Social Degradation and Religious Decay (Split from "Life on Europa")
Pages
| Author | Topic: Social Degradation and Religious Decay (Split from "Life on Europa") |
|---|---|
|
Law Bringer
Member # 2984
|
written Sunday, July 15 2007 00:00
Profile
Homepage
quote:Troll Mover God? I forget what that was an anagram for... -------------------- Encyclopaedia • Archives • Members • RSS [Topic / Forum] • Blog • Polaris • NaNoWriMo Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair. | I have a love of woodwind instruments. "That damn meddling eskimo." --WKS about Alorael Posts: 8752 | Registered: Wednesday, May 14 2003 07:00 |
|
Electric Sheep One
Member # 3431
|
written Sunday, July 15 2007 00:15
Profile
Psalm 90 gives 70 as a norm of some kind, with 80 allowed as a possible exceptional case. It doesn't say 70 was an average life span; interpreting it in such a sophisticated statistical way is reading far too much into the passage, and in a quite unreasonable way. What the psalm most plainly says is that the human life span was roughly 70 years; and it indicates that 'roughly' means a range of around a decade. Since quite obviously lots of people died of acute illness or injury decades before 70, the passage can only be talking about 'natural' life span, up to death from causes that can reasonably be labelled 'old age'. Since what we now call 'life expectancy' includes everyone who survives birth, and takes all possible forms of death into account, Psalm 90 says nothing at all about life expectancy. It speaks of the onset of extreme old age. For that, it is a useful and probably reliable data point in medical history. -------------------- We're not doing cool. We're doing pretty. Posts: 3335 | Registered: Thursday, September 4 2003 07:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 4248
|
written Monday, July 16 2007 06:45
Profile
quote:I'm pretty certain all of those were originally written or told by separate people... ...but it must've been one heck of an idiot who put them in the same book. And then there people who take all those literally because they're in the same book... [ Monday, July 16, 2007 06:47: Message edited by: Frozen Feet ] -------------------- I have nothing more to do in this world, so I can go & pester the inhabitants of the next one with a pure concscience. Posts: 617 | Registered: Tuesday, April 13 2004 07:00 |
|
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
|
written Monday, July 16 2007 09:29
Profile
SoT and Alo make a good point on distinguishing between life span and life expectancy. When I said 70-80 as average age I meant average life span. That certainly is not to say that everyone made it to 70, but that 70 or 80 would not be viewed as unusual by a person in that era whereas 90+ might be seen as very old. That is what I meant when I compared now and then. I’m not proposing that there was a statistical analysis done including infant mortality rates that we can pull up. The proof that I know of is in the Bible. Whether you take that as historically accurate or not is of course dependant on your worldview and what you choose to believe. What kind of evidence would you expect to see from millennia ago? I find the article narrow in scope for the reasons I gave earlier. For example, it mentions sewers as marking “one of the biggest jumps in life expectancy.” Where do you see that big jump in the article or the chart? One might be lead to conclude that sewers were invented in Greece or in the past couple of centuries. I also noticed that the chart jumped from broad time periods to times and places (e.g. upper Paleolithic and neoloithic compared to classical Greece and Rome). It’s not a big deal if you take it for what it is – a Wikipedia article. I hope that answers your two questions. Incidentally the article mentions diet and public health as affecting expectancy and we do know for a fact that risky foods were banned, waste was buried outside the camp, the diseased were quarantined, contact with dead animals and people was prohibited, and washing for cleanliness was a part of the culture in the days of Moses. That’s why I have no problem accepting them as living as long as we do. EDIT: quote:“In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month… “in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month…” “in the six hundred and first year, in the first month, on the first day of the month…” “in the second month, on the twenty-seventh day of the month…” These are from Noah’s log in chapter 7 and 8 of Genesis. His months were 30 days and his years had 12 months. This account shows 150 days is 5 months. The Hebrews also had a 13th month (second Adar or Veadar) for adjustment. Methuselah’s father is recorded to have fathered him when he was 65 and his grandfather came when his great-grandfather was the same age. That would make them 5 or 6 when their son was born if we divide by 12. These ages are only a problem when you assume that nothing has been lost to us, which is a big assumption. We know that genes mutate and whole species can disappear. Why is it a stretch to think that some change caused a decrease in maximum life span? It’s not at all for me when whales and tortoises can break 200 years, mollusks can approach 400, and some trees seem to have infinite life spans with ages in the tens of thousands of years. If you told someone who didn’t know that a shellfish could outlive them 4 times over they’d think you were joking. So it goes with lack of knowledge. But, I guess since man is at his peak it’s absolutely impossible for anything to have existed that we don’t see today. Any evidence to the contrary should be automatically discounted and mocked. [ Monday, July 16, 2007 09:32: Message edited by: Stillness ] Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00 |
