject 1-4, due to them being an ultimatum. Giving an ultimatum is not requesting love.

EDIT:
The rest pertain to common traits in a society, murder and theft, tend to have a negative affect on society.
The parents thing is neither here nor there.
10 is really odd, so I reject it as well
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Aaron123 on November 18, 2013, 01:57:17 AM
I see I  have to break it down to the absolute "bare bones" to get the point across.

Lets look at those 10.

Quote
And God spoke all these words:

2 “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery.

3 “You shall have no other gods before[a] me.

Nothing about love.  Just god barking orders.


Quote
4 “You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. 5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, 6 but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments.

Now here, the word "love" is used, but it's very conditional.  God makes clear that he is "jealous" (of what?  Idol statues?), and punish generations of people for worshiping idols.  His "love" is only for those that obey his rules (the same rules that christians now say is null and void, so where does that leave them?).


Quote
7 “You shall not misuse the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not hold anyone guiltless who misuses his name.

8 “Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is a sabbath to the Lord your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your male or female servant, nor your animals, nor any foreigner residing in your towns. 11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.

Again, nothing about love.  Just obedience.


Quote
12 “Honor your father and your mother, so that you may live long in the land the Lord your God is giving you.

This one is almost there.  But it doesn't say "honor your parents because you love them".  Instead, it tells you to honor them for personal benefits.



Quote
13 “You shall not murder.

14 “You shall not commit adultery.

15 “You shall not steal.

16 “You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor.

17 “You shall not covet your neighbor’s house. You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or his male or female servant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor.”

Once more, nothing is being said about love.  It's all orders.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Nam on November 18, 2013, 02:07:36 AM
I know I am late to this discussion so my comment is directed at the OP:

I recently watched a German film called "Das weiße Band (2009)[1]", and it took place a year or so before WWI. There were two interconnecting scenes where a father (who was also a pastor or priest) was telling a story (a huge lie) to his son about how masturbation causes death. Frightening his son, horribly to tears, how if he kept masturbating he'd end up dead. At the same time he was telling his son this, he asked his son not to lie to him while he obviously was lying to him. He could have said that the god of the Bible would send you to hell if he kept masturbating (keeping with the mythos of Christianity) instead he chose to lie and tell him a story about another boy the year previous who died of masturbation. I thought it hypocritical. In the connecting scene you see the same boy tied down to his bed to prevent him from masturbating.

To me this is torture. The same basic scenario of the OP. The "father" obviously loves his son, all his children but he punishes them not in a way that teaches them to learn from their mistake (if it is a mistake in the first place), or even explains the sexual emotions (physical, or otherwise) he's going through at his age but punishes him for what comes natural for all young boys, including himself at a young age.

This is is my viewpoint of Biblegod: tells you what to do, or not to do and instead of teaching you to do better when you fail instead tortures you until you do it its way. Which, in a way does "teach" the person something: don't do things my way, I will torture you until you do.

Not really a lesson to learn. It's barbaric and cruel. That's Biblegod  for you. It loves you, especially when it tortures you.

-Nam
 1. English title: The White Ribbon
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Ataraxia on November 18, 2013, 02:33:13 AM
Commandment 6: Don't kill. This deals with loving others. You won't kill if you love someone.

Hmmm, your God doesn't exactly lead a very good example of this, does he?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on November 18, 2013, 02:52:30 AM
Hmmm, your God doesn't exactly lead a very good example of this, does he?

You are confusing "punishing the evil doers" with "killing."
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Antidote on November 18, 2013, 03:02:05 AM
Hmmm, your God doesn't exactly lead a very good example of this, does he?

You are confusing "punishing the evil doers" with "killing."

At this point I fail to see the difference with what Biblegod has done.

He's flooded the entire world, killing all but a handful on an impossibly big boat, for which we have no evidence.
He sacrificed himself, to himself, for himself.
He's jealous.
He nearly caused a father to kill his own son, then stopped him at the last second, saying it was some kind of test.
He demands us to give him love and praise he doesn't deserve.

Also, he plagued a city in egypt, killing all the first born sons.
This god is not one I would ever worship, respect, or even believe exists. Nothing this evil can be real.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Ataraxia on November 18, 2013, 03:03:36 AM
Hmmm, your God doesn't exactly lead a very good example of this, does he?

You are confusing "punishing the evil doers" with "killing."

Really, you don't have to keep making excuses, you know.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Ron Jeremy on November 18, 2013, 03:19:12 AM
I've had to struggle most of my life, everything I have I've had to work hard to earn. Right now I'm unemployed in a bad job market, and working on getting back into school. A large portion of what I know I've had to struggle through and learn myself.


And how do you think you'd deal with children who laughed in the face of your hard work and effort, refused to follow your example and showed a willingness to have you support them completely for as long as you were willing?

For goodness sake; I despair at the social ineptitude of Christians. If my children laughed in my face I WOULDN'T BURN AND TORTURE THEM IN AGONY FOR ETERNITY. I WOULDN'T BURN OR TORTURE THEM AT ALL. Is this idea really so hard for Christians to understand?? Is your moral compass so corrupted by the poison of your religion that you think a suitable punishment for lack of respect is eternal torture?????

It is quite obvious that our morals do not come from this god, even if he did exist.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Antidote on November 18, 2013, 03:27:15 AM
Since this is relevant to this particular discussion, and I agree with all of his points I'll post this here:
We were going on the assumption that God is as real as the sun. If we take God's existence as a given, then wouldn't the fact that he created us and created all life be reason enough to worship Him and love Him?

After all, why spit in the face of someone who created all life? It seems hypocritical to enjoy all the wonderful things that God gave us while cursing Him.

If he is real and our god, he isn't very good at it. If he is real, I have no respect for him.

He creates a world where he allows us to treat each other like sh*t and doesn't care at all and we're supposed to get all thanky on the dude? I don't think so. He made us vastly inferior to him (which is fine) and then lets us go out on our own simply because a couple of newbies couldn't follow his rules/resisit the enticement. So he punishes all, including his own kid, because it is more important to him that the blame gets passed on for generations than it is to correct the situation in the first place.

He choses some people, kills others. His lessons don't stick, his standards don't work, his instructions are open to interpretation, his threats are traumatizing and his emphasis on faith is effectively a ban on people such as myself who have no capability to follow blindly. He says he loves us but he depends on the likes of Pat Robertson and other cold hearted money grubbers to pass on his words. He seems to value being worshipped over all other activities and he has no sensitivity to the wants and needs of the humans that he designed to have, get this, wants and needs.

He values us only for our obedience. He lets us kill each other over questions of morality instead of making right and wrong clear enough to stop the fighting.

Yea, yea ,yea, free will and all that crap. Which is a dumb f**k way to run a planet. When there is only one way to do it right, it isn't free will. If I have to do it his way or fry.  Under those conditions, it is imposed will. Yes or no is a choice when one is asked if they want a cookie. It is not a choice when one is asked if they want their eternity to be idyllic or overly toasty.

If he made us and can't allow for our various shortcomings, fruit-caused or otherwise, if he made us and then decided to sit back and watch what happens, then he doesn't love a thing about us. He isn't going to love me, an atheist, and he isn't going to love believers such as yourself, because you're less fun than I am. So for you to get all lovey-dovey with the dude, and adore him like a Beiber fan in hopes of getting an autograph some day, is a total misuse of human emotion. When your strongest attachment in life is to a being that either doesn't exist or doesn't give a crap is way too sad.

You can call it love. But it isn't. If he is real, it is indifference, pure and simple. At best, it is indifference. If he is real, it may even be distain. Perhaps even hatred. But it isn't really love. The love I have for others and that they have for me feels completely different. You need to learn the difference.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 18, 2013, 03:52:02 AM
I've had to struggle most of my life, everything I have I've had to work hard to earn. Right now I'm unemployed in a bad job market, and working on getting back into school. A large portion of what I know I've had to struggle through and learn myself.


And how do you think you'd deal with children who laughed in the face of your hard work and effort, refused to follow your example and showed a willingness to have you support them completely for as long as you were willing?

For goodness sake; I despair at the social ineptitude of Christians. If my children laughed in my face I WOULDN'T BURN AND TORTURE THEM IN AGONY FOR ETERNITY. I WOULDN'T BURN OR TORTURE THEM AT ALL. Is this idea really so hard for Christians to understand?? Is your moral compass so corrupted by the poison of your religion that you think a suitable punishment for lack of respect is eternal torture?????

It is quite obvious that our morals do not come from this god, even if he did exist.

Did you have an answer for the question there, champ? I wouldn't burn or torture them either. But I'm interested in what you would do if your children grew up and refused to get a job or contribute in any way. Would you take any action?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 18, 2013, 03:56:46 AM
I can't post further today. And I may need to be selective in further responses. They're mounting up too quickly. I'll do what i can.
You are screwed,is that what you are saying?

Poor form and disrespectful, I have answered your many questions directly and rather promptly today. I can't spend all my day on here, as much as I'd happily do it some days.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 18, 2013, 04:02:21 AM
I know I am late to this discussion so my comment is directed at the OP:

I recently watched a German film called "Das weiße Band (2009)[1]", and it took place a year or so before WWI. There were two interconnecting scenes where a father (who was also a pastor or priest) was telling a story (a huge lie) to his son about how masturbation causes death. Frightening his son, horribly to tears, how if he kept masturbating he'd end up dead. At the same time he was telling his son this, he asked his son not to lie to him while he obviously was lying to him. He could have said that the god of the Bible would send you to hell if he kept masturbating (keeping with the mythos of Christianity) instead he chose to lie and tell him a story about another boy the year previous who died of masturbation. I thought it hypocritical. In the connecting scene you see the same boy tied down to his bed to prevent him from masturbating.

To me this is torture. The same basic scenario of the OP. The "father" obviously loves his son, all his children but he punishes them not in a way that teaches them to learn from their mistake (if it is a mistake in the first place), or even explains the sexual emotions (physical, or otherwise) he's going through at his age but punishes him for what comes natural for all young boys, including himself at a young age.

This is is my viewpoint of Biblegod: tells you what to do, or not to do and instead of teaching you to do better when you fail instead tortures you until you do it its way. Which, in a way does "teach" the person something: don't do things my way, I will torture you until you do.

Not really a lesson to learn. It's barbaric and cruel. That's Biblegod  for you. It loves you, especially when it tortures you.

-Nam
 1. English title: The White Ribbon

Whilst I disagree with this, and most of your points of view generally, I have noticed a bit of a change in your posting style of late. A bit more mature-minded and considered.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 18, 2013, 04:16:50 AM
As men left the Stone Age god to become more progressive the rule of God did not progress. The rules of the Stone Age god one by one were abandoned. Men did not leave their god behind as they progressed as humanity, just his barbaric and vengeful rules.

 As a society progressed out of the Stone Age your god MM did not. His rules did not change just your view of them. The fact they were barbaric (the rules) and nonsensical you were forced to abandon them MM. You don't have to justify why you abandon the rules but the fact they were so barbaric in the first place

I flatly reject this. The role of Jesus in fulfilling the law is quite clear to me, even if it isn't to you.
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. (NIV, Matthew 5:17–18)

Is this what you're referring to? If so, it's not exactly backing up your claims.

They're not just my claims. And those verses confirm that Jesus came to fulfil the law. The law remained in place right up until everything was accomplished. What did Jesus say on the cross?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Add Homonym on November 18, 2013, 04:20:30 AM
This is is my viewpoint of Biblegod: tells you what to do, or not to do and instead of teaching you to do better when you fail instead tortures you until you do it its way. Which, in a way does "teach" the person something: don't do things my way, I will torture you until you do.

Not really a lesson to learn. It's barbaric and cruel. That's Biblegod  for you. It loves you, especially when it tortures you.

-Nam

If only the signs were so clear. I could find God, by having a wank, and he would torture me. Proof of God.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 18, 2013, 04:26:21 AM
MM why does Christianity apply to everybody and not just followers of the Christian God? You say so? Saying rules God set out only apply to the people it was written for,then Christians are the only ones it applies to now right?

That isn't making a lot of sense to me sorry. I truly don't understand what you're asking.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 18, 2013, 04:31:22 AM

I have news for you, young man:  There is nothing that merits infinite punishment.  Ever.  There are no exceptions to this rule, be one a god or be one a mortal.

Isn't that just your subjective opinion? If one was to disagree, what do you have in your defence of that statement other than you think nothing merits eternal punishment?
An infinite punishment for a finite crime is as cruel as it gets. THAT is the defense.

What if someome disagreed with you? What do you have to defend your position, other than your opinion? That was the crux of my question. You seem to have overlooked it.
I can commit any crime I please as long as I come around to loving Jesus in the end,and I accept him.

Do you have a problem with the idea of God offering forgiveness to those who are truly repentant?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 18, 2013, 04:44:40 AM

I have news for you, young man:  There is nothing that merits infinite punishment.  Ever.  There are no exceptions to this rule, be one a god or be one a mortal.

Isn't that just your subjective opinion? If one was to disagree, what do you have in your defence of that statement other than you think nothing merits eternal punishment?
An infinite punishment for a finite crime is as cruel as it gets. THAT is the defense.

What if someome disagreed with you? What do you have to defend your position, other than your opinion? That was the crux of my question. You seem to have overlooked it.
If they disagreed with me, that's fine.

Well, I'm confused. It's as cruel as it gets... but not if someone disagrees. In that case, its....what?


It just goes to show that it's inherently subjective, and any claims to objective morality is doomed to fail.

I don't think it shows anything of the sort.


EDIT:
Also any claims of objective morality are defeated anyway, by the very loophole provided by biblegod: Jesus.

What?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Ataraxia on November 18, 2013, 04:52:12 AM
What if someome disagreed with you? What do you have to defend your position, other than your opinion? That was the crux of my question. You seem to have overlooked it.
If they disagreed with me, that's fine.

Well, I'm confused. It's as cruel as it gets... but not if someone disagrees. In that case, its....what?

Try reading for comprehension. Antidote has said it's fine if someone disagree with him, not that it's suddenly not as cruel as it gets if someone disagrees with him, as if someone disagreeing with him would change his opinion.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Add Homonym on November 18, 2013, 04:58:06 AM
The ten commandments says nothing about loving god, or loving others.

As a christian, you should know this.

I see I  have to break it down to the absolute "bare bones" to get the point across.

Commandments 1-4: All deal with loving God.

Commandment 5: Honor father and mother. This deals with loving others. You will honor your parents because you love them.

Commandment 6: Don't kill. This deals with loving others. You won't kill if you love someone.

Commandment 7: No adultery. This deals with loving others. You won't commit adultery if you love the person.

Commandment 8: Don't lie. This deals with loving others. You won't lie if you love others.

Commandments 9-10: Don't steal from your neighbor. This deals with loving others. You won't steal from them if you love them.

This is not rocket science.

That's pretty distorted, for someone who claims to know the Bible. "Love thy neighbour" comes from Lev 19:18, and Deuteronomy 6:4-5.

It's a bit hyperbolic to say that you love someone, if you don't kill them. By that criterion, I love Skep. You may merely tolerate them - like your parents.

In the case of adultery, the Jews allowed for divorce and polygamy. The Jesus puritans changed all that, so you couldn't lovingly divorce someone. Adultery laws in the 10 comms and the rest of the law, are purely about property. My wife is my property. You will notice that if you work through the laws, there is no prohibition on a married man having sex, or raping a divorced, or free woman. It's not about harming or loving your current wife, at all. It's about stealing another man's wife.
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/865-adultery

In the case of "false witness", in the decalogue, it refers to court testimony. If you could lie in court, you could have someone executed. Leviticus 6 deals with some other property reasons you might lie, but other prohibitions are scattered around the place
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/10206-lying

In the case of theft, it's still about property, not love. Keeping law and order.

I think Christians like to pretend that Jesus told them to follow only the decalogue, when he says "commandments" in Mark and Matt, but it's obviously a lie.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 18, 2013, 05:04:23 AM
You seem to have a very basic understanding of the bible. The OT laws are not intended to be followed any more, this is true. That does not mean it is possible to 'discard them', as in to ignore their existence. Their existence serves a very important purpose. Do you have any ideas on what that purpose might be?

The OT laws are not to be followed anymore.  I see.  Does that include the ten commandments?  They are OT laws as well.

Good question. Its actually a major point of disagreement amongst some Christians. (you probably know that). The laws I refer to, and which most Christians mean when referring to OT law are the ceremonial laws. They tend to be very detailed and often are clearly only relevant to specific Jewish customs. The ten commandments are much broader, and almost all of them are repeated/reintroduced by Jesus during His time on earth. On this basis, most Christians (including myself) tend to believe that these commandments should be kept as closely as possible.

Of course, highly relevant is the almost unanimous, and clearly scriptual belief amongst Christians that keeping laws does not restore us to relationship with God. Jesus does that, and when we trust in Jesus we receive the Holy Spirit to work in us and convict us of God's desire for how we ought to live.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 18, 2013, 05:08:10 AM
You seem to have a very basic understanding of the bible. The OT laws are not intended to be followed any more, this is true. That does not mean it is possible to 'discard them', as in to ignore their existence. Their existence serves a very important purpose. Do you have any ideas on what that purpose might be?

The OT laws are not to be followed anymore.  I see.  Does that include the ten commandments?  They are OT laws as well.
Isn't that passage about "man laying with man as one would lie with a woman" in the OT? Or am I mistaken.

It is indeed. Can you think of any reasons why Christians believe that it is God's desire still today for sexual relationships to be between a man and woman?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 18, 2013, 05:11:19 AM
MM saying the OT laws only applied to the people he intended them for (his original followers,the Jews) can not be backed away from now.  How on earth do you now retract that statement?

What? How and where have I attempted to retract anything?

Sorry, 12M, but your posts generally in this thread aren't making much sesne to me.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Ataraxia on November 18, 2013, 05:17:11 AM
It is indeed. Can you think of any reasons why Christians believe that it is God's desire still today for sexual relationships to be between a man and woman?

SPAG homophobia?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 18, 2013, 05:18:32 AM
No, you've edited my post to make it fit your interpretation. The bible demands a most of those things, and gives a way out of punishment for the rest, if that is not a form of endorsement then I don't know what is.

Bold mine. Demands them of who? If you think those things are demanded of anybody other than the original recipients of the laws, please explain to me why. Make a case for it.

I flip that question and return it to you, why doesn't gods word apply to people equally?

Here's a good article on the relationship between OT law and Christianity.

http://www.redeemer.com/news_and_events/newsletter/?aid=363


 You've basically said that we can disregard the entire bible since it "doesn't apply to us."

No. I'm not. That's just your mis-understanding.

But for the sake of honesty, here my case: If gods word does not apply equally, why abide by it at all? If you are able to cherry pick and only follow laws that you're comfortable with, why abide by them at all?

You've just killed your biblical morality inadvertently, how do you wish to recover it?
[/quote]
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 18, 2013, 05:19:44 AM
It is indeed. Can you think of any reasons why Christians believe that it is God's desire still today for sexual relationships to be between a man and woman?

SPAG homophobia?

Any serious answers? Or is that actually the best you can do?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 18, 2013, 05:22:21 AM
Null and void if you accept and love Jesus?

Somehow, they became null and void when Jesus got hammered up,which was his plan all along.  We're suppose to accept and love him for taking down the rules that he himself established.  So... he made up a bunch of rules he intended to have a limited lifetime... and then didn't list which ones are still suppose to be in effect.  I still don't know if I'm allowed to boil a baby goat in its mother's milk.   :-\

have a look through this article..it's a straight forward explanation of the OT/NT interplay. I linked it above also, but in case you miss it.

http://www.redeemer.com/news_and_events/newsletter/?aid=363
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Ataraxia on November 18, 2013, 05:24:42 AM
It is indeed. Can you think of any reasons why Christians believe that it is God's desire still today for sexual relationships to be between a man and woman?

SPAG homophobia?

Any serious answers? Or is that actually the best you can do?

It's as serious as you're going to get from me. I could, I suppose, pretend that I think some Christians take their stance on homosexual behaviour from scripture, but that would not be in keeping with thinking that these Christians are using scripture as an excuse for their own prejudices.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Mrjason on November 18, 2013, 05:25:54 AM
It is indeed. Can you think of any reasons why Christians believe that it is God's desire still today for sexual relationships to be between a man and woman?

SPAG homophobia?

Any serious answers? Or is that actually the best you can do?

Psalm 127:3?

Basically, to out compete the competition by producing more of his believers.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Ron Jeremy on November 18, 2013, 05:26:33 AM
I've had to struggle most of my life, everything I have I've had to work hard to earn. Right now I'm unemployed in a bad job market, and working on getting back into school. A large portion of what I know I've had to struggle through and learn myself.


And how do you think you'd deal with children who laughed in the face of your hard work and effort, refused to follow your example and showed a willingness to have you support them completely for as long as you were willing?

For goodness sake; I despair at the social ineptitude of Christians. If my children laughed in my face I WOULDN'T BURN AND TORTURE THEM IN AGONY FOR ETERNITY. I WOULDN'T BURN OR TORTURE THEM AT ALL. Is this idea really so hard for Christians to understand?? Is your moral compass so corrupted by the poison of your religion that you think a suitable punishment for lack of respect is eternal torture?????

It is quite obvious that our morals do not come from this god, even if he did exist.

Did you have an answer for the question there, champ? I wouldn't burn or torture them either. But I'm interested in what you would do if your children grew up and refused to get a job or contribute in any way. Would you take any action?

As the OP is 'Would You Ever Torture You Children With Fire', I assumed (perhaps incorrectly) that we were debating what course of action we would take should our children disobey us, and would that course of action involve torturing said children with fire. So my answer is; 'No. Regardless of how much my children disrespected me, I would not torture them with fire.'

What would I do if my kids refused to get a job? I would try to teach them the value of work, to themselves and their well being, and encourage them to contribute to society. If that failed I'd try to help from afar, attempt to get job offers put their way.
If all that failed I would let the kids make their own mistakes; if that meant living in poverty so be it. I would hope they would learn from it. But I would keep an eye on them and try to ensure opportunities were still sent their way.
Fire and torture, however, would never feature in my plans.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 18, 2013, 05:35:57 AM
What if someome disagreed with you? What do you have to defend your position, other than your opinion? That was the crux of my question. You seem to have overlooked it.
If they disagreed with me, that's fine.

Well, I'm confused. It's as cruel as it gets... but not if someone disagrees. In that case, its....what?

Try reading for comprehension. Antidote has said it's fine if someone disagree with him, not that it's suddenly not as cruel as it gets if someone disagrees with him, as if someone disagreeing with him would change his opinion.

Great, but where does that leave us? Cruel or not? Antidote says yes, someone else says no. It has to be one or the other, right? 

Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Ataraxia on November 18, 2013, 05:40:09 AM
What if someome disagreed with you? What do you have to defend your position, other than your opinion? That was the crux of my question. You seem to have overlooked it.
If they disagreed with me, that's fine.

Well, I'm confused. It's as cruel as it gets... but not if someone disagrees. In that case, its....what?

Try reading for comprehension. Antidote has said it's fine if someone disagree with him, not that it's suddenly not as cruel as it gets if someone disagrees with him, as if someone disagreeing with him would change his opinion.

Great, but where does that leave us? Cruel or not? Antidote says yes, someone else says no. It has to be one or the other, right?

Saying it has to be one or the other is suggesting that there is some objective standard out there. I see no justification for making such a claim.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 18, 2013, 05:42:40 AM
It is indeed. Can you think of any reasons why Christians believe that it is God's desire still today for sexual relationships to be between a man and woman?

SPAG homophobia?

Any serious answers? Or is that actually the best you can do?

It's as serious as you're going to get from me. I could, I suppose, pretend that I think some Christians take their stance on homosexual behaviour from scripture

Another option is that you could actually seriously consider that they genuinely do


but that would not be in keeping with thinking that these Christians are using scripture as an excuse for their own prejudices.

Noted. Its easier to think the worst of people. I'm guilty of it also.

Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 18, 2013, 05:48:40 AM

What would I do if my kids refused to get a job? I would try to teach them the value of work, to themselves and their well being, and encourage them to contribute to society. If that failed I'd try to help from afar, attempt to get job offers put their way.
If all that failed I would let the kids make their own mistakes; if that meant living in poverty so be it. I would hope they would learn from it. But I would keep an eye on them and try to ensure opportunities were still sent their way.
Fire and torture, however, would never feature in my plans.

I would pretty much do the same. There was a reason I wanted that brought out, but buggered if I can remember what it was now. Oh well.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Ataraxia on November 18, 2013, 05:51:33 AM
It's as serious as you're going to get from me. I could, I suppose, pretend that I think some Christians take their stance on homosexual behaviour from scripture

Another option is that you could actually seriously consider that they genuinely do

Oh, I've tried that - don't believe them.

Quote

but that would not be in keeping with thinking that these Christians are using scripture as an excuse for their own prejudices.

Noted. Its easier to think the worst of people. I'm guilty of it also.

Hey, I'm all for trying to see the best in anyone. It's these Christians that are supplying the rope, building the gallows, slipping in their necks and kicking away the stool. I'm merely a commentator.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 18, 2013, 05:56:11 AM
What if someome disagreed with you? What do you have to defend your position, other than your opinion? That was the crux of my question. You seem to have overlooked it.
If they disagreed with me, that's fine.

Well, I'm confused. It's as cruel as it gets... but not if someone disagrees. In that case, its....what?

Try reading for comprehension. Antidote has said it's fine if someone disagree with him, not that it's suddenly not as cruel as it gets if someone disagrees with him, as if someone disagreeing with him would change his opinion.

Great, but where does that leave us? Cruel or not? Antidote says yes, someone else says no. It has to be one or the other, right?

Saying it has to be one or the other is suggesting that there is some objective standard out there. I see no justification for making such a claim.

Then telling somebody something is cruel is totally meaningless. Why even bother? What messge can it convey, other than you hold an opinion on something?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 18, 2013, 05:58:08 AM

Hey, I'm all for trying to see the best in anyone. It's these Christians that are supplying the rope, building the gallows, slipping in their necks and kicking away the stool. I'm merely a commentator.

Bold mine. Which ones?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Ataraxia on November 18, 2013, 06:05:16 AM
Saying it has to be one or the other is suggesting that there is some objective standard out there. I see no justification for making such a claim.

Then telling somebody something is cruel is totally meaningless. Why even bother? What messge can it convey, other than you hold an opinion on something?

Then I wonder how you take meaning from anything anybody ever says, including yourself. Why are any of us even bothering saying anything, because all portrayals are subjective.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Ataraxia on November 18, 2013, 06:06:52 AM

Hey, I'm all for trying to see the best in anyone. It's these Christians that are supplying the rope, building the gallows, slipping in their necks and kicking away the stool. I'm merely a commentator.

Bold mine. Which ones?

Follow the chain of posts:

It's as serious as you're going to get from me. I could, I suppose, pretend that I think some Christians take their stance on homosexual behaviour from scripture, but that would not be in keeping with thinking that these Christians are using scripture as an excuse for their own prejudices.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Quesi on November 18, 2013, 06:08:04 AM
@ Quesi ^^. That's all well and good, but it seems to me you are avoiding the question by refusing to see it as a possibility. Are you (you also NGFM) of the opinion that laziness is always (or very close to always) indicative of depression or another mental health problem? Is it possible that some children are just lazy bastards exploiting their parents love and care?

Sorry to go back so many pages in this thread.  And I'm sorry to stray so far from the OT.  But I did want to address this.

You know, we are all subject to laziness.  I woke up early this morning to work on an important funding proposal with a looming deadline.  But I'm sitting here on the forums instead of working.  So I'm being lazy.

And yes.  Perhaps I am speaking out of the blissful ignorance of my stage of parenthood.  7 year olds are so full of potential.  Perhaps the reality of her life will be nothing like what I imagine.  Maybe nogodsforme's daughter will decide that her calling in life is to be a roadie for One Direction, and my daughter will dedicate her life to blogging about the wisdom of Joel Osteen. 

But "just lazy."  You know.  I've really never met anyone who was "just lazy."  When I was a kid, there was the elderly couple who lived next door.  They had a son in his 30's or 40's who lived there, and who raked their leaves on fall days, and shoveled the snow for them in the winter.  He left his bottles of liquor in the leaf piles and the snow.  Everyone in the neighborhood shook their heads.  Such a nice elderly couple.  So sad their son never made anything of his life.  But there were those liquor bottles.  I suspect they had something to do with the situation.

For a few years, I had a contract to work with welfare moms.  Help them get training.  Job skills.  Get them off welfare. 

It was really hard work.  Everyone seems to know those lazy women who have babies just to get their welfare checks, because they are too lazy to work.  But you know what?  I never met anyone like that.

I met a lot of women with really low self esteem.  Women, young women, who had been beaten down by life.  Women who faced so many distractions, that they had a lot of problems getting to my program every day.  Poverty takes a lot of time out of your day.  Lots of people living in small apartments, with babies screaming and sirens outside and not a lot of restful sleep.  The projects where they lived were really far from convenient mass transit, and it took forever for them to get anywhere.  Even food shopping, healthy food shopping, was a half-a-day project.  They had poor nutrition.  Many had substance abuse histories or current battles.  Most of them lacked the ability to envision themselves living the kind of life I grew up dreaming about.  There were so many obstacles to the smallest of dreams. 

We had to report on their participation in our program.  Failure to participate meant that their welfare checks would be reduced, and they would have to go to a "fair hearing" to have their benefits restored.  They had lots of "fair hearings" and court dates with their children's fathers and court dates with their landlords demanding hot water and small windows of opportunity to travel to Brooklyn to the methadone clinics and no time to buy fruits or vegetables and haul them on a train and two buses back home.  But often, a woman would tell me that she got out of bed, poured herself a cup of coffee, and just never found the strength to get dressed and walk out the door.   If my days were like these women's days, I would probably not have the strength to walk out of the door every day either.  I might just sit and stare, in a semi-catatonic state sometimes, even if I knew the consequences would be fair hearings and court dates and more horrible, horrible days ahead. 

No one wants that kind of a life.  No one WANTS to eat potato chips on the couch in front of Law and Order reruns all day.  Not the privileged middle class 25 year old living in mom and dad's house, never having held a job.  Not the 25 year old mom of three kids, one of whom is starting to go through puberty. 

No one.  There is always some underlying cause.  Depression.  Substance abuse.  Something.  And no authoritarian mandate is going to provide a solution. 
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Add Homonym on November 18, 2013, 08:21:37 AM
Here's a good article on the relationship between OT law and Christianity.

http://www.redeemer.com/news_and_events/newsletter/?aid=363

Why does he choose Mark 7:19, to make his case that Jesus overturned food laws, when the fuller explanation is in Matthew, and ends with :
[20] These are the things which defile a man: but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not a man.

In both, he starts off, saying that "Ye hypocrites" observe the traditions of man (hand washing), but abuse their parents, which is prohibited by God's law. He doesn't specifically say that you should be able to eat pork.

The gospels have been cleverly edited, to not give away whether any old laws have been overturned by Jesus, and we don't know whether that's because he fears being killed for telling people to ignore certain laws, or whether he is just re-emphasizing the importance of certain Jewish laws. The Jesus in Matthew and Mark, is not a "saviour" Jesus, but a meritocracy Jesus, who talks about least and greatest in heaven, according to your awesomeness. We also don't know if he can blurt out, "I am God, and I am saving you" without being stoned, or whether he specifically says "Why do you call me Good" to warn against those [in Paul's gang] who would call him a saviour.

But if the Jesus in Matthew is a meritocrat, then we can sometimes ignore lesser Jewish laws, because adhering to them doesn't give you many points, so breaking them doesn't cost you many points:

Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Notice the "and". If you break lesser laws, "and" teach others to break them, then you get dealt a heavy blow from God. If you just break the laws, but don't tell anybody, you may be OK.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Jag on November 18, 2013, 08:53:51 AM
You didn't really address Skeptic's question, did you?
You've got to be kidding with THIS complaint. Go back and read his posts. Let him start actually responding to questions posed to HIM before you consider calling anyone else out on not answering his questions.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Add Homonym on November 18, 2013, 09:11:53 AM
http://www.thejc.com/health/45876/ocd-really-jewish-disease
http://www.jewishsexuality.com/spilling-semen-in-vain
http://www.chabad.org/parshah/article_cdo/aid/480242/jewish/Obsessive-Compulsive.htm

Those two links contain the context, for what the synoptic Jesus is rebuking in Jewish obsession. He's not saying the laws are overturned, he's saying "don't do what's in the above links".

This is lost on Western Christians:  that there is a genuinely weird obsession to rebuke.

However, the irony is that Jesus was wrong. The last link tries to justify the Jewish obsession with hand washing. And it is true. The original Torah laws on washing, were apparently for disease control
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ritual_washing_in_Judaism#Hebrew_Bible
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: jaimehlers on November 18, 2013, 10:53:12 AM
I reviewed the exchange, and to be fair I don't think Skeptic originally intended for his use of 'children' to be confined to those teenaged or younger - I think he meant it to refer more widely to offspring of any age. It appears he overlooked G-Roll's attempt to clarify the age bracket.

In any event, I think the point he is trying to make is clear enough: sometimes a parent might be forced, through a childs own actions, to take action that could appear unloving if viewed out of context.
The problem is, what he said was very unclear.  There is a huge difference between what we expect from a young child, or even a teenager, as opposed to someone who's clearly an adult.

It's clear he made no effort to clarify what he meant by children.  This is why I said his questions were misleading.  He's talking about children getting jobs in the one post - which could easily be taken to mean fairly young children; I started delivering a paper route at twelve, for example - and in the next, he's trying to castigate 'atheists' for not kicking adult children (25+) out of the house if they refused to get a job.  This is not the first time he's acted like this.

Also, I submit that giving someone an excessive punishment - for whatever reason - is not merely "unloving", but actively hateful.  For example, let's say that you have the 25-year old slacker who wants to laze about all day.  Threatening to evict them from your house if they don't start trying to find employment, and following up on it if they don't take the threat seriously, may be harsh, but it isn't excessive.  Excessive punishment is more like evicting them from your house, disowning them, cutting off communication, and pretending that you have no child at all, for the rest of their life.  If you ran across someone who had done that, merely because their adult child wouldn't find a job, wouldn't you question whether they actually loved their child at all?  At best, that would be a cold and callous indifference, not any sort of love at all.

Now imagine that they actually locked their adult child in the basement and tortured them for the rest of their life, without any possibility of reprieve, merely because their adult child wouldn't get a job.  I don't think anyone could see that as love - indeed, it would be a pretty blatant and vicious hatred.

Now, compare that to the Christian idea of hell.  The "spiritual abandonment" that many Christians now believe in is like the example of a parent who cuts their child off completely because they won't get a job.  The hellfire and eternal torment that's been a Christian staple for so long is like the example of a parent who tortures their child for the rest of their lives because they won't get a job.  In both cases, the 'punishment' is too excessive to justify for any reason.  Indeed, it's worse than the examples I gave, because of the Christian concept of eternity.

A god who would do either of those may be powerful, but they cannot be described as loving.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Astreja on November 18, 2013, 11:13:24 AM
I have news for you, young man:  There is nothing that merits infinite punishment.  Ever.  There are no exceptions to this rule, be one a god or be one a mortal.
Isn't that just your subjective opinion? If one was to disagree, what do you have in your defence of that statement other than you think nothing merits eternal punishment?

Why do I think that infinite punishment is utterly inexcusable?

I simply can't think of any situation in which it would be a positive thing.  I'm opposed to the use of pain as punishment, favouring the making of reparations and a rehabilatative approach.  The furthest I'm prepared to go is isolation of dangerous entities from the community.

Or, to put it another way, I simply cannot see the point of infinite punishment.  What is it supposed to accomplish, other than inflicting endless suffering?  It seems vindictive, unnecessary, not in the least bit useful, and completely out of scope for any god trying to market itself as loving and compassionate.  It's also bafflingly primitive for a supposedly wise god, and is more in keeping with something that a mortal ruler would inflict upon its enemies.

Furthermore, it taints the relationship between a god and its followers. How can one truly love such a god with the spectre of "Could it happen to me, too, if I slip up?" looming over one's head for eternity?

Simply put, there are no winners in this situation.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: jdawg70 on November 18, 2013, 11:14:23 AM
The problem is, what he said was very unclear.  There is a huge difference between what we expect from a young child, or even a teenager, as opposed to someone who's clearly an adult.

It's clear he made no effort to clarify what he meant by children.  This is why I said his questions were misleading.  He's talking about children getting jobs in the one post - which could easily be taken to mean fairly young children; I started delivering a paper route at twelve, for example - and in the next, he's trying to castigate 'atheists' for not kicking adult children (25+) out of the house if they refused to get a job.  This is not the first time he's acted like this.

Also, I submit that giving someone an excessive punishment - for whatever reason - is not merely "unloving", but actively hateful.  For example, let's say that you have the 25-year old slacker who wants to laze about all day.  Threatening to evict them from your house if they don't start trying to find employment, and following up on it if they don't take the threat seriously, may be harsh, but it isn't excessive.  Excessive punishment is more like evicting them from your house, disowning them, cutting off communication, and pretending that you have no child at all, for the rest of their life.  If you ran across someone who had done that, merely because their adult child wouldn't find a job, wouldn't you question whether they actually loved their child at all?  At best, that would be a cold and callous indifference, not any sort of love at all.

Now imagine that they actually locked their adult child in the basement and tortured them for the rest of their life, without any possibility of reprieve, merely because their adult child wouldn't get a job.  I don't think anyone could see that as love - indeed, it would be a pretty blatant and vicious hatred.

Now, compare that to the Christian idea of hell.  The "spiritual abandonment" that many Christians now believe in is like the example of a parent who cuts their child off completely because they won't get a job.  The hellfire and eternal torment that's been a Christian staple for so long is like the example of a parent who tortures their child for the rest of their lives because they won't get a job.  In both cases, the 'punishment' is too excessive to justify for any reason.  Indeed, it's worse than the examples I gave, because of the Christian concept of eternity.

A god who would do either of those may be powerful, but they cannot be described as loving.
Use of the word 'excessive' is unnecessary in your argument.  It involves comparative magnitude, and frankly, that's unnecessary and allows for wiggle-room questions such as 'who are you to judge what excessive is'.

I think it's more clear to simply say that any punishment that, by design, can serve no other purpose than to punish, can be viewed as a non-loving act.  An action that could appear unloving if viewed out of context is all good and well I suppose, but what additional context can be brought to bear to resolve the discrepancy between 'doing this for your own good' and 'eternal torture with no hope, at all, of redemption?

Presumably, the act that appears unloving is supposed to, in the long run, result in bettering the child (or adult-child, or person, or whatever).  The parent who tosses out their adult-child from their home if they don't get a job?  That's one thing.  The parent who tosses out their adult-child and cuts them off from any support forever has just completely washed their hands of that adult-child, effectively saying 'well, I tried to make you better.  I loved you.  I failed.  I am done trying to make you better.  You are on your own'.  That parent may have loved (past tense) their adult-child, but, after washing his/her hands of the adult-child, no longer loves (present tense) him/her.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Graybeard on November 18, 2013, 11:38:58 AM
Christians can't do that, median. Only God can because he is the Creator and Supreme King.

Since God is infinite, any sin against Him deserves infinite punishment.

I get it... If you kill a big man you get 100 years, but if you shoot a small man or a child, you only get,say, 20 years.

Skeptic, when you wrote your answer, did you honestly think that anyone who read it would believe you?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Truth OT on November 18, 2013, 11:55:35 AM
This question is for Christians. Would you ever (for any reason at all) torture your children with fire in the basement? Would you ever burn their skin from head to toe while listening to their screams of horror? Is there any reason, whatsoever, that you think this action would be justified for you to perform on your own children? Just picture yourself performing these actions in your mind. Please answer honestly.

This scenario is not exactly a fair setup IMO. The first problem I see is comparing the God/Mankind relationship to that of a parent child when in actuality it would be more in line with a programer/Sims model where the programmer creates a reality for his creations that he is not subject to and cannot enter only manipulate.

In the course of his programming the arcitect creates villain whom he endows with special abilities that can be used to test and antagonize the Sims to help the designer test his hypothesis as it pertains to what Sims would react as he desired and what Sims would "sin" and miss the mark of his desired programming.

As the program simulation develops, it appears that the antagonist with enhanced abilities developed the desire to become the 'Lord' of the simulated world and have the Sims submit to and revere him. This development angered the programmer who became jealous to the point that he designed a punishment for the antagionist that he'd also subject the Sims that "sinned" and did not revert to the goal of the programming. To help his Sims avoid this punishment the programmer made an avatar of himself that he injected into the simulation to combat the influence of the antagonist and to set up as the true Lord. The Sims that followed the influence of the avatar and bowed to his lordship would be given a reward and the continuation of existence under his benevolent reign while the antagonist and the Sims that did not submit the the avatar's rulership would be punished with a tortorous existence that would either lead to their ultimate demise causing them to be vanquished from the simulation or would be tortured within the simulation for the simulation's duration.

All this said, hopefully the Christian answers will be no, no, and nothing because doing so would be immoral.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on November 18, 2013, 12:28:08 PM
OK, suppose you had a son who refused to get a job. Would you give your son money every week? Or not give him any money?

if you give your son money every week, aren't you then enabling him to not get a job because he's getting free money? If you don't give the son any money but still refuse to kick him out, then your son is just going to be watching tv all day long and possibly surfing the internet. Then what is going to happen to your son when you die? How would he make a living? Wouldn't you be at all worried about your son's future?

The thing is, I had friends on both sides of the spectrum when I was 18-22ish. I had one friend who smoked pot and drank beer all day and didn't have a job because his dad gave him money. His dad said to him one day when I was over his house, "I don't care what you do with your life. I'm gonna be dead one day and you're gonna be on your own and it's gonna be your problem. I hope you're ready for that day."

On the flipside, I had another friend who was 23, and his father kicked him out because he wasn't doing anything at all. He slept on people's couches for 3 months going house to house and then he eventually found a job after 3 months and found a roommate and was able to live somewhere.  He said, "I hated my dad when he kicked me out but I now understand why he did it. I had to grow up." Kept in touch with him for 3 years and when he was 26, we lost touch because I moved cross country. I have no idea what happened to him.

