Do you not find it offensive that God speaks to only one person from billions of people...?!. Loool .
Right and wrong is determined by God
- Thread starter James R
- Start date
I'm still waiting for an explanation of what Baron Max, SAM and draqon actually object to about the content of the video I posted.
So far, all I'm getting is vague complaints that you feel somehow insulted by this video, but you haven't explained why or what is insulting about it.
So you are playing 'Devil's Advocate' then Max?
If you don't believe the crazy shit in Revelations, do you doubt the veracity of other chapters on the bible?
See, that's all that's going on in that video, really, it's making light of the crazy shit people believe in. And even you must admit Max, there's some really crazy shit out there, all we are debating here, is where we set the bar, before it's OK to lampoon stuff.
jayleew wrote in post #37; As for the topic...is this a question because it's not much of a statement. Right and wrong are determined by ethics, which are influenced by ideas and opinions. Right and wrong are relative things. One man's terrorist is another man's patriot.
Well, JamesR's statement asserts; Right and Wrong is determined by God.
Were we to be pedantic we could reply that every god ever invented is tasked with some determination of right and wrong in some areas of human activity. The question is therefore begged; WHICH GOD DOES JAMESR REFER TO? Before we can give a cogent answer we can't agree or disagree as he requests we do. Perhaps we are to infer he is a christian and therefore it is that god we must consider.
Anyhow, you and I agree it seems on the source of moral judgement.
There's fear involved as a theist, that if you step outside the faith in god that you will become immoral like heathens and heretics.
This is the most heinous aspect of dogma...........the smug assumption to moral superiority by denying morals to unbelievers. I find this conceit particularly galling and those who hold implacably to such conceit and smugness earn my implacable contempt. They insult all of humankind by such bigotry and violate the tenets of their faith by the alchemy of converting sin to virtue.
The whole attitude of dependence on external forces for success in anything, including morality, is flaky.
I would brand it as a type of intellectual cowardice and a fine illustration of the alchemy of converting the dysfunction of intellectual cowardice into a virtue. And on the other side of the coin we encounter the iniquity of casting the qualities of self-reliance and intellectual independence as the dross of religion's alchemy. No more heinous a crime has been foisted on humankind. Religious faith vastly reduces our worthiness to prosper and prevail.
I've said too much, so have at it...i'll sort out the best I can...
Hey, we're in broad agreement here. I've enjoyed reading your thoughts.
OriginalBiggles, Prime
Well, JamesR's statement asserts; Right and Wrong is determined by God.
Were we to be pedantic we could reply that every god ever invented is tasked with some determination of right and wrong in some areas of human activity. The question is therefore begged; WHICH GOD DOES JAMESR REFER TO? Before we can give a cogent answer we can't agree or disagree as he requests we do. Perhaps we are to infer he is a christian and therefore it is that god we must consider.
Anyhow, you and I agree it seems on the source of moral judgement.
There's fear involved as a theist, that if you step outside the faith in god that you will become immoral like heathens and heretics.
This is the most heinous aspect of dogma...........the smug assumption to moral superiority by denying morals to unbelievers. I find this conceit particularly galling and those who hold implacably to such conceit and smugness earn my implacable contempt. They insult all of humankind by such bigotry and violate the tenets of their faith by the alchemy of converting sin to virtue.
The whole attitude of dependence on external forces for success in anything, including morality, is flaky.
I would brand it as a type of intellectual cowardice and a fine illustration of the alchemy of converting the dysfunction of intellectual cowardice into a virtue. And on the other side of the coin we encounter the iniquity of casting the qualities of self-reliance and intellectual independence as the dross of religion's alchemy. No more heinous a crime has been foisted on humankind. Religious faith vastly reduces our worthiness to prosper and prevail.
I've said too much, so have at it...i'll sort out the best I can...
Hey, we're in broad agreement here. I've enjoyed reading your thoughts.
OriginalBiggles, Prime
Ya' know, James, I think the thing that bothers me the most about you posting the OP is that you actually did it. You, the guy who claims to love all people, the guy who claims to have compassion for his fellows (and actually derides me for having no compassion!), ....have proven by posting this that you are not compassionate or understanding of your fellows at all. It's just your big lie to the public ...while inside, you're as bad or worse than me!
James, billions of people in the world are Christians who believe in the God that you denigrated by posting that video. You, who claims compassion for all mankind, did something (posted the video) knowing that it might or could offend millions, if not billions, of people. And if you didn't know it, then that proves that you're a stupid sonuvabitch!
And ya' know something else, James? It also bothers me that, even when I pointed out how you might be offending all those people, instead of feeling bad about possibly offending all those people that you claim to have compassion for, you jumped immediately to make excuses for your actions .....actions which might have offended millions. And all of it from a man who claims to love his fellows, and one who claims that he has compassion for his fellows.
Baron Max
I gave an explanation, it was deleted.
Who denigrated? Max, James did not write, produce, nor feature in that video. He just linked to it. This faux offence you are trying to take doesn't wash I'm afraid. I covered the aspect of offence over beliefs people choose to hold, vs offence wrt gender or race, and you haven't acknowledged a difference.
You also completely dodged my question about patronising all beliefs, and whether you would hold some to be ridiculous. That's not very honest Max, ignoring points that deflate your faux offence.