|
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
|
written Monday, July 16 2007 09:34
Profile
quote:Because you took my comment out of context. quote:Then why do you expect that God would respond if you were petitioning Jesus? My experience is that God does respond if you petition him properly. The experience of many is that he even responds if you petition him improperly. The question is how will you treat his response. You definitely gained knowledge of God since then. You’re more educated than many on what the Bible teaches. It’s unfortunate that you have become an opponent of it. I love the account where Jesus is praying that God lets him do things differently and God’s sends an angel to strengthen him effectively answering no and Jesus gets into an physical and agonizingly painful sadness, yet he obeys. It’s because he was humble and could take the answer, ‘No. My way is best.” Some cannot. Self-centeredness and pride prevent them. quote:No, the future is bright. The world will get better. It’s just bad for now. And it’s not ignorance because I have the same hard figures we all have access to that show an increase in human suffering and bloodshed. Ignorance would be ignoring them. quote:False. Please show the scripture(s) that promote polygamy. quote:(1 Timothy 3:12) Let ministerial servants be husbands of one wife, presiding in a fine manner over children and their own households. quote:This is not God’s way and is unchristian. God’s way works best as it always has. Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00 |
|
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
|
written Monday, July 16 2007 09:37
Profile
I don’t push my faith on the internet on video game forums. I go out live and in person door to door and into the homes of people who want to listen when its time to preach. I talk to the folks here because I like video games and I find some of the discussions and perspectives enlightening. I didn’t start this thread or derail the one that spawned it (which I did start because I wanted to talk about life on other planets). Some people obviously are interacting with me because they want to for whatever reason or I wouldn’t be posting. If you do not because I’m a jerk you have options. I know I have some sort of magnetism that makes people who hate my posts unable to resist reading them and responding. Be strong. Fight it. Maybe you can pray to your plate for strength on pasta night. I always find the antics and reasonings of the obstinate atheist to be amusing. (I’ve seen video of guys preaching the pasta god and must admit they are quite funny). You all imagine that your way is the pinnacle of thought and that the majority of men now and throughout history are insane or deluded for believing in a spiritual realm. You minimize the spiritual nature and desire for higher purpose in our race, even the one in yourselves. You brush off encounters that people have had with this realm as nonsense simply because you haven’t had the experience. You exchange belief in spirits with faith in men with microscopes or promises that hope lies within us. But you still have religion. There is always something you follow. “We all can do what we please as long as no one’s hurt,” “People who believe in gods are seeking comfort because they can’t deal with death,” “Man arises from chaos and nothing more so we have to unite and put aside our differences to bring about peace.” The people who believe this stuff are more adamant than I’ll ever be in “pushing religion.” It’s funny when they can’t see that and attack the “religious” for the same things they do. Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 4248
|
written Monday, July 16 2007 09:37
Profile
quote:Bones, for example. You can tell awfull lot from simply bones; how well-fed the person was during his life, how old s/he was and whether s/he had any chronic diseases. I'm pretty certain we've dug up a pile of bones from the near-east, does anyone know how much skeletal research has been done from the material found there? -------------------- I have nothing more to do in this world, so I can go & pester the inhabitants of the next one with a pure concscience. Posts: 617 | Registered: Tuesday, April 13 2004 07:00 |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Monday, July 16 2007 10:37
Profile
My experience is that very few people talk about their lack of belief until a conversation is started by someone else. It usually begins with a "Huh, now why would you believe that?" Eventually it turns into this conversation, where the believer is inundated with disbelief. There must be something to that... -------------------- WWtNSD? Synergy - "I don't get it." Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
|
Councilor
Member # 6600
|
written Monday, July 16 2007 10:54
Profile
Homepage
Depends on where you are, Salmon. In other places, it is the disbeliever who is inundated. A majority opinion means nothing in itself. Dikiyoba. Posts: 4346 | Registered: Friday, December 23 2005 08:00 |
|
Shaper
Member # 73
|
written Monday, July 16 2007 11:55
Profile