Which parent would you say is the more loving one?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Nam on November 18, 2013, 12:41:49 PM
I know I am late to this discussion so my comment is directed at the OP:

I recently watched a German film called "Das weiße Band (2009)[1]", and it took place a year or so before WWI. There were two interconnecting scenes where a father (who was also a pastor or priest) was telling a story (a huge lie) to his son about how masturbation causes death. Frightening his son, horribly to tears, how if he kept masturbating he'd end up dead. At the same time he was telling his son this, he asked his son not to lie to him while he obviously was lying to him. He could have said that the god of the Bible would send you to hell if he kept masturbating (keeping with the mythos of Christianity) instead he chose to lie and tell him a story about another boy the year previous who died of masturbation. I thought it hypocritical. In the connecting scene you see the same boy tied down to his bed to prevent him from masturbating.

To me this is torture. The same basic scenario of the OP. The "father" obviously loves his son, all his children but he punishes them not in a way that teaches them to learn from their mistake (if it is a mistake in the first place), or even explains the sexual emotions (physical, or otherwise) he's going through at his age but punishes him for what comes natural for all young boys, including himself at a young age.

This is is my viewpoint of Biblegod: tells you what to do, or not to do and instead of teaching you to do better when you fail instead tortures you until you do it its way. Which, in a way does "teach" the person something: don't do things my way, I will torture you until you do.

Not really a lesson to learn. It's barbaric and cruel. That's Biblegod  for you. It loves you, especially when it tortures you.

-Nam
 1. English title: The White Ribbon

Whilst I disagree with this, and most of your points of view generally, I have noticed a bit of a change in your posting style of late. A bit more mature-minded and considered.

Wrong. I speak the same today as I have always spoken.

-Nam
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Truth OT on November 18, 2013, 12:42:31 PM
 >:(
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on November 18, 2013, 12:57:31 PM
Why do you keep parroting this scenario? You do realize that the whole parent kicking out a lazy child is irrelavant to the premise and questions posed by the OP don't you?

The point is that just because you kick your child out, this does not mean you love them any less. In fact, if you kept your son home while never pushing him to get a job, people will tell you that you are not a loving parent. You are spoiling them.

Is spoiling someone considered to be loving?

Imagine you told your adult son to run some errands for you while you were at work. You come home from work at night and find the house covered in beer cans and pizza boxes and your son says, "Sorry, I didn't run those errands. I got caught up in my video game. I'll do it tomorrow."

Would you be steaming mad? Or just say, "Oh that's OK son! I love you!" The son might think, "Wow my dad is such a pushover."
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Truth OT on November 18, 2013, 01:05:07 PM
Why do you keep parroting this scenario? You do realize that the whole parent kicking out a lazy child is irrelavant to the premise and questions posed by the OP don't you?

The point is that just because you kick your child out, this does not mean you love them any less. In fact, if you kept your son home while never pushing him to get a job, people will tell you that you are not a loving parent. You are spoiling them.

Is spoiling someone considered to be loving?

Imagine you told your adult son to run some errands for you while you were at work. You come home from work at night and find the house covered in beer cans and pizza boxes and your son says, "Sorry, I didn't run those errands. I got caught up in my video game. I'll do it tomorrow."

Would you be steaming mad? Or just say, "Oh that's OK son! I love you!" The son might think, "Wow my dad is such a pushover."

Okay, it still seems you are avoiding the issue at hand with your weak attempt at creating a strawman to argue over. Again, the above is IRRELAVANT to the OP as the OP attempts to address a much different issue. In case you forgot, the OP asks Christians:  Would you ever (for any reason at all) torture your children with fire in the basement? Would you ever burn their skin from head to toe while listening to their screams of horror? Is there any reason, whatsoever, that you think this action would be justified for you to perform on your own children? Just picture yourself performing these actions in your mind. Please answer honestly.

Please address these questions specifically and stop waisting everyone's time on an unrelated scenario.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Astreja on November 18, 2013, 01:28:54 PM
Is spoiling someone considered to be loving?

It's infinitely more loving than setting fire to them and letting them suffer forever and ever, ay-men.

As inappropriate as your analogy is to the OP, if My only two choices were "Spoil 'em or torture 'em," I'd opt for spoiling them and quietly clean up the beer cans and pizza boxes.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: jdawg70 on November 18, 2013, 02:08:23 PM
OK, suppose you had a son who refused to get a job. Would you give your son money every week? Or not give him any money?
If you're really married to using this analogy, you'll have to modify it somewhat to fit the actual questions at hand:

Ok, suppose you had a son who refused to get a job.  Would you give your son money every week?  Or not give him any money, call every single possible employer and tell them to, under no circumstances, ever hire your son, and hire someone else to beat your son repeatedly, and cut off all ties with your son so that you never have to ever interact with him ever again?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Boots on November 18, 2013, 02:30:04 PM
Why do you keep parroting this scenario? You do realize that the whole parent kicking out a lazy child is irrelavant to the premise and questions posed by the OP don't you?

The point is that just because you kick your child out, this does not mean you love them any less. In fact, if you kept your son home while never pushing him to get a job, people will tell you that you are not a loving parent. You are spoiling them.

Is spoiling someone considered to be loving?

Imagine you told your adult son to run some errands for you while you were at work. You come home from work at night and find the house covered in beer cans and pizza boxes and your son says, "Sorry, I didn't run those errands. I got caught up in my video game. I'll do it tomorrow."

Would you be steaming mad? Or just say, "Oh that's OK son! I love you!" The son might think, "Wow my dad is such a pushover."

To rephrase what some others have already said...

In your scenario, the kicking the kid out is a form of teaching, in the hopes that the kid will wake up and do what needs to be done.  In the Xian scenario, the sinner's soul gets kicked into the lake of fire for eternity.  There is not chance of learning anything--or, at least, not to do anything regarding what has been learned.  That's it: eternal damnation.

Does THAT sound like a loving parent to you?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: nogodsforme on November 18, 2013, 04:52:53 PM
True to form, skeptic and MM have not been able to respond directly to the question posed in the OP. God plans to torture all of us--along with most of the planet, evidently-- with hellfire for all eternity.  They can see that temporary torture for not agreeing with a dictator's religious or political views is bad. But eternal torture seems an okay thing to do to someone for not accepting Jesus as lord and savior. It is even a sign of how much he loves us. :o[1]

Aware that they are on very shaky moral and ethical ground, the believers here keep changing the subject. They don't compare temporary torture of political prisoners by a dictator (evil, cruel and bad!) to eternal torture by an powerful god (loving and good!). They are trying to compare god torturing human beings forever[2] to the frustrations of an ordinary parent who is at wits end with their misbehaving kid. Like god is Mr. Kotter and human beings are the Sweathogs.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6UNN24foi8

You see, eternal hellfire is only god's "tough love" or "scared straight" program--it just never, ever ends. And you don't learn anything from it. And you don't get scared straight, you just get scared and burnt. Over and over.

Actually it is nothing at all like the "tough love" or "scared straight" programs...  :(

God is not an ordinary loving human parent with a troublesome, lazy, disrespectful kid, no matter how many analogies you bring up.  God is, according to believers, the most powerful being ever, who created the universe and everything in it.  He knows exactly what will happen to each of us from the time we are born until we die. He knows exactly who will be tempted by sin, who will be tricked by Satan's demons into practicing the wrong religion, who will be born into the wrong environment and never learn about Christianity. And he knows exactly who will learn about it and then decide it is all BS. He knows when we are sleeping. He knows when we're awake. He knows when we've been bad or good.....  sorry. :-[

God, therefore,  knows exactly what it would take to convince each and every one of us of his existence, of his truth, of the sacrifice of Jesus, of the bible's reality or whatever. He could have done it anytime-- what is he waiting for? The ability to create the universe, to create life itself, and all he can come up with is one lame old book of crazy stories? Why is he invisible and non-existent to so many of us?

Don't say it is because we have hardened our hearts and want to keep on sinning.  Many people come here and tell us that they were horrible atheists sinning right and left, but then one fine day, god revealed everything to them, and they became the wonderful saved Christians they are today. So, god clearly knows how to get through to some people, but chooses not to get through to others. Doesn't god know how to save us from sin, or does he just not care about some of us?[3]

Don't say it is because we have chosen to be separate from god, because he is all-powerful, remember? We can't separate from him unless he wants to let us go.  We cannot push an all-powerful god around, anymore than a newborn baby can launch a nuclear missile attack. So there is no excuse.  If he wants to save us, he will. If he wants to burn us for all eternity, he will. It is not up to us--how could it be?

But you can't twist that kind of horrendous strong-arming into love--because Papa Doc Duvalier, Sadaam Hussein, Kim Jong Il, Mao Zedong and Stalin were more loving than that. They only tortured people until the victims died.

So, admit it, you would burn your children in the basement. Because god is love.
 1. We find similar sentiments from the followers of every brutal dictator--and also from victims of domestic abuse. "He only hurts you because he loves you. If you would only obey he would not have to hurt you." This is not the sign of a healthy relationship--it is a sign of emotional disturbance and mental enslavement.
 2. because we just can't see the difference between one old magical book and every other old magical book
 3. Or is it that he likes the smell of burning fat--in hell I will produce a lot of that...does your soul stay overweight if you were a chubby tubby? :?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Quesi on November 18, 2013, 05:49:37 PM
OK, suppose you had a son who refused to get a job. Would you give your son money every week? Or not give him any money?

if you give your son money every week, aren't you then enabling him to not get a job because he's getting free money? If you don't give the son any money but still refuse to kick him out, then your son is just going to be watching tv all day long and possibly surfing the internet. Then what is going to happen to your son when you die? How would he make a living? Wouldn't you be at all worried about your son's future?

The thing is, I had friends on both sides of the spectrum when I was 18-22ish. I had one friend who smoked pot and drank beer all day and didn't have a job because his dad gave him money. His dad said to him one day when I was over his house, "I don't care what you do with your life. I'm gonna be dead one day and you're gonna be on your own and it's gonna be your problem. I hope you're ready for that day."

On the flipside, I had another friend who was 23, and his father kicked him out because he wasn't doing anything at all. He slept on people's couches for 3 months going house to house and then he eventually found a job after 3 months and found a roommate and was able to live somewhere.  He said, "I hated my dad when he kicked me out but I now understand why he did it. I had to grow up." Kept in touch with him for 3 years and when he was 26, we lost touch because I moved cross country. I have no idea what happened to him.

Which parent would you say is the more loving one?

Skeptic is being VERY gender specific here. 

Skeptic, you clearly believe that the 25 year od son should be thrown out on his butt.  May I ask if you would treat a 25 year old daughter the same way?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: jaimehlers on November 18, 2013, 05:52:23 PM
Use of the word 'excessive' is unnecessary in your argument.  It involves comparative magnitude, and frankly, that's unnecessary and allows for wiggle-room questions such as 'who are you to judge what excessive is'.
Okay, then, "cruel and unusual".  If it works for our legal system, it should work for my argument.

Quote from: jdawg70
I think it's more clear to simply say that any punishment that, by design, can serve no other purpose than to punish, can be viewed as a non-loving act.  An action that could appear unloving if viewed out of context is all good and well I suppose, but what additional context can be brought to bear to resolve the discrepancy between 'doing this for your own good' and 'eternal torture with no hope, at all, of redemption?
Hmm.........

This, too, is a bit awkward.  Instead of talking about a punishment that serves no other purpose than to punish (which begs the question, since it, too, leaves quite a bit of wiggle room), instead say a punishment which primarily and intentionally focuses on retaliation, especially that which is cruel and unusual.

I mean, when you get right down to it, it's easy to argue that kicking an adult out of their parents' home when they won't get a job is intended to punish them.  Whereas it isn't generally considered a retaliatory act, and generally isn't cruel and unusual.

Quote from: jdawg70
Presumably, the act that appears unloving is supposed to, in the long run, result in bettering the child (or adult-child, or person, or whatever).  The parent who tosses out their adult-child from their home if they don't get a job?  That's one thing.  The parent who tosses out their adult-child and cuts them off from any support forever has just completely washed their hands of that adult-child, effectively saying 'well, I tried to make you better.  I loved you.  I failed.  I am done trying to make you better.  You are on your own'.  That parent may have loved (past tense) their adult-child, but, after washing his/her hands of the adult-child, no longer loves (present tense) him/her.
Thus why I am suggesting that we focus on retaliation, especially cruel and unusual retaliation.  Even though other kinds of punishments are by definition punishments, they aren't necessarily going to be retaliatory ones.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: jaimehlers on November 18, 2013, 05:58:10 PM
As inappropriate as your analogy is to the OP, if My only two choices were "Spoil 'em or torture 'em," I'd opt for spoiling them and quietly clean up the beer cans and pizza boxes.
Thankfully, that analogy is a false dichotomy, so it isn't relevant.  Parents have other choices besides "kick the bum out" and "let them stay there forever".  For example, they can make things uncomfortable, such as refusing to buy them entertainment or anything besides basic necessities, and make it clear that if they want those things, they have to figure out a way to provide them for themselves.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Add Homonym on November 18, 2013, 07:50:25 PM
Parents have other choices besides "kick the bum out" and "let them stay there forever".  For example,

For example, they can show themselves, and prove they exist.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Antidote on November 18, 2013, 08:01:12 PM

EDIT:
Also any claims of objective morality are defeated anyway, by the very loophole provided by biblegod: Jesus.

What?
Think about it; If something is objectively bad, there shouldn't be a loop hole right? Then why is it that all you have to do to get away from these punishment of an objectively bad action is accept Jesus into your heart, and suddenly you get into heaven?

That is what breaks your objective morality, it can't be objectively good or evil AND have a way out of the punishment.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Add Homonym on November 18, 2013, 08:14:50 PM
Ok, suppose you had a son who refused to get a job.  Would you give your son money every week?  Or not give him any money, call every single possible employer and tell them to, under no circumstances, ever hire your son, and hire someone else to beat your son repeatedly, and cut off all ties with your son so that you never have to ever interact with him ever again?

I think this needs some more revision:

Ok, suppose you had a son who refused to get a job with you (their parent as the employer), and the parent employer never showed up to supervise. His idea of supervision, was leaving 10 dusty, contradictory manuals around the place, all saying that you should worship various parents. If you were absent, would you give your son money every week?  Or not give him any money, then call every single possible employer and tell them to, under no circumstances, ever hire your son, and hire someone else to beat your son repeatedly, and cut off all ties with your son so that you never have to ever interact with him ever again?

Haven't got it quite right.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Astreja on November 18, 2013, 11:10:42 PM
As inappropriate as your analogy is to the OP, if My only two choices were "Spoil 'em or torture 'em," I'd opt for spoiling them and quietly clean up the beer cans and pizza boxes.
Thankfully, that analogy is a false dichotomy, so it isn't relevant.  Parents have other choices besides "kick the bum out" and "let them stay there forever".  For example, they can make things uncomfortable, such as refusing to buy them entertainment or anything besides basic necessities, and make it clear that if they want those things, they have to figure out a way to provide them for themselves.

It's easy to think of literally hundreds of appropriate responses between the extremes of coddling and condemning.  Why does the god of the Bible, allegedly the most powerful and knowing being in the universe, have trouble with such a simple idea?  (Besides the fact that he's probably just a sock puppet for vengeance-driven all-or-nothing religious zealots, I mean.)
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on November 19, 2013, 12:44:56 AM

EDIT:
Also any claims of objective morality are defeated anyway, by the very loophole provided by biblegod: Jesus.

What?
Think about it; If something is objectively bad, there shouldn't be a loop hole right? Then why is it that all you have to do to get away from these punishment of an objectively bad action is accept Jesus into your heart, and suddenly you get into heaven?

That is what breaks your objective morality, it can't be objectively good or evil AND have a way out of the punishment.
Ahhhh the get out of hell Jesus card,always a way for them to excuse the evil things they do to others. These "Christians" always have an excuse for their actions,here's a thought if it is bad or evil do what Jesus would do and stop the action. Don't do the action and then use Jesus as your reason to be excused from it (your action).

 God had high standards for his followers until Jesus came along. Suddenly they has an excuse for actions that failed the high standards their God had set for them.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Jonny-UK on November 19, 2013, 07:23:50 AM
Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement? YES or NO.
Clearly I am an atheist however i also have two teenage children. No sane parent would do the above.
It sickens all of us every time a story appears on the news about a child being beaten/starved/abused. We know with absolute certainty it is just wrong to hurt a child, children are the most precious and innocent things on this planet.

Regarding raising children, we all make mistakes but we all try and do our best. Always try and communicate and work things out together. This is the problem with god- THERE IS NO COMMUNICATION- just eternal suffering if you haven't read the right book and agreed to the very vague rules in it.
You are condemned for a game that you did not want to play and have not even been told the rules for.
Please count me,my wife and my children out please.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Graybeard on November 19, 2013, 07:33:11 AM

Imagine you told your adult son to run some errands for you while you were at work. You come home from work at night and find the house covered in beer cans and pizza boxes and your son says, "Sorry, I didn't run those errands. I got caught up in my video game. I'll do it tomorrow."

Would you be steaming mad? Or just say, "Oh that's OK son! I love you!" The son might think, "Wow my dad is such a pushover."

You are right Skeptic! Let us see what God says on the subject:

Quote
Deuteronomy 21:18-21

    If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:

    Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;

    And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.

    And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.

Dontcha just love God's Ever-lovin' Word?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ThatZenoGuy on November 19, 2013, 07:34:59 AM
To OP question.

What the heck?

What matter of person would torture their children?

Well okay, there are likely crazy bastards who do it.

But come on...
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Jag on November 19, 2013, 07:53:36 AM
Why do you keep parroting this scenario? You do realize that the whole parent kicking out a lazy child is irrelavant to the premise and questions posed by the OP don't you?

The point is that just because you kick your child out, this does not mean you love them any less. In fact, if you kept your son home while never pushing him to get a job, people will tell you that you are not a loving parent. You are spoiling them.

Is spoiling someone considered to be loving?

Imagine you told your adult son to run some errands for you while you were at work. You come home from work at night and find the house covered in beer cans and pizza boxes and your son says, "Sorry, I didn't run those errands. I got caught up in my video game. I'll do it tomorrow."

Would you be steaming mad? Or just say, "Oh that's OK son! I love you!" The son might think, "Wow my dad is such a pushover."
That you can even compare this ^^^ to an eternity in hell demonstrates the depth of your blindness and unwillingness to think at all.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: jdawg70 on November 19, 2013, 10:19:23 AM
Okay, then, "cruel and unusual".  If it works for our legal system, it should work for my argument.
I don't know if that escapes the problem I have - the response to this is just as easily "who are you to judge what cruel is?  'That's subjective', or 'only god can judge what is cruel', or 'that isn't cruel because blahblahblah'...
Quote
Hmm.........

This, too, is a bit awkward.  Instead of talking about a punishment that serves no other purpose than to punish (which begs the question, since it, too, leaves quite a bit of wiggle room), instead say a punishment which primarily and intentionally focuses on retaliation, especially that which is cruel and unusual.
When I say 'punishment that serves no other purpose', I mean a punishment that logically cannot serve any other purpose - for example, a punishment that is eternal in nature.  Now, when I started this reply I was thinking that this left no wiggle room; it is an objective demarcation for unnecessary punishment as it is simply predicated on logic and requires no comparative evaluation of 'levels' of cruelty or excess.  Unfortunately, this applies only to the person/entity subject to being eternally tortured.  I suppose that there is still wiggle room to say that person a's eternal torment is, on a whole, for the betterment of...all of reality or something (I can't actually come up with any rationale as to why eternal tortured would be warranted, but that's not exactly a strong argument).
Quote
I mean, when you get right down to it, it's easy to argue that kicking an adult out of their parents' home when they won't get a job is intended to punish them.  Whereas it isn't generally considered a retaliatory act, and generally isn't cruel and unusual.
I guess that's the thing though...if a parent kicked out their adult-child with the sole intent of punishing them (as in, the act has no intention of bettering the adult-child but strictly to make them hurt), then that would be a retaliatory and hence unloving act.  And I think eternal damnation is logically necessarily an act that is intended strictly for harm.  As per above, however, I suppose one could attempt to make the argument that such an act could have the intention of, say, teaching (scaring?) the other kids in the house to not be lazy douchebags, and on the whole be a more loving act, but that seems like a really difficult argument to make frankly.
Quote
Thus why I am suggesting that we focus on retaliation, especially cruel and unusual retaliation.  Even though other kinds of punishments are by definition punishments, they aren't necessarily going to be retaliatory ones.
Perhaps that is the best approach - 'retaliatory', for all intents and purposes, works for the argumentation.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Wasserbuffel on November 19, 2013, 10:32:01 AM
To OP question.

What the heck?

What maNNer of person would torture their children?   <---- Fixed it.

Well okay, there are likely crazy bastards who do it.

But come on...

The OP question isn't asking people to torture their kids. It's asking how a creator being (parent) could ever be considered at all good if its response to people who don't believe it exists (disobedient children) is to punish them for eternity in hellfire.

If no Christian parent can think of a single reason they would do such a thing to their kid, no matter how heinous the kid's actions, why do they worship a god that does something so repugnant?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Truth OT on November 19, 2013, 10:39:00 AM
If no Christian parent can think of a single reason they would do such a thing to their kid, no matter how heinous the kid's actions, why do they worship a god that does something so repugnant?

The parent/kid dynamic seems to be an apples to oranges comparison when relating to God and mankind. In the grand scheme, parents have children that are in essense their peers and the same cannot be said for the imagined relationship between God and man where God is infinately "higher" than man.

As I have said before, a better comparison would make God a programmer/designer and mankind would be sort of like Sims that existed as a part of God's design.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Anfauglir on November 19, 2013, 11:05:15 AM
The parent/kid dynamic seems to be an apples to oranges comparison when relating to God and mankind. In the grand scheme, parents have children that are in essense their peers and the same cannot be said for the imagined relationship between God and man where God is infinately "higher" than man.

As I have said before, a better comparison would make God a programmer/designer and mankind would be sort of like Sims that existed as a part of God's design.

Maybe a far better comparison (for the sake of the OP question) would be to ask:
"Would You Ever Torture Your Family Dog With Fire In in the Basement? YES or NO?"

I can see us being like dogs to Yahweh.  Simple, dumb creatures, with no hope of ever really understanding what he wants, but hopefully capable of some simple tricks and obedience.  Putting the dog in the place of the child emphasises the gulf in understanding that (we are told) exists between Yahweh and man.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Wasserbuffel on November 19, 2013, 11:26:49 AM
I'm not arguing whether the comparison the OP made was valid or not, I was just trying to assist A&E's comprehension of the reasoning behind the question. His answer gave the distinct impression that he did not understand it.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: nogodsforme on November 19, 2013, 11:30:27 AM
As a person who values democracy and human rights, it makes me sick to hear all the excuses for a powerful person torturing a far less powerful person. For any reason. Especially the throwing up the hands as if torture is no big deal. Maybe the Bush Administration did even more damage than we thought--Guantanamo prison and Abu Gharaib as just a little taste of god's heaven on earth.

"Oh you silly billy atheists! Would you let your kids get away with being disobedient? Or would you spoil and reward them? I'll bet you would let terror suspects just walk away, too, instead of electrocuting them in the genitals. What else could god do with his disobedient, stubborn children but throw everyone in the flaming pit of eternal hellfire?"

Uhhhh. Anything? Use your imagination. He's god, so he could do anything besides that...if he  can't do anything but torture, he's a pretty sick excuse for a god. :P
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Jonny-UK on November 19, 2013, 11:35:49 AM
"Would You Ever Torture Your Family Dog With Fire In in the Basement? YES or NO?"

I can see us being like dogs to Yahweh.  Simple, dumb creatures, with no hope of ever really understanding what he wants, but hopefully capable of some simple tricks and obedience.  Putting the dog in the place of the child emphasises the gulf in understanding that (we are told) exists between Yahweh and man.
Dog or child, love is love.
What a supposedly loving god is happy to do to people for an eternity is not love in any way shape or form (unless god simply loves inflicting pain, sado god!)
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Nam on November 19, 2013, 01:17:03 PM
I've had to struggle most of my life, everything I have I've had to work hard to earn. Right now I'm unemployed in a bad job market, and working on getting back into school. A large portion of what I know I've had to struggle through and learn myself.


And how do you think you'd deal with children who laughed in the face of your hard work and effort, refused to follow your example and showed a willingness to have you support them completely for as long as you were willing?

For goodness sake; I despair at the social ineptitude of Christians. If my children laughed in my face I WOULDN'T BURN AND TORTURE THEM IN AGONY FOR ETERNITY. I WOULDN'T BURN OR TORTURE THEM AT ALL. Is this idea really so hard for Christians to understand?? Is your moral compass so corrupted by the poison of your religion that you think a suitable punishment for lack of respect is eternal torture?????

It is quite obvious that our morals do not come from this god, even if he did exist.

Did you have an answer for the question there, champ? I wouldn't burn or torture them either. But I'm interested in what you would do if your children grew up and refused to get a job or contribute in any way. Would you take any action?

Though not toward me, if it was my child and they wished to be a bum, that'd be their choice. Whether I liked it, or not, is irrelevant. It's their life to do with as they wish. I would still love and care about them, and help them if they asked for help, but if that's the path they wish to travel on, who am I to tell them different?

-Nam
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Boots on November 19, 2013, 01:41:49 PM
I've had to struggle most of my life, everything I have I've had to work hard to earn. Right now I'm unemployed in a bad job market, and working on getting back into school. A large portion of what I know I've had to struggle through and learn myself.


And how do you think you'd deal with children who laughed in the face of your hard work and effort, refused to follow your example and showed a willingness to have you support them completely for as long as you were willing?

For goodness sake; I despair at the social ineptitude of Christians. If my children laughed in my face I WOULDN'T BURN AND TORTURE THEM IN AGONY FOR ETERNITY. I WOULDN'T BURN OR TORTURE THEM AT ALL. Is this idea really so hard for Christians to understand?? Is your moral compass so corrupted by the poison of your religion that you think a suitable punishment for lack of respect is eternal torture?????

It is quite obvious that our morals do not come from this god, even if he did exist.

Did you have an answer for the question there, champ? I wouldn't burn or torture them either. But I'm interested in what you would do if your children grew up and refused to get a job or contribute in any way. Would you take any action?

Magicmiles, while your question is definitely an interesting topic that deserves discussion, it is off the OP and continuing would, IMHO, derail this thread.  I humbly suggest you start a new thread on parenting techniques of atheists vs. theists or something--but that's not what the OP is about.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 19, 2013, 04:56:07 PM
I've had to struggle most of my life, everything I have I've had to work hard to earn. Right now I'm unemployed in a bad job market, and working on getting back into school. A large portion of what I know I've had to struggle through and learn myself.


And how do you think you'd deal with children who laughed in the face of your hard work and effort, refused to follow your example and showed a willingness to have you support them completely for as long as you were willing?

For goodness sake; I despair at the social ineptitude of Christians. If my children laughed in my face I WOULDN'T BURN AND TORTURE THEM IN AGONY FOR ETERNITY. I WOULDN'T BURN OR TORTURE THEM AT ALL. Is this idea really so hard for Christians to understand?? Is your moral compass so corrupted by the poison of your religion that you think a suitable punishment for lack of respect is eternal torture?????

It is quite obvious that our morals do not come from this god, even if he did exist.

Did you have an answer for the question there, champ? I wouldn't burn or torture them either. But I'm interested in what you would do if your children grew up and refused to get a job or contribute in any way. Would you take any action?

Magicmiles, while your question is definitely an interesting topic that deserves discussion, it is off the OP and continuing would, IMHO, derail this thread.  I humbly suggest you start a new thread on parenting techniques of atheists vs. theists or something--but that's not what the OP is about.

It was related to the general theme of the OP in that I was intending to demonstrate that an action can sometimes seem harsh when viewed without consideration of all factors.

There are a few specific posts in this thread I hope to address further, but its a big time committment and my work is pretty bad currently.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Antidote on November 19, 2013, 07:51:20 PM
It was related to the general theme of the OP in that I was intending to demonstrate that an action can sometimes seem harsh when viewed without consideration of all factors.

The fact that you can reconcile this is disgusting, but it's not surprising considering your role model.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Boots on November 19, 2013, 08:21:31 PM
It was related to the general theme of the OP in that I was intending to demonstrate that an action can sometimes seem harsh when viewed without consideration of all factors.

I can only infer that you'd then demonstrate that the action of eternal damnation in a pit of fire can seem *less* harsh by considering factors we have not.  I'd loooooove to hear those.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 19, 2013, 08:31:50 PM
It was related to the general theme of the OP in that I was intending to demonstrate that an action can sometimes seem harsh when viewed without consideration of all factors.

I can only infer that you'd then demonstrate that the action of eternal damnation in a pit of fire can seem *less* harsh by considering factors we have not.  I'd loooooove to hear those.

Well, the first thing we'd need to examine is whether hellfire is literal. Not that it probably changes a huge amount.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Antidote on November 19, 2013, 08:34:56 PM
It was related to the general theme of the OP in that I was intending to demonstrate that an action can sometimes seem harsh when viewed without consideration of all factors.

I can only infer that you'd then demonstrate that the action of eternal damnation in a pit of fire can seem *less* harsh by considering factors we have not.  I'd loooooove to hear those.

Well, the first thing we'd need to examine is whether hellfire is literal. Not that it probably changes a huge amount.

Even if it wasn't literal, the fact that it's treated as such is the problem. And you can't say that "then they aren't christian if they believe that" That's a no true scottsman.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 19, 2013, 08:37:16 PM
It was related to the general theme of the OP in that I was intending to demonstrate that an action can sometimes seem harsh when viewed without consideration of all factors.

I can only infer that you'd then demonstrate that the action of eternal damnation in a pit of fire can seem *less* harsh by considering factors we have not.  I'd loooooove to hear those.

Well, the first thing we'd need to examine is whether hellfire is literal. Not that it probably changes a huge amount.

Even if it wasn't literal, the fact that it's treated as such is the problem. And you can't say that "then they aren't christian if they believe that" That's a no true scottsman.

As I said, it changes little. Eternal suffering is eternal suffering, be it physical, spiritual or a mixture of both.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Add Homonym on November 19, 2013, 08:39:15 PM
Well, the first thing we'd need to examine is whether hellfire is literal. Not that it probably changes a huge amount.

Well, yeah, it doesn't. You are basically saying that your version of God goes against the scruptures. SDA and JW Christians deny that hell exists at all, on the basis of the OT non-existence, and perhaps the fallacy of Luke (a non-witness) including the parable of Lazarus. I'm not sure how they do it, but they manage.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Antidote on November 19, 2013, 08:49:44 PM
As I said, it changes little. Eternal suffering is eternal suffering, be it physical, spiritual or a mixture of both.
Thanks for getting to the root of my point. The fact that it exists at all, be it literal or metaphorical simply shows what kind of times  the people who wrote the bible were in. We are no longer bound by the same pressures and mysteries they once were, it's time for us to grow up and let go of these myths, and see them for what they really are.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Add Homonym on November 19, 2013, 09:03:13 PM
Look at this great statement, on a PoE site

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False%20Religions/Seventh-Day%20Adventist/sneaky.htm

This guy, lambasting SDAs for believing all sorts of Satanic shit (inc. no literal hell). He accuses them of believing that Jesus is the angel Micheal, and then says that many don't know they believe that, because: "Many of them are ignorant and don't know what they believe, which is often the case I have found."
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Antidote on November 19, 2013, 09:09:57 PM
Look at this great statement, on a PoE site

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False%20Religions/Seventh-Day%20Adventist/sneaky.htm

This guy, lambasting SDAs for believing all sorts of Satanic shit (inc. no literal hell). He accuses them of believing that Jesus is the angel Micheal, and then says that many don't know they believe that, because: "Many of them are ignorant and don't know what they believe, which is often the case I have found."

I don't even know what to say to that :/
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: median on November 20, 2013, 02:06:31 AM


Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement? YES or NO.

No.


Once you have answered this, then please answer why or why not.

Because that would be horrible. I don't want to do anything horrible to my children.

Also, very few Australian houses have basements.


Is what you call "horrible" immoral?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on November 20, 2013, 02:09:42 AM
Is what you call "horrible" immoral?

See, the thing is that it doesn't matter what we think one bit. God makes the rules and we just have to suck it up and deal with it with our heads held high.

Arguing about it saying, "Sounds too cruel to be real!" will get you nowhere in the grand scheme of things. Nobody ever said the truth had to be pretty.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 20, 2013, 02:11:47 AM


Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement? YES or NO.

No.


Once you have answered this, then please answer why or why not.

Because that would be horrible. I don't want to do anything horrible to my children.

Also, very few Australian houses have basements.


Is what you call "horrible" immoral?

Well I'd call burning my kids to death immoral, certainly. But my understanding of immoral might be different to yours.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: median on November 20, 2013, 03:34:14 AM

Well I'd call burning my kids to death immoral, certainly. But my understanding of immoral might be different to yours.

If you claim that this thing 'God' is the standard of your morality then you just admitted that God is immoral b/c he (according to the bible) does just that - tortures his children in fire, forever and ever.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 20, 2013, 03:41:22 AM
You need to fix the quote so I can respond^^
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: median on November 20, 2013, 03:42:42 AM
Is what you call "horrible" immoral?

See, the thing is that it doesn't matter what we think one bit. God makes the rules and we just have to suck it up and deal with it with our heads held high.

Arguing about it saying, "Sounds too cruel to be real!" will get you nowhere in the grand scheme of things. Nobody ever said the truth had to be pretty.

It's funny how you can't see how hypocritical your claim here is. It doesn't matter what we think? And yet somehow you "think" that God is good. So you've just contradicted yourself. It matters to you what you think insofar as you've judged this alleged 'God' thing to be "good". Yet you completely contradict yourself by saying "it doesn't matter what we think" when it is clearly shown that your God is immoral by it's own standards.

Read your last sentence again. "Nobody ever said the truth had to be pretty." Exactly. The truth is, your religion is FALSE. It is both irrational (self contradictory) and immoral by it's own standards. And you have sacrificed your rational mind AND your personal dignity all to continue holding onto it in spite of all evidence and reasonable argument to the contrary. It does matter what we think, but your mind has to go there saying, "It doesn't matter what I think" b/c if you actually decided to open your mind (and actually think for yourself) you'd wake up and realize that your religion (just like all the others) is pure bullshit.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 20, 2013, 03:48:41 AM

Well I'd call burning my kids to death immoral, certainly. But my understanding of immoral might be different to yours.

If you claim that this thing 'God' is the standard of your morality then you just admitted that God is immoral b/c he (according to the bible) does just that - tortures his children in fire, forever and ever.

Did you ever have sex with your Mum?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 20, 2013, 04:01:23 AM
I have to go home, so I'll just make my point in full.

No, you didn't ever have sex with your Mum. At least, I bloody hope not. Because that would be just completely wrong and disgusting. Maybe you could even call it immoral.  It doesn't matter. The point is, your Dad did have sex with your Mum. That, however, does not mean you consider your Dad to be wrong, disgusting and immoral.

Neither does the fact I consider it would be immoral for me to burn my children mean I am calling God immoral for choosing to do so. Your logic fails on this point.

Note that I am not attempting to make any point here whatsoever other than your logic was flawed in saying that I admit/consdier God to be immoral because He may do something I wouldn't do.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: median on November 20, 2013, 04:26:31 AM
I have to go home, so I'll just make my point in full.

No, you didn't ever have sex with your Mum. At least, I bloody hope not. Because that would be just completely wrong and disgusting. Maybe you could even call it immoral.  It doesn't matter. The point is, your Dad did have sex with your Mum. That, however, does not mean you consider your Dad to be wrong, disgusting and immoral.

Neither does the fact I consider it would be immoral for me to burn my children mean I am calling God immoral for choosing to do so. Your logic fails on this point.

Note that I am not attempting to make any point here whatsoever other than your logic was flawed in saying that I admit/consdier God to be immoral because He may do something I wouldn't do.

The logical flaws are all yours. Is God the standard of morality according to your theology? Is God (or God's 'nature') the standard of what is moral and/or immoral? If so, then you have a direct contradiction. You are hypocritically trying to apply two different standards of morality (one for yourself and one for God) all the while attempting to claim that 'God is love' (when such actions are clearly not loving). Such scripture twisting and word bending is what you have to do in order to hold onto this stuff.

So too, behold your false analogy above (more irrationality). Having sex (be it with a family member or someone else) is NOT doing unnecessary harm to an individual (especially when there is consent). But if your definition of morality is simply to "do whatever the God dictates" (regardless of consequence or circumstance) then I find you wholly immoral (as 'just following orders'). Why do you find it OK to hold this double standard regarding yourself and this alleged God you worship?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 20, 2013, 06:25:46 AM

I have to go home, so I'll just make my point in full.

No, you didn't ever have sex with your Mum. At least, I bloody hope not. Because that would be just completely wrong and disgusting. Maybe you could even call it immoral.  It doesn't matter. The point is, your Dad did have sex with your Mum. That, however, does not mean you consider your Dad to be wrong, disgusting and immoral.

Neither does the fact I consider it would be immoral for me to burn my children mean I am calling God immoral for choosing to do so. Your logic fails on this point.

Note that I am not attempting to make any point here whatsoever other than your logic was flawed in saying that I admit/consdier God to be immoral because He may do something I wouldn't do.
Is God the standard of morality according to your theology? Is God (or God's 'nature') the standard of what is moral and/or immoral?

Yes


If so, then you have a direct contradiction.


No I don't.


You are hypocritically trying to apply two different standards of morality (one for yourself and one for God)

No I'm not. I believe it would be wrong for me to burn my children. It simply does not logically follow that it would be wrong for God to do so. I could list many examples to demonstrate that an action is wrong by one person but not by another.

Everything else you posted is superfluous to the point I am making, kind of disappointing too given I took the trouble to stress that I sought only to address a specific piece of logic. The actual morality of burning kids is irrelevant to the faulty logic of "X cannot do Y,  therefore Y cannot do Y"
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Add Homonym on November 20, 2013, 07:36:46 AM

No I'm not. I believe it would be wrong for me to burn my children. It simply does not logically follow that it would be wrong for God to do so. I could list many examples to demonstrate that an action is wrong by one person but not by another.


While I see you point that God's may have a different point of view for his basis of morality, the scripture that you work from, gives no explanation of why God would desire to punish people in this way, because it's derived from the Jewish religion, which didn't work in terms of an afterlife. The afterlife scenario is just a tack on, and the idea of hell is even worsely thought out. It's just a random nasty threat; perhaps derived from hope that bad people will be punished, later, because God did nothing to them in this life. The religion says nothing about why we would want to go to heaven, either, because it's not even sure what heaven is. It's not sure whether it's a resurrection, or angels, or for eternity, or an aeon.

Since it gives no clue as to what hell could be for, you have to make stuff up, and pretend that you're OK with it.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: jynnan tonnix on November 20, 2013, 08:04:37 AM
I guess I just out and out can't fathom the mindset which can, on the one hand, hold that the infinite torture of any human (or animal, for that matter) is a horrible thing, but then turn around and somehow claim that it becomes a good thing when it is done by god.

There has to be some sort of huge disconnect in a mind which could manage to hold those two thoughts at the same time without blowing up, it seems. How do you even do it? How do you just turn off the idea of eternal agony as something no loving, or even remotely sane mind could inflict upon a sentient being? How do you manage to shrug it off as fair, just and, by very definition "good" when inflicted by god? How can you go through this thought process without ever coming to the conclusion that there is something less than perfect about this deity? How?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Jag on November 20, 2013, 08:28:37 AM
Well, the first thing we'd need to examine is whether hellfire is literal.
We can get right on that just as soon as you explain HOW.

Seriously, how do we go about examining if hellfire is literal?

Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Anfauglir on November 20, 2013, 08:39:21 AM
I believe it would be wrong for me to burn my children. It simply does not logically follow that it would be wrong for God to do so. I could list many examples to demonstrate that an action is wrong by one person but not by another.

Then what you are saying is that there is no fixed standard of morality - that sometimes it is okay to burn people, sometimes not.  In which case there is no reason at all to accept that any moral standard suggested by your god is in any way "right" - its simply another opinion of what is right and wrong.

In which case, whatever your god decides to do to use cannot universally be described as good - and any punishment he may inflict is not done as a result of any moral imperative, but is done simply because he holds power.....might makes right.

Explain again why such a being is worthy of worship, rather than simple obedience through fear?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: jdawg70 on November 20, 2013, 09:29:51 AM
See, the thing is that it doesn't matter what we think one bit. God makes the rules and we just have to suck it up and deal with it with our heads held high.
Might makes right.
Complacency in the face of suffering and tragedy.

You can hold your head up high with that, but you should be hanging it down in shame.
Quote
Arguing about it saying, "Sounds too cruel to be real!" will get you nowhere in the grand scheme of things.
I'm not sure that's what is being argued here.  I think it's more of a "Sounds too cruel!  Can't be all-loving!" kind of thing going on.
Quote
Nobody ever said the truth had to be pretty.
So why all the bulls**t about 'god being love' and all that jazz?  Just be out with the honest truth:
"God is a cruel, evil dictator that demands my worship and your worship too.  He will unleash ultimate suffering upon you lest you bow to his whims.  Petty human, do not question the might of the evil overlord.  Just shut up and do what you're told."

And you have the audacity to accuse others[1] of worshiping a demon?
 1. every Not True Christian that you have thusfar named in your time here
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Truth OT on November 20, 2013, 10:32:35 AM
Look at this great statement, on a PoE site

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False%20Religions/Seventh-Day%20Adventist/sneaky.htm

This guy, lambasting SDAs for believing all sorts of Satanic shit (inc. no literal hell). He accuses them of believing that Jesus is the angel Micheal, and then says that many don't know they believe that, because: "Many of them are ignorant and don't know what they believe, which is often the case I have found."

This is almost comical to me.

To be honest, in my opinion the SDAs and JWs ideal of an afterlife is actually far more scripturally consistant than the Christian masses. I have yet to see ANY scriptural text that says man has an undying immortal soul that could be be tortured for all eternity.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Truth OT on November 20, 2013, 11:23:58 AM
No, you didn't ever have sex with your Mum. At least, I bloody hope not. Because that would be just completely wrong and disgusting. Maybe you could even call it immoral.  It doesn't matter. The point is, your Dad did have sex with your Mum. That, however, does not mean you consider your Dad to be wrong, disgusting and immoral.

