|
|
Post by thefleetsin on Jan 2, 2019 22:42:09 GMT
billy graham before he spoke at a boys club jamboree?
|
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jan 3, 2019 1:47:17 GMT
It fails too because it is based on a current moral standard.which slavery belongs to as opposed to a moral standard that concerned itself with treatment. This has been explained numerous times and yet certain people insist paradoxically that the Bible cannot serve as their moral guide while at the same time making layer moral standard retroactively obligatory. We get it. Slavery sucked and it was way better to not be one and God should have condemned when he had the chance since it makes white dudes so angry in the 21st century. I find this post interesting, as I had not realised that you were one of the rare breed of religious/theist who don't promote the concept of an absolute or objective morality. Most theists subscribe to the camp of an objective morality which is fixed, God given and endures throughout history and into the modern day. |
|
|
|
Post by Vegas on Jan 3, 2019 3:36:56 GMT
Yeah, that's really not how analogies work. Hard to convince some people, though. Yeah... but you don't know how they work either: Yes. That is an analogy. Congratulations.
THIS is not an analogy.  THAT is a direct comparison.  And yes... You're still a moron for directly equating the two... as we do have proof that Santa doesn't exist... but, we don't really have proof that Jesus doesn't exist. " PARENTS KNOW THAT THEY ARE LYING TO THEIR CHILDREN ABOUT SANTA. They are not the same... You're still just being really fucking stupid about that. You don't get to make fun of other people arguing about an argument that nobody is actually making.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2019 3:49:35 GMT
Yeah, that's really not how analogies work. Hard to convince some people, though. Yeah... but you don't know how they work either: Neither this post nor others I've seen from you convinces me that you have the faintest idea what you're talking about, so I didn't trouble myself with reading the rest of it. So just have your little tantrum, make yourself look a bit stupid, and carry on. Ta ta. |
|
|
|
Post by Vegas on Jan 3, 2019 3:50:55 GMT
Yeah... but you don't know how they work either: Neither this post nor others I've seen from you convinces me that you have the faintest idea what you're talking about, so I didn't trouble myself with reading the rest of it. So just have your little tantrum, make yourself look a bit stupid, and carry on. Ta ta. Concession noted. Suck a dick, loser.  ...and I call "Bullshit!" on the "I didn't read the rest". So... Suck a bag of dicks, lying loser. 
EDIT:And, I'll throw in a "You shoving your fingers in your ears and going 'LA LA LA!! I'M NOT LISTENING TO ANYTHING YOU SAY!' is helluva lot closer to somebody throwing a little tantrum than me just pointing out that you're wrong.. again" just for the hell of it. |
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jan 3, 2019 4:55:35 GMT
Neither this post nor others I've seen from you convinces me that you have the faintest idea what you're talking about, so I didn't trouble myself with reading the rest of it. So just have your little tantrum, make yourself look a bit stupid, and carry on. Ta ta. Concession noted. Suck a dick, loser. ...and I call "Bullshit!" on the "I didn't read the rest". So... Suck a bag of dicks, lying loser.
EDIT:And, I'll throw in a "You shoving your fingers in your ears and going 'LA LA LA!! I'M NOT LISTENING TO ANYTHING YOU SAY!' is helluva lot closer to somebody throwing a little tantrum than me just pointing out that you're wrong.. again" just for the hell of it. ^ ^ I am so sorry your Momma lost your dummy. I am sure she will buy you another, tomorrow. If you spit it, you KNOW what will happen! |
|
|
|
Post by phludowin on Jan 3, 2019 10:13:32 GMT
You don't get to make fun of other people arguing about an argument that nobody is actually making. I hear a weird noise. Could it be the sound of an ironymeter exploding? |
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Jan 3, 2019 12:00:59 GMT
Although true that being a slavery would suck for the most part, something Scripture makes pretty clear, it is beyond stupid to think that sucky situation would somehow equate to be raped as a child. Then how lucky we are that nobody has made an argument that the two are as bad as one another. I mean, it's not like making an analogy of two things, in order to make the point that 'lessening' a bad act isn't a morally good thing to do if it endorses the continuation of the act, means that one is arguing that two things are of equal badness. Most people generally understand this. It's stupid to make child rape analogous with Biblical slavery. Where do you think the statement goes from there exactly? |
|
|
|
Post by Vegas on Jan 3, 2019 12:02:43 GMT
You don't get to make fun of other people arguing about an argument that nobody is actually making. I hear a weird noise. Could it be the sound of an ironymeter exploding? Nope... That's the sound of your stupidity ringing in your ears. |
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Jan 3, 2019 12:10:02 GMT
It fails too because it is based on a current moral standard.which slavery belongs to as opposed to a moral standard that concerned itself with treatment. This has been explained numerous times and yet certain people insist paradoxically that the Bible cannot serve as their moral guide while at the same time making layer moral standard retroactively obligatory. We get it. Slavery sucked and it was way better to not be one and God should have condemned when he had the chance since it makes white dudes so angry in the 21st century. I find this post interesting, as I had not realised that you were one of the rare breed of religious/theist who don't promote the concept of an absolute or objective morality. Most theists subscribe to the camp of an objective morality which is fixed, God given and endures throughout history and into the modern day. You don't realize this because you neither care to know or care to remember all of the silly debates had over it. You will make this statement again sooner than later. The fact that there are people whining on the internet about another person's religious beliefs based on history from thousands of years ago is automatic verification that people and times have different moral standards and theophobiacs simply try to merge them. Not all moral standards are equal and some are longer lasting. My primary moral standard is Christian. All other ones are subservient or not honored if in conflict with it. Most people, including religious ones, are fully aware that there are differing moral standards and adhere to multiple ones since not one of them covers everything. |
|
|
|
Post by phludowin on Jan 3, 2019 12:10:46 GMT
I hear a weird noise. Could it be the sound of an ironymeter exploding? Nope... That's the sound of your stupidity ringing in your ears. Actually it was my radiator. But if I had an ironymeter, it might have exploded again. |
|
|
|
Post by Vegas on Jan 3, 2019 12:12:45 GMT
Nope... That's the sound of your stupidity ringing in your ears. Actually it was my radiator. But if I had an ironymeter, it might have exploded again. And if you had a brain... You'd realize that you're just being stupid, again.  |
|
|
|
Post by rizdek on Jan 3, 2019 12:25:08 GMT
(And not too hard to guess what it's analogous to)
Someone who is putatively a great moral authority for the ages issues the following statement: "I have an important command for all pedophiles among you, so listen carefully. Pedophiles, remember to always be kind and considerate to all the children you have sex with."