The only reason those disbelievers make their disbelief known all the time in those situations is that they're constantly reacting to the believers constantly preaching. Regardless of your religion or lack thereof, however, you must admit that the FSM is pretty darn cute. Just look at his big round eyes on his noodly eye stalks! -------------------- My Myspace, with some of my audial and visual art The Lyceum - The Headquarters of the Blades designing community The Louvre - The Blades of Avernum graphics database Alexandria - The Blades of Exile Scenario database BoE Webring - Self explanatory Polaris - Free porn here Odd Todd - Fun for the unemployed (and everyone else too) They Might Be Giants - Four websites for one of the greatest bands in existance -------------------- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Posts: 2957 | Registered: Thursday, October 4 2001 07:00 |
|
Agent
Member # 2759
|
written Monday, July 16 2007 12:18
Profile
Homepage
I thought they were meatballs. -------------------- "Blink and you're dead... Don't turn your back, don't look away and don't blink." Geneforge 4 stuff. Also, everything I know about Avernum | Avernum 2 | Avernum 3 | Avernum 4 Posts: 1104 | Registered: Monday, March 10 2003 08:00 |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Monday, July 16 2007 12:18
Profile
I guess more to the point would be to suggest that it would be extremely rare to have a man and woman ring your doorbell in anticipation of dissuading you from your faith of deism/theism in favor of atheism/agnosticism. Generally speaking, people that don't care about faith don't care to spread that disbelief. It would just be silly. -------------------- WWtNSD? Synergy - "I don't get it." Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
|
Shaper
Member # 73
|
written Monday, July 16 2007 12:27
Profile
quote:He has both.  -------------------- My Myspace, with some of my audial and visual art The Lyceum - The Headquarters of the Blades designing community The Louvre - The Blades of Avernum graphics database Alexandria - The Blades of Exile Scenario database BoE Webring - Self explanatory Polaris - Free porn here Odd Todd - Fun for the unemployed (and everyone else too) They Might Be Giants - Four websites for one of the greatest bands in existance -------------------- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Posts: 2957 | Registered: Thursday, October 4 2001 07:00 |
|
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
|
written Monday, July 16 2007 12:40
Profile
I find it ironic that one of the mascots for the aggressive athiestic movement appears right after JS's last post. Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00 |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Monday, July 16 2007 12:55
Profile
It is kinda silly. It would be silly beyond epic proportions if atheists began wearing that symbol on chains around their necks, or plastered on the back of their cars. But come on, no one would ever dream to do that, right? ps. This previous statement just begs for someone to find a reference or illustrative picture. -------------------- WWtNSD? Synergy - "I don't get it." Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
|
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Monday, July 16 2007 13:24
Profile
Homepage
quote:Does anyone else notice the glaring hypocrisy, given the last argument that Stillness was in? -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
|
Councilor
Member # 6600
|
written Monday, July 16 2007 13:30
Profile
Homepage
Originally by Salmon: quote:  Dikiyoba also found a necklace and shirts. Edit: Added quote and links. [ Monday, July 16, 2007 13:36: Message edited by: Dikiyoba ] Posts: 4346 | Registered: Friday, December 23 2005 08:00 |
|
Shaper
Member # 73
|
written Monday, July 16 2007 13:33
Profile
quote:The Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster isn't aggressively atheist. They're aggressively anti-jerk. You can have whatever religion you want as long as you don't hurt anyone or shove it down our throats. You don't need to be a Pastafarian or conform to the more specific bits of FSM's system of ethics to get into FSM's heaven, but it helps. quote:There's nothing wrong with wearing symbols around your neck (cross necklaces are everywhere and nobody, not even atheists, complains). As for people who utilize bumper stickers and street corner preaching, in the latter case it's usually in response to obnoxious missionaries and evangelists (you generally wouldn't see them forcing their views on people walking past Buddhist temples, for instance, unless they're jerks in which case the FSM doesn't like them anyway regardless of what they think) and in the former case you don't have to look. Going door to door to interrupt people's meals and/or work or derailing every thread that even touches upon religion and some that don't, however, is quite a different story, because you can't just ignore someone standing at your door (especially those who ring repeatedly and don't leave), and even if one person wants to ignore the new subject of the thread, everyone else has moved on to arguing about religion so you look like an idiot if you try to respond to the original topic. Yes, I know you started the thread without mentioning religion, Stillness, but three posts later you were also the one who brought up religion and made started making stupid statements. When I was about twelve years old and the only person home at the time, minding my own business and mowing the lawn, one particularly obnoxious Jehovah's Witness stood at my next-door uncle's door ringing