Neither does the fact I consider it would be immoral for me to burn my children mean I am calling God immoral for choosing to do so. Your logic fails on this point.

Seriously dude? You are comparing the act of consenting sex to a torturous fiery unending punishment! That's utterly ridiculous! You'd have done better to say that you raped your mom and your dad subsequently did the same thing years ago. That would be a more fitting comparison. And it could easily be stated that BOTH you and your dad were immoral, wrong, and disgusting because you BOTH engaged in the SAME immoral activity.

Note that I am not attempting to make any point here whatsoever other than your logic was flawed in saying that I admit/consdier God to be immoral because He may do something I wouldn't do.

....................... It simply does not logically follow that it would be wrong for God to do so. I could list many examples to demonstrate that an action is wrong by one person but not by another.

........................The actual morality of burning kids is irrelevant to the faulty logic of "X cannot do Y,  therefore Y cannot do Y"

You seem to be glossing over the point that if activity "Y" is immoral, neither Person A or Person B can engage in it and not be considered as immoral. I submit that purposely burning kids, with malace forethought (or without this premeditation) is ALWAYS immoral. Raping a woman, no matter who does it is ALWAYS immoral. How is it that you can claim that a party can do any of these immoral acts and not be immoral in doing so?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Hatter23 on November 20, 2013, 11:30:28 AM
Christians can't do that, median. Only God can because he is the Creator and Supreme King.


So might makes right. Wow, that's pretty much the philosophy of evil

Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Hatter23 on November 20, 2013, 11:35:28 AM

"My house, my rules. If you don't like it, then leave."
Is the parent evil and wrong?
Would you prefer the parent spoil the children and let them do anything they want?


Hrrm no I would expect a good parent to actually talk to the child and use corrective punishment, not leave garbled instructions through a baby sitter who has been occasionally known to lie,never see the child and then show up at the end of a few years and take the child to basement and set them on fire forever.

What you are doing is a false dichotomy.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Hatter23 on November 20, 2013, 11:39:05 AM



If I do my job as a parent well, I will not every have to "make her work."  I hope to inspire her to work.  As my parents inspired me.  To contribute to society. To create something.  To discover something.  To make a difference.  I want her to make a good living.  And I hope that she will never be greedy.  That she will never feel entitled.  That she will understand that none of us live in a silo, and that everything we do impacts on the world around us.  That she will take pride in her accomplishments, and that she will treat everyone around her with respect.   

 

I'm sure the vast majority of parents want that. And usually they can achieve that, as parents. However, somethimes the best parents can have children that for whattever reason simply refuse to listen or learn, and insist on being selfish.

You didn't really address Skeptic's question, did you? You essentially dismissed the perfectly legitimate scenario he raised and chose to instead discuss your own experiences and hopes. Whilst commendable, they are not relevant to the question.

How would you react, as a parent, to a child that insisted on playing no useful part in society and was determined to live in comfort through your efforts only? Would you allow it? Or would there be an ultimatum of sorts, at some point?
Sure there would. However, if I failed to ever even show up until that point, and never to have done some corrective partial measures, I would be a shitty parent and the child's bad behavior was really my fault.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Hatter23 on November 20, 2013, 11:42:35 AM
To use this passage as some sort of argument that modern day parents should stone their disobedient children is intellectually retarded in the biggest way.

That's the point, that's what the post was about, to point out how ridiculous the bible is. Actually read it, cover to cover, especially the Old Testament, it's packed full of stuff like that. One of the primary reasons I don't take it seriously, I only own a bible because my mother bought me one when I was 8 and still going to church.[1]

EDIT:
The bible endorses: includes various instances of
1) Slavery
2) Rape
3) Murder
4) Genocide
5) Incest
6) Patricide
7) Matricide
8 ) Infanticide
etc
The list goes on, and that's JUST the Old Testament.
 1. no I wasn't religious then

I have edited your quote to make it more accurate.

WRONG!!!!!!!! If 'The Lord' orders most of these things(which happen numerous time throughout the Old Testament); by defintion it endorces it. If it gives explict instruction of how to properly treat a slave other than "let them go" it endorces slavery.

Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Truth OT on November 20, 2013, 12:01:06 PM

"My house, my rules. If you don't like it, then leave."
Is the parent evil and wrong?
Would you prefer the parent spoil the children and let them do anything they want?


But what if the "children" cannot leave and are trapped in the house and told to properly obey the some rules that aren't exactly clear or else they will be tossed into the basement and forever subjected to a fire that cannot be quenched?

You are trying to compare a parental home to a prison! It doesn't work Skep, it doesn't work.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: median on November 20, 2013, 12:31:35 PM
Is God the standard of morality according to your theology? Is God (or God's 'nature') the standard of what is moral and/or immoral?

Yes

If so, then you have a direct contradiction.

No I don't.


You are hypocritically trying to apply two different standards of morality (one for yourself and one for God)

No I'm not. I believe it would be wrong for me to burn my children. It simply does not logically follow that it would be wrong for God to do so. I could list many examples to demonstrate that an action is wrong by one person but not by another.

Everything else you posted is superfluous to the point I am making, kind of disappointing too given I took the trouble to stress that I sought only to address a specific piece of logic. The actual morality of burning kids is irrelevant to the faulty logic of "X cannot do Y,  therefore Y cannot do Y"

Actually, you have (once again - as is so often the case) misrepresented my argument (straw man fallacy). I did not say, "X cannot do Y, therefore Y cannot do Y" and you are bearing false witness by misquoting me this way (btw). What I stated was that if God is the standard of morality, and you are to follow this 'standard', then God acts immorally by breaking his own nature/rules (which are supposedly "the standard"). Can God be the standard of morality and not be the standard of morality at the same time?

MY ARGUMENT:

P1 - If God's nature is the standard of morality, then anyone at all who breaks his rules (which are in accordance with his nature) has acted immorally
P2 - So too, anyone who follows God's rules is moral
P3 - God has broken his own stated rules (which are supposedly in accordance with is 'nature')
C - Therefore, God has acted immorally

By your own admission God is the standard of what is moral. Yet at the same time, you think God can perform actions which are immoral and still have them be moral? When I pointed out you have a direct contradiction (and all you said was "No I don't.") you didn't somehow magically resolve the contradiction by denying it. You have presented a God who violates his own rules (i.e. - violates "objective" morality) yet somehow tells you to be like him (i.e. - be Christlike/Godlike etc) by following his alleged example. That is a direct conflict.

Can you think of ANY scenario, whatsoever, for any person (at all anywhere) by which it would be justified to torture children with fire? How about to own other human beings as property? Is there ANY circumstance whatsoever where owning another human being as property, and beating them severely to near death, is moral? The bible very clearly states that this thing 'God' cannot lie (Hebrews 6), that he cannot deny himself (2 Timothy 2), and that he cannot be tempted by evil or tempt anyone with evil (James 1). Do you think that God (who is supposedly 'holy') can commit sins??

If you think that morality, as you define it, is such that specific actions can be deemed 'moral' when performed by a God yet 'immoral' when performed by human beings then God, and its alleged 'nature', necessarily cannot be the standard of what is moral. If, for example, torturing your children in the basement with fire is not morally wrong for the reason that it is against God's nature to do so then the standard of morality is not found in God's nature.

This renders the Christian response to the Euthyphro Dilemma completely falsified.

THE DILEMMA:

Is something moral because God commands it, or does God command it because it is moral?

No longer can you attempt to use the "it's Gods nature" argument (as shown above). So which is it? Divine Command Theory (where God is a big dictator mafia-boss who can violate his own rules and cause tons of suffering, or change the rules anytime), or a morality that exists outside of this 'God' things 'nature' (whereby then God itself is subject to that morality)? You can't have it both ways and still be rational.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Hatter23 on November 20, 2013, 01:32:56 PM
I will point out the hole in that this crappy reasoning that I've seen time and time again.

Corrective punishment is useless if it is unseen and a person cannot learn from it. If punishment is unseen, thereby not showing others, nor can a person learn from it(that is come back to life in the case of Hell) then it is uselessly cruel and sadistic. It is the equivalent to said father taking the child(that has some sort of miraculous regenerative ability) into the basement and locking it into the furnace burning it ....forever.

I saw my father, when he punished me, it was so I could learn I did wrong; he didn't leave garbled instructions through a baby sitter that said things I couldn't believe in, then set me on fire for not following them
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Astreja on November 20, 2013, 03:29:22 PM
See, the thing is that it doesn't matter what we think one bit. God makes the rules and we just have to suck it up and deal with it with our heads held high.

So you say -- But I sincerely believe that a genuine god wouldn't make up stupid rules in the first place.

From what I can see, Skeptic, you and other True Believers™ have been had.  Your precious and unique lives have become spastic, badly-painted puppets in the beefy hands of primitive men who wanted power over their neighbours -- And wanted it so badly that they thought nothing of terrifying even young children with tales of a mythical Hell.

Quote
Arguing about it saying, "Sounds too cruel to be real!" will get you nowhere in the grand scheme of things.

It's actually gotten Me quite far -- In fact, I'm accelerating away from Christianity at warp factor 9.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: nogodsforme on November 20, 2013, 04:28:06 PM
The religious perspective here is: Morality comes from god; he and only he determines what is good and what is bad. There is no way of establishing good or bad outside of god. If god does or commands that something be done, it must by definition be good.   If a human does what god commands, it must also be good, even if other humans judge the action as bad.

Of course this right here is full of fail, because people of every and no religion do things that are accepted by other religions as good. It must be that religion does not matter to morality because god appears to speak to people regardless of religion. Religious people try to get around this by saying the human conscience is god's voice; good and bad are written on our hearts; etc.

However, the "written on our hearts" stuff has no evidence-- in fact, god's voice is rather fuzzy around the edges. Some people in every society--psychopaths and sociopaths-- seem to not have the writing on their hearts. They break the rules of their own society, and do not feel bad about it either, apparently due to a glitch in their brains. And what is written on our hearts seems to change, too, over time. Whereas being waited on hand and foot by a chattel slave raised hardly a hackle in polite US society of 1722, it was legally forbidden by 1892 and completely hidden from public view today. What does it say on our hearts about slavery today that was not there in 1722?

What exactly is wrong also varies by culture. Incest is universally wrong, but what constitutes incest varies from one culture to another. Do first cousins count or not? We won't even get into the bible stories full of seemingly not forbidden sibling incest and parent-child incest. And royal people of many cultures marry relatives with the approval of their society. Can't have royal blood mixed with common blood, now can we?

So it does not seem to hold that there is a universal but secret morality invented by god waiting, floating out there for people to figure out.[1]What is far more likely is: no god, no secret universal morality. People have made up their own morality out of what makes cultural sense for group survival. That is why morality varies so much over time and space, but has a lot of cultural overlap on the basics.

The idea that morality was developed as humans evolved actually has some evidence. Code of Hammurabi, Golden Rule, etc. predate Christianity. Every society from the Chinese to the Aztec to the Kingdom of Mali to the Aboriginals of Australia to the Inuit of the frozen north has developed moral codes, and there is a big overlap among all of them as to what kind of behavior is good or bad.

Don't kill friends and relatives, don't take what is not yours, don't have sex with your mama or daddy. Societies that require you to kill your friends and family, to steal from others and to sex up your parents don't tend to stick around very long. Again, religion is irrelevant to morality except as a way for some cultures to try to give weight to their social rules.

 

 
 1. Unless god is really incompetent...
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 20, 2013, 04:55:57 PM
Note to all: I've gotten carried away with posting on the forums (not for the first time) and as a result I have slipped in my output at work. I therefore need to concentrate on that fully for some time and get back on top of it. I will be absent from the forum for at least a couple of weeks.

Please don't see this as an attempt to back away from debate...trust me, I really want to pursue this and other topics. But I can't risk my job over it.

Until then.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on November 20, 2013, 05:24:42 PM
MM you can't answer the questions put forth, or return an even average rebuttal . I am sure you still think you are winning this debate.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: median on November 20, 2013, 05:48:26 PM
MM you can't answer the questions put forth, or return an even average rebuttal . I am sure you still think you are winning this debate.

In either one of the scenarios I put forth above, Christians are still falling on their own sword. They cannot use the argument that "God's nature is the standard of morality" b/c it is clearly within that 'God's nature' to violate its own rules (aka - violate it's own nature). So then the Christian is left with having to choose between only two possibilities (either A) God is a hypocritical dictator, or B) morality exists independently of 'God'). If the Christian chooses option A, then God is nothing more than a monstrous hypocritical thug, who can violate his own rules and change what is 'moral' at anytime (at which case there really is no 'objective' morality because it can change). If the Christian chooses option B, then God is not the standard of morality (and therefore there is something which is in fact greater than God - at which case we need not listen to its commands; i.e. - we can discover morality on our own, independently of God, and God is subject to those rules as well as us).

So as it turns out, this concept that "God is the standard of objective morality" is completely bankrupt: DECLINED FOR INSUFFICIENT FUNDS! Christian morality: FALSIFIED.  This 'God' thing is not the standard of morality and that is why Christians have to jump through every irrational 'hoop and bound' to get around this obvious fact, and the terrible dilemma that their "faith" puts them in. Christianity is inherently immoral. It makes claims to 'objective' morality but cannot backup those claims b/c the foundation upon which those claims rest is not fixed, but constantly changing (i.e. - an alleged 'divine' thing that doesn't have to follow it's own nature).
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on November 20, 2013, 11:34:39 PM
The aboriginal indigenous cultures around the world prove without a shadow of a doubt you do not need BibleGod to live a highly evolved non violent "moral" society. Did they have gods and rituals,of course,were some of these rituals barbaric,yes,was there war,sometimes. The way these society's did not mirror Christianity was the massive scale of slaughter carried out in a gods name or by a gods command.

 The excuse that these were not "true Christians" won't hold either. The culture of Christianity changes as the world becomes less accepting of the movements actions becomes more civilized. From the time they killed for their God,to the slave trade,to emancipation,the civil rights movement and the treatment of women,Christianity evolved to stay socially relevant.

 There was a time for Christians when ALL actions against "others" at one point in time or another was acceptable and normal,until the time when they were told by society to cease the barbaric actions.Christians did not stop until society as a whole stopped them.  For the most part the modern day church of Christianity cringes at the actions of its own past. Today we have Christian's like Magic miles,who have forgotten the actions of the past and are confused as to why we are so cruel and apathetic towards them
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on November 21, 2013, 12:14:04 AM
MM you can't answer the questions put forth, or return an even average rebuttal . I am sure you still think you are winning this debate.

Don't treat him like that.

if the man said he has to work, he has to work. What's so hard to believe about that?

I myself actually question if some atheists on this website even have jobs at all.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Antidote on November 21, 2013, 12:16:03 AM
MM you can't answer the questions put forth, or return an even average rebuttal . I am sure you still think you are winning this debate.

Don't treat him like that.

if the man said he has to work, he has to work. What's so hard to believe about that?

I myself actually question if some atheists on this website even have jobs at all.

You ask someone not to be a douche, then you act like a douche, good job skep.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Jag on November 21, 2013, 12:47:09 AM
I myself actually question if some atheists on this website even have jobs at all.
Judgmental little dude aren't you? I myself actually question if you just had a nasty romantic breakup and suddenly have a lot of free time and injured pride to deal with.

Do you really want to play that game? I can do this all day and I promise you: I'm better at it than you are.

I happen to be one of those atheists who doesn't have a job, but the two facts have nothing to do with each other - I'm a full time college student living off my savings. Free time to be here arguing with and making fun of theists is just a bonus, and a side effect of the many hours I spend on my computer on any given day.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Nam on November 21, 2013, 01:27:04 AM
MM you can't answer the questions put forth, or return an even average rebuttal . I am sure you still think you are winning this debate.

Don't treat him like that.

if the man said he has to work, he has to work. What's so hard to believe about that?

I myself actually question if some atheists on this website even have jobs at all.

I work 100 hours a week, at home, and get paid $0.00. I worked 80-100 hrs a week from 17 years old to 32 years old averaging about $60,000 a year[1], I've been on the internet since the late 1980's[2], and on the world wide web since 2001. From 2001-2008, I worked at about 8 places plus published 5 books[3][4]. I have done volunteer editing, reviews, research, and written anonymous literary biographies for many online literary websites[5], and I donate 15% of what I earn, per year[6] to two charities; one dealing with literacy, and the other homelessness.

I've spent more hours at http://allpoetry.com than any other website online. I have over 31,000 comments on that website with at least 90%+ of them being critiques. I have also been a moderator there, a teacher, and a researcher--all volunteering, and once wrote a guideline on how to respectfully treat new members of the website, which was implemented for the greeting staff[7] some years ago. I am highly respected there by many people, even those who dislike me with a passion. At one point: I had over 30 separate accounts there[8] that I wrote, and critiqued regularly under simultaneously. Many people there still, to this day, have fond memories of some of them.

I have a pretty busy life. And it's been busy for a very long time. You think I spend a lot of time here? Compared, collectively, to other places on/offline--not even close.

How about you get a life rather than you telling us to.

There's a thought.

-Nam
 1. note I said "averaging"; which means some of those years I got considerably less, and almost nothing
 2. you read that right
 3. one actually selling better than the other four combined
 4. I don't necessarily advertise my work, it's something you either find, or are pointed toward by other readers
 5. of varying literary fields
 6. minus these last 4-5 years but still donate what little I do get when I can
 7. I shit you not--whether they still use it, I don't know.
 8. which was allowed confined to the rules
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on November 21, 2013, 01:31:33 AM
Might makes right.
Complacency in the face of suffering and tragedy.

No. It is understanding that we should fear God for our actions.

The same way a child may shake in terror when he got an F on his test waiting for his dad to get home. If the child was laughing and in an upbeat mood waiting for the father to come home, I would question the father's parenting skills.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on November 21, 2013, 01:37:18 AM
MM you can't answer the questions put forth, or return an even average rebuttal . I am sure you still think you are winning this debate.

Don't treat him like that.

if the man said he has to work, he has to work. What's so hard to believe about that?

I myself actually question if some atheists on this website even have jobs at all.

I work 100 hours a week, at home, and get paid $0.00. I worked 80-100 hrs a week from 17 years old to 32 years old averaging about $60,000 a year[1], I've been on the internet since the late 1980's[2], and on the world wide web since 2001. From 2001-2008, I worked at about 8 places plus published 5 books[3][4]. I have done volunteer editing, reviews, research, and written anonymous literary biographies for many online literary websites[5], and I donate 15% of what I earn, per year[6] to two charities; one dealing with literacy, and the other homelessness.

I've spent more hours at http://allpoetry.com than any other website online. I have over 31,000 comments on that website with at least 90%+ of them being critiques. I have also been a moderator there, a teacher, and a researcher--all volunteering, and once wrote a guideline on how to respectfully treat new members of the website, which was implemented for the greeting staff[7] some years ago. I am highly respected there by many people, even those who dislike me with a passion. At one point: I had over 30 separate accounts there[8] that I wrote, and critiqued regularly under simultaneously. Many people there still, to this day, have fond memories of some of them.

I have a pretty busy life. And it's been busy for a very long time. You think I spend a lot of time here? Compared, collectively, to other places on/offline--not even close.

How about you get a life rather than you telling us to.

There's a thought.

-Nam
 1. note I said "averaging"; which means some of those years I got considerably less, and almost nothing
 2. you read that right
 3. one actually selling better than the other four combined
 4. I don't necessarily advertise my work, it's something you either find, or are pointed toward by other readers
 5. of varying literary fields
 6. minus these last 4-5 years but still donate what little I do get when I can
 7. I shit you not--whether they still use it, I don't know.
 8. which was allowed confined to the rules

That is interesting to hear, Nam. Sounds like you are a busy lad.

But in statistics, there are things known as outliers. You are probably an outlier.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Nam on November 21, 2013, 01:38:21 AM
MM you can't answer the questions put forth, or return an even average rebuttal . I am sure you still think you are winning this debate.

Don't treat him like that.

if the man said he has to work, he has to work. What's so hard to believe about that?

I myself actually question if some atheists on this website even have jobs at all.

I work 100 hours a week, at home, and get paid $0.00. I worked 80-100 hrs a week from 17 years old to 32 years old averaging about $60,000 a year[1], I've been on the internet since the late 1980's[2], and on the world wide web since 2001. From 2001-2008, I worked at about 8 places plus published 5 books[3][4]. I have done volunteer editing, reviews, research, and written anonymous literary biographies for many online literary websites[5], and I donate 15% of what I earn, per year[6] to two charities; one dealing with literacy, and the other homelessness.

I've spent more hours at http://allpoetry.com than any other website online. I have over 31,000 comments on that website with at least 90%+ of them being critiques. I have also been a moderator there, a teacher, and a researcher--all volunteering, and once wrote a guideline on how to respectfully treat new members of the website, which was implemented for the greeting staff[7] some years ago. I am highly respected there by many people, even those who dislike me with a passion. At one point: I had over 30 separate accounts there[8] that I wrote, and critiqued regularly under simultaneously. Many people there still, to this day, have fond memories of some of them.

I have a pretty busy life. And it's been busy for a very long time. You think I spend a lot of time here? Compared, collectively, to other places on/offline--not even close.

How about you get a life rather than you telling us to.

There's a thought.

-Nam
 1. note I said "averaging"; which means some of those years I got considerably less, and almost nothing
 2. you read that right
 3. one actually selling better than the other four combined
 4. I don't necessarily advertise my work, it's something you either find, or are pointed toward by other readers
 5. of varying literary fields
 6. minus these last 4-5 years but still donate what little I do get when I can
 7. I shit you not--whether they still use it, I don't know.
 8. which was allowed confined to the rules

That is interesting to hear, Nam. Sounds like you are a busy lad.

But in statistics, there are things known as outliers. You are probably an outlier.

And you're probably an idiot. No, wait...

-Nam
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on November 21, 2013, 01:44:47 AM
And you're probably an idiot. No, wait...

-Nam

You are quite the Jekyll & Hyde.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Nam on November 21, 2013, 01:48:24 AM
And you're probably an idiot. No, wait...

-Nam

You are quite the Jekyll & Hyde.

Jykell & Hyde are pussies compared to me.

-Nam
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Antidote on November 21, 2013, 01:48:46 AM
And you're probably an idiot. No, wait...

-Nam

You are quite the Jekyll & Hyde.
And you're quite the Hyde, but throwing around insults accomplishes nothing.
Have you run out of arguments?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on November 21, 2013, 01:52:21 AM
And you're quite the Hyde, but throwing around insults accomplishes nothing.
Have you run out of arguments?

i didn't run out of anything. It's just that we are at a standstill.

I have explained that certain rules apply to some people but not others. The manager at a job does not follow the same rules as the employees.

Me and other Christians accept that, atheists don't. So, standstill.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Antidote on November 21, 2013, 01:54:11 AM
And you're quite the Hyde, but throwing around insults accomplishes nothing.
Have you run out of arguments?

i didn't run out of anything. It's just that we are at a standstill.

I have explained that certain rules apply to some people but not others. The manager at a job does not follow the same rules as the employees.

Me and other Christians accept that, atheists don't. So, standstill.

Wait, what the hell does that have to do with parents and children?
You just moved the goal post AGAIN.

Also if the same rules don't apply equally, you don't have morality, you have a train wreck.
Rules need to apply equally. Just look at corporations, it's a prime example of WHY rules need to apply equally, it's so corrupt and it's taking down our governments with it.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Jag on November 21, 2013, 01:57:06 AM
And you're quite the Hyde, but throwing around insults accomplishes nothing.
Have you run out of arguments?

i didn't run out of anything. It's just that we are at a standstill.

I have explained that certain rules apply to some people but not others. The manager at a job does not follow the same rules as the employees.

Me and other Christians accept that, atheists don't. So, standstill.
Excellent! Does that mean you'll get back on topic now?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: median on November 21, 2013, 02:23:38 AM

I have explained that certain rules apply to some people but not others. The manager at a job does not follow the same rules as the employees.

Me and other Christians accept that, atheists don't. So, standstill.

There goes your "objective" morality then. If you think some actions (such as torturing children with fire) are immoral for us (and therefore wrong) but moral for your alleged God then God (aka - God's nature) cannot be the standard of what is moral (since it clearly is not objective at all - but changes with this alleged 'Gods' whims). And this all brings you back to the Euthyphro Dilemma. You can no longer appeal to "God's nature" as an out for what is moral (b/c clearly that alleged 'nature' does things which are immoral for us).

So, is something moral because this alleged 'God' commands it, or does this thing command is because it is moral? You can't have it both ways.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Azdgari on November 21, 2013, 02:30:04 AM
Might makes right.
Complacency in the face of suffering and tragedy.

No. It is understanding that we should fear God for our actions.

The same way a child may shake in terror when he got an F on his test waiting for his dad to get home. If the child was laughing and in an upbeat mood waiting for the father to come home, I would question the father's parenting skills.

Your post would have made a lot more sense if you'd started it with "Yes." instead of "No."  Because after denying that you were describing "might makes right" morality, you then went right on to describe "might makes right" morality:  "X is the right thing to do because I am afraid of what the authorities will do to me if I don't do X"
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Anfauglir on November 21, 2013, 03:31:39 AM
I have explained that certain rules (of morality) apply to some people but not others. .

Then what you are saying is that there is no fixed standard of morality - that sometimes it is okay to burn people, sometimes not.  In which case there is no reason at all to accept that any moral standard suggested by your god is in any way "right" - its simply another opinion of what is right and wrong.

In which case, whatever your god decides to do to use cannot universally be described as good - and any punishment he may inflict is not done as a result of any moral imperative, but is done simply because he holds power.....might makes right.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ThatZenoGuy on November 21, 2013, 03:33:23 AM
I think the thread should be renamed.

Quote
Would you flood the entire earth to the extent of virtual complete death of all life, because of people "sinning"?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Hatter23 on November 21, 2013, 08:31:21 AM
The manager at a job does not follow the same rules as the employees.

However, he is supposed to follow the same morality; put in your hours, display a work ethic, don't steal from the company, etc. So your point is moot.

Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: median on November 21, 2013, 11:12:01 AM
I have explained that certain rules apply to some people but not others. The manager at a job does not follow the same rules as the employees.

You "have explained" wrongly. I know you want it to be, but this is NOT a 'standstill', sorry. There is plenty we can say (regardless of how irrational you are - which has already been shown dozens of times).

You have demonstrated a False Analogy. You cannot rightly compare a manager of a company to this 'God' thing. Managers, judges, police officers etc are held to the SAME STANDARD - not a different one. Sorry, you are irrational again. None of these beings can violate the law and they would be just as immoral for locking a child in the basement and torturing them with fire. So again, your attempt with this analogy (which is so common with Christians) fails miserably. Managers are NOT held to a different standard of morality.

Again, you are now caught in the Euthyphro Dilemma. You cannot use "God's nature" as an out for that dilemma (as noted in my previous posts to MM). So answer the dilemma. Either this alleged 'God' is a thug dictator who can change the rules at anytime (making "objective morality" null and void), or morality is something this 'God' thing itself must follow (which means morality exists outside independently, and then we don't need God for anything). Which is it?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Truth OT on November 21, 2013, 11:33:35 AM
You silly atheists just don't get it (in my skeptic12345 voice), the god I think I know is ABOVE the law. No rules apply to him. The only relationship he has to rules is that he makes them. You guys keep saying that morals are rules developed by man to help better our coexistence by laying out behavioral guidelines that serve to protect us from one another and then you try to subject my god to these rules all the while totally overlooking the fact that he is not real, I mean that he is not one of us so no rules for coexistence exists for him. All he does is insert the program of morality in our hearts so we can know how to interact with and coexist with one another all the while being mindful of the fact that we need to bow down to his might. The fact that you all can't see that god has nothing to do with us baffles me. You act like he walks with and interacts with us on a daily basis and would therefore need to be a part of our coexistance rule system, but he does not because he's outside of the realm of reality.

Is any of this really that hard?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Antidote on November 21, 2013, 02:15:40 PM
You silly atheists just don't get it (in my skeptic12345 voice), the god I think I know is ABOVE the law. No rules apply to him. The only relationship he has to rules is that he makes them. You guys keep saying that morals are rules developed by man to help better our coexistence by laying out behavioral guidelines that serve to protect us from one another and then you try to subject my god to these rules all the while totally overlooking the fact that he is not real, I mean that he is not one of us so no rules for coexistence exists for him. All he does is insert the program of morality in our hearts so we can know how to interact with and coexist with one another all the while being mindful of the fact that we need to bow down to his might. The fact that you all can't see that god has nothing to do with us baffles me. You act like he walks with and interacts with us on a daily basis and would therefore need to be a part of our coexistance rule system, but he does not because he's outside of the realm of reality.

Is any of this really that hard?

Wait... what? o.0
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 28, 2013, 03:25:36 AM

Actually, you have (once again - as is so often the case) misrepresented my argument (straw man fallacy). I did not say, "X cannot do Y, therefore Y cannot do Y" and you are bearing false witness by misquoting me this way (btw). What I stated was that if God is the standard of morality, and you are to follow this 'standard', then God acts immorally by breaking his own nature/rules (which are supposedly "the standard"). Can God be the standard of morality and not be the standard of morality at the same time?

MY ARGUMENT:

P1 - If God's nature is the standard of morality, then anyone at all who breaks his rules (which are in accordance with his nature) has acted immorally
P2 - So too, anyone who follows God's rules is moral
P3 - God has broken his own stated rules (which are supposedly in accordance with is 'nature')
C - Therefore, God has acted immorally


The flaw in your argument is you assert that when God gives laws to mankind He is also subject to them.

If I tell my kids not to drive the car, am I breaking my rules when i drive it? Of couese not. The rule, though coming from me, does not apply to me. Of course, the state, for whatever reason, might rule that I can no longer drive the car. Fair enough. And when you find a higher authority than God, you might have some sort of case to suggest God might be breaking a rule.

You're arguing against a partial God. For the purpose of trying to make a point you claim that morality comes from God alone. What you ignore is that if God alone has ultmate authority to decide what is moral, you can't then make any sort of claim of "what goes for us goes for you also" against Him, no matter how it might appear to tick the boxes of some philosophical/logical formula.

I wish to stress again, as so many people have failed to read my various caveats, or have ignored them, that in my exchange with Median on this specific point I have not sought to comment on the rights and wrongs of God sending anybody to hell. I have sought only to argue that Median uses faulty logic in claiming that God is immoral if he acts in a way that would be immoral for me.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Antidote on November 28, 2013, 03:27:42 AM

Actually, you have (once again - as is so often the case) misrepresented my argument (straw man fallacy). I did not say, "X cannot do Y, therefore Y cannot do Y" and you are bearing false witness by misquoting me this way (btw). What I stated was that if God is the standard of morality, and you are to follow this 'standard', then God acts immorally by breaking his own nature/rules (which are supposedly "the standard"). Can God be the standard of morality and not be the standard of morality at the same time?

MY ARGUMENT:

P1 - If God's nature is the standard of morality, then anyone at all who breaks his rules (which are in accordance with his nature) has acted immorally
P2 - So too, anyone who follows God's rules is moral
P3 - God has broken his own stated rules (which are supposedly in accordance with is 'nature')
C - Therefore, God has acted immorally


The flaw in your argument is you assert that when God gives laws to mankind He is also subject to them.

If I tell my kids not to drive the car, am I breaking my rules when i drive it? Of couese not. The rule, though coming from me, does not apply to me. Of course, the state, for whatever reason, might rule that I can no longer drive the car. Fair enough. And when you find a higher authority than God, you might have some sort of case to suggest God might be breaking a rule.

You're arguing against a partial God. For the purpose of trying to make a point you claim that morality comes from God alone. What you ignore is that if God alone has ultmate authority to decide what is moral, you can't then make any sort of claim of "what goes for us goes for you also" against Him, no matter how it might appear to tick the boxes of some philosophical/logical formula.

I wish to stress again, as so many people have failed to read my various caveats, or have ignored them, that in my exchange with Median on this specific point I have not sought to comment on the rights and wrongs of God sending anybody to hell. I have sought only to argue that Median uses faulty logic in claiming that God is immoral if he acts in a way that would be immoral for me.

The difference is, is a child capable or responsible enough to drive a car? Is it responsible for you to allow your child to drive a car in such a case?
That's a bad analogy.

Also it's illegal to allow a child to drive a car, and it's the parent who gets the consequences of it, so it's not the same even in that aspect.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Anfauglir on November 28, 2013, 03:40:55 AM
.....if God alone has ultmate authority to decide what is moral, you can't then make any sort of claim of "what goes for us goes for you also" against Him.....

So morality is subjective, varies depending on whether you are the rulemaker or the subjects, and derived from a position of power?

Sorry, but I struggle to see how any of that makes god's decisions on morality "right".
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 28, 2013, 03:50:11 AM

Actually, you have (once again - as is so often the case) misrepresented my argument (straw man fallacy). I did not say, "X cannot do Y, therefore Y cannot do Y" and you are bearing false witness by misquoting me this way (btw). What I stated was that if God is the standard of morality, and you are to follow this 'standard', then God acts immorally by breaking his own nature/rules (which are supposedly "the standard"). Can God be the standard of morality and not be the standard of morality at the same time?

MY ARGUMENT:

P1 - If God's nature is the standard of morality, then anyone at all who breaks his rules (which are in accordance with his nature) has acted immorally
P2 - So too, anyone who follows God's rules is moral
P3 - God has broken his own stated rules (which are supposedly in accordance with is 'nature')
C - Therefore, God has acted immorally


The flaw in your argument is you assert that when God gives laws to mankind He is also subject to them.

If I tell my kids not to drive the car, am I breaking my rules when i drive it? Of couese not. The rule, though coming from me, does not apply to me. Of course, the state, for whatever reason, might rule that I can no longer drive the car. Fair enough. And when you find a higher authority than God, you might have some sort of case to suggest God might be breaking a rule.

You're arguing against a partial God. For the purpose of trying to make a point you claim that morality comes from God alone. What you ignore is that if God alone has ultmate authority to decide what is moral, you can't then make any sort of claim of "what goes for us goes for you also" against Him, no matter how it might appear to tick the boxes of some philosophical/logical formula.

I wish to stress again, as so many people have failed to read my various caveats, or have ignored them, that in my exchange with Median on this specific point I have not sought to comment on the rights and wrongs of God sending anybody to hell. I have sought only to argue that Median uses faulty logic in claiming that God is immoral if he acts in a way that would be immoral for me.

The difference is, is a child capable or responsible enough to drive a car? Is it responsible for you to allow your child to drive a car in such a case?
That's a bad analogy.


Nope, for the point I am making it is a perfectly sound analogy. In fact, you have furthered my point quite nicely.

No, a child is not capable or responsible enough to drive a car. It requires somebody with much sounder capabilities to make that decision. In the case of God, nobody sounder exists.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 28, 2013, 03:55:26 AM
.....if God alone has ultmate authority to decide what is moral, you can't then make any sort of claim of "what goes for us goes for you also" against Him.....

So morality is subjective, varies depending on whether you are the rulemaker or the subjects, and derived from a position of power?

Sorry, but I struggle to see how any of that makes god's decisions on morality "right".

For the purpose of my disagreement with Median's logic, it really doesn't matter whether you consider it 'right' that God is the one who decides. It matters only that he is. Can't you see that?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Anfauglir on November 28, 2013, 04:08:06 AM
.....if God alone has ultmate authority to decide what is moral, you can't then make any sort of claim of "what goes for us goes for you also" against Him.....

So morality is subjective, varies depending on whether you are the rulemaker or the subjects, and derived from a position of power?

Sorry, but I struggle to see how any of that makes god's decisions on morality "right".

For the purpose of my disagreement with Median's logic, it really doesn't matter whether you consider it 'right' that God is the one who decides. It matters only that he is. Can't you see that?

Absolutely.  It all depends on your "if" at the start of your statement (bolded).  And as I said, I didn't see anything in your response that led me to accept that "if" as being correct.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 28, 2013, 04:14:34 AM
.....if God alone has ultmate authority to decide what is moral, you can't then make any sort of claim of "what goes for us goes for you also" against Him.....

So morality is subjective, varies depending on whether you are the rulemaker or the subjects, and derived from a position of power?

Sorry, but I struggle to see how any of that makes god's decisions on morality "right".

For the purpose of my disagreement with Median's logic, it really doesn't matter whether you consider it 'right' that God is the one who decides. It matters only that he is. Can't you see that?

Absolutely.  It all depends on your "if" at the start of your statement (bolded).  And as I said, I didn't see anything in your response that led me to accept that "if" as being correct.

This is why it is so very difficult to have discussions about God's authority, God's 'morality' and God's actions generally. If someone wants to argue something about God, it makes it very hard when one aspect of God's being is conceded (for the sake or argument) but another aspect of Gods being is not conceded when it is used to argue against the point being attempted.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Anfauglir on November 28, 2013, 04:18:05 AM
This is why it is so very difficult to have discussions about God's authority, God's 'morality' and God's actions generally. If someone wants to argue something about God, it makes it very hard when one aspect of God's being is conceded (for the sake or argument) but another aspect of Gods being is not conceded when it is used to argue against the point being attempted.

Quite.  It must be very hard for you - for all Christians.  So why not explain exactly why your god can be both the arbiter of morality AND not subject to morality, without it boiling down to "might makes right"?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Antidote on November 28, 2013, 04:35:21 AM
MM If you're going to quote me, DON'T quote mine me, address all the points of my post as they're all relevant.

Also it's illegal to allow a child to drive a car, and it's the parent who gets the consequences of it, so it's not the same even in that aspect.

You conveniently left this portion out.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Hatter23 on November 28, 2013, 04:06:27 PM



No, a child is not capable or responsible enough to drive a car. It requires somebody with much sounder capabilities to make that decision. In the case of God, nobody sounder exists.

Major flaw in the argument...that isn't about morality that is about responsibility.

The morality is...it is wrong to endanger yourself and others with likely bodily harm and death. It applies to the adult and the child. If the adult had just come out of Dental surgery...they would be wrong to operate a motor vehicle...for the exact same moral argument that a child shouldn't operate a motor vehicle at all.



Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 28, 2013, 04:21:48 PM
This is why it is so very difficult to have discussions about God's authority, God's 'morality' and God's actions generally. If someone wants to argue something about God, it makes it very hard when one aspect of God's being is conceded (for the sake or argument) but another aspect of Gods being is not conceded when it is used to argue against the point being attempted.

Quite.  It must be very hard for you - for all Christians.  So why not explain exactly why your god can be both the arbiter of morality AND not subject to morality, without it boiling down to "might makes right"?

I can't do that. No mere mortal can. But again, I don't think I need to be able to do that in order to demonstrate that Median's logic is flawed. God makes the rules, we are subject to them. Is that 'right'? You may think not. Can we explain how? Not really, no. But that doesn't make Median's argument correct.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: median on November 28, 2013, 04:25:31 PM

The flaw in your argument is you assert that when God gives laws to mankind He is also subject to them.

If I tell my kids not to drive the car, am I breaking my rules when i drive it? Of couese not. The rule, though coming from me, does not apply to me. Of course, the state, for whatever reason, might rule that I can no longer drive the car. Fair enough. And when you find a higher authority than God, you might have some sort of case to suggest God might be breaking a rule.

You're arguing against a partial God. For the purpose of trying to make a point you claim that morality comes from God alone. What you ignore is that if God alone has ultmate authority to decide what is moral, you can't then make any sort of claim of "what goes for us goes for you also" against Him, no matter how it might appear to tick the boxes of some philosophical/logical formula.

I wish to stress again, as so many people have failed to read my various caveats, or have ignored them, that in my exchange with Median on this specific point I have not sought to comment on the rights and wrongs of God sending anybody to hell. I have sought only to argue that Median uses faulty logic in claiming that God is immoral if he acts in a way that would be immoral for me.

Driving a car is not a moral or immoral action. False analogy fallacy. But it's actually funny that you are attempting to argue in this way (i.e. - admitting that God can violate his own alleged rules). The bible states that God cannot lie. Isn't that b/c it "violates his nature"? Do you not believe that morality stems from this 'nature'? If so, then God's 'nature' is self-contradictory (and thus this God cannot exist). An alleged God that violates its own nature is logically absurd and incoherent. Yet you still hold onto it in spite of all reason to the contrary.

Attempting to use God's nature as a foundation for morality is irrational - b/c that 'nature' is contradictory in what it attempts to display, in the claims of that bible. Thus, you are still stuck in the Euthyphro Dilemma. So then answer the question. Is an action moral because God commands it or does he command it because it is moral? Remember: the "God's' nature" argument is not an option here.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 28, 2013, 04:28:32 PM
MM If you're going to quote me, DON'T quote mine me, address all the points of my post as they're all relevant.

Also it's illegal to allow a child to drive a car, and it's the parent who gets the consequences of it, so it's not the same even in that aspect.

You conveniently left this portion out.

It was very convenient. I was rushed for time, and that part of your post didn't hold much relevance to the point I was making. It still doesn't.

No analogy is perfect. But it clearly demonstrates that a person making rules need not be subject to them.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: median on November 28, 2013, 04:31:33 PM
MM If you're going to quote me, DON'T quote mine me, address all the points of my post as they're all relevant.

Also it's illegal to allow a child to drive a car, and it's the parent who gets the consequences of it, so it's not the same even in that aspect.

You conveniently left this portion out.

It was very convenient. I was rushed for time, and that part of your post didn't hold much relevance to the point I was making. It still doesn't.

No analogy is perfect. But it clearly demonstrates that a person making rules need not be subject to them.

So then you are choosing option #1 of the Euthyphro Dilemma? According to you, whatever this alleged God commands is 'right' merely b/c he says it's right?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 28, 2013, 04:33:07 PM



No, a child is not capable or responsible enough to drive a car. It requires somebody with much sounder capabilities to make that decision. In the case of God, nobody sounder exists.

Major flaw in the argument...that isn't about morality that is about responsibility.

The morality is...it is wrong to endanger yourself and others with likely bodily harm and death. It applies to the adult and the child. If the adult had just come out of Dental surgery...they would be wrong to operate a motor vehicle...for the exact same moral argument that a child shouldn't operate a motor vehicle at all.