What, if any, effect should such a pronouncement have on his status as a great moral authority? I would at least think it should at least disqualify him from being considered God. |
|
|
|
Post by Vegas on Jan 3, 2019 12:25:33 GMT
Then how lucky we are that nobody has made an argument that the two are as bad as one another. I mean, it's not like making an analogy of two things, in order to make the point that 'lessening' a bad act isn't a morally good thing to do if it endorses the continuation of the act, means that one is arguing that two things are of equal badness. Most people generally understand this. It's stupid to make child rape analogous with Biblical slavery. Where do you think the statement goes from there exactly? I think Graham might have had a stroke recently... He seems a lot dumber than he used to be. It's such a moronic trap that they think they've set: "Here an a little analogy.. And not too hard to guess what it's analogous to... but, you're stupid if you think that what I'm alluding to is just as bad as what I'm making an analogy to."  I mean... he's not alluding to "Putting the wrong recyclables in the wrong bin"  ... It's supposed to be something that he considers bad, if not as bad or worse than the analogy... That's kinda the point of making the analogy in the first place. They're fucking idiots. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2019 12:59:27 GMT
Then how lucky we are that nobody has made an argument that the two are as bad as one another. I mean, it's not like making an analogy of two things, in order to make the point that 'lessening' a bad act isn't a morally good thing to do if it endorses the continuation of the act, means that one is arguing that two things are of equal badness. Most people generally understand this. It's stupid to make child rape analogous with Biblical slavery. The analogy was more about the response people have to the bible's endorsement of slavery. |
|
|
|
Post by Vegas on Jan 3, 2019 13:08:55 GMT
It's stupid to make child rape analogous with Biblical slavery. Which only works if one considers slavery to be generally as bad as pedophilia. The Bible DOESN'T endorse slavery.... A huge part of the OT is The Jews being slaves... and them not liking it. It's not being endorsed. Schools that give out condoms don't endorse children having sex... It's a "If this is going to happen, at least do it this way..." HOLY SHIT!!! An actual analogy!!! |
|
|
|
Post by Isapop on Jan 3, 2019 16:48:48 GMT
The analogy was more about the response people have to the bible's endorsement of slavery. Which only works if one considers slavery to be generally as bad as pedophilia. The Bible DOESN'T endorse slavery.... A huge part of the OT is The Jews being slaves... and them not liking it. It's not being endorsed. Schools that give out condoms don't endorse children having sex... It's a "If this is going to happen, at least do it this way..." HOLY SHIT!!! An actual analogy!!! So let's apply your analogy to slavery. Schools know they're powerless to forbid teenagers from having sex. So they do what they can to minimize some bad consequences. Was God in a similar position, powerless to forbid the Israelites from engaging in slavery? And that's why he regulated it, because it would happen anyway, even if he forbade it?
|
|
|
|
Post by Vegas on Jan 3, 2019 18:18:31 GMT
Which only works if one considers slavery to be generally as bad as pedophilia. The Bible DOESN'T endorse slavery.... A huge part of the OT is The Jews being slaves... and them not liking it. It's not being endorsed. Schools that give out condoms don't endorse children having sex... It's a "If this is going to happen, at least do it this way..." HOLY SHIT!!! An actual analogy!!! So let's apply your analogy to slavery. Schools know they're powerless to forbid teenagers from having sex. So they do what they can to minimize some bad consequences. Was God in a similar position, powerless to forbid the Israelites from engaging in slavery? And that's why he regulated it, because it would happen anyway, even if he forbade it?
I dunno... Like I said... I'm not really defending slavery here... Maybe, God thought that a foreign enemy is better as a live slave than a dead combatant? Or that some people's chances of survival would rely on just being a slave?... So He provided rules for such arrangements.  |
|
|
|
Post by Isapop on Jan 3, 2019 18:36:03 GMT
So let's apply your analogy to slavery. Schools know they're powerless to forbid teenagers from having sex. So they do what they can to minimize some bad consequences. Was God in a similar position, powerless to forbid the Israelites from engaging in slavery? And that's why he regulated it, because it would happen anyway, even if he forbade it?
Maybe, God thought that a foreign enemy is better as a live slave than a dead combatant? Or that some people's chances of survival would rely on just being a slave?... So He provided rules for such arrangements. Just spitballing here. After WWII the Allies didn't keep the Axis POWs as slaves.Don't worry. Nobody thinks you're in favor of slavery. |
|
|
|
Post by Vegas on Jan 3, 2019 19:28:13 GMT
Maybe, God thought that a foreign enemy is better as a live slave than a dead combatant? Or that some people's chances of survival would rely on just being a slave?... So He provided rules for such arrangements. Just spitballing here. After WWII the Allies didn't keep the Axis POWs as slaves. The Allies also didn't live in The Bronze Age. |
|