the doorbell for about twenty minutes. I didn't realize he was a missionary (he was wearing a business suit, so I thought he was some sort of financial adviser or something) so I told him I didn't think he was home and to come back later. The guy then walked up to me, a lone child, on my private property (not even on my walkway, actually into my back yard), entirely without my invitation, and started handing me all sorts of stupid propaganda and asking if I knew who Jesus was like I had been living under a rock my whole life. He wouldn't leave despite me telling him to until I took his propaganda. Stupid fricking Watchtower garbage. Ugh. EDIT: Minor typos. [ Monday, July 16, 2007 13:34: Message edited by: The Almighty Do-er of Stuff ] -------------------- My Myspace, with some of my audial and visual art The Lyceum - The Headquarters of the Blades designing community The Louvre - The Blades of Avernum graphics database Alexandria - The Blades of Exile Scenario database BoE Webring - Self explanatory Polaris - Free porn here Odd Todd - Fun for the unemployed (and everyone else too) They Might Be Giants - Four websites for one of the greatest bands in existance -------------------- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Posts: 2957 | Registered: Thursday, October 4 2001 07:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 335
|
written Monday, July 16 2007 13:40
Profile
Homepage
There are definitely proselytizing atheists. They tend not to go door to door, but most religions don't do that. There's not enough of a shared atheist "liturgy" for any common symbols, really, but I am fond of the big gold h-bar necklace. Also, because it needs doing: I always find the antics and reasonings of the obstinate fundamentalists to be amusing. (I’ve seen video of guys preaching and must admit they are quite funny). You all imagine that your way is the pinnacle of thought and faith and that the majority of men now and throughout history are insane or deluded for believing in a spiritual realm realm other than yours, or perhaps none at all. You minimize the secular nature and desire for self-driven purpose in our race, even the one in yourselves. You brush off encounters that people have had with this realm as nonsense simply because you refuse to accept non-religious explanations. You exchange belief in evidence, experience, and reality for vain promises and blind faith. But you still have doubts. There is always a need to accept reality despite its disharmony with your baseless beliefs. “We cannot do as we want but must do as religious authority bids no matter who is hurt.” “People who deny God are fools who cannot accept spiritualitiy or a higher power.” “Man was made by God, so unity can only be achieved by the promulgation of a universal belief in my God.” The people who believe this stuff are more adamant than I’ll ever be in pushing non-fundamentalism.” It’s funny when they can’t see that and attack the "atheists" for the same things they do/ What lies between God and me is a private matter. Trumpeting what you think lies between God and you is nothing more or less than spiritual exhibitionism. I find it distasteful and I find it an affront to the God in whom I believe. —Alorael, who also finds it amusing that he can so blithely be dismissed as an atheist because he does not have faith in your God. His belief is apparently worth nothing at all because he does not loudly share it with others. Posts: 14579 | Registered: Saturday, December 1 2001 08:00 |
|
Agent
Member # 1934
|
written Monday, July 16 2007 14:09
Profile
Homepage
quote:I have found religion. -------------------- You acquire an item: Radio Free Foil Posts: 1169 | Registered: Monday, September 23 2002 07:00 |
|
Councilor
Member # 6600
|
written Monday, July 16 2007 14:16
Profile
Homepage
Pushing your religious beliefs (of any religion) on others does more harm to your religion than good. For example, there are only a few denominations that have people go door-to-door (and not every person who goes door-to-door is disrespectful and extremely invasive) but it's often all Christians who get scorn because of it. Yes, there needs to be talk about faith and religious beliefs, but it needs to be less of a push and more of a helping hand. Dikiyoba. Posts: 4346 | Registered: Friday, December 23 2005 08:00 |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Monday, July 16 2007 14:42
Profile
It is a narrow line, as a religion must explain itself to flourish, but to appear pushy could defeat the purpose. It seems that most are in agreement that premeditated proselytizing is a bad way to go, yet it seems a mainstay for at least one very prominent religion. What does seem to be a common denominator for successful religions is that they must allow for some self-sacrifice in order to increase the wealth of the whole. But, this isn't such a strange thing, as it is what runs all collective bodies of purpose, whether they be families, guilds, towns, or entire countries. The loose collective of sport fishermen that I run with have an unspoken agreement to never leave anyone behind. I know of several people that have their lives (but no more boat) because of this bond. It isn't exactly a religion, but if you swap out some words it certainly acts like one. I think what it boils down to, for me, is that organized (spiritual) religion has nothing to offer me. These other forms of collective association and common purpose have a lot to offer me. In this age it seems a lot less necessary to have organized religion, in spite of the remaining need for organizations that serve similar purposes. Or, it might be that going 50 miles offshore in a 26 foot boat is just a little too "out there" to not have fellow fishermen looking out for you. -------------------- WWtNSD? Synergy - "I don't get it." Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