I disagree that it is a flaw in my argument, and your distinction between responsibility and morality, whilst quite valid, is not really relevant. I used the analogy to demonstrate that a law-giver need not be subject to the laws. It applies equally whether the person is dispensing responsibilities or moral laws.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on November 28, 2013, 04:35:49 PM
I'll read up on this Euthyphro Dilemma later so I can respond appropriately.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: median on November 28, 2013, 04:38:55 PM

I disagree that it is a flaw in my argument, and your distinction between responsibility and morality, whilst quite valid, is not really relevant. I used the analogy to demonstrate that a law-giver need not be subject to the laws. It applies equally whether the person is dispensing responsibilities or moral laws.

Merely making laws doesn't make them moral, especially in this case where you have an alleged deity who cannot lie yet deliberately deceives people (i.e. - lies to them, Hebrews 6, 2 Thessalonians 2).

Even further, how can a deity who violates his own rules be "holy" if it can violate its own moral prescriptions (which btw are supposed to be in accord with it's nature). Your argument fails miserably b/c you are ignoring passages like, "Be ye perfect as your father in heaven is perfect" or the claim that we are made "in God's image and likeness". And what about all the passages talking about being "Christlike" or being 'righteous as God is righteous'. These verses are an even further problem for your position if you are not resting your argument upon God's alleged "nature".

The bible says God is holy and that he does not change, and it also says that we are to mimic him, or be like him. Yet clearly if you think God can violate his own rules then it follows that he is violating his own nature. You have a clear contradiction on your hands.

Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Azdgari on November 28, 2013, 07:09:48 PM
I can't do that. No mere mortal can. ...

Then the reasonable thing to say is "as far as humans can tell, divine morality is a 'might-makes-right' affair" - no?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Anfauglir on November 29, 2013, 05:12:20 AM
Quite.  It must be very hard for you - for all Christians.  So why not explain exactly why your god can be both the arbiter of morality AND not subject to morality, without it boiling down to "might makes right"?

I can't do that. No mere mortal can. But again, I don't think I need to be able to do that in order to demonstrate that Median's logic is flawed. God makes the rules, we are subject to them. Is that 'right'? You may think not. Can we explain how? Not really, no. But that doesn't make Median's argument correct.

"Might makes right" then.  We are subject to rules, because someone says so.  There is no explanation as to why it is "right".  So the ONLY extant reason is "because I say so".

Might makes right.  Simples.

I can see why you don't want to come right out and agree that is what you are saying.  It doesn't sit very well with the claim of a loving and benevolent god, that the only expressible reason for the construction of morality is that of brute force.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Hatter23 on November 29, 2013, 05:59:36 AM



No, a child is not capable or responsible enough to drive a car. It requires somebody with much sounder capabilities to make that decision. In the case of God, nobody sounder exists.

Major flaw in the argument...that isn't about morality that is about responsibility.

The morality is...it is wrong to endanger yourself and others with likely bodily harm and death. It applies to the adult and the child. If the adult had just come out of Dental surgery...they would be wrong to operate a motor vehicle...for the exact same moral argument that a child shouldn't operate a motor vehicle at all.

I disagree that it is a flaw in my argument, and your distinction between responsibility and morality, whilst quite valid, is not really relevant. I used the analogy to demonstrate that a law-giver need not be subject to the laws. It applies equally whether the person is dispensing responsibilities or moral laws.

No it doesn't. That's my point exactly, responsibility will vary based on ability...morality is for all. If Morality isn't for all...then might makes right.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Add Homonym on November 29, 2013, 06:45:02 AM
Morality can't be for all, because the laws that we follow are recommendations, for our species to survive in a civilization. A dictum to not eat pork, or wash your hands, might be to control infection. You can argue that monogamy or permanent polygamy is also to control, or slow venereal disease, rather than the wrath of God. Obviously, killing is not good for our species, or any mammal, because our reproduction times are very slow, and the investment per child is high.

If the species changes, then the rules change. If you have a species which requires fertilization from multiple males, then you cannot possibly have monogamous morality, or the species will die. If there are no venereal diseases, then you can screw who you like. If the species requires rape to make the female ovulate, then rape is moral. If the animal requires death to spawn, then killing in certain circumstances is moral.

Morality is what necessarily has to happen to make the species survive, or the civilization/culture flourish.

It follows that God cannot have any morality, unless you know what God is trying to achieve, because the morality of God will be convergent on what needs to happen, for his reproduction to occur. We have no information on what God needs, to reproduce, or who he needs to exploit to achieve it. God could have no morality at all, if he does not need to reproduce, or create culture.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Truth OT on December 02, 2013, 12:42:43 PM
The concept of might makes right, though frowned upon by nearly all, is in a real respect a reality that has been the norm throughout existence. Exceptions have always been make for those people or entities with the means and power to see to it that rules don't apply to them in the same way they do everyone else.

Some examples include that police officer that turns on his sirens so he can run a red light, the parent that can restrict a child to having to stay confined to a single room for a given duration of time, as well as humans having the gall (right) to conduct experiments on animals.

All that to say that the concept of might equals right is real and plays out in our lives daily.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: One Above All on December 02, 2013, 12:52:03 PM
<snip>

I'm going to have to disagree with your terminology. Might makes things possible. Just because people with power do something doesn't make it right. It just means they have the power to do it. This also applies to a hypothetical petty god, such as YHWH. It sends people to hell because it can. Doesn't mean it should, and it certainly doesn't mean it's right.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Truth OT on December 02, 2013, 12:56:31 PM
<snip>

I'm going to have to disagree with your terminology. Might makes things possible. Just because people with power do something doesn't make it right. It just means they have the power to do it. This also applies to a hypothetical petty god, such as YHWH. It sends people to hell because it can. Doesn't mean it should, and it certainly doesn't mean it's right.

But what is "right" but a concept that we have surmized that indicates what behaviors are acceptable and what behaviors are not?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: One Above All on December 02, 2013, 01:03:22 PM
But what is "right" but a concept that we have surmized that indicates what behaviors are acceptable and what behaviors are not?

My point remains. Their behavior is not acceptable. Accepted[1]=/=Acceptable.
 1. Which it isn't, but, for the sake of this argument, let's say it is.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Jag on December 02, 2013, 03:22:50 PM
It's the difference between "accepting" someone's behavior when you have no choice in the matter, versus agreeing that someone's behavior meets the minimum standard commonly agreed upon in your society as "acceptable".
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: nogodsforme on December 02, 2013, 04:05:00 PM
If the person in charge of the rules is exempt from the rules, and furthermore, is not even to be questioned about the rules, everything makes perfect sense. It has to makes sense. Especially if the rules supposedly come from god, the biggest dictator of all.

And if the ruler tells you that the earth is 9,000 years old and is at the center of the solar system, or to not eat a certain food, or to have lots of babies, or not to have lots of babies, or cut off a body part of someone who steals, or stone a rape victim to death, or torture a child with fire in the basement, or make other people into your slaves, or go to war against a neighboring group for their land, or to drink a glass of kool-aid with cyanide in it, you do it.

Who the hell are you to demand explanations or reasons? Trust that your ruler knows best. You have no choice in the matter. And when the ruler tells you to do the opposite of what they just said to do, you change on a dime and forget there was ever any difference. Today you love Goldstein and tomorrow you hate him. Don't think about it, just shut up and obey.  Whatever the ruler wants.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4zYlOU7Fpk

Goes back to religion being quite compatible with dictatorship-- religion is such wonderful dictatorship glue. We should try to be better than the Taliban, Saudi Arabia, or the Catholic monarchies of medieval Europe. Just because we have a lot of examples does not mean "might makes right" and "shut yer traitorous face, dammit" are the best ways to run a society.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: median on December 02, 2013, 06:45:10 PM
This thread is just another example of how when Christians can't handle the truth, they bail out and keep believing bullshit instead of amending their beliefs that have been refuted.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on December 02, 2013, 07:16:11 PM
This thread is just another example of how when Christians can't handle the truth, they bail out and keep believing bullshit instead of amending their beliefs that have been refuted.

I haven't yet had time to research the Eurthymic dilema but I'll get to it. Maybe when tomorrow comes.

As for your post quoted here, are you suggesting that I, for instance, genuinely have been convinced that my beliefs are wrong but cling to them anyway?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: median on December 02, 2013, 07:22:44 PM
This thread is just another example of how when Christians can't handle the truth, they bail out and keep believing bullshit instead of amending their beliefs that have been refuted.

I haven't yet had time to research the Eurthymic dilema but I'll get to it. Maybe when tomorrow comes.

As for your post quoted here, are you suggesting that I, for instance, genuinely have been convinced that my beliefs are wrong but cling to them anyway?

I never used the word 'convinced'. Being refuted, and admitting that you've been refuted (i.e. - dropping the spin, rationalizing, cognitive dissonance, confirmation bias or etc, and coming to that admission) are two entirely different things. If you'd like to continue this discussion, by all means. Please respond to the previous posts which were responses to your posts.

Btw, its the Euthyphro Dilemma.

http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=Euthyphro_dilemma (http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=Euthyphro_dilemma)
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Azdgari on December 04, 2013, 02:57:12 PM
As for your post quoted here, are you suggesting that I, for instance, genuinely have been convinced that my beliefs are wrong but cling to them anyway?

If he did, then you of all people would have no grounds to object.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on December 04, 2013, 03:04:45 PM
As for your post quoted here, are you suggesting that I, for instance, genuinely have been convinced that my beliefs are wrong but cling to them anyway?

If he did, then you of all people would have no grounds to object.

I wouldn't object to that asertion being made, no. But I would know differently.

Also, in the post you allude to, I speak more of getting a sense of God's presence as opposed to having a full on, relaity staring me in the face type of belief.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: median on December 04, 2013, 05:23:12 PM
As for your post quoted here, are you suggesting that I, for instance, genuinely have been convinced that my beliefs are wrong but cling to them anyway?

If he did, then you of all people would have no grounds to object.

I wouldn't object to that asertion being made, no. But I would know differently.

Also, in the post you allude to, I speak more of getting a sense of God's presence as opposed to having a full on, relaity staring me in the face type of belief.

How can you distinguish this 'sense' you claim to have from SPAG, self delusion, emotional feelings, or misinterpretation of purely natural phenomena? Self diagnosis of alleged internal experiences like this are highly subject to error, misinterpretation, confirmation bias, and false memory from wishful thinking. Further, basing your entire life on said experiences (including the fashion in which you interpret said 'holy' texts which are connected to these alleged experiences) is not a reliable method for fact finding (since you are allowing your personal subjective interpretation of an alleged 'experience' to govern how you interpret evidence to the contrary of it). A subjective "sense" is not a reliable foundation for determining what is true from what is not true (especially when every religion makes claims to this effect and they contradict your own). Why aren't you practicing more critical thinking and having a higher standard of evidence than this?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on December 04, 2013, 05:26:21 PM
The post I refer to is one in which I claim everybody on this website has at one time or another gotten a sense of God being a reality.

I am convinced.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: median on December 04, 2013, 05:33:07 PM
The post I refer to is one in which I claim everybody on this website has at one time or another gotten a sense of God being a reality.

I am convinced.

And everyone on planet earth, at one time or another, has been mistaken about their personal subjective experiences and their interpretations of them. People "feel" their partner loves them and then realize the other person does not and has been cheating and is leaving. They claim a strong "intuition" about an alleged thing happening (and it does not), or they 'just know in their heart' that their son could not be a murderer (when it is later discovered that he is).

Feelings are highly inaccurate and very subject to error. Why are you attempting to approach fact finding this way? Why would you trust some feeling which you know is subject to grievous error?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Boots on December 04, 2013, 05:45:44 PM
The post I refer to is one in which I claim everybody on this website has at one time or another gotten a sense of God being a reality.

I am convinced.

I'm an excellent case in point to support median's post.  As a teen, I definitely "felt" god's presence.  That feeling was the last thing that prevented me from calling myself an atheist, after having gone from a die-hard RC contemplating priesthood to gradually rejecting all religion and belief in any god who takes a daily interest in our lives--but that pesky memory of that feeling experience remained.  I did an experiment, and was able to (nearly) replicate that feeling using exercise and martial arts training, completely exclusive of god worship or superstition of any kind.  that was the final nail in my theistic coffin, the final step in my transition to atheist.

I opine that I am more convinced than you.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Jag on December 04, 2013, 05:47:50 PM
The post I refer to is one in which I claim everybody on this website has at one time or another gotten a sense of God being a reality.

I am convinced.

I claim everyone who believes in God makes up out of their own heads the majority of what they claim is true and refuse to admit that they're full of beans.

I'm convinced.

Are you really bringing this up again? :o

Meanwhile, back to the conversation; you might be right if you limit your inclusion to those of us who readily admit to being former believers. I certainly did experience exactly what you are referring to, but I was quite young still and had no frame of reference to compare it to. I also have had a sense of magic being a reality too, among many, many other similar things. That "sense" is the problem - it can be attributed to any number of external stimuli when in reality it's an internal sensation. So what? I've had a sense of dread that is just as random and just as pervasive, and based on absolutely nothing concrete as well. I've been overwhelmed by sadness, seemingly from nowhere, and also by joy, in the same inspried-by-nothing-specific. Humans have emotional experiences. The urge to make our own experiences extra-special (even if only in our minds) is a function of our ego, not a supernatural entity.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: The Gawd on December 04, 2013, 06:13:47 PM
there is absolutely nothing my child could ever do that I would torture her in any manner. Absolutely nothing.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: nogodsforme on December 04, 2013, 06:29:15 PM
It is very hard to monitor your own brain functions--feelings come from your brain and feelings can lie. Mental illness like schizophrenia[1] is only one extreme example of that; think of all the mistakes and illusions that we fall for in our everyday lives! The fluttering leaf that looks like a rat at first; the crumpled paper that you think is money until you see it is a cigarette package; the piece of chocolate cake in the fridge that turns out to be some strange brown cheese.  :(

Con artists, casinos, prostitutes, drug dealers, cults and advertisers use the exact same manipulative techniques as mainstream religious groups to get us to feel stuff that is not true. Things that get your imagination and heart rate going, but are not what you think.

Try to convince a clinically depressed person that there is nothing to be sad about. Try to convince a love-struck teen that in a year they will have forgotten that rock star who snubbed them when they asked for his autograph. Try to convince a racist that they are wrong about Jews, blacks or Mexicans being the cause of all the world's problems.

Try to convince a member of a different religion (Islam, or Hinduism or JW's) that their equally intense religious feelings are not coming from the one true faith....
 1. I just watched A Beautiful Mind where the guy had a college roommate/life long best friend whose existence turned out to be an illusion!
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: xyzzy on December 04, 2013, 06:51:15 PM
The post I refer to is one in which I claim everybody on this website has at one time or another gotten a sense of God being a reality.

I am convinced.

I claim everyone who believes in God makes up out of their own heads the majority of what they claim is true and refuse to admit that they're full of beans.

I'm convinced.

I'm unaware of the reference but, no absolutely no, I have never, ever, ever, sensed that any god was a reality. Ever.

I was, however, told that Yahweh was real. I was told to believe. But, at the risk of beating a dead horse, I was also told that the tooth-fairy was real, babies came via storks, Father Christmas came down the chimney, and that Budweiser was decent beer.

My sense of a god was never any more real than any of those items and, frankly, was dissipated way before I cottoned on to the truth of Father Christmas. Sigh, I wish someone had warned me about Budweiser sooner though, as that could have saved some taste buds from an untimely death.

there is absolutely nothing my child could ever do that I would torture her in any manner. Absolutely nothing.

I am also unable to conceive of doing such a thing. Just considering it fills me with disgust. That must be those morals I, as an atheist, don't have kicking in and messing me up again.

Edit: I'm assuming that magicmiles is referring to something specific that one reflectively ascribes to a god and not hijacking feelings of smallness and intensity when considering such things as our place in the universe, or the origin of life.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ThatZenoGuy on December 04, 2013, 06:58:25 PM
I just watched A Beautiful Mind where the guy had a college roommate/life long best friend whose existence turned out to be an illusion![/nb]

You know what i am going to say...t-*redacted*

So, if the "feeling" of being correct makes the religion correct, doesn't that make every single religion correct?
Which obviously cannot be the correct answer.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: xyzzy on December 04, 2013, 07:06:03 PM
It is very hard to monitor your own brain functions--feelings come from your brain and feelings can lie. Mental illness like schizophrenia[1] is only one extreme example of that; think of all the mistakes and illusions that we fall for in our everyday lives! The fluttering leaf that looks like a rat at first; the crumpled paper that you think is money until you see it is a cigarette package; the piece of chocolate cake in the fridge that turns out to be some strange brown cheese.  :(

Con artists, casinos, prostitutes, drug dealers, cults and advertisers use the exact same manipulative techniques as mainstream religious groups to get us to feel stuff that is not true. Things that get your imagination and heart rate going, but are not what you think.

Try to convince a clinically depressed person that there is nothing to be sad about. Try to convince a love-struck teen that in a year they will have forgotten that rock star who snubbed them when they asked for his autograph. Try to convince a racist that they are wrong about Jews, blacks or Mexicans being the cause of all the world's problems.

Try to convince a member of a different religion (Islam, or Hinduism or JW's) that their equally intense religious feelings are not coming from the one true faith....
 1. I just watched A Beautiful Mind where the guy had a college roommate/life long best friend whose existence turned out to be an illusion!

Exactly.

Edit: Forgot to add the link

http://youtu.be/51B8MzcxOX0
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: median on December 04, 2013, 07:37:28 PM

So, if the "feeling" of being correct makes the religion correct, doesn't that make every single religion correct?
Which obviously cannot be the correct answer.

No, this is just the religious believers tactic for hiding away their religion so that it will be immune from refutation. Claim that it is non-falsifiable, internal, subjective, and/or "personal to me", so that they are immune from having to give actual evidence and so that they can ultimately retreat back to it when all other arguments fail. Religious people inherently know they have no demonstrable evidence that is sufficient to warrant belief (like one would expect for any other phenomena in life). They argue that way merely as a defense strategy to keep away anyone from refuting their "personal experience" assumption and b/c they assumed their religion was true from the outset (either due to cultural or societal influence, their parents, etc). This is why someone who grows up in India will become Hindu, if anything, and why someone in Saudi Arabia will become Muslim. One's religion is directly connected (generally) to their geographic location. This indicates that 'God' is man-made not the other way around.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on December 04, 2013, 08:58:00 PM
The post I refer to is one in which I claim everybody on this website has at one time or another gotten a sense of God being a reality.

I am convinced.
Convinced of what ? I never having a "God" experience,asking for "God's" help or any of the things you associate with a "God". Am I an anomaly,or was I raised the proper way where I use my rational mind?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: nogodsforme on December 04, 2013, 11:25:57 PM
One's religion is directly connected (generally) to their geographic location. This indicates that 'God' is man-made not the other way around.

Yet another reason, besides getting to sleep in on weekends, for being an atheist: Gods are all geographically limited and do not travel well.

Nobody ever knows of any religion or gods other than the ones that arise in their own fixed geographical locations. It is like there are no transcendent supernatural powers to these beings at all, because they all rely completely on the ability of humans to tell other humans about them. Or not. This is hardly good evidence for an all-powerful being. This is so obvious to us godless infidels, but seems never to occur to religious folks. 

The very first thing all missionaries do is discover, always to their dismay, that the local people have their own false god(s) and have never heard of the true one(s). Just once, I am sure, Christians want to arrive on some island in the middle of nowhere and find isolated natives in the jungle kneeling in front of a coconut tree cross with a coconut shell Jesus hanging on it, praying in fluent Latin to the god of Christianity. Reading the OT from palm-leaf bibles in thatch-roofed churches lit by wooden bike power a la Gilligan's Island. &)

But gods cannot cross mountains, deserts, or, especially, oceans. It is like the gods all have fear of heights, agoraphobia or sea sickness or something--no Dramamine in heaven? Nobody in the Americas or the Pacific ever heard of Jesus, Jehovah, Shango, Yemayah, Muhammed or Allah before the arrival of Africans and Europeans. Nobody in Asia or Africa ever heard of Zeus or Quetzalcoatl.

Is a puzzlement, to steal from Yul Brynner.

As a JW kid, I spent a lot of my spare time witnessing to other people about Jehovah God. Every single weekend, we went house to housing. It was unthinkable to stay home and watch cartoons when there were all these desperate sinners out there waiting for us to save them from Satan. If the JW's didn't personally get to absolutely everyone, then they would never know about true Christianity and would all perish. An awesome responsibility to put on a small child. :o

Now I wonder how all those thousands of JW's[1] miss this very basic point: god is perfect, outside of space and time, way more powerful, more knowledgeable than we are; yet, for some reason he depends completely on us effed up flawed humans to do get his most important work done.

Whatever happened to "if you want something done right, do it yourself?" :?

If god is really all that, why the hell does he need lower middle class black people from Chicago to save everyone on the planet from Armageddon? Why doesn't god just tell everyone himself and make sure they all know exactly what they need to know? What is the need of sacred verses, holy books and translating and mis-translating? Why doesn't god get off his holy a$$ and go somewhere and do something?  :P
 1. oh, and yes, the millions of other missionaries, televangelists, crusaders and proselytizers out there
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on December 04, 2013, 11:33:37 PM


The very first thing all missionaries do is discover, always to their dismay, that the local people have their own false god(s) and have never heard of the true one(s). Just once, I am sure, Christians want to arrive on some island in the middle of nowhere and find isolated natives in the jungle kneeling in front of a coconut tree cross with a coconut shell Jesus hanging on it, praying in fluent Latin to the god of Christianity. Reading the OT from palm-leaf bibles in thatch-roofed churches lit by wooden bike power a la Gilligan's Island. &)

Wouldn't that be something.

The idea of a God seems to have been implanted into their consciousness, all the same. And often when they do hear about Jesus, they somehow know straightaway that He really was the son of the one true God and start following Him.

Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Jag on December 04, 2013, 11:53:01 PM
^^^Have you ever read the Barbara Kingsolver novel The Poisonwood Bible (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Poisonwood_Bible)?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on December 04, 2013, 11:53:45 PM
^^^Have you ever read the Barbara Kingsolver novel The Poisonwood Bible (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Poisonwood_Bible)?

No Ma'am.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Jag on December 05, 2013, 12:09:51 AM
Great book! (if only for a perspective on the Belgian Congo in the 60's and 70's.) The family telling the story are missionaries from the US, and the author does a great job of making the huge gap of understanding between the two cultures very real but quite sympathetic. It's a good read. The conversion of the native villagers unfolds in a way that seems likely to mimic the process in reality, and I honestly don't think you'd find the book offensive or ...spiritually challenging? Although the father character is somewhat heavy-handed and authoritarian, even he is portrayed with a eye toward seeing the person behind the ego. Recommended read for a perspective on missionary work.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on December 05, 2013, 12:13:59 AM
Great book! (if only for a perspective on the Belgian Congo in the 60's and 70's.) The family telling the story are missionaries from the US, and the author does a great job of making the huge gap of understanding between the two cultures very real but quite sympathetic. It's a good read. The conversion of the native villagers unfolds in a way that seems likely to mimic the process in reality, and I honestly don't think you'd find the book offensive or ...spiritually challenging? Although the father character is somewhat heavy-handed and authoritarian, even he is portrayed with a eye toward seeing the person behind the ego. Recommended read for a perspective on missionary work.

Does it have any green mamba snakes? I like green mamba snakes.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: xyzzy on December 05, 2013, 12:15:03 AM
One's religion is directly connected (generally) to their geographic location. This indicates that 'God' is man-made not the other way around.

If god is really all that, why the hell does he need lower middle class black people from Chicago to save everyone on the planet from Armageddon? Why doesn't god just tell everyone himself and make sure they all know exactly what they need to know? What is the need of sacred verses, holy books and translating and mis-translating? Why doesn't god get off his holy a$$ and go somewhere and do something?  :P

The very first thing all missionaries do is discover, always to their dismay, that the local people have their own false god(s) and have never heard of the true one(s). Just once, I am sure, Christians want to arrive on some island in the middle of nowhere and find isolated natives in the jungle kneeling in front of a coconut tree cross with a coconut shell Jesus hanging on it, praying in fluent Latin to the god of Christianity. Reading the OT from palm-leaf bibles in thatch-roofed churches lit by wooden bike power a la Gilligan's Island. &)

Wouldn't that be something.

The idea of a God seems to have been implanted into their consciousness, all the same. And often when they do hear about Jesus, they somehow know straightaway that He really was the son of the one true God and start following Him.

How does that happen, one asks?

Well, those I've spoken to who have been on mission work, usually to some impoverished, undereducated, region which has often just suffered a god-supplied? natural disaster, have provided some clues.

These kind people help the indigenous population to understand how their false god has not attended to their needs, and that the nice, kind, loving Christians are there because the Christian god loves them and wants to help them. The nice, kind, Christian workers are only too happy to replace existing superstitious beliefs with supposedly more effective ones. The powerful implication being that the Christian god is the impetus behind that clean water, and that lovely school in which the locals can voluntarily learn about this new god.

What they are not taught is that these advancements are the product of the scientific method, and not the Christian god.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on December 05, 2013, 12:18:10 AM
Your insights vary mightily from mine.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Jag on December 05, 2013, 12:26:30 AM
Great book! (if only for a perspective on the Belgian Congo in the 60's and 70's.) The family telling the story are missionaries from the US, and the author does a great job of making the huge gap of understanding between the two cultures very real but quite sympathetic. It's a good read. The conversion of the native villagers unfolds in a way that seems likely to mimic the process in reality, and I honestly don't think you'd find the book offensive or ...spiritually challenging? Although the father character is somewhat heavy-handed and authoritarian, even he is portrayed with a eye toward seeing the person behind the ego. Recommended read for a perspective on missionary work.

Does it have any green mamba snakes? I like green mamba snakes.
Snakes, definitely, although I don't recall specific breeds.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: xyzzy on December 05, 2013, 12:52:20 AM
Your insights vary mightily from mine.

If that is in response to my post then, yes, I readily accept that what others have told me about their experiences may, well, differ from your insights.

However, I would be more than delighted to hear about your experiences of Christian missionaries who have provided unbiased education in comparative religion, and have taught under-educated peoples how to utilise, and advance, technology without recourse to superstition.

Can you do this for me?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on December 05, 2013, 12:59:16 AM
Your insights vary mightily from mine.

If that is in response to my post then, yes, I readily accept that what others have told me about their experiences may, well, differ from your insights.

However, I would be more than delighted to hear about your experiences of Christian missionaries who have provided unbiased education in comparative religion, and have taught under-educated peoples how to utilise, and advance, technology without recourse to superstition.

Can you do this for me?

The first part, almost certainly not. Every Christian missionary I have personally known teaches that there is one true God, revealed in the bible and Jesus was God's son. That does not mean to say they would never discuss what other religions are based on and teach. I think that is inevitable.

The second part, most definitely. I don't know any Christians who are scared of science or shy about using technology, and giving due credit to ingenoius men and women who develop it.

I know of a missionary based in the southern Philippines, an extremely dangerous area filled with vicious gangs. He and his family are safe because this missionary essentially taught himself to perform basic surgery. One night he saved the life of the biggest gang leader in the region.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on December 05, 2013, 01:00:31 AM


Can you do this for me?

That sounds rather condescending by the way. I'm not your 1st grade pupil requiring encouragement to perform some task.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Add Homonym on December 05, 2013, 01:07:35 AM
One night he saved the life of the biggest gang leader in the region.

That sounds like the moment in the movie, Horrible Bosses, where the guy saves the person they are trying to kill, ... or that moment in Dexter where he stops the Trinity killer from committing suicide.

Well, at least he can continue to preach Christianity, while being protected by the mob.

Sounds like the Catholic church, really.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: xyzzy on December 05, 2013, 01:08:01 AM


Can you do this for me?

That sounds rather condescending by the way. I'm not your 1st grade pupil requiring encouragement to perform some task.

Not at all, it was a genuine request for your participation. My apologies to you that it came over in a different manner.  The rest I will respond to tomorrow.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: magicmiles on December 05, 2013, 01:15:23 AM
No worries. I can't guarantee my own further involvement. I'm flighty. But I will try to return. Still trying to find time to study up on the Eurythmo Problem
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 05, 2013, 01:32:11 AM
What they are not taught is that these advancements are the product of the scientific method, and not the Christian god.

Actually, it is a mixture of both.

Christians started science. Since the Bible teaches that God created the laws of nature, the early Christian scientists wanted to examine the orderly universe that God created for us.

Science has been subject to a lot of perversion recently though. It is no longer dominated by honest Christians looking to understand God's universe. It's now godless and corrupted.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ThatZenoGuy on December 05, 2013, 02:01:33 AM
BAHAHAHA...

Corrupted?

Really?

What possible gain would there be for scientists to go around saying "Lol, god didn't do this, natural processes, evolution and stuff did."
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 05, 2013, 02:15:33 AM
BAHAHAHA...

Corrupted?

Really?

What possible gain would there be for scientists to go around saying "Lol, god didn't do this, natural processes, evolution and stuff did."

Illuminati does it, not the scientists. They just want Christianity destroyed.

Not everything in science is corrupted, but much of it is. Mainly big bang, abiogenesis, and evolution. Abiogenesis still has no empirical backing. It's based on the circular logic of, "Well we are here, so life must have formed on its own."
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: The Gawd on December 05, 2013, 02:17:06 AM
BAHAHAHA...

Corrupted?

Really?

What possible gain would there be for scientists to go around saying "Lol, god didn't do this, natural processes, evolution and stuff did."

Illuminati does it, not the scientists. They just want Christianity destroyed.

Not everything in science is corrupted, but much of it is. Mainly big bang, abiogenesis, and evolution. Abiogenesis still has no empirical backing. It's based on the circular logic of, "Well we are here, so life must have formed on its own."
listen, troll, the bible is enough to destroy christianity. its doing a good job at this point.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 05, 2013, 02:20:57 AM
listen, troll, the bible is enough to destroy christianity. its doing a good job at this point.

I do not see any empirical backing for abiogenesis in your post.
Do you concede that there is no empirical backing for it?

Don't blame me. It is not my fault there is no empirical backing for it.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Aaron123 on December 05, 2013, 02:21:51 AM
Not everything in science is corrupted, but much of it is. Mainly big bang, abiogenesis, and evolution. Abiogenesis still has no empirical backing. It's based on the circular logic of, "Well we are here, so life must have formed on its own."

Christianity still has no empirical backing. It's based on the circular logic of, "Well the bible says so, so god must've done it."
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 05, 2013, 02:24:46 AM
Christianity still has no empirical backing. It's based on the circular logic of, "Well the bible says so, so god must've done it."

So basically, one is no better than the other according to you?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Aaron123 on December 05, 2013, 02:30:40 AM
Abiogenesis has far more going for it than creationism.

Abiogenesis involves trying to examine the available evidence and seeing where that leads us.

Creationism involves looking at a dusty old book and going "welp, there's the answer, lets not look any further".
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Astreja on December 05, 2013, 02:42:39 AM
Christians started science.

Nope.  Mesopotamia, China, Egypt and Greece already had a history of scientific discovery long before the first Christian walked the Earth.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 05, 2013, 02:44:47 AM
Abiogenesis has far more going for it than creationism.

Abiogenesis involves trying to examine the available evidence and seeing where that leads us.

Creationism involves looking at a dusty old book and going "welp, there's the answer, lets not look any further".

OK, so what is the evidence for abiogenesis?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Aaron123 on December 05, 2013, 02:57:55 AM
OK, so what is the evidence for abiogenesis?

I'm really not the one to talk about abiogenesis in depth.  But I can point to where the subject is talked about thoroughly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/abioprob/


Care to go through them?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 05, 2013, 03:08:16 AM
OK, so what is the evidence for abiogenesis?

I'm really not the one to talk about abiogenesis in depth.  But I can point to where the subject is talked about thoroughly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/abioprob/


Care to go through them?

The talk origins link says that it is rejected by creationists because of its impossibility.

I personally don't argue that. I argue that there is no empirical backing for it, so it can't be scientific.

It can be religious, but not scientific.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Aaron123 on December 05, 2013, 03:16:27 AM
The talk origins link says that it is rejected by creationists because of its impossibility.

I personally don't argue that. I argue that there is no empirical backing for it, so it can't be scientific.

It can be religious, but not scientific.

Both links refers to several scientific studies done on the subject.  It has nothing to do with religion.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ThatZenoGuy on December 05, 2013, 03:19:15 AM
The talk origins link says that it is rejected by creationists because of its impossibility.


ERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR.

Wrong.

It states.
Quote
Creationists have asserted that a statistical principle called "Borel's Law" mathematically demonstrates that abiogenesis is impossible.

Note: Creationists.

Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Hatter23 on December 05, 2013, 08:32:06 AM
Illuminati does it,

Fnord

Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Hatter23 on December 05, 2013, 08:33:15 AM
The talk origins link says that it is rejected by creationists because of its impossibility. it disagrees with there unsupported illogical and unnegatiable assertion

fixed that for you
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: RED_ApeTHEIST on December 05, 2013, 10:17:07 AM
Abiogenesis has far more going for it than creationism.

Abiogenesis involves trying to examine the available evidence and seeing where that leads us.

Creationism involves looking at a dusty old book and going "welp, there's the answer, lets not look any further".

OK, so what is the evidence for abiogenesis?


I hate to start posting on here by being confrontational, or by playing "pile on the theist", but I have a question that I think is important to this exchange:

What would you consider acceptable evidence for abiogenesis? Would a detailed description of the probable process be enough or would we have to reproduce it in a lab?

2ndly; Whatever your standards of evidence may be, can you provide evidence for creation by a deity that would meet those standards?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Jonny-UK on December 05, 2013, 10:50:24 AM
Welcome to the forum RED_ApeTHEIST (is that a hellboy reference?)
Good questions for Skeptic.


Science has been subject to a lot of perversion recently though. It is no longer dominated by honest Christians looking to understand God's universe. It's now godless and corrupted.
I suspect you only think this as science moves further and further away from the "god did it" conclusions you want to see.

Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Jonny-UK on December 05, 2013, 11:14:28 AM
What would you consider acceptable evidence for abiogenesis? Would a detailed description of the probable process be enough or would we have to reproduce it in a lab?
Is it in the bible?    no- not evidence    yes- must be true

Quote
2ndly; Whatever your standards of evidence may be, can you provide evidence for creation by a deity that would meet those standards?
It's in the bible, thats all I need.

Sorry Skeptic, but I just know what your answers are going to be.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: median on December 05, 2013, 11:23:18 AM

Wouldn't that be something.

The idea of a God seems to have been implanted into their consciousness, all the same. And often when they do hear about Jesus, they somehow know straightaway that He really was the son of the one true God and start following Him.

There are lots of things that 'seem to be implanted in human consciousness' but this has no bearing on whether those beliefs are true. Are you really that naive? Second, they do not "know straightaway" (they are convinced) b/c, like you, they are gullible. Scores of magicians and con artists tell this tale very well. Humans are easily fooled into false beliefs. Did you not know this?

Besides this fact, not all people have some inherent 'deity' belief. Lots of people grow up in non-religious societies and have no belief in any god 'thing' whatever. The only ones who think otherwise are the ones who buy wholesale the tall tale told by Paul in Romans ch 1. But just saying something is so (and writing it down) doesn't make it so (sorry Paul!).
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: median on December 05, 2013, 11:30:35 AM

Illuminati does it, not the scientists. They just want Christianity destroyed.

Not everything in science is corrupted, but much of it is. Mainly big bang, abiogenesis, and evolution. Abiogenesis still has no empirical backing. It's based on the circular logic of, "Well we are here, so life must have formed on its own."

What a convenient coincidence that the three branches of science that you think are "corrupted" are the ones that as it just so happens , falsify your theology.

(http://wemeantwell.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/hypocrisy.jpg)
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: median on December 05, 2013, 11:41:33 AM

Actually, it is a mixture of both.

Christians started science. Since the Bible teaches that God created the laws of nature, the early Christian scientists wanted to examine the orderly universe that God created for us.

Science has been subject to a lot of perversion recently though. It is no longer dominated by honest Christians looking to understand God's universe. It's now godless and corrupted.

You are so ignorant it's comical. Christians did not 'start science'. Are you kidding? There were people doing science long before Christianity. You really need to stop your confirmation bias and look at things openly and honestly; that is, if you actually care whether or not your beliefs are true. But, obviously you don't. So here we are.

Does it make you feel good to be arrogant about your ignorance?



Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 05, 2013, 01:03:26 PM
I hate to start posting on here by being confrontational, or by playing "pile on the theist", but I have a question that I think is important to this exchange:

What would you consider acceptable evidence for abiogenesis? Would a detailed description of the probable process be enough or would we have to reproduce it in a lab?

2ndly; Whatever your standards of evidence may be, can you provide evidence for creation by a deity that would meet those standards?

I would accept abiogenesis if it was videotaped without human intervention.

Creating life in a lab would only prove that it takes intelligence to create life. The only way to definitively prove it would be to videotape it happening on its own with no human intervention.

Can this be done? They claim it happened already, so I need to see it with my own 2 eyes.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: jdawg70 on December 05, 2013, 01:06:17 PM
Creating life in a lab would only prove that it takes intelligence to create life.
Does creating diamonds in a lab only prove that it takes intelligence to create diamonds?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 05, 2013, 01:07:40 PM
Does creating diamonds in a lab only prove that it takes intelligence to create diamonds?

Yes. God made the process from the get-go. These silly claims like "snowflakes prove no designer" go nowhere because we Christians believe God made the intricacies of the snowflake.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 05, 2013, 01:09:13 PM

Actually, it is a mixture of both.

Christians started science. Since the Bible teaches that God created the laws of nature, the early Christian scientists wanted to examine the orderly universe that God created for us.

Science has been subject to a lot of perversion recently though. It is no longer dominated by honest Christians looking to understand God's universe. It's now godless and corrupted.

You are so ignorant it's comical. Christians did not 'start science'. Are you kidding? There were people doing science long before Christianity. You really need to stop your confirmation bias and look at things openly and honestly; that is, if you actually care whether or not your beliefs are true. But, obviously you don't. So here we are.

Does it make you feel good to be arrogant about your ignorance?

They may have been doing science but they didn't get very far. They didn't have electricity or cars. This happened once Christianity became dominant because people expected an orderly world because the Bible says God created the laws of nature. (Jeremiah 33:25)
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: jdawg70 on December 05, 2013, 01:15:04 PM
Yes. God made the process from the get-go. These silly claims like "snowflakes prove no designer" go nowhere because we Christians believe God made the intricacies of the snowflake.
Who the hell says that "snowflakes prove no designer"?  They need to be smacked upside the head.  Snowflakes are evidence that intricate patterns can result from simple rules.  But you reject that because...you believe god is directly responsible for creating all snowflakes?  Or is it more of a "god made the rules that allow for the snowflake to be intricate"?

Is there such a thing as anything happening without intelligence involved?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 05, 2013, 01:17:28 PM
Yes. God made the process from the get-go. These silly claims like "snowflakes prove no designer" go nowhere because we Christians believe God made the intricacies of the snowflake.
Who the hell says that "snowflakes prove no designer"?  They need to be smacked upside the head.  Snowflakes are evidence that intricate patterns can result from simple rules.  But you reject that because...you believe god is directly responsible for creating all snowflakes?  Or is it more of a "god made the rules that allow for the snowflake to be intricate"?

Is there such a thing as anything happening without intelligence involved?

No. This whole universe is intelligently run.

Think of computers. Sometimes they freeze and crash and you have to turn it off. Can you imagine if the universe was glitchy like that?

Thank God the universe runs like clockwork, never freezing, never crashing.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: RED_ApeTHEIST on December 05, 2013, 01:21:10 PM

I would accept abiogenesis if it was videotaped without human intervention.

Creating life in a lab would only prove that it takes intelligence to create life. The only way to definitively prove it would be to videotape it happening on its own with no human intervention.

Can this be done? They claim it happened already, so I need to see it with my own 2 eyes.

Thank you for your response.  If that's the position that you take, then I can understand why you are skeptical of current ideas about abiogenesis.

Could you answer the 2nd of my questions as well?


2ndly; Whatever your standards of evidence may be, can you provide evidence for creation by a deity that would meet those standards?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Wasserbuffel on December 05, 2013, 01:22:00 PM

No. This whole universe is intelligently run.

Think of computers. Sometimes they freeze and crash and you have to turn it off. Can you imagine if the universe was glitchy like that?

Thank God the universe runs like clockwork, never freezing, never crashing.
Seriously. Tears in my eyes from the laughter. That's a very special worldview you've got going on there, Skep.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: wright on December 05, 2013, 01:23:36 PM
skeptic, provide actual proof of these "Illuminati" of yours. If you could actually show they're more than a paranoid Christian persecution fantasy, then we'd have at least one reason to take your other claims seriously.

Well, not the one about demons. That'd still be laughable.

And welcome to the forum, Red APE.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Hatter23 on December 05, 2013, 01:28:02 PM
Does creating diamonds in a lab only prove that it takes intelligence to create diamonds?

Yes. God made the process from the get-go. These silly claims like "snowflakes prove no designer" go nowhere because we Christians believe God made the intricacies of the snowflake.

Because "Magic Man Must have done it" is a very comfortable and easy to understand, unlike actually difficult to understand aspect of hexoganal crystal formation based on the arrangement of clusters of H2O molecules.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: jdawg70 on December 05, 2013, 01:30:36 PM
No. This whole universe is intelligently run.

Think of computers. Sometimes they freeze and crash and you have to turn it off. Can you imagine if the universe was glitchy like that?

Thank God the universe runs like clockwork, never freezing, never crashing.
Are you implying:
a) God, being perfect and without glitches, has an intelligence 'running' him?
b) God, not being intelligently run, has glitches?

If a, please explain the nature of the intelligence 'running' god.
If b, please reject any claims of god's 'perfection'.

If neither, then I think your only outs are:
c) A glitchless system does not imply intelligence behind it.
d) Everything that appears to function without 'glitches' necessarily implies an intelligence behind it, except god (special pleading)

Of course, we're using the word 'glitch' and I am rather uncertain what 'glitch' means in the context of the general operating principles of the universe.  Would a miracle be considered a 'glitch'?  If not, how do you discern between a 'glitch' and a 'miracle'?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: The Gawd on December 05, 2013, 01:37:30 PM
We're still addressing the troll?

