Is it wrong to have sex for fun, knowing it might possibly lead to an abortion?

[Write4U]

I am talking about the historical account of the Exodus in the Bible. Miracles and all.

There are no miracles in history. They only exist in historical accounts by word-of-mouth.

And the evidence on the ground for it. Some of it is visible in Google Earth.

Then list those "some of it (miracles)" with a link to a book on history please. Else it is just word-of-mouth again and that doesn't count as history, right?

The bible is not a book on history. Genesis proves that in the first few pages.
Two accounts of "loaves and fishes" In Matthews and Mark and a lame belated explanation that they were separate events. Each with a different number of people and loaves and fishes anf baskets.

Which then is the correct historical account or was history passed on by word-of-mouth and of course took on a life of their own just like mundane "rumor" and "hearsay"?

 

[cluelusshusbund]

"those are some of my old posts. The old ignorant me!"

So you used to be ignorant...

"Sometimes I am stupid, and make wrong choices."

...now in you'r current posts you have evolved to stupid

Mayb less Bible study woud help to slow this regression

 

[Write4U]

Precious...!

 

[Write4U]

Just one example...

The massive water erosion from the Split Rock that Moses struck is visible on Satellite Imagery, at the Mountain of God in Saudi Arabia, where Moses was given the Ten Commandments. The quarry is there as well, and much more.

On your 5 year quest did you read wiki at all?

Modern biblical scholarship differs as to whether Exodus 19-20 describes the people of Israel as having directly heard all or some of the decalogue, or whether the laws are only passed to them through Moses.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Commandments

Oh, and were is this;

According to the biblical narrative there were two sets of tablets. The first, inscribed by the finger of God, (Exodus 31:18) were smashed by Moses when he was enraged by the sight of the Children of Israel worshipping a golden calf (Exodus 32:19) and the second were later cut by Moses and rewritten by God as He said in Exodus 34:1. (Exodus 34:28)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tablets_of_Stone

I recommend that you treat all of it with skepticism.

I treat all hearsay from three thousand years ago with incredulity. Especially when the experts disagree.

I am convinced after researching it for over 5 years.

Five years, wow, it took me five minutes to learn that the experts cannot agree on this historical fact.

But I do not expect you to agree

Correct, nor do the experts.

Only Lewis Black knows.......

 

[RainbowSingularity]

Lewis Black

wow ! lewis is awesome.
stage presence & timing...

 

[sideshowbob]

Ok, what is the basis for your morality?

As I said, the social contract.

 

[sideshowbob]

Go to YouTube
And do a search for...

Finding the Mountain of Moses

That whole idea is rubbish.

 

[James R]

No, I would not, I am not God.
But He certainly is righteous in all His judgements.
Praise Him!

Interesting. May I ask by what standard are you judging God's righteousness in all His judgements?

Take an example, if you like: the killing of all the first-born sons of Egypt at the time of Moses's liberation of the Jewish people from slavery in Egypt, which I know you believe actually happened. You say it was right for God to kill all those innocent Egyptian children, because God is righteous in all his judgements. Agree?

Now here's what I'm wondering: Was it right for God to kill those children just because God said it was right? Or was it the right thing to do independent of what God said about it?

See, the thing is, if it's only God's say-so that makes things right or wrong, then morality is a slave to the whims of an arbitrary God. Do you agree? If God says the murder of innocents is right and good, then it's right and good, regardless of anything else we paltry humans might think about it.

Is this how your personal morality works? God says homosexuality is evil, so that makes it evil and there's nothing more to say? Or what?

Just to be clear: on this view, killing of innocents is wrong (or right, as the case may be) only because God says so - no other arguments as to why it might be right or wrong "count", because God is righteous by default in all his judgements. And in that case saying that God is righteous in all his judgements isn't to say anything of substance other than "God is God, and God gets to set the rules". After all, under this system of morality, there's no way to decide what is right or wrong other than by referring to God's arbitrary dictates.

I will be most interested to learn from you whether this is how you decide your personal morality, SetiAlpha. I look forward to your response.

 

[RainbowSingularity]

is it wrong to force your own moral ideology at the point of a sword and then expect your own religious ideology should be protected by other peoples lives ?

 

[billvon]

Are you really sure?

Here is a question for someone who claims to possess a surety in the accuracy of the Bible -

Did God create Man or cattle first?

 

[Bowser]

As I said, the social contract.

Written by whom?

 

[sideshowbob]

Written by whom?

Society.

 

[Bowser]

Society.

where is it written?

 

[James R]

where is it written?

In the patterns of social interactions that human beings engage in when they participate in a society. Moreover, it is those particular patterns which are generally considered to be normative for the functioning of society for mutual benefit.

 

[Bowser]

In the patterns of social interactions that human beings engage in when they participate in a society. Moreover, it is those particular patterns which are generally considered to be normative for the functioning of society for mutual benefit.

An assumed contract? So there are no codified rules?

 

[James R]

An assumed contract? So there are no codified rules?

Were you not aware of this? Are you unfamiliar with the term "social contract"?

If this is your first time encountering the term, it might be a good idea for you to google it and then we can discuss after you've got yourself up to speed a bit more.

By the way, didn't you say you were leaving? You're still here.

 

[Bowser]

It would seem that the social contract is quite pliable. Would you agree?

By the way, didn't you say you were leaving? You're still here.

I have some time to kill. Are you complaining?

 

[James R]

It would seem that the social contract is quite pliable. Would you agree?

Maybe. In what sense are you saying it's "pliable"? What do you mean by that?

I have some time to kill. Are you complaining?

No. Just wondering why you made such a production about banning yourself and/or taking a break from the forum, when it has all amounted to nothing. It's all a bit the boy who cried wolf.

Carry on.

 

[Bowser]

Maybe. In what sense are you saying it's "pliable"? What do you mean by that?

The social contract changes over time.

No. Just wondering why you made such a production about banning yourself and/or taking a break from the forum, when it has all amounted to nothing. It's all a bit the boy who cried wolf.

Carry on.

I didn't see it as a "production," nor did I cry wolf. I thought you might be tired of my participation and offered you an opportunity. It appears that it's not an issue, As for taking a break, I might or might not. I might be feeling one way one day and another way the next.

 

[RainbowSingularity]

do pro choice people seek to pro choice morality they try and force into law to force others to comply with their forced fascist dictatorship of religious ideology ?
is there pro choice in there somewhere ?