|
Shaper
Member # 6292
|
written Monday, July 16 2007 16:54
Profile
For one of the most sensible explanations for where the absurd longevities of early Bible texts comes from, look here. Synergy wrote: "I have to say I never experienced anything that suggested there was any Jesus listening or responding or doing anything in response. Jesus himself pointed at the Father, God, rather than suggest he himself was to be prayed to or petitioned or deified." Stillness replied: "Then why do you expect that God would respond if you were petitioning Jesus?" Jesus as God—or Jesus petitioning the not so warm and fuzzy God on our behalf—would have God respond...it was really rather sloppy how anyone specified what you were actually doing or attempting to do or who was going to do it for you. But they were all sure to slap, "In Jesus' name" onto the end of any prayer as if it were a magical invocation. I expected God/Jesus/whichever really was God to respond because that was what I was indoctrinated to do by many Christians who all liked to brag about how God did this or that for them based upon their successful effort to bring something down from on high. I assumed something must be wrong or wicked about me, because I simply didn't find it worked that way, no matter how sincere or fervent my heart and efforts. I believe what we call prayer does have the power to invoke results, but not because we have properly suppositioned a deity who does anything for us like a doting grandfather. I am not saying I have not seen that power. I am saying I see it has no observable link to God/Jesus or any other particular you address it to. But this is another topic I don't care to explore here. ... See, I disagree with you that the world is "bad now." In Biblical terms, the curse was that humankind would be subjugated to the endless and hurtful propensity to judge all things according to its own fallible sense of "good and evil" of one's own design and conscience (the knowledge of good and evil). Based upon this very kind of inclination, we ironically now have the endless divisiveness and intolerance of Christianity and other religions who are all certain they have the narrow path to salvation from a "bad world." They judge between good and evil, quite apart from the wisdom of Deity, and suppose in doing so they are wise and true. But in the Hebrew scripture, God Himself claims he creates light and darkness alike, creates evil and woe on the earth, and orders the steps of all men despite their own devising. Sounds like that God has a higher concept of ultimately what is good and evil for the world in the Bible of their own worshipping. Winning the lottery can be the worst thing that ever happened to a person. Losing one's sight could be the best thing that ever happened to another. Who can judge how things ultimately work out in a life? Divorce can be the best thing that happens to a life. Jehovah divorced Israel. Is God evil? Did God fail? I think this is a fantastic world going through purposeful growing pains, and is right on schedule, and it's up to us to grow up. But if God is the Father of all, spiritually, as the Hebrew religion teaches, then I trust He is a good Father Who knows what the hell He is doing and I don't have to worry that I have a negligent, incompetent, or absent Dad. If we are still spiritual children, then I trust the Father of the children will do what is necessary to bring us to adulthood intact ultimately, including letting us fall on our faces and make lots of mistakes in the process. I see the real problem with Christianity is that it doesn't really trust the Father they declare. They deify the satan guy and make him the real power over humankind. It's all absurd as a literal, but it's a potent allegory. You are wrong to suggest I oppose the Bible. I have great fondness for it in many ways. I think there is wisdom, revelation, and magnificent storytelling and poetry found therein. I am opposed to the unreasonable and unfortunate claims people make about what the Bible is and what our obligation to it is hundreds and thousands of years and miles later. An increase in suffering and bloodshed? How do you expect to validate that claim? An increase in population and increase in our awareness of more deeds worldwide skews perception. I'd rather live now than in the B.C. era in which so many nations treated so many so cruelly and disposably. Romanticizing the past I can only consider ignorant at this point. Mankind has been slaughtering one another as long as we have recorded history. What makes it worse now? I really really wish I could send people back to ancient Assyria as a captured soldier or something to give them an idea how much "worse" we are now by comparison. I'm not looking so much at what the "wicked" are doing in seeing this as an improved and improving day. I am looking at what the loving, wise, tolerant, and caring are doing in this time and how our ideas, attitudes, and laws are shifting. The Bible promoted polygamy by wholly describing those who practiced it (the patriarchs and kings) and never condemning it in the least. If God came to give the important laws to Moses, and how arrangements between men and women were to be conducted civilly was included in those important laws, then doncha think there would have been, "Thou shalt have one wife for one man, thus says the Lord your God"? Instead, in the entire Old Testament, we have a complete omission of any concern or consideration how humankind chose to arrange marriages. Paul was giving advice to some people—where—the church at Corinth was it?