Someone ask it if a meteor striking the earth and killing off dinosaurs is a glitch. Ask it if all the failed attempts at planets are glitches.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Hatter23 on December 05, 2013, 01:38:32 PM

I would accept abiogenesis if it was videotaped without human intervention.


So you are only willing to accept something that has explanations of how it possibly could have happened without human intervention if it has been videotaped. Something that would have had to happen only once as we see that the product does have an inclination towards self replication and variance, such as the observed examples of speciation.

However, you ARE perfectly willing to accept a tale of magic, deities, and monsters because it is in a book.

(http://4.asset.soup.io/asset/2699/5252_f7ff_500.jpeg)
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Hatter23 on December 05, 2013, 01:43:02 PM
No. This whole universe is intelligently run.

Think of computers. Sometimes they freeze and crash and you have to turn it off. Can you imagine if the universe was glitchy like that?

Thank God the universe runs like clockwork, never freezing, never crashing.
Are you implying:
a) God, being perfect and without glitches, has an intelligence 'running' him?
b) God, not being intelligently run, has glitches?

If a, please explain the nature of the intelligence 'running' god.
If b, please reject any claims of god's 'perfection'.

If neither, then I think your only outs are:
c) A glitchless system does not imply intelligence behind it.
d) Everything that appears to function without 'glitches' necessarily implies an intelligence behind it, except god (special pleading)

Of course, we're using the word 'glitch' and I am rather uncertain what 'glitch' means in the context of the general operating principles of the universe.  Would a miracle be considered a 'glitch'?  If not, how do you discern between a 'glitch' and a 'miracle'?

Wouldn't supernovas, nebulas, failed planets, planetary body collisions, and black holes be examples of the universe not running like a perfect clockwork, but rather an indication of a chaotic system with laws?

Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: jdawg70 on December 05, 2013, 01:45:32 PM
So you are only willing to accept something that has explanations of how it possibly could have happened without human intervention if it has been videotaped. Something that would have had to happen only once as we see that the product does have an inclination towards self replication and variance, such as the observed examples of speciation.

However, you ARE perfectly willing to accept a tale of magic, deities, and monsters because it is in a book.
It's actually worse than that.

On the one hand, he's explicitly saying that he would accept abiogenesis (which, I think, he agrees means the spontaneous emergence of self-replicating entities without intelligent intervention), and on the other hand, he's explicitly rejecting that there is any phenomenon that can be attributed to a non-intelligent cause.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: jdawg70 on December 05, 2013, 01:49:39 PM
Wouldn't supernovas, nebulas, failed planets, planetary body collisions, and black holes be examples of the universe not running like a perfect clockwork, but rather an indication of a chaotic system with laws?
I don't know.  Frankly, we've now bumped into the problem of evaluating the merits of the totality of reality.  I have no idea how to do that.  There needs to be some standard to compare against if we are to make some evaluation of something "working perfectly" or "not working perfectly".  What is reality's function?  If we don't know what that is, and (for unclear reasons) assume that there must be a function, in what way can we discern if it "works perfectly" or not?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Hatter23 on December 05, 2013, 01:53:11 PM
Wouldn't supernovas, nebulas, failed planets, planetary body collisions, and black holes be examples of the universe not running like a perfect clockwork, but rather an indication of a chaotic system with laws?
I don't know.  Frankly, we've now bumped into the problem of evaluating the merits of the totality of reality.  I have no idea how to do that.  There needs to be some standard to compare against if we are to make some evaluation of something "working perfectly" or "not working perfectly".  What is reality's function?  If we don't know what that is, and (for unclear reasons) assume that there must be a function, in what way can we discern if it "works perfectly" or not?

Which brings us back to the basic issue of assertion and Occam's razor.

In order to assert the universe was intelligently designed(the postive assertion) you have to show us an example of a universe without the attribute of that positive assertion.

However Creationists are too deluded or stupid to understand that.

Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Nam on December 05, 2013, 01:55:30 PM
Welcome to the forum RED_ApeTHEIST (is that a hellboy reference?)
Good questions for Skeptic.


Science has been subject to a lot of perversion recently though. It is no longer dominated by honest Christians looking to understand God's universe. It's now godless and corrupted.
I suspect you only think this as science moves further and further away from the "god did it" conclusions you want to see.



It's funny he says that since most credible science done by Christians in the past have been done by Catholics; and to him: they are demon-lead. See, when it favors his point-of-view (like most protestant Christians) then they too are Christian, when it doesn't, they're not.

-Nam
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Jonny-UK on December 05, 2013, 02:01:25 PM
I actually thought about questioning that "honest christian" remark.The boundaries for being a christian in his eyes are certainly changeable. I am beginning to suspect what has been mentioned before, that Skeptic is actually more than one person.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Nam on December 05, 2013, 02:04:39 PM
I actually thought about questioning that "honest christian" remark.The boundaries for being a christian in his eyes are certainly changeable. I am beginning to suspect what has been mentioned before, that Skeptic is actually more than one person.

Doesn't matter: they're all idiots, if so, and if not.

-Nam
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Jonny-UK on December 05, 2013, 02:12:30 PM
Doesn't matter: they're all idiots, if so, and if not.

-Nam
(http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd115/jonny998/monkeys.jpeg) (http://s225.photobucket.com/user/jonny998/media/monkeys.jpeg.html)
Certainly no getting through to him/them
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Jonny-UK on December 05, 2013, 02:16:52 PM
Unless it's in here he does not want to know-
(http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd115/jonny998/monkeybible.jpeg) (http://s225.photobucket.com/user/jonny998/media/monkeybible.jpeg.html)
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Nam on December 05, 2013, 02:22:10 PM
Unless it's in here he does not want to know-
(http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd115/jonny998/monkeybible.jpeg) (http://s225.photobucket.com/user/jonny998/media/monkeybible.jpeg.html)

And even then, that's not enough because t/he[y] obviously have never read it.

-Nam
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ParkingPlaces on December 05, 2013, 03:23:00 PM
Folks, there is no way to argue with someone who thinks that all of his conclusions are facts. Nothing we say can get him to think even a little tiny bit. If an actual idea bit him in the ass, he'd just scratch it absentmindedly.

He can spell science, but that's all he knows about it. He reads the bible like its porn, looking only for the good parts (of course he doesn't actually know where to look for the sex stuff in it. That would be a sin.), and he presumes a personal superiority in all matters. Which he finds quite easy to do because he doesn't know jack shit and doesn't know he doesn't know jack shit.

That's the worst kind of theist.

The only way I could have a lower opinion of his mental capabilities was if he were also a republican congressman. Which I don't think is impossible.

Our conversations are so one sided with him that it is like he isn't even there. I suggest that we act accordingly.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Hatter23 on December 05, 2013, 03:26:58 PM
I actually thought about questioning that "honest christian" remark.The boundaries for being a christian in his eyes are certainly changeable. I am beginning to suspect what has been mentioned before, that Skeptic is actually more than one person.

Changeable so that he is not held accountable for any statement made, enough slime to keep that cognitive dissonance well greased from actual conclusions he doesn't want to hear.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: nogodsforme on December 05, 2013, 03:49:12 PM
A skeptic contradiction quickie:

He says any scientific advances done by non-Christians or before Christianity don't count as real deal science. So the astronomical, mathematical and architectural genius of the Mayans don't count. Incas had food science that allowed them to freeze-dry staples like potatoes when food preservation in Europe meant "just add more salt". The study of optics, the incredible documentation of human anatomy, the mapping techniques and the amazing irrigation systems of the Arabs and Muslims don't count.[1]

It is only once European Christians (mainly Catholics of course) got involved, science really took off and that's the only reason we have antibiotics and computers and cars and hearing aids and houses full of plastic sh!t. The fact that monks and priests were the only literate people in Europe and controlled access to new knowledge might have had a tad bit to do with Christian domination of scientific advances in the Middle Ages for a while.

Okay. But all those modern advances are coming along even faster at the same time as any Christian religious influence in science has almost completely disappeared. Cars, computers, antibiotics, airplanes, vaccinations and on and on are all from the 19-20th century. Islam is growing faster then Christianity.  No Christian institutions are at the forefront of inventions or medical advances nowadays. Today, technological innovations and new discoveries are coming from Japan, India and China. Are universities around the world full of clever demons in lab coats, inventing cool stuff just to trick people away from religion? You would think that the one true god would not let that happen....
 1. I guess he doesn't realize that without the number system from India and algebra from the Arab world, it would be impossible to do the kind of math that modern science is based on. Try writing decimal fractions with Christian Roman numerals.... &)
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Jonny-UK on December 05, 2013, 03:58:45 PM
Are universities around the world full of clever demons in lab coats, inventing cool stuff just to trick people away from religion?
I think you have given him the perfect response to your post!
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ParkingPlaces on December 05, 2013, 04:44:30 PM
Yep, the only christian advances he can point to were made by demon-filled catholics. Yet he wants to take full credit. For their findings and everyone elses.

Go figure.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Hatter23 on December 05, 2013, 04:54:08 PM
Yep, the only christian advances he can point to were made by demon-filled catholics. Yet he wants to take full credit. For their findings and everyone elses.

Go figure.
Changeable so that he is not held accountable for any statement made, enough slime to keep that cognitive dissonance well greased from actual conclusions he doesn't want to hear.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: nogodsforme on December 05, 2013, 06:07:38 PM
Did he actually say that he will only accept abiogenesis as fact if he sees it on a video? Because no scientific experiments, extrapolations or investigations will prove that something happened in the past. Just video.[1]

When is he going to post the videos that support his religious ideas about what happened in the past? The videos of god creating the universe in real time, of Adam and Eve talking (in what language?) to the snake, of Noah loading up the ark with millions of animals in the torrential rain, of Abraham and Moses, of people turning into pillars of flame, of Jesus doing miracles? He must have videos, since he accepts those as fact without any scientific evidence whatsoever.

There is far, far more scientific evidence for abiogenesis, for the age of the earth being 4 billion+ years, for the age of the universe being ~14 billion years, and for all life having arisen from a common ancestor ~3.8 billion years ago than for any of the miracles in the bible. We don't have videos of every past event in real time, but we do at least have the scientific evidence. They got nothing but old stories and strong feelings.

I am sure that skeptic accepts that CSI units get consistent results without video of the actual crime in real time. You don't need a video to suspect your loser neighbor of robbing your house if you apply the scientific method to investigating: if police find his DNA in your living room, glass from your broken window on his closet floor and on his shoes, tracks from his tires on your driveway--and your missing computer and camera in his place. You have pretty good evidence that it was him, and not, say, a blind elderly guy paralyzed and in a wheelchair who lives in a nursing home the next town over, and has no car.

Creationists like skeptic are trying to tell us that, despite all the evidence,  it is far more likely that the elderly guy magically regained his sight, temporarily cured himself of his paralysis, levitated himself over to your house, framed the neighbor for no reason and then returned home, leaving no trace and with no witnesses seeing any of this. Because it says, in a book of fairy tales, that there are people who can do this.

It would be sad and kind of funny if not for the fact that real people have been killed as witches after being accused, with no evidence, of doing impossible shit like that. It is hard to understand how anyone in modern times can think that way.

 1. Since we have no video of any event before the mid-19th century, there is no way of knowing what really happened back then. The world could have been created in the year 1725. Maybe none of our ancestors existed, and maybe humans never migrated out of Africa. Columbus never reached the Americas.  Because there is no video!  &)
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: jynnan tonnix on December 05, 2013, 09:01:10 PM
Skeptic...do you honestly, honestly not see the contradictions in your thinking?

Read Nogodsforme's post carefully. She has stated one of your problems very clearly here.

There is all sorts of evidence --incredible amounts of it, all leading clearly and logically toward things like evolution, an old earth, etc, yet every time someone tries to present it to you, you go off on some tangent about how nothing can be empirically proven, or else you simply avoid answering altogether. Yet when it comes to anything about god and your own beliefs about him, you emphatically try to present it as fact even though there is not one piece of evidence outside of an old book of what is indistinguishable from any other mythology. And you have absolutely no problem when it comes to anything in this text being far, far less concrete and far more contradictory in its assertations compared to the scientific discoveries in present day.

Don't you see even a tiny discrepancy in what you demand from us as evidence and what you blithely accept for yourself?

Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Add Homonym on December 05, 2013, 10:15:35 PM
Could you answer the 2nd of my questions as well?

There is no question you could ever ask skep that would make him skeptical.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Add Homonym on December 05, 2013, 10:19:47 PM
When is he going to post the videos that support his religious ideas about what happened in the past? The videos of god creating the universe in real time, of Adam and Eve talking (in what language?) to the snake, of Noah loading up the ark with millions of animals in the torrential rain, of Abraham and Moses, of people turning into pillars of flame, of Jesus doing miracles? He must have videos, since he accepts those as fact without any scientific evidence whatsoever.

The thing you are missing, is that Skep is 99.99% percent sure that his Biblical God exists, therefore he requires no video evidence, because it's a given. Whilst, abiogenesis, he is 99.99% percent sure that it didn't happen, so it requires stern evidence to convince him that something that could not have happened, actually did happen.

/slight sarcasm
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Nam on December 05, 2013, 10:23:54 PM
When is he going to post the videos that support his religious ideas about what happened in the past? The videos of god creating the universe in real time, of Adam and Eve talking (in what language?) to the snake, of Noah loading up the ark with millions of animals in the torrential rain, of Abraham and Moses, of people turning into pillars of flame, of Jesus doing miracles? He must have videos, since he accepts those as fact without any scientific evidence whatsoever.

The thing you are missing, is that Skep is 99.99% percent sure that his Biblical God exists, therefore he requires no video evidence, because it's a given. Whilst, abiogenesis, he is 99.99% percent sure that it didn't happen, so it requires stern evidence to convince him that something that could not have happened, actually did happen.

/slight sarcasm

Wrong. He believes 100%. Which is sad. No one who doesn't believe less defends it to such an extent. Even OldChurchGuy, and magicmiles relent once in awhile.

-Nam
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: jynnan tonnix on December 05, 2013, 10:55:45 PM
But the thing which really gets to me is that even though HE may believe 100%, he can't seem to understand that his reasoning relies on huge suppositions and assumptions which he would never accept in an opposing view. He just feels that those things can be glossed right over in his arguments while nit-picking every little thing in the opposition. Nit-picking to the point of absurdity with flights of solipsism and semantics which take the questions way out of the realm of what was even being originally asked. That's his strategy, I guess...just go off on such tangents that the original point gets lost and buried somewhere, and none of the real questions ever actually get answers.

In point of fact, it seems much more likely that since he is one who decided to become a theist (if I recall correctly, after a prayer for the recovery of a friend's dog -- and his vow to devote his life to god if it did get well --was seemingly answered), he is forced to stick his fingers in his ears and eyes so as to be sure not to let any provoking question or doubt so much as even enter his mind. As is often stated here, it is impossible to simply decide to believe in something by force of will. But somehow his rash vow became a point of honor, so he was bound to find a way to keep it.

It's quite impressive, really, as a sheer act of misguided integrity.

At least, that's about the only way I can understand it.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Add Homonym on December 05, 2013, 11:02:00 PM
his rash vow became a point of honor,

I missed the rash vow, but I know another Christian who said she'd become a Christian if God saved her daughter. Of course her daughter wasn't dead, when she made the vow.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Nam on December 06, 2013, 12:20:47 AM
But the thing which really gets to me is that even though HE may believe 100%, he can't seem to understand that his reasoning relies on huge suppositions and assumptions which he would never accept in an opposing view.

That's because he doesn't understand. And, when I say that, I don't mean what he means in that he doesn't understand an opposing view to his own, i actually mean he doesn't understand, at all. He understands nothing, not even what he says is true. He just believes it's true because of one single event in his life that he attributes to his current viewpoint. Which, in of itself, isn't even understanding anything just what he chooses to interpret it as.

When he debates, he doesn't understand how to debate even when explained to him which is why when he was challenged to a debate i stated he'd lose on his first comment. And, he hss no wont to learn because it, in his mind, doesn't propagate his belief. To him.

Also, if one notices: he uses our style (ineffectively) against us. If I use a certain type of argument, or you do, etc., then he attempts to argue against us in that style because he doesn't have one of his own because he doesn't understand how to not only debate/argue his point but he can't understand either points (in the style) that he's arguing for/against.

Look at all the known phrases (in the debate realm and/ or atheist/scientist) used by us against him. He attempts to use those against us without actually understanding their correct usage.

Quote
He just feels that those things can be glossed right over in his arguments while nit-picking every little thing in the opposition. Nit-picking to the point of absurdity with flights of solipsism and semantics which take the questions way out of the realm of what was even being originally asked.

That's his only recourse in argumentation because that's what he does with his own beliefs. Since he doesn't question his own process, how can he then argue with anyone else. His process, for his beliefs, works for him (because they are dictated by him) and he feels thusly that it would work for others, and he just doesn't understand why it doesn't work for us since it works for him, against himself.

Quote
That's his strategy, I guess...just go off on such tangents that the original point gets lost and buried somewhere, and none of the real questions ever actually get answers.

Because he can't understand his logic as being flawed, and why we don't understand his wisdom, which isn't.

Quote
In point of fact, it seems much more likely that since he is one who decided to become a theist (if I recall correctly, after a prayer for the recovery of a friend's dog -- and his vow to devote his life to god if it did get well --was seemingly answered), he is forced to stick his fingers in his ears and eyes so as to be sure not to let any provoking question or doubt so much as even enter his mind. As is often stated here, it is impossible to simply decide to believe in something by force of will. But somehow his rash vow became a point of honor, so he was bound to find a way to keep it.

He believes he helped Biblegod  in a "miracle". He can't understand why he actually didn't, nor why we don't believe him. This is because before the "miracle" his understanding process was the same as it is now. He doesn't try to better his understanding because he believes he understands everything and Biblegod  validates that for him.

It's not impressive, it's pitiful.

-Nam
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 06, 2013, 12:30:16 AM
In point of fact, it seems much more likely that since he is one who decided to become a theist (if I recall correctly, after a prayer for the recovery of a friend's dog -- and his vow to devote his life to god if it did get well --was seemingly answered), he is forced to stick his fingers in his ears and eyes so as to be sure not to let any provoking question or doubt so much as even enter his mind. As is often stated here, it is impossible to simply decide to believe in something by force of will. But somehow his rash vow became a point of honor, so he was bound to find a way to keep it.

It's quite impressive, really, as a sheer act of misguided integrity.

At least, that's about the only way I can understand it.

Not just that. The writing in blood saying "get out" that appeared on my friend's wall and disappeared while I was staring at it.

This stuff is rock solid proof to me. Greater than any logical argument. What has been seen can not be unseen.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Nam on December 06, 2013, 12:34:18 AM
In point of fact, it seems much more likely that since he is one who decided to become a theist (if I recall correctly, after a prayer for the recovery of a friend's dog -- and his vow to devote his life to god if it did get well --was seemingly answered), he is forced to stick his fingers in his ears and eyes so as to be sure not to let any provoking question or doubt so much as even enter his mind. As is often stated here, it is impossible to simply decide to believe in something by force of will. But somehow his rash vow became a point of honor, so he was bound to find a way to keep it.

It's quite impressive, really, as a sheer act of misguided integrity.

At least, that's about the only way I can understand it.

Not just that. The writing in blood saying "get out" that appeared on my friend's wall and disappeared while I was staring at it.

This stuff is rock solid proof to me. Greater than any logical argument. What has been seen can not be unseen.

Not only proving my point but everyone else's, too.

-Nam
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ParkingPlaces on December 06, 2013, 01:35:48 AM
Not just that. The writing in blood saying "get out" that appeared on my friend's wall and disappeared while I was staring at it.

This stuff is rock solid proof to me. Greater than any logical argument. What has been seen can not be unseen.

A guy that only talks to you and lies to Pat Robertson (Who was told by god that Obama wouldn't be re-elected) has no ability to impress. Me or anyone else. Besides you and Pat.

If I saw something happen that seemed impossible, I would first and foremost suspect my own brain, long before I would start suspecting some unknown or hoped for force in the universe. My second guess would be a misunderstanding between my brain and my eyes. I'd also check the side-effects of any medication I was taking, legal or otherwise.

Were you looking for god when you found him? Minds that actually inquire want to know.

Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 06, 2013, 01:38:00 AM
Not only proving my point but everyone else's, too.

-Nam

Nam, please tell me what point of yours I am proving.

 I am getting frustrated with these beating around the bush type of answers. Can I read minds? Then, how would I know what point you are referring to?

Please stop the passive-aggressive nonsense.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 06, 2013, 01:46:32 AM
Not just that. The writing in blood saying "get out" that appeared on my friend's wall and disappeared while I was staring at it.

This stuff is rock solid proof to me. Greater than any logical argument. What has been seen can not be unseen.

A guy that only talks to you and lies to Pat Robertson (Who was told by god that Obama wouldn't be re-elected) has no ability to impress. Me or anyone else. Besides you and Pat.

If I saw something happen that seemed impossible, I would first and foremost suspect my own brain, long before I would start suspecting some unknown or hoped for force in the universe. My second guess would be a misunderstanding between my brain and my eyes. I'd also check the side-effects of any medication I was taking, legal or otherwise.

Were you looking for god when you found him? Minds that actually inquire want to know.

If you applied that much skepticism to your everyday life, you would be a solipsist. But, you are not a solipsist. This means you have one standard of evidence for everyday life, and another standard for rare events. This means you are trying to dismiss anything contrary to your worldview.

So a quick question, how rare does something have to be to demand different standards? If blood appeared and disappeared every day on the wall, would you still think your eyes are playing tricks on you?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on December 06, 2013, 01:47:47 AM
Not only proving my point but everyone else's, too.

-Nam

Nam, please tell me what point of yours I am proving.

 I am getting frustrated with these beating around the bush type of answers. Can I read minds? Then, how would I know what point you are referring to?

Please stop the passive-aggressive nonsense.
As are we with the Dodgeing
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on December 06, 2013, 01:49:06 AM
Not just that. The writing in blood saying "get out" that appeared on my friend's wall and disappeared while I was staring at it.

This stuff is rock solid proof to me. Greater than any logical argument. What has been seen can not be unseen.

A guy that only talks to you and lies to Pat Robertson (Who was told by god that Obama wouldn't be re-elected) has no ability to impress. Me or anyone else. Besides you and Pat.

If I saw something happen that seemed impossible, I would first and foremost suspect my own brain, long before I would start suspecting some unknown or hoped for force in the universe. My second guess would be a misunderstanding between my brain and my eyes. I'd also check the side-effects of any medication I was taking, legal or otherwise.

Were you looking for god when you found him? Minds that actually inquire want to know.

If you applied that much skepticism to your everyday life, you would be a solipsist. But, you are not a solipsist. This means you have one standard of evidence for everyday life, and another standard for rare events. This means you are trying to dismiss anything contrary to your worldview.

So a quick question, how rare does something have to be to demand different standards? If blood appeared and disappeared every day on the wall, would you still think your eyes are playing tricks on you?
No me as most would seek professional help for our mental disorder
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Nam on December 06, 2013, 02:10:45 AM
Not only proving my point but everyone else's, too.

-Nam

Nam, please tell me what point of yours I am proving.

 I am getting frustrated with these beating around the bush type of answers. Can I read minds? Then, how would I know what point you are referring to?

Please stop the passive-aggressive nonsense.

I really don't know why you label me as "passive-aggressive" when I have never in my life showed such. Yet another phrase you don't understand and apply frivolously to one you object to.

Proving my point every post you make.

-Nam
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 06, 2013, 02:13:25 AM
I really don't know why you label me as "passive-aggressive" when I have never in my life showed such. Yet another phrase you don't understand and apply frivolously to one you object to.

Proving my point every post you make.

-Nam

You're one of a kind, Nam.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Nam on December 06, 2013, 02:14:29 AM
I really don't know why you label me as "passive-aggressive" when I have never in my life showed such. Yet another phrase you don't understand and apply frivolously to one you object to.

Proving my point every post you make.

-Nam

You're one of a kind, Nam.

Your answer is proving my point.

-Nam
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Foxy Freedom on December 06, 2013, 02:27:27 AM
Not just that. The writing in blood saying "get out" that appeared on my friend's wall and disappeared while I was staring at it.

This stuff is rock solid proof to me. Greater than any logical argument. What has been seen can not be unseen.

A guy that only talks to you and lies to Pat Robertson (Who was told by god that Obama wouldn't be re-elected) has no ability to impress. Me or anyone else. Besides you and Pat.

If I saw something happen that seemed impossible, I would first and foremost suspect my own brain, long before I would start suspecting some unknown or hoped for force in the universe. My second guess would be a misunderstanding between my brain and my eyes. I'd also check the side-effects of any medication I was taking, legal or otherwise.

Were you looking for god when you found him? Minds that actually inquire want to know.

If you applied that much skepticism to your everyday life, you would be a solipsist. But, you are not a solipsist. This means you have one standard of evidence for everyday life, and another standard for rare events. This means you are trying to dismiss anything contrary to your worldview.

So a quick question, how rare does something have to be to demand different standards? If blood appeared and disappeared every day on the wall, would you still think your eyes are playing tricks on you?

Just because you thought you saw something appear on a wall, why would this have anything to do with Christianity?

This stuff is rock solid proof to me. Greater than any logical argument.

This means you are trying to dismiss anything contrary to your worldview.


(http://i00.i.aliimg.com/wsphoto/v0/1285283592_1/Solid_925Sterling_Silver_ILLUMINATI_ring_Handmade_All_Sizes.jpg_200x200.jpg)

How does a solipsist account for his own coming into existence?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 06, 2013, 02:28:29 AM
Your answer is proving my point.

-Nam

You give me headaches.

Nothing but love for you anyway, brother.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 06, 2013, 02:30:11 AM
How does a solipsist account for his own coming into existence?

In the same way you account for it in your dream. You're just there.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Nam on December 06, 2013, 02:30:22 AM
Your answer is proving my point.

-Nam

You give me headaches.

Nothing but love for you anyway, brother.

Still proving my point.

-Nam
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Foxy Freedom on December 06, 2013, 02:36:36 AM
How does a solipsist account for his own coming into existence?

In the same way you account for it in your dream. You're just there.

In a dream you might just accept that you were there, but in real life you know that you had a childhood and are not just there.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 06, 2013, 02:43:41 AM
In a dream you might just accept that you were there, but in real life you know that you had a childhood and are not just there.

You know you had a childhood, but don't for sure about anyone else, like in a dream.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Nam on December 06, 2013, 02:45:14 AM
In a dream you might just accept that you were there, but in real life you know that you had a childhood and are not just there.

You know you had a childhood, but don't for sure about anyone else, like in a dream.

Actually witnessing with one's own eyes another child growing up is actually a dream? Again: you're proving my point.

-Nam
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ParkingPlaces on December 06, 2013, 02:49:49 AM
If you applied that much skepticism to your everyday life, you would be a solipsist. But, you are not a solipsist. This means you have one standard of evidence for everyday life, and another standard for rare events. This means you are trying to dismiss anything contrary to your worldview.

So a quick question, how rare does something have to be to demand different standards? If blood appeared and disappeared every day on the wall, would you still think your eyes are playing tricks on you?

The problem with that question is that it is such a big if that I can't answer it. My experience is with things that are common. Nothing has ever happened in my life that, if I told the story to others, would cause them to question my veracity. So what I am trying to do is imagine something outside of not only my experience, but also outside of the experiences of almost everyone else. And I can't do it. Your story is something out of a sci-fi or horror book/movie, not real life.

I can only apply standards to things which I have had a chance to set standards. I have none for the paranormal or the bizarre.

And rarity has little to do with it. I'm trying to think of the rarest thing I've experienced personally, and the best I can come up with is a big earthquake (I'm talking about rare for me, not rare for the world or for people living in earthquake zones). It took me a few seconds to realize what was happening, and then after understanding the situation, I started wondering if I was going to get overwhelmed by how powerful it was, but then it died down and things returned to normal. Now had I never heard of earthquakes, I might have had some kind of mystical moment, until I found out that they are normal. Then I'd ingest that info and get back to living.

Obviously blood on the wall is just plain not normal, so if that is what you actually experienced, it is far weirder than a silly old quake. I'm not comparing the two, just telling you what my limited experience has been.

So I'm SOL in this department. Nothing strange has happened to me. All I can do is try to imagine experiences such as the one you have related, and all I can do it assume, until I have better information, that it didn't really happen the way you are saying it did (which does not mean that you are lying. There may be valid explanations for why you think something happened that didn't that do not involve dishonesty on your part). Or perhaps it happened. But I doubt it.

You say that something fantastic occurred, then the physical proof of at least the blood on the wall disappeared, and all you were left with was a story. And you expect people to believe you. I should note that a very religious friend called me this evening and I asked him what his reaction would be to such a story and he shrugged it off as the talk of someone crazy. He very much believes in approximately the same god you do, but he doesn't accept the story either. So what can I say.

You should know by now that atheists aren't easily impressed. It is you that need to do better, not us. Our negative reactions are the norm under these circumstances.

Your solipsism discussion does nothing. If it is correct, then you can only be sure that you are talking to yourself. Which would make our words about 50 times as scary because they would have to be coming from your own mind. Of course, it this is all solipsistic for me, then I'm 100 times more scared, because your words are coming from my mind. Ick.

It is not something to argue about, because if you win, you end up realizing you were talking to your self. Which takes the fun out of being right. I'd go find some other big word if I were you.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Foxy Freedom on December 06, 2013, 02:54:36 AM
In a dream you might just accept that you were there, but in real life you know that you had a childhood and are not just there.

You know you had a childhood, but don't for sure about anyone else, like in a dream.

So knowing he had a childhood, how would a solipsist account for his becoming a child, since it is perceived as a beginning both from one's own thoughts and witnessing others being born?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ThatZenoGuy on December 06, 2013, 03:00:13 AM
I have said this before.

If you think life is just a dream, get a gun, load a round in the chamber, cock it, aim gun to your head (preferably brain), and pull the trigger.

You have nothing to lose, so reply after you have fired.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Anfauglir on December 06, 2013, 06:29:57 AM
I would accept abiogenesis if it was videotaped without human intervention.
...
Can this be done? They claim it happened already, so I need to see it with my own 2 eyes.

I will accept god exists when I can videotape him interacting in the world.  I need to see god with my own two eyes before I will accept it is real.

Until that point - by Skep's argument - I don't have to accept a single word said about it.  Glad we've sorted that out.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Anfauglir on December 06, 2013, 06:37:54 AM
just that. The writing in blood saying "get out" that appeared on my friend's wall and disappeared while I was staring at it.

This stuff is rock solid proof to me. Greater than any logical argument. What has been seen can not be unseen.

So fine.  Take it step by step.  Two patterns of red appeared on a wall, then disappeared.

1) How did you determine it was blood, if it disappeared?
2) How did you establish intelligence behind those patterns of blood? 
3) How did you move from spontaneous appearance of possible words to "therefore, god"?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Jonny-UK on December 06, 2013, 07:44:23 AM
Not just that. The writing in blood saying "get out" that appeared on my friend's wall and disappeared while I was staring at it.
This stuff is rock solid proof to me. Greater than any logical argument.
I think you watched "The Amityville Horror" then smoked something illegal and then imagined "GET OUT" on the wall.
Were there lots of flies around at the time too?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Boots on December 06, 2013, 08:49:10 AM
Not just that. The writing in blood saying "get out" that appeared on my friend's wall and disappeared while I was staring at it.
This stuff is rock solid proof to me. Greater than any logical argument.
I think you watched "The Amityville Horror" then smoked something illegal and then imagined "GET OUT" on the wall.
Were there lots of flies around at the time too?

I'm thinking there was some drinking of red rum as well
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Hatter23 on December 06, 2013, 08:54:46 AM

Not just that. The writing in blood saying "get out" that appeared on my friend's wall and disappeared while I was staring at it.

This stuff is rock solid proof to me. Greater than any logical argument. What has been seen can not be unseen.
[/quote]

So, things beyond the understanding of science from transdimention entities communicating in a manner that can be traced directly to horror movies and disappearing without a trace is "rock solid proof"

However the suggestion that this was your mind playing tricks on you, breifly, despite that matches with documented psychological phenomenon, even down to the cultural context aspect, is unthinkable.

(http://4.asset.soup.io/asset/2699/5252_f7ff_500.jpeg)

Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Hatter23 on December 06, 2013, 09:06:34 AM
Nothing has ever happened in my life that, if I told the story to others, would cause them to question my veracity.

I cannot say the same.

From being attack by wild dogs, to playing a prank at a mob owned business that got one of the patriarchs to laugh, to stealing a dump truck, to collecting money for a guy named Dino then working for the Department of Corrections one month later, to getting in trouble in high school for 'he's looking at me.' to being falsely accused of being a stalker, to pranks and s&M sessions I did while dressed as a Catholic Preist, To late night races in excess of 100 miles an hour, to playing pranks with a fake uzi or a minigun as a young adult, to being falsely arrested for stealing my own car, to saving the Campus Christian Center from burning down on Halloween...twice; there are several stories from my past people don't quite believe.

However, none of said unusual circumstances has violated physics.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ThatZenoGuy on December 06, 2013, 10:29:33 AM
just that. The writing in blood saying "get out" that appeared on my friend's wall and disappeared while I was staring at it.

This stuff is rock solid proof to me. Greater than any logical argument. What has been seen can not be unseen.

Sounds like you had a teeeeeeeeeny bit too much LSD, tripped ballz and imagined the whole thing...

By the way, you cannot catch the magical purple Heroin dragon.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Mrjason on December 06, 2013, 10:53:32 AM

By the way, you cannot catch the magical purple Heroin dragon.

or the green absinthe fairy
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: jdawg70 on December 06, 2013, 10:57:10 AM

By the way, you cannot catch the magical purple Heroin dragon.

or the green absinthe fairy
Both can be easily captured.  You just need the help of the Salvia goddess.

You guys just lack faith.  Or possibly something to do with demons.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 06, 2013, 11:09:46 AM
I will accept god exists when I can videotape him interacting in the world.  I need to see god with my own two eyes before I will accept it is real.

Until that point - by Skep's argument - I don't have to accept a single word said about it.  Glad we've sorted that out.

God is invisible. Can't videotape God. That's preposterous.
God just is. Bibe says it. Very advanced radical description for its time. "I am that I am."

No "head of a snake, body of a lion" nonsense, which is physical and can be seen.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Mrjason on December 06, 2013, 11:17:09 AM
I will accept god exists when I can videotape him interacting in the world.  I need to see god with my own two eyes before I will accept it is real.

Until that point - by Skep's argument - I don't have to accept a single word said about it.  Glad we've sorted that out.

God is invisible. Can't videotape God. That's preposterous.
God just is. Bibe says it. Very advanced radical description for its time. "I am that I am."

No "head of a snake, body of a lion" nonsense, which is physical and can be seen.

Its the interaction that we're all interested in. You can't see gravity but you can see the effect that it has.
You've said that you saw writing appear on a wall then disappear. That would be something that you could record.
Whip your phone out next time something like that occurs  :)
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ThatZenoGuy on December 06, 2013, 11:17:54 AM
God is invisible. Can't videotape God. That's preposterous.
God just is. Bibe says it. Very advanced radical description for its time. "I am that I am."

No "head of a snake, body of a lion" nonsense, which is physical and can be seen.

The magical pink fluffy texture-less invisible flying grounded pony also cannot be video taped.

Ohh wait, such things do not exist.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Aaron123 on December 06, 2013, 11:22:03 AM
God is invisible. Can't videotape God. That's preposterous.
God just is. Bibe says it. Very advanced radical description for its time. "I am that I am."

No "head of a snake, body of a lion" nonsense, which is physical and can be seen.


The religious person demands rigid evidence of things, but when the same is asked of them in return, they suddenly make their idea exempt from such things.

Funny how that works out.  Almost as if... they know they have no evidence for their claims.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: jdawg70 on December 06, 2013, 11:24:26 AM
God is invisible. Can't videotape God. That's preposterous.
God just is. Bibe says it. Very advanced radical description for its time. "I am that I am."
"I am that I am" is perhaps the most un-radical description ever for anything in the history of every universe ever.  Holy sh*t.  Seriously - how you find such an unremarkable description to be radical or profound is utterly mind-boggling.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: RED_ApeTHEIST on December 06, 2013, 11:26:19 AM
*snip


God is invisible. Can't videotape God. That's preposterous.


If God can not be perceived visibly then what evidence do you use to justify your belief in his existence? Why do you believe he created life if he cant produce the evidence you would require to believe another explanation?

The requirement for videotaped evidence to believe abiogenesis was your requirement. Can you explain this requirement in relation to not requiring the same type of evidence for God?

I would like to note that I'm not saying that you do not require evidence for God, as you have repeatedly stated that you do in fact require evidence for belief in things. I'm just wondering what the standards of evidence you require are and how those standards change in relation to the nature of claims.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 06, 2013, 11:33:24 AM
Look guys,

If there was no God, I would not expect to see a universe at all.
Since there is a universe, it is evidence of God.

If we videotaped the Earth forming, it would be an effect of God. We would see the planets forming regardless.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 06, 2013, 11:37:25 AM
You guys say I have no evidence for God and I say you guys have no evidence for abiogenesis.

So I believe in the beginning.....God.

You believe in the beginning....dirt.

Don't tell me my theory is religious and yours is scientific.
They are both religious.

That's one of the problems I have with atheists. They tell us not to listen to apologetic websites for our science information, but then they use secular websites for their religious information.

It's a dishonest double standard.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Mrjason on December 06, 2013, 11:41:37 AM
Look guys,

If there was no God, I would not expect to see a universe at all.
Since there is a universe, it is evidence of God.

If we videotaped the Earth forming, it would be an effect of God. We would see the planets forming regardless.

This is exactly the point. we would see planets forming with or without god, so why is god the conclusion?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: nogodsforme on December 06, 2013, 11:44:09 AM
When Hindus see planets forming, they say it is the work of Brahma, the creator. How can you tell it is not Brahma, skeptic?

Remember, skeptic, every religion has strange events that people have experienced-- once seen, can't be unseen, right? I have had many strange and unlikely things happen to me-- I have seen things that, if I was religious, I would attribute to supernatural forces.

If I had a brain like you, skeptic, instead of my own hard-a$$ed logical one, I would be here babbling on about how I saw the spirit of Ogun possess some women at a Haitian palo monte ceremony. Because that is what they said I was seeing. But there is no Ogun, so it had to be something else going on.

I was flying in a small plane in a lightning storm, over an African country, that was ordered to be shot down, piloted by two drunk Italian teenagers. I am not making this up. I heard the other woman on the plane say into her walkie-talkie, "I don't think we are going to  make it!"

The plane landed safely--with at least one atheist on board. If I was religious, I would say Jesus/Allah/Krishna took the wheel. But those entities do not exist, so it had to be something else going on.

As for the blood on the wall, skeptic, would you accept that story from a Hindu as evidence for Shiva, god of death and destruction?  If not, why not?

Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: RED_ApeTHEIST on December 06, 2013, 11:44:37 AM
Snip*


Since there is a universe, it is evidence of God.


No.

The universe's existence is only evidence of the universes existence. Anything else is an unwarranted assumption. That's a beginner mistake.

 Aspects of said universes structure may be used to demonstrate evidence of directed creation, but you would have to point out those aspects and then explain how they demonstrate your assertion.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Aaron123 on December 06, 2013, 11:52:01 AM
Don't tell me my theory is religious and yours is scientific.
They are both religious.

That's one of the problems I have with atheists. They tell us not to listen to apologetic websites for our science information, but then they use secular websites for their religious information.

It's a dishonest double standard.

Another sign that we have skeptic54768 backed up against the wall.  When in doubt, just claim the other side follow a religion too!

Saying "I see religions everywhere" gets old pretty fast.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 06, 2013, 11:52:53 AM
Don't tell me my theory is religious and yours is scientific.
They are both religious.

That's one of the problems I have with atheists. They tell us not to listen to apologetic websites for our science information, but then they use secular websites for their religious information.

It's a dishonest double standard.

Another sign that we have skeptic54768 backed up against the wall.  When in doubt, just claim the other side follow a religion too!

Saying "I see religions everywhere" gets old pretty fast.

No, it is honest.

The atheist is afraid of saying it is a religion, not me.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Nam on December 06, 2013, 11:54:23 AM
Don't tell me my theory is religious and yours is scientific.
They are both religious.

That's one of the problems I have with atheists. They tell us not to listen to apologetic websites for our science information, but then they use secular websites for their religious information.

It's a dishonest double standard.

Another sign that we have skeptic54768 backed up against the wall.  When in doubt, just claim the other side follow a religion too!

Saying "I see religions everywhere" gets old pretty fast.

No, it is honest.

The atheist is afraid of saying it is a religion, not me.

If atheism were a religion we'd say it was. But it's not you fucking loon.

-Nam
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Mrjason on December 06, 2013, 11:55:03 AM
Don't tell me my theory is religious and yours is scientific.
They are both religious.

That's one of the problems I have with atheists. They tell us not to listen to apologetic websites for our science information, but then they use secular websites for their religious information.

It's a dishonest double standard.

Another sign that we have skeptic54768 backed up against the wall.  When in doubt, just claim the other side follow a religion too!

Saying "I see religions everywhere" gets old pretty fast.

No, it is honest.

The atheist is afraid of saying it is a religion, not me.

The atheist doesn't want to state something that they know not to be true. Unlike you.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Aaron123 on December 06, 2013, 12:02:36 PM
No, it is honest.

The atheist is afraid of saying it is a religion, not me.

*Yawn*  This whole "atheism is a religion" thing is a PRATT.[1]

Funny how the theists keep going on about how great and wonderful religions and beliefs are, but they're quick to spin them as Bad Things when it suits them.

Religions involves holy books and creeds.  I know what the holy book of christianity is.  I know what the apostle's creed is.  Atheism has no holy books or creed.  The only thing it means is "does not have god beliefs".  Saying atheism is a religion is like saying 'Off' is a TV channel, or Bald is a hair color.[2]
 1. Points Refuted A Thousand Times
 2. Yes, I know those are old retorts, but what else am I to do against an old retort?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Hatter23 on December 06, 2013, 12:09:46 PM
Don't tell me my theory is religious and yours is scientific.