But onto that video Max, and the last sequence. Why did God create us with foreskins, only to command some to cut them off? Does that make sense to you?
So you don't believe that anyone could possibly be offended by that video, is that what you're saying? ...and that YOU are the one to determine that offense or not, not theirs?
Baron Max
Max, I asked you some questions, and you still haven't answered them. It's a dishonest tactic of yours, all you ever do is ask questions and never actually clarify your own position or opinion.
Of course someone could take offense to that video, some people would be offended merely because they depict God. The debate is not whether people take offense though, but rather if it is reasonable and so far, all you have done is play devil's advocate and show faux offense.
the concept can be drilled down to the egyptians
as well since moses as a baby who was raised in pharoahs house (Pharaoh's daughter pulled him from the river)
and Moses is who is said to write the first 5 books of torah
so moses, knowledge, reasoning, clippings and no dipping into pork, could all be rules from 'that' god of the time; the pharoah
it is why i often imply that moses was used to having dinner and talking with god
pork: not prepared properly and people die
clipping: waring bodies ravaged the women of the conquerred (it reduced illnesses brought back from traveling warriors)
but god told them 'the law'...........because that knowledge evolved over time and was poven 'good' (supports life to continue)
then notice how knowledge evolved further; we have refrigerators and nostradamus taught people to bath (it is how he single-handedly assisted more with and saving lives (the plague), then Muhammed, jesus and moses combined)
(enjoy the history and learn a bit, tit's fun)
Right and wrong is determined by the inner human conscience . We have thousands of religions in this world and everyone of them plays different tunes of mythology.....
.Right and wrong is determined by the inner human conscience . We have thousands of religions in this world and everyone of them plays different tunes of mythology.....
if.........IF ............ BIG if; god is all mass, energy time (keep the if up)
and we know 'life' and its continuance is the process we find 'instinctive' in nature (mass/energy over time; continuing to process; alive)
then 'life' is that ultimate measure over time
good, lives longer via changing, "transmutation" over an evolving environment.
like learning; to progress, learn more
and the quality combinations of life, last longer (no matter if is literal (a species, a lineage..etc) or even knowledge (we still use confucius) or perhaps forest (the groves of red woods)......... in all examples; a choice by people can cause 'life to continue' longer than the person has the choice to cause it (awake).............
then the combining of the comprehension can exist binding 'good and bad' to existence (god himself) naturally.
mankind is the only thing that 'thinks' it is separate from existence (away from the garden)
he can make choices,
good: support life to continue
bad: loss to the common
why waste you energy (life) being a 'loss to the common' when evolving, combining, contributing; giving of self for other (and life) is what provides each with longer life
these rules are bound to nature, compassion and existence itself that all can observe equally
then to know the math (the last word) to verify the absolute to nature, existence, science, religion and philosophy..........
then OH SHIT, the absolute can be known equally; to all mankind (,by god; evolved over time)
did any understand what darwin said about 'the tree of life'?
Something to the effect, if the life don't 'transmutate' and change for the future; they go extinct (no more life for that whole chain)
that be an oooooooooops.........(when mankind can choose)
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
For the little fish to be heard, requires both unity and ingenuity
And even then it's just a bluff ?
Your questions have no bearing on anything ...which is why I decided not to bother answering them.
People who are Christians and believe in the Bible.
Don't make no difference to the price of eggs anywhere! He found it, ..he thought it was funny/cute/or whatever, ...he copied it, ...he linked it, ....he brought it into this house! It's the same whichever it was and whoever did it.
And it's even worse, in my view, if James didn't realize, didn't know, that it "might" offend some people. See? He knew that people would be offended, and that's why he did it. I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't do just to try to get another rise out of me like what's happening right now. The bully strikes again ....and gets away with it because he's a moderator.
If I posted something derogatory about gays and lesbians, he'd delete and threaten to ban me for it. And, yes, in my opinion, homosexuality is a choice that one makes ...in the same way as religion is a choice.
It has nothing to do with whether you approve of people taking offense, it's whether those people felt offense or not. Feelings, ya' know? Or are you in the habit of seeking to approve everyone else's feelings?
Again, it makes no difference. If someone is offended by something, then they're offended by it. You might not agree, but that's a whole 'nother topic altogether.
Don't have to make sense. If people believe in God, then they believe in God, ain't got nothing to do with foreskins or fingernails or hair or beards or..... See? You're trying to force everyone to believe as you believe ....and denigrate everyone who believes something different to your beliefs. That's just not very nice of you. Nor is it very nice of James R. to post this threat.
Reasonable? According to whom? Are you the one determining judge as to what's reasonable? If so, when did we vote you into that office?
Baron Max
James,
you keep asking why people find the video offensive, yet no one has been offended (to my knowledge).
I'm inclined to think that it is the fundi-atheist who is offended by God, why they find this material funny.
Praise God! The most High.
As for the video, the humour is silly (which may be its aim), the type of material I have come to expect from angry atheists.
jan.
you keep asking why people find the video offensive, yet no one has been offended (to my knowledge).
I'm inclined to think that it is the fundi-atheist who is offended by God, why they find this material funny.
Praise God! The most High.
As for the video, the humour is silly (which may be its aim), the type of material I have come to expect from angry atheists.
jan.