—when he promoted HIS idea (which may or may not have been inspired, and I have no way of knowing in that time and place) that ministerial servants be the husband of one wife. 1) If you are not a minister, you are excluded from this suggestion. 2) If you do not believe Paul was speaking to all people in all times and all cultures, you are excluded. 3) If you do not automatically assume Paul was the mouth of God speaking to all peoples for all times and all places, you are excluded. There are huge assumptions made every time Christians seek to make blanket laws out of what one apostle wrote in a letter to one church based on one contextual need of the moment. I find that laughable, but such people are free to subject themselves to the entire law of the OT if they feel good about it too. Too bad they want to beat you up if you don't do what they do. The only law given in the NT is the law of love. People don't like the freedom such generality gives them. So they drum up more laws in lieu of the freedom and responsibility being handed them. "Give us a King!" they clamor. They'd rather have some other perceived authority to rule over them than find and explore the rule of Love in their own being. -S- [ Monday, July 16, 2007 17:18: Message edited by: Synergy ] -------------------- A4 Items • A4 Singleton • G4 Items • G4 Forging • G4 Infiltrator • NR Items • The Lonely Celt Posts: 2009 | Registered: Monday, September 12 2005 07:00 |
|
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
|
written Monday, July 16 2007 20:11
Profile
Homepage
quote:Yes. And that's enough to make me check out of this argument. In respond to the whole rest of the thread though: Oh holy hell. -------------------- Slarty vs. Desk • Desk vs. Slarty • Timeline of Ermarian • G4 Strategy Central Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00 |
|
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
|
written Monday, July 16 2007 20:31
Profile
quote:OK, but would you mind clarifying exactly what was hypocritical for my own edification before you and Kel check out. If I see I’m wrong I’ll gladly admit to it. I really don’t get it atm. Are we talking about video game addiction or the infamous “Regulation?” quote:Alo, if you’re speaking about me, I wasn’t dismissing you as an atheist or saying your belief is worthless or even talking about you. I was talking about those calling me and anyone with religion stupid, jerk, etc. and claiming I derail every topic (which is completely false). Oh well, guess you can’t please any of the people some of the time. Also your attempt at turning my words around on me was poor, as my main point was that those who vehemently attack religion are in a religion themselves. It would be good if I didn’t think I was in a religion. It would also be good if I went around calling people stupid, idiotic, jerks. I do not. Not where I can hide in anonymity behind a screenname, nor in person. quote:Hard numbers. I already have. If you don’t see more people dying numerically as well as proportionally as an increase in bloodshed I don’t really know what to tell you that won’t sound disrespectful. It’s not like the past wasn’t bad too, just not as much. So it’s not romanticized. Still there are good things now, there always has been good. It can and will be much better. The truth is I actually agree with a lot of the things you say about religion and God, like the part about letting us fall on our faces. I can’t help but to sense some negative experience that turned you off. What was it? Or was it just an accumulation of doubt over time? The reason I call you an opponent is because of stuff like what you say next which is false, yet you continue to repeat. quote:Gen 1:24 That is why a man will leave his father and his mother and he must stick to his wife and they must become one flesh. Deut 17:17 He should also not multiply wives for himself, that his heart may not turn aside… Deut 21:14 And it must occur that if you have found no delight in her, you must then send her away, agreeably to her own soul; but you must by no means sell her for money. You must not deal tyrannically with her after you have humiliated her. Mal 2:13-16 13 “And this is the second thing that YOU people do, this resulting in covering with tears the altar of Jehovah, with weeping and sighing, so that there is no more a turning toward the gift offering or a taking of pleasure in anything from YOUR hand…Jehovah himself has borne witness between you and the wife of your youth, with whom you yourself have dealt treacherously, although she is your partner and the wife of your covenant…with the wife of your youth may no one deal treacherously…For he has hated a divorcing,” Jehovah the God of Israel has said. There is much more. So you are simply wrong. Polygamny was tolerated and regulated, not promoted. Marriage was given great attention in the “Old Testament.” You are equally wrong about the original institution being restored under Christ. See Mat 19:4-9; 1 Cor 7:2. Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00 |