So don't tell you facts. Obvoius facts.

No yours is religious and ours is scientific, and by the way, water is wet.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 06, 2013, 12:09:51 PM
No, it is honest.

The atheist is afraid of saying it is a religion, not me.

*Yawn*  This whole "atheism is a religion" thing is a PRATT.[1]

Funny how the theists keep going on about how great and wonderful religions and beliefs are, but they're quick to spin them as Bad Things when it suits them.

Religions involves holy books and creeds.  I know what the holy book of christianity is.  I know what the apostle's creed is.  Atheism has no holy books or creed.  The only thing it means is "does not have god beliefs".  Saying atheism is a religion is like saying 'Off' is a TV channel, or Bald is a hair color.[2]
 1. Points Refuted A Thousand Times
 2. Yes, I know those are old retorts, but what else am I to do against an old retort?

it is!

My friend back in the day was bald and his driver's license said:

hair color: bald.

So this means you concede the point?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: RED_ApeTHEIST on December 06, 2013, 12:12:58 PM
No, it is honest.

The atheist is afraid of saying it is a religion, not me.

*Yawn*  This whole "atheism is a religion" thing is a PRATT.[1]

Funny how the theists keep going on about how great and wonderful religions and beliefs are, but they're quick to spin them as Bad Things when it suits them.

Religions involves holy books and creeds.  I know what the holy book of christianity is.  I know what the apostle's creed is.  Atheism has no holy books or creed.  The only thing it means is "does not have god beliefs".  Saying atheism is a religion is like saying 'Off' is a TV channel, or Bald is a hair color.[2]
 1. Points Refuted A Thousand Times
 2. Yes, I know those are old retorts, but what else am I to do against an old retort?

it is!

My friend back in the day was bald and his driver's license said:

hair color: bald.

So this means you concede the point?

Do you really want to use the Governments judgement to support your argument? The DMV in particular?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Aaron123 on December 06, 2013, 12:14:04 PM
it is!

My friend back in the day was bald and his driver's license said:

hair color: bald.

So this means you concede the point?


Is this really what it's going to boil down to?  A misprint on a driver's license?


You know it's beyond pathetic when they argue about some guy's driver's license.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Mrjason on December 06, 2013, 12:17:22 PM
it is!

My friend back in the day was bald and his driver's license said:

hair color: bald.

So this means you concede the point?


Is this really what it's going to boil down to?  A misprint on a driver's license?


You know it's beyond pathetic when they argue about some guy's driver's license.

I think its just the same as saying N/A rather than a misprint.

Anyway, the existential question has been solved by an irrelevant anecdote.
I'm going home.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 06, 2013, 12:20:05 PM
it is!

My friend back in the day was bald and his driver's license said:

hair color: bald.

So this means you concede the point?


Is this really what it's going to boil down to?  A misprint on a driver's license?


You know it's beyond pathetic when they argue about some guy's driver's license.

Now it's a misprint? The guy was as bald as a cue ball.

Funny how the arguments change to suit the the worldview.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 06, 2013, 12:22:10 PM
Do you really want to use the Governments judgement to support your argument? The DMV in particular?

So we can use the governments judgment on separation of church and state but not with hair colors?

Something smells fishy here.....
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Hatter23 on December 06, 2013, 12:23:03 PM
it is!

My friend back in the day was bald and his driver's license said:

hair color: bald.

So this means you concede the point?


Is this really what it's going to boil down to?  A misprint on a driver's license?


You know it's beyond pathetic when they argue about some guy's driver's license.

It isn't a misprint. Since a desriptor is usually there, something is expected by the system. It isn't a matter of a misprint: it is a matter of semantics for a specific circumstance. Yet, it is just that, semantic games. He is equally part of the religon of "NoFlyingShoesWhileSleeping" as he is a Aflyingshoeist.

You see our common religion of AflyingShoeist has a heirarchy, a holy book, specific tenents of deep solemnity regarding our common belief that shoes do not fly around the room while you are asleep and no recording devices are present.



Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ParkingPlaces on December 06, 2013, 12:26:08 PM
Now it's a misprint? The guy was as bald as a cue ball.

Funny how the arguments change to suit the the worldview.

When your argument needs an aberration to survive, you should find another one. A bureaucratic requirement does not a good argument make. Technically bald is not a hair color, but governments, usually weird, don't count.

We can come up with a lot more examples, and not all of them will have government bailouts for you.

If it is important for your distortion field to think that atheism is a religion, go ahead and lie to yourself about that too. Just don't go having really babyish expectations that all others will agree with you.

I may disagree with your view of your religion, but I accept your definition. That you cannot accept ours from our POV, that only demonstrates the feebleness of your own beliefs.

I ask yet again. Are you clear on any concept?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 06, 2013, 12:37:18 PM
I have said this before.

If you think life is just a dream, get a gun, load a round in the chamber, cock it, aim gun to your head (preferably brain), and pull the trigger.

You have nothing to lose, so reply after you have fired.

I never said I believe life is a dream. I'm not a solipsist.

I said that since everything can only be known through minds, then there must be an "eternal mind" that existed long before human minds. For if there was no mind before human minds, then nothing can be known about the external world because you need a mind to describe it. Only an eternal mind gets you out of this problem.

Nothing can be known without minds! So it's nonsensical to try and posit what existed without any minds around!
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Hatter23 on December 06, 2013, 12:40:14 PM
So it's nonsensical to try and posit what existed without any minds around![/b][/i][/u]

So it is nonsensical to poit what happens within the chamber of a piston on an internal combustion engine as no "mind" was within said engine. Ok, got it.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 06, 2013, 12:50:45 PM
So it's nonsensical to try and posit what existed without any minds around![/b][/i][/u]

So it is nonsensical to poit what happens within the chamber of a piston on an internal combustion engine as no "mind" was within said engine. Ok, got it.

God's mind is.

you're failing to understand this.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Nam on December 06, 2013, 12:52:15 PM
So it's nonsensical to try and posit what existed without any minds around![/b][/i][/u]

So it is nonsensical to poit what happens within the chamber of a piston on an internal combustion engine as no "mind" was within said engine. Ok, got it.

God's mind is.

you're failing to understand this.

Pot meet kettle.

-Nam
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 06, 2013, 12:56:42 PM
Pot meet kettle.

-Nam

Reality can only be defined by minds. With no minds around, you can't say what things are like. As soon as you posit something existing outside of your mind, you are using your mind to say that something exists outside of your mind, which is nonsensical.

It's a brick wall, unless you allow for the eternal mind that existed WAYYYY before anyone else did.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Nam on December 06, 2013, 12:59:28 PM
Pot meet kettle.

-Nam

Reality can only be defined by minds. With no minds around, you can't say what things are like. As soon as you posit something existing outside of your mind, you are using your mind to say that something exists outside of your mind, which is nonsensical.

It's a brick wall, unless you allow for the eternal mind that existed WAYYYY before anyone else did.

Proving my point. You just don't understand anything anyone here says so instead you reply as if you actually do but they don't match the comments in reply to.

You must be the biggest moron on the planet.

-Nam
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 06, 2013, 01:09:03 PM
Pot meet kettle.

-Nam

Reality can only be defined by minds. With no minds around, you can't say what things are like. As soon as you posit something existing outside of your mind, you are using your mind to say that something exists outside of your mind, which is nonsensical.

It's a brick wall, unless you allow for the eternal mind that existed WAYYYY before anyone else did.

Proving my point. You just don't understand anything anyone here says so instead you reply as if you actually do but they don't match the comments in reply to.

You must be the biggest moron on the planet.

-Nam

They laughed at a lot of great thinkers in history at first.

Now, nobody's laughing at them anymore.

"Fine line between genius and insanity."

Kant and Hume even admitted Berkeley was a genius.

Please brush up on philosophy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fs1MeDUgEOA
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on December 06, 2013, 01:15:18 PM
Pot meet kettle.

-Nam

Reality can only be defined by minds. With no minds around, you can't say what things are like. As soon as you posit something existing outside of your mind, you are using your mind to say that something exists outside of your mind, which is nonsensical.

It's a brick wall, unless you allow for the eternal mind that existed WAYYYY before anyone else did.
You got baked and watched the matrix trilogy again didn't you?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Nam on December 06, 2013, 01:16:36 PM
Pot meet kettle.

-Nam

Reality can only be defined by minds. With no minds around, you can't say what things are like. As soon as you posit something existing outside of your mind, you are using your mind to say that something exists outside of your mind, which is nonsensical.

It's a brick wall, unless you allow for the eternal mind that existed WAYYYY before anyone else did.

Proving my point. You just don't understand anything anyone here says so instead you reply as if you actually do but they don't match the comments in reply to.

You must be the biggest moron on the planet.

-Nam

They laughed at a lot of great thinkers in history at first.

Now, nobody's laughing at them anymore.

"Fine line between genius and insanity."

Kant and Hume even admitted Berkeley was a genius.

You are not a genius, you have a lower IQ than a monkey on steroids.

You say:

Quote
God's mind is.

you're failing to understand this.

Then I reply:

Quote
Pot meet kettle.

Which means that you say we don't understand but you don't understand almost everything of people say to you here thus my reply. But you state something that has nothing to do with what I wrote because you are the one who understands nothing. Then you imply you're a genius. Yeah, you're a genius, at being retarded.

-Nam
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 06, 2013, 01:18:49 PM
Nam, if you watch that video I posted, you will not see me as crazy. The video is irrefutable.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: RED_ApeTHEIST on December 06, 2013, 01:19:29 PM
Do you really want to use the Governments judgement to support your argument? The DMV in particular?

So we can use the governments judgment on separation of church and state but not with hair colors?

Something smells fishy here.....

That's a fair point. Thankfully I have all sorts of logical arguments and historical examples of why Theocracy is a bad thing, so I don't need to rely on the government in a logical debate. I only need the government's definition in the  context of working within the systems that the government administrates.

In fact, the governments insistence on strict legalistic policy and thinking is the reason why trusting thier views on something like hair color is suspect. The reason that Bald is listed on the drivers license is because the database needs to distinguish those who cant grow hair from folks with hair of any given color who keep it shaved off. It shows the government's inherent tendency towards confusion when the strict legalistic framework of the law is unable to keep up with the complications and vagaries of the real world.

If you would like to continue this discussion in a legalistic fashion then I'm more than happy to oblige. I'm a professional bureaucrat and this sort of thing is my bread and butter. Would you like to propose a definition of God that we can use for this discussion?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Nam on December 06, 2013, 01:19:43 PM
Nam, if you watch that video I posted, you will not see me as crazy. The video is irrefutable.

The only thing "irrefutable" is your moronic self.

-Nam
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Aaron123 on December 06, 2013, 01:25:05 PM
Now it's a misprint? The guy was as bald as a cue ball.

Funny how the arguments change to suit the the worldview.

You're the one trying to define 'bald' as a type of color.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Jonny-UK on December 06, 2013, 01:53:05 PM
Reality can only be defined by minds. With no minds around, you can't say what things are like. As soon as you posit something existing outside of your mind, you are using your mind to say that something exists outside of your mind, which is nonsensical.
It's a brick wall, unless you allow for the eternal mind that existed WAYYYY before anyone else did.
You got baked and watched the matrix trilogy again didn't you?
It seems Skeptics reality is somewhere between The Amityville Horror and The Matrix.
Perhaps someone should confiscate his DVD player or maybe we could suggest some more down to earth films to watch.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Wasserbuffel on December 06, 2013, 01:57:06 PM
The DMV isn't making any claim that bald is a hair color. The form is standardized, and most people are smart enough to understand that there is no claim being made. It's inconvenient to the point of stupidity to devote separate space for the option of bald.

Name:
Height:
Weight:
Hair: ()Yes ()No
     Color[1]:
   
I don't work for the DMV, but another gov. agency that isn't dissimilar in the information we gather from permit seekers. We don't have an option in the computer for multicolored hair either. If you've died your hair into a rainbow, I'm just going to have to pick a color at random. If you've got salt and pepper[2] hair, I'm going to select gray. We also can't do exact heights. If you're 5'6.5", I'm going to have to round and list you as 5'7".  We're not making a statement that all peoples' heights are exact to the half inch, or that everyone only has one color of hair.

Your argument it invalid, and you're an idiot.
 1. If bald, leave blank. We don't want anyone to assume we're making a statement about bald being a hair color. Can't be too careful!
 2. People have put this on the application
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Hatter23 on December 06, 2013, 02:12:08 PM
So it's nonsensical to try and posit what existed without any minds around![/b][/i][/u]

So it is nonsensical to poit what happens within the chamber of a piston on an internal combustion engine as no "mind" was within said engine. Ok, got it.

God's mind is.

you're failing to understand this.

And right back to circular reasoning and assuming your premise.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Aaron123 on December 06, 2013, 02:26:36 PM
Concerning this "atheism is a religion" thing; what exactly is it suppose to accomplish?  Beside derailing the thread, I mean.

Even in the unlikely event that it's conceded that atheism is a religion, what would this change?  We would still demand evidence for the existence of a god.  No evidence will be forthcoming.  The theist will huff and fuss something about free will, and then the cycle starts all over again.  "Atheism as a religion" would not lessen the need for evidence.  It would not change the lack of evidence for god.  It would not make reality operate differently, and amputees would still not be healed.

It would not put theism and atheism "on equal grounds", as this line of thinking appears to suggest.  It would just slap on new label on things.  An ineffective and meaningless label.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ParkingPlaces on December 06, 2013, 02:41:20 PM
Nam, if you watch that video I posted, you will not see me as crazy. The video is irrefutable.

Bad news, we are not cartoon characters. And you don't even have a perception of what the word "irrefutable" is. So you shouldn't try using it in a sentence.

Philosophy can be fun, but I suggest against taking it so seriously that you end up being wrong about everything. And if you are about to protest about my saying that you are wrong about everything, keep in mind I am also saying that you have no idea how to know even that much. You will just be guessing. Like you are about everything else. And guessing very poorly. You couldn't do it any worse.

How many people have you found in your life that agree with you? My guess would be zero, but that number may be a little high.

Edit: Crap, my english sure went downhill with this post. Its always been bad, but Skep is making it worse. The dude is pulling my mind down way too far. Fuck him and his attempt to have ideas.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Willie on December 06, 2013, 04:28:24 PM
I never said I believe life is a dream. I'm not a solipsist.

I said that since everything can only be known through minds, then there must be an "eternal mind" that existed long before human minds. For if there was no mind before human minds, then nothing can be known about the external world because you need a mind to describe it. Only an eternal mind gets you out of this problem.


Nothing can be known without minds! So it's nonsensical to try and posit what existed without any minds around!


Non-sequitur. Taking you at your word that you are not arguing solipsism, i.e., that you are talking only about the means by which an external reality can be known, and not about the means by which it can exist, then there is no logical connection between your premise and your conclusion. Without descending into solipsism, there is no reason why an external world could not exist before there were any minds to contemplate it, and without that, you're left with no reason why an "eternal mind" would have to exist.

Neither have you shown any reason (as opposed to mere assertion) why a mind contemplating an external reality at times prior to the time of its own existence is any more problematic than a mind contemplating external reality in real time. In either case, you have the same dependency on perception and interpretation, and the same vulnerability to imagination. We observe evidence and construct mental models, regardless of whether the events are present or past. And while we cannot rule out the possibility of having misperceived, misinterpreted, or simply imagined said evidence, that does not mean that we actually have. That something is possible does not, by itself, indicate that it is true, nor even that it is likely.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: nogodsforme on December 06, 2013, 05:42:48 PM
"Nothing exists without a mind to perceive it"--what does that even mean? What the hell is a disembodied mind?

There are all kinds of things that exist without human beings (or alien beings for that matter) knowing about them. Like the things that dogs can smell and hear, that humans can't. There are microbes that clearly existed because they made us sick for millennia-- before we saw them in the microscope and made the connection between germs and illness.

Species of all kinds lived and died millions of years before humans even appeared on the planet--were there no dinosaurs before we found the fossils? Was there no Australia before  the first aboriginal people showed up there? Do entire ecosystems poof into existence when "minds" show up and start to "perceive"?

I don't even want to get into this stupidity.  &)
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Nam on December 06, 2013, 07:26:49 PM
I would say having skeptic on ignore is easier but it isn't. He's like a cockroach. He won't die (figuratively).

-Nam
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Jag on December 06, 2013, 07:52:26 PM
^^^ I actually find it easier to read the threads with his posts closed off. I found that I could keep track of the conversation even if I skipped anything people quoted, just by reading the responses.

As a bonus, the persistent headache has finally gone away as I've stopped rolling my eyes over his posts.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Betelnut on December 06, 2013, 08:04:25 PM
Do you really want to use the Governments judgement to support your argument? The DMV in particular?

So we can use the governments judgment on separation of church and state but not with hair colors?

Something smells fishy here.....

The "government" didn't create the notion of the separation of church and state. Individual citizens who wrote and ratified the constitution did that.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 06, 2013, 08:37:13 PM
"Nothing exists without a mind to perceive it"--what does that even mean? What the hell is a disembodied mind?

There are all kinds of things that exist without human beings (or alien beings for that matter) knowing about them. Like the things that dogs can smell and hear, that humans can't. There are microbes that clearly existed because they made us sick for millennia-- before we saw them in the microscope and made the connection between germs and illness.

Species of all kinds lived and died millions of years before humans even appeared on the planet--were there no dinosaurs before we found the fossils? Was there no Australia before  the first aboriginal people showed up there? Do entire ecosystems poof into existence when "minds" show up and start to "perceive"?

I don't even want to get into this stupidity.  &)

You're failing to understand.

They say those fossils are millions of years old, but we are relying on our minds to say that. We see them NOW, but don't know what they look like if no minds are around. You are assuming they exist outside the mind.

In an atheistic world, you have no idea if what you are seeing is truly real, or if what you are seeing is just the way our senses see things (which isn't how things REALLY look.)

I don't think you watched that video.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on December 06, 2013, 08:46:36 PM
You are just plain ignorant Skeptic,it's a good thing you are the only theist around here for miles
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 06, 2013, 08:48:26 PM
You are just plain ignorant Skeptic,it's a good thing you are the only theist around here for miles

It's not ignorance. It's highly respected as a worldview.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on December 06, 2013, 08:49:48 PM
You are just plain ignorant Skeptic,it's a good thing you are the only theist around here for miles

It's not ignorance. It's highly respected as a worldview.
By people who do real science or by people like you?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: jynnan tonnix on December 06, 2013, 08:52:11 PM
You are just plain ignorant Skeptic,it's a good thing you are the only theist around here for miles

It's not ignorance. It's highly respected as a worldview.

Respected as a thought experiment, perhaps, but I doubt you would find too many people who would actually claim that as their real, working worldview.

I mean, does the average person out there really think that Shrodinger's cat is really both dead and alive at the same time?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 06, 2013, 08:52:20 PM
You are just plain ignorant Skeptic,it's a good thing you are the only theist around here for miles

It's not ignorance. It's highly respected as a worldview.
By people who do real science or by people like you?

you are assuming a "fossil" is a "fossil" when no minds are around.
You assume the senses are 100% telling the truth.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 06, 2013, 08:55:06 PM
You are just plain ignorant Skeptic,it's a good thing you are the only theist around here for miles

It's not ignorance. It's highly respected as a worldview.

Respected as a thought experiment, perhaps, but I doubt you would find too many people who would actually claim that as their real, working worldview.

http://www.philosophypages.com/hy/4r.htm

"Irish philosopher George Berkeley believed that Locke's Essay did not carry the principles of empiricism far enough."

you should really read that page. It actually should be right up the atheist's alley. You guys love empiricism.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ParkingPlaces on December 06, 2013, 09:25:44 PM
You are just plain ignorant Skeptic,it's a good thing you are the only theist around here for miles

It's not ignorance. It's highly respected as a worldview.
By people who do real science or by people like you?

you are assuming a "fossil" is a "fossil" when no minds are around.
You assume the senses are 100% telling the truth.

You are assuming a mind has to be around. You are assuming that your assumptions are good. You are assuming that nobody else could be right. You are assuming you know what you're talking about.

I don't have to assume how wrong you are.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 06, 2013, 09:27:57 PM
You are assuming a mind has to be around. You are assuming that your assumptions are good. You are assuming that nobody else could be right. You are assuming you know what you're talking about.

I don't have to assume how wrong you are.

No, that is not an assumption. That is based on evidence of us only knowing about things through minds.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Hatter23 on December 06, 2013, 09:33:31 PM
You are assuming a mind has to be around. You are assuming that your assumptions are good. You are assuming that nobody else could be right. You are assuming you know what you're talking about.

I don't have to assume how wrong you are.

No, that is not an assumption. That is based on evidence of us only knowing about things through minds.

We know things through mind. Yes. However things only work/exist because of minds is the premise you are asserting. The is a positive assertion. It is what is called a unfalsifiable premise. An unfalsifiable premise isn't science, it is mere conjecture, a philosophical dead end.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on December 06, 2013, 09:35:09 PM
With all due respect Skep I think your mind hovers somewhere around your backside,don't sit down for extended periods or your mind will go to sleep,,,,oops to late
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 06, 2013, 09:37:37 PM
You are assuming a mind has to be around. You are assuming that your assumptions are good. You are assuming that nobody else could be right. You are assuming you know what you're talking about.

I don't have to assume how wrong you are.

No, that is not an assumption. That is based on evidence of us only knowing about things through minds.

We know things through mind. Yes. However things only work/exist because of minds is the premise you are asserting. The is a positive assertion. It is what is called a unfalsifiable premise. An unfalsifiable premise isn't science, it is mere conjecture, a philosophical dead end.

I see nobody wants to read the page so I'm gonna have to spoonfeed it to you guys.

Putting aside all of the forgoing lines of argument, Berkeley declared, the whole issue can be allowed to rest on a single question: is it possible to conceive of a sensible object existing independently of any perceiver? The challenge seems easy enough at first. All I have to do is think of something so remote—a tree in the middle of the forest, perhaps—that no one presently has it in mind. But if I conceive of this thing, then it is present in my mind as I think of it, so it is not truly independent of all perception.

----------------------------------

Take heat, for example: does it exist independently of our perception of it? When exposed to great heat I feel a pain that everyone acknowledges to be in me, not in the fire, Berkeley argued, so the warmth I feel when exposed to lesser heat must surely be the same. What is more, if dip both of my hands into a bowl of tepid water after chilling one and warming the other, the water will feel both warm and cold at the same time. Clearly, then, heat as I perceive it is nothing other than an idea in my mind.

Similar arguments and experiments establish that other sensible qualities—colors that vary with changes in ambient light, tastes and smells that change perceptibly when I have a cold, and sounds that depend for their quality on the position of my ears and conditions in the air—are, like heat, nothing but ideas in my mind. But the same considerations apply to primary qualities as well, Berkeley pointed out, since my perception of shape and size depend upon the position of my eyes, my experience of solidity depends upon my sense of touch, and my idea of motion is always relative to my own situation. Locke was correct in his view of secondary qualities but mistaken about primary qualities: all sensible qualities are just ideas.

--------------------------------------------

All of that is from the webpage I linked to.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on December 06, 2013, 09:37:47 PM
You are assuming a mind has to be around. You are assuming that your assumptions are good. You are assuming that nobody else could be right. You are assuming you know what you're talking about.

I don't have to assume how wrong you are.

No, that is not an assumption. That is based on evidence of us only knowing about things through minds.
This premise if it only exists in say,,,,your mind,why are you arguing with yourself in your own mind?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 06, 2013, 09:40:26 PM
This premise if it only exists in say,,,,your mind,why are you arguing with yourself in your own mind?

Bloody hell!

Read the webpage!!!!!!
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on December 06, 2013, 09:40:59 PM
The heat has a source that can be identified,does it not? The sun,electric heater,lava,fire. You pretending the heat has no source is plainly retarded
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 06, 2013, 09:44:49 PM
The heat has a source that can be identified,does it not? The sun,electric heater,lava,fire. You pretending the heat has no source is plainly retarded

I will not respond anymore unless you read the webpage.

That is not what berkeley said!

He said the heat is not "hot" independent of perception. We just perceive it as hot. All that stuff you mentioned is still based on perception, not mind-independence.

Bloody hell!
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on December 06, 2013, 09:45:23 PM
This premise if it only exists in say,,,,your mind,why are you arguing with yourself in your own mind?

Bloody hell!

Read the webpage!!!!!!
I could read it but I won't
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on December 06, 2013, 09:48:06 PM
The heat has a source that can be identified,does it not? The sun,electric heater,lava,fire. You pretending the heat has no source is plainly retarded

I will not respond anymore unless you read the webpage.

That is not what berkeley said!

He said the heat is not "hot" independent of perception. We just perceive it as hot. All that stuff you mentioned is still based on perception, not mind-independence.

Bloody hell!
It is hot because WE have labelled it that way,we could have an alien species out there who would not label it "hot" but as "cold" depending on the conditions of their planet of origin.......see I can spew out nonsensical garbage too.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 06, 2013, 09:48:15 PM
This premise if it only exists in say,,,,your mind,why are you arguing with yourself in your own mind?

Bloody hell!

Read the webpage!!!!!!
I could read it but I won't

Because it would change your worldview.

that's not a good reason. That's childish.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on December 06, 2013, 09:49:30 PM
This premise if it only exists in say,,,,your mind,why are you arguing with yourself in your own mind?

Bloody hell!

Read the webpage!!!!!!
I could read it but I won't

Because it would change your worldview.

that's not a good reason. That's childish.
No it would definitely  NOT,in the same way reading the Koran would fail to change your view and make you convert to Islam
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 06, 2013, 09:50:59 PM
No it would definetley  NOT

How do you know it wouldn't if you haven't read it?

Sounds like you don't wanna give up materialism.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on December 06, 2013, 09:51:49 PM
See revised post
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: jynnan tonnix on December 06, 2013, 09:58:31 PM
I did read a bunch of it, but, in the end, it's all just a thought experiment. You can probably come up with some sort of scenario to prove more or less anything if you led off with questions like these and then steered them in whatever direction you wanted them to go. But, ultimately, that's just not the way the world works. 

You say you are not a solipsist. Fine. Neither are we (as far as I know, we don't have anyone here who espouses that philosophy). So, just because it's a philosophy which can be shoehorned into a world view (rather like a religion) doesn't mean anyone, even those people who like to play with the concepts involved, actually believe that the world behaves that way in real life.

There have been any number of very well-known philosophers throughout the ages, and they have come up with various models to explain "reality". There is no single one to whom we can point and say, "yes, this person worked it all out". Ultimately, it's all about what sorts of scenarios you can come up with, and how you can use (or sometimes abuse) the laws of logic to support them.

At least, as a non-philosophy-geek, that's the way it appears to me.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ParkingPlaces on December 06, 2013, 10:02:59 PM
What you're not considering, you silly goose, is that maybe objects simply blink out of existence if we aren't perceiving them. That no god is involved, and trees and such just come and go as we think of them in our minds. You are adding a god when you have no way of knowing whether he is there perceiving the universe into existence or not.

You think that god perceiving everything is the reason it is there when you aren't looking. And you have no evidence for that.

You are assuming that you still have an ass when you are looking in the mirror.

You are hoping god is looking at it.

You are assuming he perceives you when you are asleep. If he doesn't, that would mean that you disappear at night

You are assuming a god in the picture because in the tiny world you have invented, you have to have him or your existence makes no sense.

You are adding a god for your convenience, not because he is necessary.

Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 06, 2013, 10:11:14 PM
What you're not considering, you silly goose, is that maybe objects simply blink out of existence if we aren't perceiving them. That no god is involved, and trees and such just come and go as we think of them in our minds. You are adding a god when you have no way of knowing whether he is there perceiving the universe into existence or not.

You think that god perceiving everything is the reason it is there when you aren't looking. And you have no evidence for that.

You are assuming that you still have an ass when you are looking in the mirror.

You are hoping god is looking at it.

You are assuming he perceives you when you are asleep. If he doesn't, that would mean that you disappear at night

You are assuming a god in the picture because in the tiny world you have invented, you have to have him or your existence makes no sense.

You are adding a god for your convenience, not because he is necessary.

Your point is answered in the "Common Sense" section of that webpage I linked to.

Care to give it a whirl?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on December 06, 2013, 10:13:47 PM
care to give the Koran a whirl?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 06, 2013, 10:16:48 PM
care to give the Koran a whirl?

This is completely different.

Immaterialism is based on empiricism.
Atheists love empiricism.
Ergo, atheists should be immaterialists.
but then they wouldn't be atheists anymore anyway.

Perhaps the 4th sentence is the scary one for you guys.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Hatter23 on December 06, 2013, 10:17:31 PM


you are assuming a "fossil" is a "fossil" when no minds are around.

As in the number of molecules and their configuration, the fact said molecules are following a pattern establish by once living matter...yes.

The interpretation of those molecules as a "fossil" no.

You assume the senses are 100% telling the truth.


No. I assume they generally give me a working idea of reality.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on December 06, 2013, 10:18:11 PM
The Koran is shorter and has much more clarity than the OT and NT with NONE of the contradictory bullshit,I think you should give it a go,you will find Mohamed to be the true path to God,not Jesus.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on December 06, 2013, 10:22:01 PM
care to give the Koran a whirl?

This is completely different.

Immaterialism is based on empiricism.
Atheists love empiricism.
Ergo, atheists should be immaterialists.
but then they wouldn't be atheists anymore anyway.

Perhaps the 4th sentence is the scary one for you guys.
Just because you can cut and paste and quote garbage does not mean you understand it is just hypothetical,that's why its called philosophy
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: jaimehlers on December 06, 2013, 10:22:08 PM
You guys say I have no evidence for God and I say you guys have no evidence for abiogenesis.
The difference is that scientists are actually looking for evidence that they can use to support the abiogenesis hypothesis, whereas you (and other theists like you) are seemingly content to just say "God did it" and leave it at that.

Quote from: skeptic54768
So I believe in the beginning.....God.
Which explains nothing.

Quote from: skeptic54768
You believe in the beginning....dirt.
Actually, there is no "in the beginning" with the abiogenesis hypothesis.

Quote from: skeptic54768
Don't tell me my theory is religious and yours is scientific.
They are both religious.
Nope.  Religious beliefs depend on people being willing to accept them at face value.  Scientific theories depend on people constantly questioning and examining them.  So, your belief is religious, and abiogenesis is scientific.

Quote from: skeptic54768
That's one of the problems I have with atheists. They tell us not to listen to apologetic websites for our science information, but then they use secular websites for their religious information.
Why would you trust an apologetic website for scientific information to begin with?  Apologetics are by definition not scientific.  That being said, it's only your assertion that atheists get religious information from secular websites.  And, frankly, it's a ridiculous one to boot.  It's like suggesting that someone gets philosophy information from a car manual.

Quote from: skeptic54768
It's a dishonest double standard.
If there is any double standard here, it's in your attempts to pretend that your religious beliefs don't need proof, but scientific theories do.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ParkingPlaces on December 06, 2013, 10:22:58 PM
What you're not considering, you silly goose, is that maybe objects simply blink out of existence if we aren't perceiving them. That no god is involved, and trees and such just come and go as we think of them in our minds. You are adding a god when you have no way of knowing whether he is there perceiving the universe into existence or not.

You think that god perceiving everything is the reason it is there when you aren't looking. And you have no evidence for that.

You are assuming that you still have an ass when you are looking in the mirror.

You are hoping god is looking at it.

You are assuming he perceives you when you are asleep. If he doesn't, that would mean that you disappear at night

You are assuming a god in the picture because in the tiny world you have invented, you have to have him or your existence makes no sense.

You are adding a god for your convenience, not because he is necessary.

Your point is answered in the "Common Sense" section of that webpage I linked to.

Care to give it a whirl?

No, the consistencies we think we perceive may not exist at all. They, like peripheral vision, may be made up. How do you know they are not? You are assuming a consistency that may not exist.

Plus, you are demanding that this is the way the universe must operate, and taking no other possibilities into account. So for it to work, you think a god has to be involved too. It may work in very different ways and you would never know it because you prefer your narrow points of view.

Berkeley is playing mind games. I see no connection to reality. Yes, water can feel either warm or cool in comparison to something else. Even simultaneously. But I know of no way for molten iron or cascading lava fresh from a volcano to be perceived as cool. Examples that only work under certain conditions aren't of much use.

Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ParkingPlaces on December 06, 2013, 10:31:44 PM
Another one. If this is true, god is complicit in most all sins.

If I decide I have to murder someone who I hate, and decide to do it with a high powered rifle, and I go lay in wait for my victim, and the victim shows up and is in a good position for me to shoot them, and, just to be careful, I turn around first to make sure that nobody is behind me, god has to maintain that reality or it will disappear. I return my eyes to the victim, see him and shoot, killing him.

God helped. He is complicit in the murder. All he had to do would be vary reality just a tiny little bit and poof, the shot becomes impossible and the person lives. Instead, god goes along with it. God is evil.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 06, 2013, 10:38:48 PM
If there is any double standard here, it's in your attempts to pretend that your religious beliefs don't need proof, but scientific theories do.

That's not a double standard.

there's a reason they are called BELIEFS. Science claims to be based on facts, so when it's based on beliefs, we have to label it religion.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 06, 2013, 10:42:34 PM
Another one. If this is true, god is complicit in most all sins.

If I decide I have to murder someone who I hate, and decide to do it with a high powered rifle, and I go lay in wait for my victim, and the victim shows up and is in a good position for me to shoot them, and, just to be careful, I turn around first to make sure that nobody is behind me, god has to maintain that reality or it will disappear. I return my eyes to the victim, see him and shoot, killing him.

God helped. He is complicit in the murder. All he had to do would be vary reality just a tiny little bit and poof, the shot becomes impossible and the person lives. Instead, god goes along with it. God is evil.

Is it your position that God should control us like puppets?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ParkingPlaces on December 06, 2013, 10:54:17 PM
Another one. If this is true, god is complicit in most all sins.

If I decide I have to murder someone who I hate, and decide to do it with a high powered rifle, and I go lay in wait for my victim, and the victim shows up and is in a good position for me to shoot them, and, just to be careful, I turn around first to make sure that nobody is behind me, god has to maintain that reality or it will disappear. I return my eyes to the victim, see him and shoot, killing him.

God helped. He is complicit in the murder. All he had to do would be vary reality just a tiny little bit and poof, the shot becomes impossible and the person lives. Instead, god goes along with it. God is evil.

Is it your position that God should control us like puppets?

You are trying to tell us this shit is real. This is not my position at all. I disagree with all of it. Minds are not required for things to exist. You brought it up. Don't get my reality mixed up with yours and then pretend you're putting up a good argument.

I am saying that if it is true that it takes god to perceive the universe for it to exist, he is complicit in sin. In everything from shoplifting to the holocaust.

He is the one making me into an atheist because he is manifesting a world where he doesn't seem to exist. It's his fault I don't believe in him.

I don't believe any of it. So my arguments here are not to back up any part of it. You are the one telling us what we must be and what we must think, even though you haven't listened to a thing any of us have said about what we actually think, who we actually are. You live in a tiny world where atheists have to have religion or you won't be able to get up in the morning. You live in a tiny little world where the planet can only be 6,000 years old or your mind will explode. You live in a tiny little world where, if the universe isn't exactly like you think it is, you won't be able to survive the night.

My reality allows for much more error. My reality requires no nonsense. And apparently I have no way to describe it to you because you have your fingers stuck in your eyes and ears for safeties sake.

My universe allows for unanswered questions. An which is an anathema to you.

If the only way you can win an argument is to put words in your opponents mouth and then mock them, you still got nutting'.

Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: jaimehlers on December 06, 2013, 11:02:55 PM
If there is any double standard here, it's in your attempts to pretend that your religious beliefs don't need proof, but scientific theories do.

That's not a double standard.
Yes, it is.  You're claiming that science requires facts, but your religious beliefs do not - yet you are also trying to claim that your religious beliefs have a higher truth value than any science.  How is that not a double standard?

Quote from: skeptic54768
there's a reason they are called BELIEFS. Science claims to be based on facts, so when it's based on beliefs, we have to label it religion.
Incorrect.  First off, a religion is a belief in a god or godlike entity.  For example, Scientology is a religion that deifies human beings.  That means that in order for science to be a religion, someone would have to deify science.  The problem being that nobody who actually practices science deifies it, because they know it's nothing more than a set of tools we use for discovering things.  It would be like worshiping a hammer or a crowbar.

Second, science is based on evidence.  There's a reason we differentiate between hypotheses and theories in science, because the former does not have sufficient evidence to support them, whereas the latter do.  A hypothesis might be true, but we don't have the evidence to say for sure, whereas a theory is probably true because we have evidence which sufficiently supports it.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ParkingPlaces on December 06, 2013, 11:10:17 PM
We're wasting our breathe, jaimehlers. Skep keeps insisting on arguing with who he insists we are, not who we actually are. Of course, he doesn't know who he is either, which only complicates matters.

Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Nam on December 06, 2013, 11:13:23 PM
We're wasting our breathe, jaimehlers. Skep keeps insisting on arguing with who he insists we are, not who we actually are. Of course, he doesn't know who he is either, which only complicates matters.



As I stated yesterday: he doesn't understand, anything. He pretends he does. He has little comprehension.

He's an actual real life moron and should be treated as such.

-Nam
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: nogodsforme on December 06, 2013, 11:59:18 PM
skeptic, did you think of a response to my post #350 about CSI? Can you explain why some ideas about how a crime was committed fit the evidence and others don't?

I often find that people who say science is not based on facts and evidence (when it comes to evolution or fossils) have no problem with the exact same techniques applied to solving murders and robberies.  Or diagnosing that a sick child has the measles and not lung cancer or a broken leg. Or making a bridge that withstands heavy trucks or a rocket that can fly up into space.

If science was a 'religion' then its applications would only work as often as random chance, the way religion does. With religion, you just have to take it as it is and then make up reasons for why it doesn't work. Religion offers no way to test solutions and see if they are correct or not. Religion is the same as doing nothing.

With science, you don't have to "believe" in it, and pretend that whatever happens is what you wanted anyway. With science, anyone can test it and see what happens. You test a new medicine against a placebo and you should only keep using the medicine if it works better than nothing.  With science you get closer and closer to accurate predictions about the world as you discard the things that don't work. Bridges don't fall down as often, kids with measles get better more often, people know when a blizzard, a tornado or a hurricane is coming, you push a button and things work.  Life is not quite as scary and unpredictable because science helps us to plan and prepare. The scientific method is the only way we have found that beats random chance.

With religion, that is not so. You can't test god, as we are often told. You pray and get yes, no, maybe, later. There is no way to test prayer-- to figure out how to pray better and reach god with more accuracy. Every religion has the exact same accuracy rate-- the same rate as random chance. That is why people keep inventing new religions-- the previous ones don't work!
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: caveat_imperator on December 07, 2013, 12:30:32 AM
As I stated yesterday: he doesn't understand, anything. He pretends he does. He has little comprehension.

He's an actual real life moron and should be treated as such.

-Nam

Maybe some treatment in the Emergency Room would help clear the delusions of competence from skeptic's mind.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Antidote on December 07, 2013, 12:37:05 AM
Skeptic kinda reminds me of my younger brother, except he can read and write (skeptic).
My younger brother is so ready to believe anything about aliens, but the moment you try to explain the facts to him he shuts down and ignores you. In fact just today I had to spend 30 minutes explaining that a ball of light reflecting off the clouds wasn't a UFO but my friend's halogen light he uses at night to check on his horses.

EDIT:
It wasn't the moon, the moon was in the opposite direction.

EDIT2:
English, how does it work? xD
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 07, 2013, 02:23:57 AM
Skeptic kinda reminds me of my younger brother, except he can read and write (skeptic).
My younger brother is so ready to believe anything about aliens, but the moment you try to explain the facts to him he shuts down and ignores you. In fact just today I had to spend 30 minutes explaining that a ball of light reflecting off the clouds wasn't a UFO but my friend's halogen light he uses at night to check on his horses.

EDIT:
It wasn't the moon, the moon was in the opposite direction.

EDIT2:
English, how does it work? xD

Aliens are definitely real.......but they are......

I shouldn't have to say it. By this point, you guys should know exactly what aliens are.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 07, 2013, 02:26:52 AM

If science was a 'religion' then its applications would only work as often as random chance, the way religion does.
With religion, you just have to take it as it is and then make up reasons for why it doesn't work. Religion offers no way to test solutions and see if they are correct or not. Religion is the same as doing nothing.

Can you point me to the evidence that shows prayers are answered no better than random chance?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Jonny-UK on December 07, 2013, 02:47:42 AM
Can you point me to the evidence that shows prayers are answered no better than random chance?
There is none- prayers are never answered. There may be coincidences (someone prayed for a sunny day and it was sunny) but there are no answered prayers.
Please feel free to prove me wrong though.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 07, 2013, 02:50:52 AM
Can you point me to the evidence that shows prayers are answered no better than random chance?
There is none- prayers are never answered. There may be coincidences (someone prayed for a sunny day and it was sunny) but there are no answered prayers.
Please feel free to prove me wrong though.

My prayer was answered. It's what made me stop being an atheist.

I don't know if you heard the story of my prayer but it's late now and I'm very tired. Tomorrow.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Jonny-UK on December 07, 2013, 02:57:27 AM
My prayer was answered. It's what made me stop being an atheist.
I don't know if you heard the story of my prayer but it's late now and I'm very tired. Tomorrow.
An atheist wouldn't be praying - therefore you were not an atheist.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ThatZenoGuy on December 07, 2013, 03:25:57 AM
My prayer was answered. It's what made me stop being an atheist.

I don't know if you heard the story of my prayer but it's late now and I'm very tired. Tomorrow.

May i ask what was answered?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Nam on December 07, 2013, 03:56:49 AM
My prayer was answered. It's what made me stop being an atheist.

I don't know if you heard the story of my prayer but it's late now and I'm very tired. Tomorrow.

May i ask what was answered?

He wished[1] Biblegod would cure a dog then he saw blood in words[2] written on all a wall and he believed.

I didn't make that up, he's stated it countless times (except notes).

-Nam
 1. i mean "prayed"
 2. REDRUM
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Jonny-UK on December 07, 2013, 04:17:42 AM
He seems to enjoy a good film though-
The Amityville horror, The Matrix and now The Shining all seem to be getting referenced.

(http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd115/jonny998/jonny.png) (http://s225.photobucket.com/user/jonny998/media/jonny.png.html)Thats my next avatar sorted   ;)
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Jonny-UK on December 07, 2013, 04:35:31 AM
Since God is infinite, any sin against Him deserves infinite punishment.
Going back to the original post, do you still stand by this answer Skeptic.

Astreja asked you this-
Quote
Skeptic, what do you suggest we do to alleviate the suffering of people in Hell? 
in your ask Skeptic thread but I feel it worth repeating the question here.
Would you try and help people suffering for eternity or would you never question what your loving god does?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ThatZenoGuy on December 07, 2013, 04:58:47 AM
He wished[1] Biblegod would cure a dog then he saw blood in words[2] written on all a wall and he believed.

-Nam
 1. i mean "prayed"
 2. REDRUM

Wow...that is...just....umm...*sigh*

I am out of words...
(http://www.quickmeme.com/img/9e/9ee1cfb8a4fc259d6ead995189273b85f059c4773614283a94553ef7363dffc7.jpg)

That's better.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Aaron123 on December 07, 2013, 10:16:56 AM
Can you point me to the evidence that shows prayers are answered no better than random chance?

There has been studies done on the effectiveness of prayers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efficacy_of_prayer

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/31/health/31pray.html?_r=0


Quote
Prayers offered by strangers had no effect on the recovery of people who were undergoing heart surgery, a large and long-awaited study has found.

And patients who knew they were being prayed for had a higher rate of post-operative complications like abnormal heart rhythms, perhaps because of the expectations the prayers created, the researchers suggested.

Because it is the most scientifically rigorous investigation of whether prayer can heal illness, the study, begun almost a decade ago and involving more than 1,800 patients, has for years been the subject of speculation.

The question has been a contentious one among researchers. Proponents have argued that prayer is perhaps the most deeply human response to disease, and that it may relieve suffering by some mechanism that is not yet understood. Skeptics have contended that studying prayer is a waste of money and that it presupposes supernatural intervention, putting it by definition beyond the reach of science.

At least 10 studies of the effects of prayer have been carried out in the last six years, with mixed results. The new study was intended to overcome flaws in the earlier investigations. The report was scheduled to appear in The American Heart Journal next week, but the journal's publisher released it online yesterday.

Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: G-Roll on December 07, 2013, 10:53:41 AM
Skeptic kinda reminds me of my younger brother, except he can read and write (skeptic).
My younger brother is so ready to believe anything about aliens, but the moment you try to explain the facts to him he shuts down and ignores you. In fact just today I had to spend 30 minutes explaining that a ball of light reflecting off the clouds wasn't a UFO but my friend's halogen light he uses at night to check on his horses.

EDIT:
It wasn't the moon, the moon was in the opposite direction.

EDIT2:
English, how does it work? xD

Aliens are definitely real.......but they are......

I shouldn't have to say it. By this point, you guys should know exactly what aliens are.

Beings from another planet? A race of hunters that collect the bones of other species and keeps them as trophies, only Arnold Schwarzenegger can stop them with a pointy stick and some mud?

Back to the op I think it's weird that everyone here will condemn burning innocent living people. 1 or 2 and it’s a horrible act. I would imagine burning most of the world (number varies from theist to theist) would be unimaginably horrible. Especially because the burning people are pretty much innocent and good people for the most part. They just don’t get the Jesus thing for whatever reason. And for that and that alone they are tossed into the river of fire. It's all good...
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: jdawg70 on December 07, 2013, 11:17:30 AM
My prayer was answered. It's what made me stop being an atheist.

I don't know if you heard the story of my prayer but it's late now and I'm very tired. Tomorrow.
We've been over this in other threads. Demons start the false religions and disguise themselves as gods and plant these thoughts in people's heads. Why do you think people believe in all these different religions? They get their prayers answered by demons and it becomes real to them.
This is probably the 948756439 time this has been brought up.

Acknowledge it, you demon-worshipping sh*t-head.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: jaimehlers on December 07, 2013, 11:28:14 AM
^I know why he won't acknowledge that, even as a purely hypothetical possibility.  It's because if he does, he'll essentially be admitting that his life, from the time his 'prayer' was answered till today, has been engaged in the worship of one of the very demons he despises.  He doesn't know what he would do if that were true, so he avoids even thinking about it.  That's how most people think and act.  There are precious few humans who can face themselves squarely and deal with what they find there, so most of us simply never do so.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Aaron123 on December 07, 2013, 11:39:21 AM
He'll just say that he "knows/felt in my heart" that it really was god that has answered him.

Even though every one of those "demon-possessed" christians will say the exact same thing.  Even though, presumably, those demons can replicate the exact same "feelings" in their hearts. 

How we're suppose to tell the difference; I doubt we'll get a concrete answer.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ParkingPlaces on December 07, 2013, 11:45:57 AM
And since there aren't actually any demons either, that makes it even harder for him to handle the truth.

Being excited about god answering a prayer about a dog and then being able to causally accept that he doesn't answer prayers about children is a little weird. Well, real weird.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 07, 2013, 12:25:16 PM
And since there aren't actually any demons either, that makes it even harder for him to handle the truth.

Being excited about god answering a prayer about a dog and then being able to causally accept that he doesn't answer prayers about children is a little weird. Well, real weird.

You don't understand. There's more of an incentive to heal a dog because they get no afterlife.

Children, no matter how horrible it may look, get an afterlife.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 07, 2013, 12:27:00 PM
My prayer was answered. It's what made me stop being an atheist.

I don't know if you heard the story of my prayer but it's late now and I'm very tired. Tomorrow.
We've been over this in other threads. Demons start the false religions and disguise themselves as gods and plant these thoughts in people's heads. Why do you think people believe in all these different religions? They get their prayers answered by demons and it becomes real to them.
This is probably the 948756439 time this has been brought up.

Acknowledge it, you demon-worshipping sh*t-head.

In the false religions, they are not praying to Jesus.

Demons do not answer prayers that are in Jesus' name. They are too terrified & cowardly to do that.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ParkingPlaces on December 07, 2013, 12:27:53 PM
And since there aren't actually any demons either, that makes it even harder for him to handle the truth.

Being excited about god answering a prayer about a dog and then being able to causally accept that he doesn't answer prayers about children is a little weird. Well, real weird.

You don't understand. There's more of an incentive to heal a dog because they get no afterlife.

Children, no matter how horrible it may look, get an afterlife.

Good job. You were again able to respond only to something trite and avoid the more serious comments and questions of others. I'm proud of you.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 07, 2013, 12:31:07 PM
Good job. You were again able to respond only to something trite and avoid the more serious comments and questions of others. I'm proud of you.

Which posts are you referring to, double P?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 07, 2013, 12:42:17 PM
Second, science is based on evidence.  There's a reason we differentiate between hypotheses and theories in science, because the former does not have sufficient evidence to support them, whereas the latter do.  A hypothesis might be true, but we don't have the evidence to say for sure, whereas a theory is probably true because we have evidence which sufficiently supports it.

If we lived in a universe where if the cosmological constant was off by .00000000000000000000001%, we wouldn't exist, would this be evidence of God?

If we lived in a universe where life can only flourish under SPECIFIC conditions, would this be evidence for God?

If we lived in a universe with behavioral laws, would this be evidence for God?

Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: The Gawd on December 07, 2013, 02:36:04 PM
this guy is even ignorant on troll standards...
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: jdawg70 on December 07, 2013, 03:22:09 PM
We've been over this in other threads. Demons start the false religions and disguise themselves as gods and plant these thoughts in people's heads. Why do you think people believe in all these different religions? They get their prayers answered by demons and it becomes real to them.
This is probably the 948756439 time this has been brought up.

Acknowledge it, you demon-worshipping sh*t-head.

In the false religions, they are not praying to Jesus.
I'd wager I could find at least several tens of millions of Catholics who are indeed attempting to pray to Jesus.

Quote
Demons do not answer prayers that are in Jesus' name. They are too terrified & cowardly to do that.
So this demon you worship has disguised himself as Jesus and planted the thought that 'demons are too terrified & cowardly to <answer prayers that are in Jesus' name> in your head.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: jaimehlers on December 07, 2013, 04:45:13 PM
If we lived in a universe where if the cosmological constant was off by .00000000000000000000001%, we wouldn't exist, would this be evidence of God?
First off, the number you picked is totally made-up.  We have no idea how things might work in such a universe, so claiming that life wouldn't exist in such a universe is useless speculation.  Second, a universe where the conditions made life impossible wouldn't serve as evidence for anything except that life could not develop there.

Quote from: skeptic54768
If we lived in a universe where life can only flourish under SPECIFIC conditions, would this be evidence for God?
You do realize that your words apply to this universe, right?  That aside, the fact that life can only flourish under specific circumstances only serves as evidence that life can only flourish under specific circumstances.

Quote from: skeptic54768
If we lived in a universe with behavioral laws, would this be evidence for God?
I don't actually know what you mean by behavioral laws.  I'm guessing that it'd be laws that govern the behavior of life.  I don't think that would represent evidence for anything except the existence of behavior laws, though.

And, in any case, we aren't talking about other hypothetical universes.  We're talking about this one.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Jonny-UK on December 07, 2013, 05:54:33 PM
Since God is infinite, any sin against Him deserves infinite punishment.
Going back to the original post, do you still stand by this answer Skeptic.

Astreja asked you this-
Quote
Skeptic, what do you suggest we do to alleviate the suffering of people in Hell? 
in your ask Skeptic thread but I feel it worth repeating the question here.
Would you try and help people suffering for eternity or would you never question what your loving god does?
Any chance of an answer here Skeptic?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Graybeard on December 07, 2013, 06:03:35 PM
Second, science is based on evidence.  There's a reason we differentiate between hypotheses and theories in science, because the former does not have sufficient evidence to support them, whereas the latter do.  A hypothesis might be true, but we don't have the evidence to say for sure, whereas a theory is probably true because we have evidence which sufficiently supports it.

If we lived in a universe where if the cosmological constant was off by .00000000000000000000001%, we wouldn't exist, would this be evidence of God?

If we lived in a universe where life can only flourish under SPECIFIC conditions, would this be evidence for God?

If we lived in a universe with behavioral laws, would this be evidence for God?
No, of course not. Fish live in water because that is what they have evolved to do. We live on this planet because we have evolved to meet its conditions.

Two-thirds of the planet is useless sea-water. Of the rest, about half is fit for humans. If any creator-god had any sense at all, he would have designed it differently, wouldn't He?

Have you always been unable to think in a straight line?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: nogodsforme on December 07, 2013, 06:05:08 PM
And since there aren't actually any demons either, that makes it even harder for him to handle the truth.

Being excited about god answering a prayer about a dog and then being able to causally accept that he doesn't answer prayers about children is a little weird. Well, real weird.

You don't understand. There's more of an incentive to heal a dog because they get no afterlife.

Children, no matter how horrible it may look, get an afterlife.

Coolio, skeptic. Gotcha. God made the afterlife, so he don't need to care about saving nobody in this life. Kinda like bypassing the party and heading straight to the after party. Maybe that's why he lets so many future babies die as miscarriages--straight to the after party with you, almost-a-person. Elective abortion is also fine with god, then, because, zygotes, matter how horrible it may look, get an afterlife.

But as we know from my post about my sister, who prayed so hard trying to save her beloved sweet kitty, god apparently has zero incentive to heal a cat. Presumably, because cats also have an afterlife, according to what I might for lack of a better term call your logic.[1] Perhaps as many as nine afterlives?  &)

But, hey, no doggies in heaven, so I definitely ain't going. Screw god for not giving doggies an afterlife--I agree with James Thurber:  "If I have any beliefs about immortality, it is that certain dogs I have known will go to heaven, and very, very few persons."

BTW, skeptic, since you only respond to trivial questions, where do doggies go when they die?
 1. It actually made my skin crawl to type that-- skeptic is so beyond logic it is not even funny. He makes junebug sound reasonable. We should pick up Old Church Guy and magic miles and use them to beat some Christian sense into skeptic... :angel:
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Astreja on December 07, 2013, 06:54:42 PM
If we lived in a universe where if the cosmological constant was off by .00000000000000000000001%, we wouldn't exist, would this be evidence of God?

No, because some other form of life might exist instead of us.  Our particular species, Homo sapiens sapiens, may be unique in the universe, but I don't think it's special.  There's only one ace of clubs in a deck of playing cards, but its importance varies depending on what game you're playing.

By the way, it takes very little variation in the river of time to cause completely different outcomes.  If I had received a different job offer in the summer of 1997, for instance, I probably wouldn't have met the woman who is My best friend.  If I had answered one question differently on a phone call in June 1974, My daughter wouldn't exist and I'd likely be living in a completely different city right now.  .00000000000000000000001% happens.  *shrug*

Quote
If we lived in a universe where life can only flourish under SPECIFIC conditions, would this be evidence for God?

No, because those conditions are likely physically-based -- Atoms already form molecules under specific conditions, but according to fairly simple principles that do not require the intervention of a sentient agent.

Quote
If we lived in a universe with behavioral laws, would this be evidence for God?

No, because you would have to demonstrate that these laws were somehow deliberately created.  A "law," in the scientific sense, just indicates that something happens in a consistent manner.  Sometimes this can be mathematically described, as in Kepler's laws of planatary motion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kepler's_laws_of_planetary_motion).
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: nogodsforme on December 07, 2013, 07:48:45 PM
Astreja, I love it when you talk sciency! if I was not married to my husband, your partner would be in danger of losing you. :-*

Isn't it silly when theists try to use probability to prove god? Not realizing that even if their numbers made sense and were accurate and they could show that a god was likely, the very same numbers rule out their particular god.

What are the chances that their god was the one that did all the creating? And what are the chances that they picked the one true way to reach that god, out of all the different religions that have been thought of? My husband attends the same kind of Christian church his father attended. I was a JW because my family was. Most religious people believe what they believe only because that happened to be a popular religion in their part of the world the year they were born.

According to skeptic, about 90% of the world's people are wrong and he is right. What are the chances of that being true?  &)
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Tero on December 07, 2013, 07:53:22 PM
Scaring and beating of children is ONLY allowed for St Nicholaus and his sidekick:
http://karireport.blogspot.com/2013/12/lump-of-coal-or-worse.html?m=1

Other than that, there were plenty of children to abuse from the middle ages on. It built character!
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Antidote on December 07, 2013, 08:31:39 PM
I wonder if skep has ever heard of [wiki]extremophiles[/wiki] specifically the [wiki]Tardigrade[/wiki]

Those little guys are proof that life can exist in a wide range of habitats, and that we shouldn't use Earth as the golden standard.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: median on December 07, 2013, 09:03:26 PM
You guys say I have no evidence for God and I say you guys have no evidence for abiogenesis.

So I believe in the beginning.....God.

You believe in the beginning....dirt.

Don't tell me my theory is religious and yours is scientific.
They are both religious.

That's one of the problems I have with atheists. They tell us not to listen to apologetic websites for our science information, but then they use secular websites for their religious information.

It's a dishonest double standard.

Nope. The double standard is YOURS. I say "I don't know" how exactly the universe, life, etc began (AND NEITHER DO YOU) - yet for some reason you still want to pretend like you do, stemming from an argument from ignorance and incredulity fallacy.

It's a shame that you hate science so much.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: median on December 07, 2013, 09:12:59 PM

Actually, it is a mixture of both.

Christians started science. Since the Bible teaches that God created the laws of nature, the early Christian scientists wanted to examine the orderly universe that God created for us.

Science has been subject to a lot of perversion recently though. It is no longer dominated by honest Christians looking to understand God's universe. It's now godless and corrupted.

You are so ignorant it's comical. Christians did not 'start science'. Are you kidding? There were people doing science long before Christianity. You really need to stop your confirmation bias and look at things openly and honestly; that is, if you actually care whether or not your beliefs are true. But, obviously you don't. So here we are.

Does it make you feel good to be arrogant about your ignorance?

They may have been doing science but they didn't get very far. They didn't have electricity or cars. This happened once Christianity became dominant because people expected an orderly world because the Bible says God created the laws of nature. (Jeremiah 33:25)

This is called the fallacy of Moving the Goal Post. You are an outright dishonest debater and it shows. Again, does it feel good to lie for your beliefs?

Also, you haven't done your philosophy homework. The ideas of an orderly nature existed long before Christianity. GO STUDY!
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: median on December 07, 2013, 09:20:15 PM

No. This whole universe is intelligently run.

Think of computers. Sometimes they freeze and crash and you have to turn it off. Can you imagine if the universe was glitchy like that?

Thank God the universe runs like clockwork, never freezing, never crashing.

This is even more intellectual hypocrisy (b/c of course you will not allow ANY counter-evidence to falsify your view - when it clearly does). Earthquakes, tsunamis, tidal waves, and hurricanes that kill thousands of people, plagues, sicknesses, deceases, famine, mass murderers, and black holes all show NO "design". We contrast design with nature.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: median on December 07, 2013, 09:24:22 PM

Not just that. The writing in blood saying "get out" that appeared on my friend's wall and disappeared while I was staring at it.

This stuff is rock solid proof to me. Greater than any logical argument. What has been seen can not be unseen.

That isn't proof b/c proof is demonstrable to others. That is your own personal, subjective, interpretation based upon your own presuppositional biases - which btw are highly subject to confirmation bias, error, false memory, wishful thinking, and delusion. If this is the 'crux' of why you are basing your entire life upon the frickin bible then you are worse than gullible.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Antidote on December 07, 2013, 09:28:04 PM

Actually, it is a mixture of both.

Christians started science. Since the Bible teaches that God created the laws of nature, the early Christian scientists wanted to examine the orderly universe that God created for us.

Science has been subject to a lot of perversion recently though. It is no longer dominated by honest Christians looking to understand God's universe. It's now godless and corrupted.

You are so ignorant it's comical. Christians did not 'start science'. Are you kidding? There were people doing science long before Christianity. You really need to stop your confirmation bias and look at things openly and honestly; that is, if you actually care whether or not your beliefs are true. But, obviously you don't. So here we are.

Does it make you feel good to be arrogant about your ignorance?

They may have been doing science but they didn't get very far. They didn't have electricity or cars. This happened once Christianity became dominant because people expected an orderly world because the Bible says God created the laws of nature. (Jeremiah 33:25)

Have you heard of the [wiki]Antikythera mechanism[/wiki]? It uses some pretty advanced gears, and it predates modern science by quite a large margin. Most historians estimate that it was created in 87BCE.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Nam on December 07, 2013, 09:34:55 PM
BCE.

;)

-Nam
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Hatter23 on December 07, 2013, 10:01:28 PM
Second, science is based on evidence.  There's a reason we differentiate between hypotheses and theories in science, because the former does not have sufficient evidence to support them, whereas the latter do.  A hypothesis might be true, but we don't have the evidence to say for sure, whereas a theory is probably true because we have evidence which sufficiently supports it.

If we lived in a universe where if the cosmological constant was off by .00000000000000000000001%, we wouldn't exist, would this be evidence of God?

If we lived in a universe where life can only flourish under SPECIFIC conditions, would this be evidence for God?

If we lived in a universe with behavioral laws, would this be evidence for God?

More Underwear Gnomes theism. You are doing yet another appeal to ignorance. Even...even if it did indicate a Diety...there's NOTHING that says it is Yahweh. Might be the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Antidote on December 07, 2013, 10:02:19 PM
BCE.

;)

-Nam

Details details ;)

Fixed it though, thanks Nam.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Nam on December 07, 2013, 10:03:33 PM
BCE.

;)

-Nam

Details details ;)

Pretty big detail. One signifies Christianity, and the other signifies science.

-Nam
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Add Homonym on December 07, 2013, 10:07:26 PM
Second, science is based on evidence.  There's a reason we differentiate between hypotheses and theories in science, because the former does not have sufficient evidence to support them, whereas the latter do.  A hypothesis might be true, but we don't have the evidence to say for sure, whereas a theory is probably true because we have evidence which sufficiently supports it.

If we lived in a universe where if the cosmological constant was off by .00000000000000000000001%, we wouldn't exist, would this be evidence of God?

If we lived in a universe where life can only flourish under SPECIFIC conditions, would this be evidence for God?

If we lived in a universe with behavioral laws, would this be evidence for God?

More Underwear Gnomes theism. You are doing yet another appeal to ignorance. Even...even if it did indicate a Diety...there's NOTHING that says it is Yahweh. Might be the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

He's back to this again, is he?  Don't forget the multiverse, where everything happens, no matter how unlikely.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Add Homonym on December 07, 2013, 10:29:37 PM
They may have been doing science but they didn't get very far. They didn't have electricity or cars. This happened once Christianity became dominant because people expected an orderly world because the Bible says God created the laws of nature. (Jeremiah 33:25)

I think you will find that it happened when Islam became dominant.

The west required 500 years to dump Roman numerals, before they could even count. After Christianity became dominant, we were thrown into a dark age, from 400AD to around 1500AD. Some time around 1000AD, a Catholic pope enthusiastically advocated eastern counting methods, but his import was rejected, due to Christians not caring about how to count. Fibonacci then tried to introduce Arabic counting, in 1240AD, but failed again. It wasn't until 1500+ that Christian retards realised they even needed to count. THEN, WESTERN SCIENCE TOOK OFF, and only by copying the Arabs. It seems each "discovery" we made, seemed to be something we ripped off the Indians, Arabs and Chinese.

Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: jaimehlers on December 07, 2013, 10:46:13 PM
^Actually, the Dark Ages only lasted till about 1,000 CE.  And while it's true that Arabic numerals didn't replace Roman numerals in common usage until about 1500 CE, they were used by mathematicians after Fibonacci brought them to Europe.  In addition, that Catholic pope you mentioned was responsible for the spread of a more advanced abacus, which incorporated the numbers 1-9.

So no, it isn't because Christians didn't care how to count.  It's because Roman numerals were the established system; human inertia did the rest.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Add Homonym on December 07, 2013, 11:13:53 PM
^Actually, the Dark Ages only lasted till about 1,000 CE.

There is a bit of circularity in the definition of the end of the dark ages, because some people regard The Arab Golden Age as part of the non-dark, and therefore the dark ages were not that dark.

The term was originally coined in 1330, by Petrarch, who didn't like the Latin literacy skills of anyone before him.

How about we end the Christian dark ages at the time that Christians rejected Plato's idea that we only saw, because light shone out of our eyes. Being the case, the world must have been dark up to that point. Another possible end point, might be when Galileo dropped a rock off the Tower of Pisa. Arguably, scientific intellectual darkness continued until someone actually did an experiment.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ThatZenoGuy on December 07, 2013, 11:20:19 PM
So what level of technology would we be at, if the dark ages was replaced with normal scientific progress?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: jaimehlers on December 07, 2013, 11:33:53 PM
So what do you mean by "dark ages", Add Homonym?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Add Homonym on December 07, 2013, 11:51:11 PM
So what level of technology would we be at, if the dark ages was replaced with normal scientific progress?

Galen dissected dogs in 129AD. It wasn't until 1540 that  Andreas Vesalius bothered to look inside an animal, and find out that Galen was wrong about a few things.

The ancient Greeks made some good headway 300BC, but this was all stuffed up by philosophers like Plato, who refused to look at reality. Their viewpoint was adopted by the Greek Christian empire, known as Byzantium. You can only conclude that Christians looked for some types of truth inwardly, rather than objectively. Obviously they were making slow progress in metallurgy and building, because of their crazy temple designs. These subjects weren't taboo.

However, it's evident that sudden discoveries can thrust a scientific community forwards, just as some forms of cultural bias can retard it - like Roman numerals. The Arabs enjoyed a golden age that was quickly ruined by the oppressiveness of Islamic scholars. A lot of retardation was caused because humans couldn't draw properly. Their idea of drawing, was like a child, who draws a house with windows and a chimney, and a blue sky with the sun on the left. The mindset was supported by Christian symbolic icon art.

So, in answer to your question: difficult to say. It requires multiple cultures to overcome a constipated mindset.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Nam on December 07, 2013, 11:53:27 PM
So what level of technology would we be at, if the dark ages was replaced with normal scientific progress?

Ask yourself this instead: What level of science and technology would be at if religion never existed?

-Nam
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ThatZenoGuy on December 07, 2013, 11:54:26 PM
I can only assume we would have a higher level of technology...
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Add Homonym on December 07, 2013, 11:56:56 PM
So what do you mean by "dark ages", Add Homonym?

In this context, it's really about when any meaningful scientific observation started to happen, that would distance us from 0AD Roman thinking. Certainly, Islamic culture was well underway, by the time anything really started to scientifically change in Christendom, in the context of what Skep is talking about.

That illustration about nothing really happening between Galen and  Andreas Vesalius is telling.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_humani_corporis_fabrica


Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Nam on December 07, 2013, 11:57:34 PM
I can only assume we would have a higher level of technology...

Would we? To what extent, do you think?

-Nam
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ThatZenoGuy on December 08, 2013, 12:05:41 AM
I don't know...

Without religion, there would likely be less monarchy, and a lot of it comes from "divine" people.
Without monarchy, we would have a better government system.

Then factor in Hitler not starting a war, because there would be no Jews.

So, i can assume war technology would be less, but systems, likely computers, would be better?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Nam on December 08, 2013, 12:09:47 AM
I don't know...

Without religion, there would likely be less monarchy, and a lot of it comes from "divine" people.
Without monarchy, we would have a better government system.

Then factor in Hitler not starting a war, because there would be no Jews.

So, i can assume war technology would be less, but systems, likely computers, would be better?

Why do you presume religion is the main factor of war? Wouldn't "power"? Is power only for those who are primarily religious?

-Nam
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Add Homonym on December 08, 2013, 12:16:47 AM
Without religion, there would likely be less monarchy, and a lot of it comes from "divine" people.
Without monarchy, we would have a better government system.

Not that straightforward. Monarchs can help science if they are so inclined. A monarch is a competitive thing, which is needed to compete against other monarchies with big armies. You need absolute power to tax the shit out of people to make armies. Modern war typically causes science to advance in some areas. Warfare would have caused a lot of metallurgy development.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ThatZenoGuy on December 08, 2013, 12:48:00 AM
Why do you presume religion is the main factor of war? Wouldn't "power"? Is power only for those who are primarily religious?

-Nam

Crusades.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Add Homonym on December 08, 2013, 01:06:05 AM
Why do you presume religion is the main factor of war? Wouldn't "power"? Is power only for those who are primarily religious?

-Nam

Crusades.

They didn't just do it for the holy lands. They were mainly just beating up Arabs and Jews, to get their land, and free up trade in the Mediterranean. When you beat up an enemy, it's important to dehumanise them, because Christians can't stand the thought that they are just like everybody else.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Nam on December 08, 2013, 01:14:22 AM
Why do you presume religion is the main factor of war? Wouldn't "power"? Is power only for those who are primarily religious?

-Nam

Crusades.

So the atheist government murdering Catholics in Mexico in the early 20th Century, or the Communist regimes in Eastern Europe, Asia etc., that took millions of lives all in the basic name of power, land, and world domination was better than the Crusades? Not worse or at least equated?

-Nam
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: jaimehlers on December 08, 2013, 01:17:25 AM
In this context, it's really about when any meaningful scientific observation started to happen, that would distance us from 0AD Roman thinking. Certainly, Islamic culture was well underway, by the time anything really started to scientifically change in Christendom, in the context of what Skep is talking about.

That illustration about nothing really happening between Galen and  Andreas Vesalius is telling.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_humani_corporis_fabrica
The problem is that's a badly skewed version of history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_in_the_Middle_Ages

Occam's Razor was developed in the early 14th Century, for example, and was absolutely crucial to later scientific thought.  And Roger Bacon helped formulate the scientific method[1] even earlier than that, in the late 13th Century.

I'm basing my position on the Dark Ages ending in the 11th Century due to the fact that that's when earlier knowledge (mostly Greek) became available to Europeans again, allowing them to build on it instead of having to try to rediscover it.  Naturally, it wasn't a fast process (the translations were largely completed by the 12th Century, for example) , but I don't really think you can argue that there was no forward progress in Europe for almost 1500 years (which is what your position seems to be, since you're basing it on moving forward from 0AD Roman thinking).

So, my view is that the European Dark Ages largely lasted from roughly 550 CE (when Justinian the Great bankrupted his empire trying to reconquer its western territories, which left huge swathes of territory vulnerable to plague and disease) until about 1050 CE (when the preserved Greek/Roman knowledge found its way back to Europe).  The period from about 1050 CE to about 1250 CE was in large part recovery and rebuilding of scientific knowledge.
 1. Note that it is described almost exactly the way it persists even today - a cycle of observation, hypothesizing, experimenting, and independently verifying.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Add Homonym on December 08, 2013, 01:37:08 AM

However, more recent reevaluations emphasize that he was essentially a medieval thinker, with much of his "experimental" knowledge obtained from books, in the scholastic tradition.[3]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Bacon

"Empiricism" was reading Greek and Arab works, and intellectually re-mashing them.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 08, 2013, 02:39:34 AM
Why do you presume religion is the main factor of war? Wouldn't "power"? Is power only for those who are primarily religious?

-Nam

Crusades.

So the atheist government murdering Catholics in Mexico in the early 20th Century, or the Communist regimes in Eastern Europe, Asia etc., that took millions of lives all in the basic name of power, land, and world domination was better than the Crusades? Not worse or at least equated?

-Nam

I'm shocked you mentioned this, Nam.

It's common knowledge that atheistic regimes have murdered far more people than all "religious wars" combined.

That's why we theists laugh when atheists blame religion for all the problems.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 08, 2013, 02:41:05 AM
Nope. The double standard is YOURS. I say "I don't know" how exactly the universe, life, etc began (AND NEITHER DO YOU) - yet for some reason you still want to pretend like you do, stemming from an argument from ignorance and incredulity fallacy.

It's a shame that you hate science so much.

So you do not know how everything happened?

So this means you can not rule out God if you don't know, correct?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 08, 2013, 02:45:28 AM
They didn't just do it for the holy lands. They were mainly just beating up Arabs and Jews, to get their land, and free up trade in the Mediterranean. When you beat up an enemy, it's important to dehumanise them, because Christians can't stand the thought that they are just like everybody else.

That's blatantly untrue. We are like everyone else. No better, no worse. The only difference is that we ask forgiveness for our sins. Others don't. But, this does not mean we are somehow better.

Martin Luther King, a devout Christian could have said, "I have a dream where all God's perfect black people can live in perfect harmony by getting rid of all of the white devils." But, since Luther realized he was no better than anyone else, he wanted equal treatment.

Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 08, 2013, 02:52:19 AM
No, of course not. Fish live in water because that is what they have evolved to do. We live on this planet because we have evolved to meet its conditions.

Two-thirds of the planet is useless sea-water. Of the rest, about half is fit for humans. If any creator-god had any sense at all, he would have designed it differently, wouldn't He?

Have you always been unable to think in a straight line?

Did you just call water useless?
Have you ever taken Earth Science 101?

OK if we evolved to fit the Earth's conditions, then please explain why life doesn't evolve on every planet to fit their conditions.

Either life should be teeming everywhere if that's the case, or life can only form under SPECIFIC designed conditions.
 Quite a pickle for the atheist.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ParkingPlaces on December 08, 2013, 03:05:47 AM
I'm shocked you mentioned this, Nam.

It's common knowledge that atheistic regimes have murdered far more people than all "religious wars" combined.

That's why we theists laugh when atheists blame religion for all the problems.

When people are in the mood to kill those who get their way, they seldom let their beliefs, or lack of beliefs, get in the way. Yes, Stalin, who went to divinity school as a young man, did kill a lot of people while espousing atheism. But he espoused atheism because he wanted the state to take precedence over the church, and he had no tolerance for competition in that area. His atheism was for his convenience, not something he felt strongly about. He apparently was an atheist, but he wasn't very good at it.

And yes, I know, you can say that had he been a believer, he wouldn't have killed so many. But Hitler was a believer, and he killed more than Stalin. How do you explain King Leopold II, of Belgium, who was religious and oversaw the killing of ten million people in the Congo region of Africa in the 19th and early 20th century, all so that he could make money exploiting the resources there? His belief in a god didn't slow him down any.

Of course you're going to say that neither Hitler or King Leopold were the right kind of Christian. Fine, I'll accept that. But Stalin wasn't the right kind of atheist. You don't get to denounce the bad guys on your side of the fence and deny us the opportunity to denounce our own.

Laugh if you must, but you'll be wrong yet again.
 
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 08, 2013, 03:09:54 AM
I'm shocked you mentioned this, Nam.

It's common knowledge that atheistic regimes have murdered far more people than all "religious wars" combined.

That's why we theists laugh when atheists blame religion for all the problems.

When people are in the mood to kill those who get their way, they seldom let their beliefs, or lack of beliefs, get in the way. Yes, Stalin, who went to divinity school as a young man, did kill a lot of people while espousing atheism. But he espoused atheism because he wanted the state to take precedence over the church, and he had no tolerance for competition in that area. His atheism was for his convenience, not something he felt strongly about. He apparently was an atheist, but he wasn't very good at it.

And yes, I know, you can say that had he been a believer, he wouldn't have killed so many. But Hitler was a believer, and he killed more than Stalin. How do you explain King Leopold II, of Belgium, who was religious and oversaw the killing of ten million people in the Congo region of Africa in the 19th and early 20th century, all so that he could make money exploiting the resources there? His belief in a god didn't slow him down any.

Of course you're going to say that neither Hitler or King Leopold were the right kind of Christian. Fine, I'll accept that. But Stalin wasn't the right kind of atheist. You don't get to denounce the bad guys on your side of the fence and deny us the opportunity to denounce our own.

Laugh if you must, but you'll be wrong yet again.

but you can't denounce Stalin. there is no objective standard of how an atheist must behave and act. You could be an atheist and find murder as pleasant as a walk in the park on a sunny day.

but since there is an objective standard in the Bible for Christians, we can tell who's who. Christians don't kill people for land and power. Simple as that.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ParkingPlaces on December 08, 2013, 03:11:48 AM
Nope. The double standard is YOURS. I say "I don't know" how exactly the universe, life, etc began (AND NEITHER DO YOU) - yet for some reason you still want to pretend like you do, stemming from an argument from ignorance and incredulity fallacy.

It's a shame that you hate science so much.

So you do not know how everything happened?

So this means you can not rule out God if you don't know, correct?

We can't rule out a god. You can't rule out the possibility that there isn't one.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 08, 2013, 03:12:32 AM
I can only assume we would have a higher level of technology...

I've actually been doing some research and the truth is that Christians really didn't slow down any progress at all. it's just a myth atheists try to perpetrate to the uneducated to get them on their side. It's propaganda.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ParkingPlaces on December 08, 2013, 03:18:13 AM
but you can't denounce Stalin. there is no objective standard of how an atheist must behave and act. You could be an atheist and find murder as pleasant as a walk in the park on a sunny day.

but since there is an objective standard in the Bible for Christians, we can tell who's who. Christians don't kill people for land and power. Simple as that.

Don't tell me who I can and cannot denounce. Don't imagine your standards to be higher than mine. Don't pretend that you are superior. Christianity has no monopoly on goodness, no monopoly on righteousness. Don't stand there, telling me that you are a wonderful christian, and simultaneously condemn me on autopilot because I'm an atheist. You don't know me anywhere well enough to decide that.

Hitler was a christian and he killed people for land and power. King Leopold was a Christian and he killed for gold. Don't be so maniacally righteous.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ParkingPlaces on December 08, 2013, 03:20:32 AM
I can only assume we would have a higher level of technology...

I've actually been doing some research and the truth is that Christians really didn't slow down any progress at all. it's just a myth atheists try to perpetrate to the uneducated to get them on their side. It's propaganda.

Links or you're lying about the research.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 08, 2013, 03:24:50 AM
but you can't denounce Stalin. there is no objective standard of how an atheist must behave and act. You could be an atheist and find murder as pleasant as a walk in the park on a sunny day.

but since there is an objective standard in the Bible for Christians, we can tell who's who. Christians don't kill people for land and power. Simple as that.

Don't tell me who I can and cannot denounce. Don't imagine your standards to be higher than mine. Don't pretend that you are superior. Christianity has no monopoly on goodness, no monopoly on righteousness. Don't stand there, telling me that you are a wonderful christian, and simultaneously condemn me on autopilot because I'm an atheist. You don't know me anywhere well enough to decide that.

Hitler was a christian and he killed people for land and power. King Leopold was a Christian and he killed for gold. Don't be so maniacally righteous.

They were not Christians. Just saying you are doesn't mean jack diddly.

Sitting in your garage making "vroom" noises doesn't make you a car.
Jesus said, "by their fruits you will know them."
Even you atheists roll your eyes and say, "Good loving Christian" sarcastically when you hear stuff like this.

How much proof do you need that they weren't Christian?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ParkingPlaces on December 08, 2013, 03:25:16 AM
No, of course not. Fish live in water because that is what they have evolved to do. We live on this planet because we have evolved to meet its conditions.

Two-thirds of the planet is useless sea-water. Of the rest, about half is fit for humans. If any creator-god had any sense at all, he would have designed it differently, wouldn't He?

Have you always been unable to think in a straight line?

Did you just call water useless?
Have you ever taken Earth Science 101?

OK if we evolved to fit the Earth's conditions, then please explain why life doesn't evolve on every planet to fit their conditions.

Either life should be teeming everywhere if that's the case, or life can only form under SPECIFIC designed conditions.
 Quite a pickle for the atheist.

Water is useless in the sense that we can't walk on it. Most of this planet made just for us is uninhabitable.

Life can only form under specific conditions. But those specific conditions may well be wider than what we have here on earth. If your god made this universe, he made the billions of planets that exist in our galaxy alone, and since there are over 100 billion galaxies, he may well have made many quadrillions of planets. We are still trying to find out if there is any life on other planets, but we don't have the technology to explore even our own solar system to the extend necessary to find out if there is life.

Of course you are going to ignore everything I just said and make some snappy comeback, but when you find out you're an idiot, don't say you weren't warned.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 08, 2013, 03:26:47 AM
Links or you're lying about the research.

http://blogs.nature.com/soapboxscience/2011/05/18/science-owes-much-to-both-christianity-and-the-middle-ages
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Add Homonym on December 08, 2013, 03:28:23 AM
That's blatantly untrue. We are like everyone else. No better, no worse. The only difference is that we ask forgiveness for our sins.

OK. So, its fine to kill Jews and Arabs, if you ask forgiveness afterwards. My mistake.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ParkingPlaces on December 08, 2013, 03:29:36 AM
They were not Christians. Just saying you are doesn't mean jack diddly.

Sitting in your garage making "vroom" noises doesn't make you a car.
Jesus said, "by their fruits you will know them."
Even you atheists roll your eyes and say, "Good loving Christian" sarcastically when you hear stuff like this.

How much proof do you need that they weren't Christian?

I told you you'd say that. That you would denounce them as not christian but that you wouldn't let us denounce the atheists who were bad. So here you are, making up criteria that make you look like a frickin' saint and making up new rules for us that tie us directly to every death ever recorded in human history. I repeat. When you find out that you are an idiot, don't make excuses about having never been told.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Add Homonym on December 08, 2013, 03:30:48 AM
I can only assume we would have a higher level of technology...

I've actually been doing some research and the truth is that Christians really didn't slow down any progress at all. it's just a myth atheists try to perpetrate to the uneducated to get them on their side. It's propaganda.

You sound like an Muslim, lying about the Islamic golden age of science.


Quote
I've actually been doing some research

FARK !!
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 08, 2013, 03:31:06 AM
No, of course not. Fish live in water because that is what they have evolved to do. We live on this planet because we have evolved to meet its conditions.

Two-thirds of the planet is useless sea-water. Of the rest, about half is fit for humans. If any creator-god had any sense at all, he would have designed it differently, wouldn't He?

Have you always been unable to think in a straight line?

Did you just call water useless?
Have you ever taken Earth Science 101?

OK if we evolved to fit the Earth's conditions, then please explain why life doesn't evolve on every planet to fit their conditions.

Either life should be teeming everywhere if that's the case, or life can only form under SPECIFIC designed conditions.
 Quite a pickle for the atheist.

Water is useless in the sense that we can't walk on it. Most of this planet made just for us is uninhabitable.

Life can only form under specific conditions. But those specific conditions may well be wider than what we have here on earth. If your god made this universe, he made the billions of planets that exist in our galaxy alone, and since there are over 100 billion galaxies, he may well have made many quadrillions of planets. We are still trying to find out if there is any life on other planets, but we don't have the technology to explore even our own solar system to the extend necessary to find out if there is life.

Of course you are going to ignore everything I just said and make some snappy comeback, but when you find out you're an idiot, don't say you weren't warned.

God made all that stuff for s to marvel at. Imagine how boring it would be with just an Earth and a sun and NOTHING else.

You atheists sometimes are so intellectual that you forget about the little beautiful things.

It's like a person who never watches a football game but he keeps refreshing the box score all game and says "great game" at the end.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Add Homonym on December 08, 2013, 03:32:38 AM

You atheists sometimes are so intellectual that you forget about the little beautiful things.


Quite true. I must adopt some Buddhist mindfullness techniques.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ThatZenoGuy on December 08, 2013, 03:33:02 AM
(http://www.lolwtfcomics.com/upload/uploads/1316007923.jpg)

I got my info virtually from this...
If i am wrong somewhere, please tell me.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ParkingPlaces on December 08, 2013, 03:34:06 AM
Links or you're lying about the research.

http://blogs.nature.com/soapboxscience/2011/05/18/science-owes-much-to-both-christianity-and-the-middle-ages

Those weren't christians. They were catholics. You have condemned them over and over. You can't claim them for your own now.

And the article isn't completely accurate. Bruno was burned at the stake by those non-christians in 1600 for heresy for saying, among other things, that the earth was not the center of the universe.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 08, 2013, 03:35:21 AM
OK. So, its fine to kill Jews and Arabs, if you ask forgiveness afterwards. My mistake.

Who says that? Certainly not me. I don't believe in killing. I'm Christian. Everyone is equal.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Add Homonym on December 08, 2013, 03:37:09 AM
I got my info virtually from this...
If i am wrong somewhere, please tell me.

As Mr Hlers pointed out, Christian science would have taken off, around 1300, but the black plague wiped it out, because Christians were still clueless about infectious diseases, and maintained no hygiene or rat control.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 08, 2013, 03:37:46 AM
They were not Christians. Just saying you are doesn't mean jack diddly.

Sitting in your garage making "vroom" noises doesn't make you a car.
Jesus said, "by their fruits you will know them."
Even you atheists roll your eyes and say, "Good loving Christian" sarcastically when you hear stuff like this.

How much proof do you need that they weren't Christian?

I told you you'd say that. That you would denounce them as not christian but that you wouldn't let us denounce the atheists who were bad. So here you are, making up criteria that make you look like a frickin' saint and making up new rules for us that tie us directly to every death ever recorded in human history. I repeat. When you find out that you are an idiot, don't make excuses about having never been told.

Well, if you're gonna denounce Stalin, then let us denounce Hitler.

Glad to see you guys won't be using the "no true scotsman" anymore. Very refreshing to hear that.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ParkingPlaces on December 08, 2013, 03:38:39 AM


God made all that stuff for s to marvel at. Imagine how boring it would be with just an Earth and a sun and NOTHING else.

You atheists sometimes are so intellectual that you forget about the little beautiful things.

It's like a person who never watches a football game but he keeps refreshing the box score all game and says "great game" at the end.

He should have made the stuff closer so we could have marveled sooner. We just got enough information to figure out how many billions of planets there are in our solar system last month. And looking at little tiny dots taken by telescopes is sort of hard to marvel at.

I have no trouble marveling at nature. I walk through the woods almost every day and appreciate everything I see. You keep making up stuff about us and using it to jump to conclusions. You're not good at anything.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ParkingPlaces on December 08, 2013, 03:40:16 AM
Well, if you're gonna denounce Stalin, then let us denounce Hitler.

Glad to see you guys won't be using the "no true scotsman" anymore. Very refreshing to hear that.

You already denounced Hitler, but you said we couldn't denounce Stalin. You don't have to do it again I believed you.

You did the scotsman thingy, not me.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Nam on December 08, 2013, 03:53:07 AM
Why do you presume religion is the main factor of war? Wouldn't "power"? Is power only for those who are primarily religious?

-Nam

Crusades.

So the atheist government murdering Catholics in Mexico in the early 20th Century, or the Communist regimes in Eastern Europe, Asia etc., that took millions of lives all in the basic name of power, land, and world domination was better than the Crusades? Not worse or at least equated?

-Nam

I'm shocked you mentioned this, Nam.

It's common knowledge that atheistic regimes have murdered far more people than all "religious wars" combined.

That's why we theists laugh when atheists blame religion for all the problems.

Let's see...religions started, what? 3,000 BCE? Somewhere around there. So, for 5,000+ years religious people have been murdering people in the name of religion and that total adds up to less than atheist regimes? You may able get away with counting Communist regimes but you can't get away with including Hitler and his Nazis, even if by your logic they were demon-lead. A great deal of them were Christians. Hitler may have been their leader but Jesus was their god.

So, if bound by statistical guesstimates you still contend religious have murdered less?

See, I'm not afraid to say that atheists have murdered people, even mass murdered like other atheists are but I am not stupid enough to state, like you, without the evidence, that one has done more than the other. Clearly I hold my opinion based on the historical standpoint of both, and atheists haven't really had such a grip on the world except in the 20th Century, and it's highly improbable, even with the technology, in my opinion ion, that atheists murdered more than religious people have in all of history.

But then you make your own comment moot when you state atheism is a religion. It seems it's only a religion when it works in your best interest, and since calling atheism a religion doesn't help you here, I guess right now it isn:'t one.

You lose. Try again.

-Nam
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Add Homonym on December 08, 2013, 03:53:27 AM

Those weren't christians. They were catholics. You have condemned them over and over. You can't claim them for your own now.


That was a smart move. I wouldn't have thought of that one.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Add Homonym on December 08, 2013, 03:56:22 AM
Who says that? Certainly not me. I don't believe in killing. I'm Christian. Everyone is equal.

Everyone is equal, unless you dehumanise them, and then, even though you are not superior to average humans, you are superior to the people you just napalmed.

I think you're the ONLY Christian though.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Nam on December 08, 2013, 04:06:34 AM

Those weren't christians. They were catholics. You have condemned them over and over. You can't claim them for your own now.


That was a smart move. I wouldn't have thought of that one.

If you think about it true Christianity didn't start until the 16th Century. So, anything they hold before then, according to skeptic, were done by demon-lead people.

-Nam
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Add Homonym on December 08, 2013, 04:44:30 AM
If you think about it true Christianity didn't start until the 16th Century. So, anything they hold before then, according to skeptic, were done by demon-lead people.
-Nam

If you think about it, the Muslims are the real Christians
http://www.haqq.com.au/~salam/earlychristians/truechri.html
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Add Homonym on December 08, 2013, 05:03:46 AM
They didn't just do it for the holy lands. They were mainly just beating up Arabs and Jews, to get their land, and free up trade in the Mediterranean. When you beat up an enemy, it's important to dehumanise them, because Christians can't stand the thought that they are just like everybody else.

That's blatantly untrue. We are like everyone else. No better, no worse. The only difference is that we ask forgiveness for our sins. Others don't. But, this does not mean we are somehow better.

Martin Luther King, a devout Christian could have said, "I have a dream where all God's perfect black people can live in perfect harmony by getting rid of all of the white devils." But, since Luther realized he was no better than anyone else, he wanted equal treatment.

Is it just me, or does anyone else see some irony in this statement?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: wheels5894 on December 08, 2013, 05:21:32 AM


God made all that stuff for s to marvel at. Imagine how boring it would be with just an Earth and a sun and NOTHING else.

You atheists sometimes are so intellectual that you forget about the little beautiful things.

It's like a person who never watches a football game but he keeps refreshing the box score all game and says "great game" at the end.

Well, I hardly see where anyone says they don't appreciate beauty so I think you fail at your first point.

As to the second, that your god made everything, well where's the evidence? In fact there is exactly no evidence - zero - for what you say. All there is comes in stories in old books. Old books which, in fact, didn't even understand the facts of the size and shape of the planet and of the rest of the solar system. God creates a flat earth with a dome on top holding the stars in Genesis for example.

I'm sure there must be an explanation, somewhere, that supports you view but I doubt it fits the facts,
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: jaimehlers on December 08, 2013, 08:49:56 AM
However, more recent reevaluations emphasize that he was essentially a medieval thinker, with much of his "experimental" knowledge obtained from books, in the scholastic tradition.[3]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Bacon

"Empiricism" was reading Greek and Arab works, and intellectually re-mashing them.
Much of scientific development today is taking what people have already done and intellectually re-mashing it.  There are precious few truly 'new' ideas, in science or anything else; most work that gets done involves taking what people have already done and working with it.  Don't dismiss Bacon simply because a wiki states that he was a "medieval thinker" - that's nothing more than a sloppy form of intellectual laziness.

I am not suggesting that he was a modern experimental scientist, or that his approach was unflawed - but neither should you try to pretend that there was no scientific learning or development in Europe for nearly 1500 years simply because it's more convenient for you.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: jaimehlers on December 08, 2013, 09:09:24 AM
but you can't denounce Stalin. there is no objective standard of how an atheist must behave and act. You could be an atheist and find murder as pleasant as a walk in the park on a sunny day.
Oh, I can't denounce Stalin?  Well, sorry to burst your bubble, but I can and do, and I don't need any faux "objective standard" to do so.  For that matter, you don't act based on any such "objective standard" either.  See below.

Quote from: skeptic54768
but since there is an objective standard in the Bible for Christians, we can tell who's who.
Which has never once stopped Christians from violating this so-called "objective standard" whenever it pleased them, not to mention rewriting it to suit their biases.  So this "objective standard" you boast of is a myth.  It never existed in the first place.

Quote from: skeptic54768
Christians don't kill people for land and power. Simple as that.
By which you mean "the real Christians who believe the way I do".  This is a fallacy for a reason.

Never mind that Christians can and did kill people - millions upon millions of people - for land or power.  For all that you would like to disavow them as not actually being Christians, the unavoidable fact of the matter is that they were, and claiming that they were misled by demons is nothing but an excuse so you can pretend that your own beliefs are the only real form of Christianity.  Belief that other people (including other Christians) are misled by demons or devils is endemic to Christianity - which doesn't mean it's actually true, it just means the belief is common.  If the results weren't so bloody, I'd almost call it a Christian pastime to denounce others as being misled (or possessed) by demons or devils.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: jaimehlers on December 08, 2013, 09:17:54 AM
I've actually been doing some research and the truth is that Christians really didn't slow down any progress at all. it's just a myth atheists try to perpetrate to the uneducated to get them on their side. It's propaganda.
The problem with the Dark Ages is that Greco-Roman civilization and knowledge basically splintered and mostly became lost to the European world.  It took hundreds of years for Europeans to build themselves back up to the point where they were building on knowledge that had already been acquired, rather than rediscovering it.  So yes, Christians still did scientific work, even during the Dark Ages - but it was piecemeal and halting, and much of it involved trying to preserve knowledge rather than improve on it.

So yes, progress drastically slowed down in Europe as a result of the Dark Ages.  Be thankful that the Muslims were able to hold onto that existing knowledge until Christians had built their society back up enough that they were able to take up the torch and preserve knowledge for its own sake.  We would be far worse off if that knowledge had actually been lost rather than relocated.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: jaimehlers on December 08, 2013, 09:29:16 AM
I got my info virtually from this...
If i am wrong somewhere, please tell me.
How about that entire picture, for starters?  For one thing, it totally ignores India and China, where many (if not most) scientific advances first came about, not to mention the Fertile Crescent civilizations, which served as the bridge to India (and, to a lesser degree, China).  For another, there was not a thousand-year period where nothing happened in Europe (and the Mediterranean, since it includes the Greeks and Romans, both of which were Mediterranean civilizations).  You might be able to argue that there was no basis for systematic improvement for several hundred years, but to simply act like nothing happened is wrong.

The fact of the matter is that there's no nice, neat charts measuring the amount of scientific advancement that happened during X and Y and Z time periods, as that graph claims.  If you want to learn about how things really worked, you have to be willing to get your hands dirty.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: caveat_imperator on December 08, 2013, 10:31:32 AM
BCE.

;)

-Nam

Details details ;)

Pretty big detail. One signifies Christianity, and the other signifies science.

-Nam

I prefer the Tranquility Calendar myself.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Nam on December 08, 2013, 12:30:25 PM
BCE.

;)

-Nam

Details details ;)

Pretty big detail. One signifies Christianity, and the other signifies science.

-Nam

I prefer the Tranquility Calendar myself.

I wasn't born in June, I was born in Mendel!

-Nam
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on December 08, 2013, 01:36:17 PM
I can only assume we would have a higher level of technology...

I've actually been doing some research and the truth is that Christians really didn't slow down any progress at all. it's just a myth atheists try to perpetrate to the uneducated to get them on their side. It's propaganda.
You ARE the uneducated,plain and simple. You cut and paste crap you do not even understand in hope you will enlighten the more intelligent on these boards. You fail to prove a point or improve your understanding of the real world,because you live in a fantasy world.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: nogodsforme on December 08, 2013, 02:34:40 PM
skeptic,  it is clear that you don't mind contradicting yourself, maybe because you don't read your previous posts and just make everything up as you go, or maybe because there are several different people posting under the same name and they don't even agree on their own terms. Who knows? But we still have not gotten any clear response from you on any major question.

1) Were the European Catholics who preserved and promoted scientific knowledge in the middle ages real Christians or not?[1] 

2) Were the Dutch and British who brought their Christianity to Africa and the Americas in the 1600's-1800's real Christians or not?

3) Were the the Spanish and French and Portuguese who brought Christianity to the Americas in the 1400's-1700's real Christians or not?[2]

Both groups enslaved, tortured and massacred the native people-- in the name of Jesus Christ. Both groups then stole the land and forcibly converted the survivors--in the name of Jesus Christ. Still, those groups are the reason Christianity exists in the world outside of the Middle Ages today. If they and their descendants and converts are not real Christians, who is?

It seems that every time we talk about Christians doing bad stuff, you re-assign them to the non-Christian category. Yet, you say that Christians are like everyone else and just as prone to do bad things. And you ignore the many non-Christians who do good things.

skeptic, can you name any group of Christians, anywhere, other than the good atheists and other non-Christians who don't know they are Christians?  &)
 1. Yeah, they did allow some science, even as they were burning Protestants as heretics and random women as witches.
 2. Or did true Christianity not arrive in the Americas until later, like, about the time when you came along and prayed for a dog to get better?   
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on December 08, 2013, 03:24:48 PM
Cmon nogods,we all know Skeptic and the select few like him are "true Christians" the rest of them,including those who raped and pillaged the world were NOT "true Christians" They were deceived by Demons into slaughtering the indigenous populations around the globe. They thought they were following God/Jesus,turns out demons deceived them ALL.

 Have you not followed Skeptics thought patterns at all?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: One Above All on December 08, 2013, 03:27:03 PM
Have you not followed Skeptics thought patterns at all?

It thinks?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on December 08, 2013, 03:37:14 PM
Have you not followed Skeptics thought patterns at all?

It thinks?
Not really,like God he contradicts himself all the time,talks in endless circles and makes little sense PERIOD.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: median on December 08, 2013, 06:04:45 PM

So you do not know how everything happened?

So this means you can not rule out God if you don't know, correct?

This would depend upon how you are defining the term 'God'. I believe your God, the Christian conception of a deity, IS in fact imaginary (b/c it's conception holds mutually contradictory characteristics, and thus cannot exist). As far as the extreme far fetched logical mere 'possibility' of some other type of deity (such as something like what Spinoza raised), sure. Such concepts are not logically 'impossible' - but neither is the idea of purplish pink unicorns living on Pluto logically impossible either. The time to believe something is when you have sufficient evidence and not a second before. That is your problem. You have no sound evidence - just hear-say, "I say so", and mere assertions.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: median on December 08, 2013, 06:08:57 PM

They were not Christians. Just saying you are doesn't mean jack diddly.

Sitting in your garage making "vroom" noises doesn't make you a car.
Jesus said, "by their fruits you will know them."
Even you atheists roll your eyes and say, "Good loving Christian" sarcastically when you hear stuff like this.

How much proof do you need that they weren't Christian?

No True Scotsman Fallacy...
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: median on December 08, 2013, 09:00:12 PM
I'll read up on this Euthyphro Dilemma later so I can respond appropriately.


Ok waiting...
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Hatter23 on December 08, 2013, 09:13:43 PM
(http://www.lolwtfcomics.com/upload/uploads/1316007923.jpg)

I got my info virtually from this...
If i am wrong somewhere, please tell me.

The chart quantifies the unquantifiable. Not good evidence.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Hatter23 on December 08, 2013, 09:19:41 PM

Those weren't christians. They were catholics. You have condemned them over and over. You can't claim them for your own now.


That was a smart move. I wouldn't have thought of that one.

If you think about it true Christianity didn't start until the 16th Century. So, anything they hold before then, according to skeptic, were done by demon-lead people.

-Nam

Which would have included those that made the Bible and those that founded Protestantism.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: nogodsforme on December 09, 2013, 12:32:28 AM
Yeah. Today's born again and evangelical Christians wish we would all just forget all that nonsense between oh, about 200 CE and 1600 CE. You know, the formative years of the religion that began during the Roman Empire. The empire that used political power and military force to establish Christianity as the dominant religious faith in Europe....

Except when they want to call on that time period to prove that Christians were really smart and philosophical and sciency and stuff, back when the main kind of Christianity was the wrong kind, Catholic or Orthodox or Coptic.  &)

Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Anfauglir on December 09, 2013, 03:22:21 AM
I would accept abiogenesis if it was videotaped without human intervention.
...
Can this be done? They claim it happened already, so I need to see it with my own 2 eyes.

I will accept god exists when I can videotape him interacting in the world.  I need to see god with my own two eyes before I will accept it is real.

Until that point - by Skep's argument - I don't have to accept a single word said about it.  Glad we've sorted that out.

God is invisible. Can't videotape God. That's preposterous.

You will not accept something that people SAY is true unless you can see video evidence of it.  Good show, that's an enquiring and skeptical mind.

Why do you call me preposterous for refusing to accept something YOU say is true unless I can see video evidence of it?

Why are you a rational clear thinker for refusing to accept claims without proof, while I am preposterous and dumb?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Nam on December 09, 2013, 07:13:27 AM

Those weren't christians. They were catholics. You have condemned them over and over. You can't claim them for your own now.


That was a smart move. I wouldn't have thought of that one.

If you think about it true Christianity didn't start until the 16th Century. So, anything they hold before then, according to skeptic, were done by demon-lead people.

-Nam

Which would have included those that made the Bible and those that founded Protestantism.

Which is evidence that skeptic is demon-lead. Doesn't matter the version of the Bible he holds to, it's main source was written by demon-lead people.

He can't win. He lost from the beginning.

-Nam
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 10, 2013, 12:31:19 PM
You will not accept something that people SAY is true unless you can see video evidence of it.  Good show, that's an enquiring and skeptical mind.

Why do you call me preposterous for refusing to accept something YOU say is true unless I can see video evidence of it?


Why are you a rational clear thinker for refusing to accept claims without proof, while I am preposterous and dumb?

if you haven't seen the evidence of abiogenesis, then you are being a hypocrite for accepting it and not accepting God.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Truth OT on December 10, 2013, 12:57:08 PM
You will not accept something that people SAY is true unless you can see video evidence of it.  Good show, that's an enquiring and skeptical mind.

Why do you call me preposterous for refusing to accept something YOU say is true unless I can see video evidence of it?


Why are you a rational clear thinker for refusing to accept claims without proof, while I am preposterous and dumb?

if you haven't seen the evidence of abiogenesis, then you are being a hypocrite for accepting it and not accepting God.

"There are no other alternatives, either you buy into abiogenesis or you must admit that my god exists and is responsible for the creation of the universe/multiverse/everything.
Other possibilities like life beginning at the onset of the universe when space and time came to be must not be considered. There's no way that my god is less likely than contraversial topics like panspermia.  And if you think I'm gonna be intellignet enough or intellectually honest enough to differentiate between cosmology and the evolution of life, you people have another thing coming!

Bottom line, if you can't fully prove beyond a shadow of a doubt everything you accept as reasonable, then you must not only admit that my god exists, you must bow down and worship him by subscribing to my worldview and living in conjuction with what I believe to be moral and right."

Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Astreja on December 10, 2013, 01:20:59 PM
if you haven't seen the evidence of abiogenesis, then you are being a hypocrite for accepting it and not accepting God.

Apparently you aren't familiar with the Miller-Urey experiment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller%E2%80%93Urey_experiment).

Do you have a similar experiment we can do to find your alleged god?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ParkingPlaces on December 10, 2013, 01:21:49 PM
if you haven't seen the evidence of abiogenesis, then you are being a hypocrite for accepting it and not accepting God.

We're here. There are no gods. Abiogenesis seems pretty likely. There may be yet other explanations. That is always possible. In the meantime, we're working on it.

Bring your dark ages along and watch.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 10, 2013, 02:22:08 PM
We're here. There are no gods. Abiogenesis seems pretty likely. There may be yet other explanations. That is always possible. In the meantime, we're working on it.

Bring your dark ages along and watch.

Double P,

I am sorry but that is circular logic:

"We're here so it must have started on its own."

How do we know it started on its own? Because we're here.
Why are we here? Because it started on its own.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Zankuu on December 10, 2013, 03:34:07 PM
skeptic, do you see what you did there?

ParkingPlaces made a soft statement and included "seems pretty likely [...] there may be other explanations." But you attributed to him the hard, all-or-nothing statement of "must have started on it's own." That's very disingenuous. Do you see why people have a hard time communicating with you?

P1: ParkingPlaces exists.
P2: ParkingPlaces has experienced no gods during his existence.
C: Life arising naturally seems likely to ParkingPlaces considering A and B, but may not necessarily be true.

There's no fallacious reasoning here.

Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: nogodsforme on December 10, 2013, 06:27:34 PM
The past 10,000 years or so of human existence has been the story of a pretty intense search for signs of the supernatural--humans have spent (wasted?) centuries investigating gods, magic, spirits, psychic powers, what have you. The positive results of millions of people worldwide trying out thousands of competing and equally unfounded supernatural arguments (with no demonstrable evidence supporting them) have been spotty at best: little bit of empirical information about the world, plus some good feelings and community cohesion among groups of believers.

And of course, some really awful conflicts and horrible cruelty. No need to go into a lot of detail-- Christian crusades, partition of India, inquisitions, witch burnings, persecution of Jews, fatwas, enslavement and massacres of other religious groups everywhere.   

Also, to be fair, lots of interesting and beautiful artistic expression. Religious inspiration has decorated the world with impressive art, music, writings, dance, and other subjective, culturally specific human endeavors. However, as an atheist I am amazed at how many people attribute the universal human creative impulse to their preferred supernatural being. This in spite of the fact that they cannot explain why their god would inspire so many pagans, infidels and other unbelievers to create equally intricate and fascinating tributes to their false beliefs. [1]


But all this has produced almost no explanatory power about the world, no predictive results that can be transferred to other non-religious settings. In other words, we tried the supernatural and it did not work. Humans spent 10,000 years asking the supernatural to cure people of deadly horrors like leprosy, smallpox, bubonic plague, polio, childbed fever, syphilis, cancer, influenza and malaria with zero effect.

And guess what? In only a couple hundred years of applying the scientific method, we have discovered how to eliminate, cure, or at least treat, all of those and more. Consistently, and for everyone, not just for those who worship the right supernatural beings. Science works. Religion doesn't.[2]

Nobody has to take my world for it.  Just compare life expectancy, infant mortality rates, and overall quality of life in places where all they have is religion (like Haiti, Afghanistan and Bangladesh)  to places that have science (with religion as in the US or without as in Japan and Scandinavia). Where would you rather drink the water? In a place where they pray over it, or a place where they treat it scientifically to kill the germs? Hands down, science does a far better job than religion of taking care of people and fixing them up when they break. 

If that was not the case, religious people would not have to keep changing what they mean by "save" and "heal". Science saves and heals here on earth in real time, visibly and in ways that everyone can document. Religion has to make up stories about how its benefits are invisible, spiritual and maybe show up only after you are dead....

BTW, the gods of the past 10,000 years don't exist. ;)
 1. Stonehenge, Chichen Itza, Angkor Wat, Ummayyad Mosque, Hagia Sofia, Pyramids of Giza, and Winchester Cathedral are all artistically awesome, but make no "universal" statement about the supernatural other than that many people believe in some aspect of it.
 2. Remember how most churches have decided not to do communion when there is an infectious disease in the community? Because even the ministers and priests know that god won't protect them from AIDS or typhoid fever, but germ theory will. Science works, baby. Religion doesn't.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ParkingPlaces on December 10, 2013, 07:47:20 PM
We're here. There are no gods. Abiogenesis seems pretty likely. There may be yet other explanations. That is always possible. In the meantime, we're working on it.

Bring your dark ages along and watch.

Double P,

I am sorry but that is circular logic:

"We're here so it must have started on its own."

How do we know it started on its own? Because we're here.
Why are we here? Because it started on its own.

(Thanks for covering my six on this on Zankuu. But its alright. He's shooting blanks.)

Skeptic

You need to help me out with this. I have never heard any god-based explanation of the universe or earth or life that didn't simply involve a cute little story with many a lesson in it. Not very good lessons, but lessons. And I have never heard any easily measurable consistency from believers about the story; I've heard many variations, but nothing I can call congruous with reality.

Science, on the other hand, tells stories that are amazingly consistent. Science tells stories that match my reality. Science tells stories that are backed up by theories and laws, tests and experiments, and repeatable claims. Science comes up with proofs; ideas that seem solid but that science is willing to modify or even discard if sufficient evidence to do so is found.

The claims of religion, most especially the christian version that says the universe and our planet are only about 6,000 years old, are not nearly as solid. And I'm putting that mildly. Everything we measure indicates that the universe is almost 3,000,000 times older. And you are telling us that even though there appears to be evidence of things that are older than 6,000 years, they really aren't. And the lack of evidence for a worldwide flood should be disregarded. And the failure of DNA analysis to link all humans back to Noah and the gang shouldn't put us off. You are asking us to disregard the order in which dinosaur and other fossil specimens are buried, to disregard the ancient ice cores that we are drilling out of Greenland and the Antarctic, disregard archaeological evidence for much older human cultures, disregard the vast evidence for continental drift, disregard the obvious slowness of current soil and rock erosion, that you instead ask us not to extrapolate back in time past your magic date; you are asking us to ignore countless conclusions from competent human being who are interested in the truth, and instead go with your story, even though the only evidence for it is, like, you know, your story.

There are no fine lines here. It isn't christianity claiming that the earth is 6,000 years old and science saying its more like 6,119 years old. We're talking a huge disparity. Well, bigger than that but I'm trying to use terms that christians can understand.

If we said that each row of pews in your church represents 1,000 years of earths history, you would say that that history only goes back six pews. We would point to the other pews behind and say "Nope, you kind of need to go 1300 miles worth of pews further."

Imagining that scientific knowledge can be corrected to allow for your reality is naïve. If science was that wrong, it would be a cinch to prove it. You shouldn't need outlier scientists working from house trailers labels as "Institutes" or "Universities" be the only ones doing the work. You shouldn't have such a short list of counter arguments that each and ever theist visitor here is forced to use the same ones. You shouldn't have division within christianity about whether or not evolution actually happened. You shouldn't be limited to a few repetitive web sites to back up your claims, as compared to the hundreds of thousand, if not millions, of sources that we can turn to.

If you had anything more than an active imagination and a book, you would have many more tools with which to counter scientific arguments. You wouldn't need a strident tone in your voice, you wouldn't need to sit constantly on the verge of panic because of your few resources. You wouldn't need to fear next weeks science news, which will probably put more nails in the coffin of creationism. You would have a described reality that contained a plethora of evidence for your argument, and you would be able to quote unquestionably legitimate fact-finding studies by the gazillions, instead of the ten or twenty you hope you have now.

To make the world young, you also have to make it tiny. You have to minimize input and maximize excuses. You have to narrow your search for evidence down to those things that at best are oddball, and then you have to pin all of your hopes on those few anomalies that, if you don't look too close or really pay any attention, might just back up your side of the story a tiny little bit.

In the above synopsis, I did leave out one thing. Your incredulity. That is the one thing you have a lot of. It isn't going for you, but you have a lot of it. "Well, it seems to me that this or that could never happen…" is the most common argument we get. "I don't see how…" is a close second. With "There is no way that such a thing could happen!" pulling a distant third. Which means you give more credence to your instincts, which are based on faulty information, then you do to actual evidence. Which fails to impress every time.

Scientists a hundred years ago knew so little compared to what we know today, and had theories we now sort of laugh at. And I've no doubt that a hundred years from now people will shake their heads at how little we knew, and how wrong we were about some aspects of some of the sciences. But they won't be saying "How the f**k did they think the earth was so old! Mostly they will be feeling sorry for us because we didn't have the access to geologic data from other planets so similar to our own. That we didn't have the technical ability to drill a hundred miles into the planet an take rock samples. That our nanotechnology was limited to manipulating only atoms, which they would consider so big.

We have much to learn. We are held up by the tens of thousands, by the millions, that refuse to accept modern information, and hence both oppose progress and insulate themselves from the scientific world, which means that they cannot make contributions. While we fight wars against other religions and other people, we also fight amongst ourselves because we choose to follow different data sources.

So you go ahead and help hold us back. I would expect no less.  Your artificially tiny world allows you to do nothing else. As you sit at your keyboard and complain about our ignorance, bask in the glow of your own self-satisfaction and ignore every little doubt you ever have about your stance. Because you've got a world to keep on ruining. Tradition is important and you must do your part.

That'll teach you to put words in my mouth. Read what I wrote next time. Mine is not the strident voice in this conversation. Mine is not the desperate one. Make more stuff up if you have to, but don't also expect us, your opponents, to eventually walk two by two into your ark of ignorance.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 11, 2013, 01:44:27 AM
There is no evidence of anything older than 6,000-10,000 years old.

Agriculture started right around the time God was said to have created the world because God told man to "til the ground."
Writing started right around the time God was said to have created the world.

Agriculture and writing should be tens of thousands of years old in the "billions of years" model. Do you guys think it's a huge coincidence that all this stuff started right around the time God was said to have created the universe?

You guys expect us to think modern man was around for 190,000 years without thinking of agriculture and writing? if you believe that, you'll fall for anything. It's no wonder atheists unquestioningly accept scientists words.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ThatZenoGuy on December 11, 2013, 01:54:12 AM
Bahahahaha XD

Aboriginals (Australian ones) are dated at the least, 40 thousand years.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 11, 2013, 01:56:21 AM
Bahahahaha XD

Aboriginals (Australian ones) are dated at the least, 40 thousand years.

And yet they couldn't even write anything down or grow some corn....sounds fishy.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 11, 2013, 01:59:01 AM
We're here. There are no gods. Abiogenesis seems pretty likely. There may be yet other explanations. That is always possible. In the meantime, we're working on it.

Bring your dark ages along and watch.

Double P,

I am sorry but that is circular logic:

"We're here so it must have started on its own."

How do we know it started on its own? Because we're here.
Why are we here? Because it started on its own.

(Thanks for covering my six on this on Zankuu. But its alright. He's shooting blanks.)

Skeptic

You need to help me out with this. I have never heard any god-based explanation of the universe or earth or life that didn't simply involve a cute little story with many a lesson in it. Not very good lessons, but lessons. And I have never heard any easily measurable consistency from believers about the story; I've heard many variations, but nothing I can call congruous with reality.

Science, on the other hand, tells stories that are amazingly consistent. Science tells stories that match my reality. Science tells stories that are backed up by theories and laws, tests and experiments, and repeatable claims. Science comes up with proofs; ideas that seem solid but that science is willing to modify or even discard if sufficient evidence to do so is found.

The claims of religion, most especially the christian version that says the universe and our planet are only about 6,000 years old, are not nearly as solid. And I'm putting that mildly. Everything we measure indicates that the universe is almost 3,000,000 times older. And you are telling us that even though there appears to be evidence of things that are older than 6,000 years, they really aren't. And the lack of evidence for a worldwide flood should be disregarded. And the failure of DNA analysis to link all humans back to Noah and the gang shouldn't put us off. You are asking us to disregard the order in which dinosaur and other fossil specimens are buried, to disregard the ancient ice cores that we are drilling out of Greenland and the Antarctic, disregard archaeological evidence for much older human cultures, disregard the vast evidence for continental drift, disregard the obvious slowness of current soil and rock erosion, that you instead ask us not to extrapolate back in time past your magic date; you are asking us to ignore countless conclusions from competent human being who are interested in the truth, and instead go with your story, even though the only evidence for it is, like, you know, your story.

There are no fine lines here. It isn't christianity claiming that the earth is 6,000 years old and science saying its more like 6,119 years old. We're talking a huge disparity. Well, bigger than that but I'm trying to use terms that christians can understand.

If we said that each row of pews in your church represents 1,000 years of earths history, you would say that that history only goes back six pews. We would point to the other pews behind and say "Nope, you kind of need to go 1300 miles worth of pews further."

Imagining that scientific knowledge can be corrected to allow for your reality is naïve. If science was that wrong, it would be a cinch to prove it. You shouldn't need outlier scientists working from house trailers labels as "Institutes" or "Universities" be the only ones doing the work. You shouldn't have such a short list of counter arguments that each and ever theist visitor here is forced to use the same ones. You shouldn't have division within christianity about whether or not evolution actually happened. You shouldn't be limited to a few repetitive web sites to back up your claims, as compared to the hundreds of thousand, if not millions, of sources that we can turn to.

If you had anything more than an active imagination and a book, you would have many more tools with which to counter scientific arguments. You wouldn't need a strident tone in your voice, you wouldn't need to sit constantly on the verge of panic because of your few resources. You wouldn't need to fear next weeks science news, which will probably put more nails in the coffin of creationism. You would have a described reality that contained a plethora of evidence for your argument, and you would be able to quote unquestionably legitimate fact-finding studies by the gazillions, instead of the ten or twenty you hope you have now.

To make the world young, you also have to make it tiny. You have to minimize input and maximize excuses. You have to narrow your search for evidence down to those things that at best are oddball, and then you have to pin all of your hopes on those few anomalies that, if you don't look too close or really pay any attention, might just back up your side of the story a tiny little bit.

In the above synopsis, I did leave out one thing. Your incredulity. That is the one thing you have a lot of. It isn't going for you, but you have a lot of it. "Well, it seems to me that this or that could never happen…" is the most common argument we get. "I don't see how…" is a close second. With "There is no way that such a thing could happen!" pulling a distant third. Which means you give more credence to your instincts, which are based on faulty information, then you do to actual evidence. Which fails to impress every time.

Scientists a hundred years ago knew so little compared to what we know today, and had theories we now sort of laugh at. And I've no doubt that a hundred years from now people will shake their heads at how little we knew, and how wrong we were about some aspects of some of the sciences. But they won't be saying "How the f**k did they think the earth was so old! Mostly they will be feeling sorry for us because we didn't have the access to geologic data from other planets so similar to our own. That we didn't have the technical ability to drill a hundred miles into the planet an take rock samples. That our nanotechnology was limited to manipulating only atoms, which they would consider so big.

We have much to learn. We are held up by the tens of thousands, by the millions, that refuse to accept modern information, and hence both oppose progress and insulate themselves from the scientific world, which means that they cannot make contributions. While we fight wars against other religions and other people, we also fight amongst ourselves because we choose to follow different data sources.

So you go ahead and help hold us back. I would expect no less.  Your artificially tiny world allows you to do nothing else. As you sit at your keyboard and complain about our ignorance, bask in the glow of your own self-satisfaction and ignore every little doubt you ever have about your stance. Because you've got a world to keep on ruining. Tradition is important and you must do your part.

That'll teach you to put words in my mouth. Read what I wrote next time. Mine is not the strident voice in this conversation. Mine is not the desperate one. Make more stuff up if you have to, but don't also expect us, your opponents, to eventually walk two by two into your ark of ignorance.

I admire your dedication, Double P. You always have a lot to say and defend your cause with vigor.

The problem is that I have read all the refutations of talk origins at www.trueorigin.org

That website has point by point refutations of articles written on talk origins. Without reading both sides, you'll never know if you're being taken for a ride. Talk origins seems legit, but it's all smoke and mirrors. Dig beneath the surface and you'll find the truth.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ThatZenoGuy on December 11, 2013, 01:59:15 AM
Why would they need to?

They already had a language and were nomads.

When your food goes around and is not common, you chase after it, or starve.

You do not farm it, because the resources to do so would starve you.

Also, Australia does not have corn.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 11, 2013, 02:02:39 AM
Why would they need to?

They already had a language and were nomads.

When your food goes around and is not common, you chase after it, or starve.

You do not farm it, because the resources to do so would starve you.

Also, Australia does not have corn.

So you are saying that one day they had no need to farm, and another day they magically had a need to farm?

And you want us to swallow that whole?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ThatZenoGuy on December 11, 2013, 02:04:37 AM
They never had farms, ever.

(excluding one tribe, which farmed eels, their farm was discovered.)
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Astreja on December 11, 2013, 02:21:01 AM
In the history of humanity, farming, written language and cities are comparatively young -- And intricately related.  My theory is as follows:

Nomadic hunter-gatherer tribes, consisting of several families, had oral traditions rather than written ones.  A small group of people, travelling frequently with few possessions, would neither need writing nor the burden of carrying written records from place to place.  Fortified villages with permanent houses allowed the communities to grow, and because of the immobility of the settlement it then became necessary to have a consistent supply of food -- Hence agriculture.  (Perhaps a village was set up near a river, and someone observed that the seeds of a wild grain would sprout and create more grain if thrown into the mud near the water.)

One of the earliest known writing systems, from Sumer, was initially used for accounting.  I would surmise that with a large population and weaker inter-familial ties, more complex dealings came about and a person-to-person trust system was no longer adequate.

This isn't a binary process where one day everyone decides to put down their spears and pick up plows instead -- It's a series of small discoveries that, when put together, give us the world we have today.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: skeptic54768 on December 11, 2013, 02:26:21 AM
In the history of humanity, farming, written language and cities are comparatively young -- And intricately related.  My theory is as follows:

Nomadic hunter-gatherer tribes, consisting of several families, had oral traditions rather than written ones.  A small group of people, travelling frequently with few possessions, would neither need writing nor the burden of carrying written records from place to place.  Fortified villages with permanent houses allowed the communities to grow, and because of the immobility of the settlement it then became necessary to have a consistent supply of food -- Hence agriculture.  (Perhaps a village was set up near a river, and someone observed that the seeds of a wild grain would sprout and create more grain if thrown into the mud near the water.)

One of the earliest known writing systems, from Sumer, was initially used for accounting.  I would surmise that with a large population and weaker inter-familial ties, more complex dealings came about and a person-to-person trust system was no longer adequate.

This isn't a binary process where one day everyone decides to put down their spears and pick up plows instead -- It's a series of small discoveries that, when put together, give us the world we have today.

While I see what you are trying to say, is there evidence for it?

Do you have evidence that people had oral traditions?
How would you know?

i know this stuff sounds "cool" when it comes from a scientist's mouth, but does this mean we should just accept whatever they say?
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ThatZenoGuy on December 11, 2013, 02:28:24 AM
Okay, this started with you saying there is no evidence for anything over 10 thousand years.

I gave you a well known example.

You must counter somehow.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Foxy Freedom on December 11, 2013, 02:51:29 AM
There is no evidence of anything older than 6,000-10,000 years old.

Agriculture started right around the time God was said to have created the world because God told man to "til the ground."
Writing started right around the time God was said to have created the world.

Agriculture and writing should be tens of thousands of years old in the "billions of years" model. Do you guys think it's a huge coincidence that all this stuff started right around the time God was said to have created the universe?

You guys expect us to think modern man was around for 190,000 years without thinking of agriculture and writing? if you believe that, you'll fall for anything. It's no wonder atheists unquestioningly accept scientists words.

This is called moving the goal posts to get the answer you want. Do you see how you are fooling yourself?

The creation date calculated according to the bible is 4004 bc. Now that modern archaeology has discovered agriculture back to 10,000 bc, you want to change your dates. In fact you want to more or less double the length of time since the biblical creation.

(My parents bought a huge gold plated pulpit bible from a church for investment. The officially accepted years bc for everything are given in the margins, back to the creation.)

Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Add Homonym on December 11, 2013, 04:29:30 AM
This is called moving the goal posts to get the answer you want. Do you see how you are fooling yourself?

The creation date calculated according to the bible is 4004 bc. Now that modern archaeology has discovered agriculture back to 10,000 bc, you want to change your dates. In fact you want to more or less double the length of time since the biblical creation.

That's not the idiotic fallacy that Skep just made, though.

If you have homonids around for X,000 years, and none of them can write, or farm, due to circumstance; perhaps either ice age, or not having paper, then obviously they aren't going to be able farm or write any Bible down.

Then suddenly, they can write, because they invent paper, or agricultural civilization becomes efficient enough for a clerical class to contemplate its navel; then more detailed religious texts then follow, soon afterwards.

It would be very strange if we had had reading and writing skills, and we carried around parchments with us as nomads, and showed the parchments to the 10 people we met, every now and then. (sarcasm) I'm sure they would take note, and whip out their own parchments and copy it all down, and subvert their own religious beliefs, and then carry them around while they hunted pigs.

It follows that Jewish type written religion can only start when there is a big enough civilization to have a fat-arsed priest class, paper and agriculture.

What Skep hates, is that Judaism and Christianity did not start earlier, because God left all those people to burn, until they invented paper and clerics.

Skep is also missing an opportunity to credit religion with humans making progress. Since if we had literacy skills and agriculture for 100,000 years, and we stayed in that state without religion, then obviously religion is important for progress, if mankind suddenly became technological 1000 years after the invention of Judaism.

Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Mrjason on December 11, 2013, 06:07:19 AM
Bahahahaha XD

Aboriginals (Australian ones) are dated at the least, 40 thousand years.

And yet they couldn't even write anything down or grow some corn....sounds fishy.

They could paint though - http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/jun/18/rock-australia-art (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/jun/18/rock-australia-art)
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Anfauglir on December 11, 2013, 06:24:25 AM
You guys expect us to think modern man was around for 190,000 years without thinking of agriculture and writing? if you believe that, you'll fall for anything. It's no wonder atheists unquestioningly accept scientists words.

Define "modern man", Skep. 

You expect us to believe that the One True God that created the whole world and man was unknown to all bar one tiny little corner of the world for the first 4,000 years of its existence?  Does not feature even in the mythology of vast chunks of the world until his own myths were brought there?  All seems a bit implausible to me - that despite vast chunks of his creation having no idea of his existence until told by missionaries, a One True Creator God still exists.

If you believe that, you'll fall for anything. It's no wonder theists unquestioningly accept the Bible's words.

Other than that, Add has covered everything I wanted to say.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ThatZenoGuy on December 11, 2013, 06:25:07 AM
They could paint though - http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/jun/18/rock-australia-art (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/jun/18/rock-australia-art)

How could i forget our artwork...
Darnit.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Nam on December 11, 2013, 06:33:12 AM
They could paint though - http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/jun/18/rock-australia-art (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/jun/18/rock-australia-art)

How could i forget our artwork...
Darnit.

You have a pony brain?

;)

-Nam
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: ThatZenoGuy on December 11, 2013, 07:32:26 AM
You have a pony brain?

;)

-Nam

(http://images.sodahead.com/polls/003892289/4520568637_derpy_by_doctor_g_d54mzib_answer_1_xlarge.png)

To make matters worse, my eyes actually look like this.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Hatter23 on December 11, 2013, 08:33:54 AM
There is no evidence of anything older than 6,000-10,000 years old.
.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2012/06/120614-neanderthal-cave-paintings-spain-science-pike/

It didn't take more than 90 seconds or research to prove you wrong.
Title: Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
Post by: Hatter23 on December 11, 2013, 09:11:40 AM
<