Latest Diablo 3 News
DiabloWiki Updates
Page 81 of 145 FirstFirst ... 317177787980818283848591131 ... LastLast
Results 801 to 810 of 1449
  1. #801
    IncGamers Member Vivi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    boring group of faint distant stars
    Posts
    7,823

    Re: Off-Topic in the OTF

    You can combine it with something from Dr Oetker.

  2. #802
    IncGamers Member Stevinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    chicagoland
    Posts
    5,003

    Re: Off-Topic in the OTF

    Quote Originally Posted by jmervyn View Post
    Since I don't have a "crummy" mother, and she is one of the most worthy role models I can think of off-hand, your point remains completely asinine (which is no surprise, given the source).

    Did you learn nothing from your parents that made you think, 'I will do better as an adult'?

    At this stage (two separate people casting aspersions upon my Mother), particularly on the GW OTF, the Mods normally would be rushing in to beat **ME** like Gallagher on a watermelon. Dredd's staying cool.
    Whoa bud, you're the one that said your mom was a bad person for not believing in god. I don't know jack about your mom, I'm just going off what you said. It doesn't matter who the person in your life is, you can't judge all of the various flavors of atheism/skepticism/agnosticism/etc off one person. Even two people that might agree on the particulars aren't going to have the same ideas on much else. That's why it's not a religion, we don't necessarily think the same about everything else, or anything else.

    As for my parents, I really can't complain. It's unlikely I'll ever live up to their example.

    Because you missed the point (detail below), which is sad given that your assertion about Christians is remarkably legitimate - and unexpected coming from you.
    I've been through the education/indoctrination of two very different christian faiths, and have attended a variety of different denomination's services. I told you merv I was on a lengthy search in my youth. I understand exactly what the difference is.

    You sustain a fundamental misunderstanding of both creeds. There is no higher authority to which an Atheist must be held accountable, and therefore no "absolutes". This is true regardless of consideration of actual supernatural reality; if Deity does not exist, the religious still believes that there is something keeping score, while the Atheist has no consideration of any judgement if he/she decides to "sin". Murder? Well, there was a good enough reason, rather than "thou shalt not".
    Sure, the christian thinks god is watching. But how is that different from my desire to be good because it's the right thing to do? We may not always agree on what is right and wrong, but certainly both people have their own idea, and they feel guilt when they break their own principles. The believer sees that as god telling them something, the non believer attributes it to cognitive dissonance between their self perception and the evidence at hand, but it's the same thing. I think the problem with god is their are so many versions, you can't know what right and wrong really is, because the versions don't always agree. With the non-believer, at least you're accountable to something, even if you can self justify whatever you want--it's not like believers don't throw out whatever bits of the bible they don't like and cling to the ones they do anyway.

    Neither of the two groups of thinking is going to eliminate evil. You say atheists are going to be more evil. I say it won't make any difference at all.

    As for murder, I think murder is wrong because I'm taking something from that person whom I murdered. I know I certainly wouldn't want to be murdered, I think pretty much all codes of ethics say murder is wrong--god or no god. That rule--the golden rule, pops up all over the place, as is not exclusive to Christianity (nor did it originate in it). Right and wrong are determined by culture and upbringing, and when you say you can't have joint goals or morals without a god, I scratch my head, because the only way you could have joint morals is if there was only one interpretation of god (or one godless philosophy). That's unlikely in a free society.

    The same is not true for the religious, though the interpretation of what is accountable varies by the religion; as an example, killing aggressive pagans, heretics, and Atheists is legitimate for Islamism.
    all the more reason to say a belief in god is not correlated to morality.

    False argument.
    No it's not. Where could you go to set up some society where no one has ever had the idea of god (or gods). It's an experiment that can never happen. And I don't think we want to try, because we'd have to kill a bunch of people to even set it up. Sometimes hypotheses are not testable.

    False argument again. It's been tried, repeatedly, with horrific result.
    Um no it hasn't. The soviet union didn't go somewhere where there was no churches, they tried to kill anyone that went to church. a very different dynamic. And again, not one i endorse. (I have to say these things because you keep telling me I do endorse them)


    That's also false, IIRC, but I don't blame you for falling for it - you're probably using this information, which is anecdotal and considers the number of "every damned Sunday" (see page 2 of the article). Church attendance in **MAINSTREAM TRADITIONAL LIBERAL** churches has definitely dropped to those levels and lower; non-denominational and evangelical variants' attendance have skyrocketed.[/QUOTE]

    okay, so even at self reporting numbers, it's only 40%. Any half of those are occasional. People may have changed churches, but most people don't go to church. I forget why that mattered.

  3. #803
    IncGamers Member jmervyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    12,933

    Re: Off-Topic in the OTF

    Quote Originally Posted by Stevinator View Post
    Whoa bud, you're the one that said your mom was a bad person for not believing in god. I don't know jack about your mom, I'm just going off what you said.
    Where did I say that?

    Chapter & verse, please, with links, or you're proven a massive pedo-bear arsehole who sucks donkey dongs when you're not engaged in doing unspeakable sex acts with gophers and newts.

    Spoiler

    Quote Originally Posted by Stevinator View Post
    It doesn't matter who the person in your life is, you can't judge all of the various flavors of atheism/skepticism/agnosticism/etc off one person.
    How & why would I ever be so incredibly stupid as to do so? Though I strongly suspect your view of the Religious has more to do with your mentor Jon Stewart than any reality.

    I'm stating that the principle of Atheism, as I prescribed it (a belief in NO god) falls under the definitive category that "Vox Day" states: "because I'm an *******". You like to dodge that definition, but you're not very good at it; you have a distinct antagonism for anyone professing or even considering faith.
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevinator View Post
    I've been through the education/indoctrination of two very different christian faiths, and have attended a variety of different denomination's services. I told you merv I was on a lengthy search in my youth. I understand exactly what the difference is.
    Yet you apparently regard your comprehension as comprehensive. That's pretty feckin' arrogant in my book, and you believe I wrote the book on arrogance. As far as I recall, you never read anything by C.S. Lewis or anyone else on the subject; you didn't even know The Screwtape Letters when I recommended them. For someone to reject a faith based on personal experience rather than actual understanding is... shallow, to say the least.
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevinator View Post
    The believer sees that as god telling them something, the non believer attributes it to cognitive dissonance between their self perception and the evidence at hand, but it's the same thing.
    So you work like a dog, every day, because the bank's floor manager ISN'T watching? You smell, you're so full of it. You never had instruction on MacGregor's theory X and Y, so here's a pocket summary: people have both good and evil elements, follow both elements, and relying too much on a single element is stupid.
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevinator View Post
    I think the problem with god is their are so many versions, you can't know what right and wrong really is, because the versions don't always agree.
    Sure you don't. That's self-serving, of course.
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevinator View Post
    With the non-believer, at least you're accountable to something, even if you can self justify whatever you want--it's not like believers don't throw out whatever bits of the bible they don't like and cling to the ones they do anyway.
    Do you take that shovel to bed with you when you sleep? Christians can't throw out parts they dislike, where Atheists have no requirement to keep any standards - theirs is truly "do as thou wilt", and feck the "harm none" bit if you can get away with it.

    Dinner's ready. It's more important, because you're not interested in hearing.
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevinator View Post
    Any half of those are occasional. People may have changed churches, but most people don't go to church. I forget why that mattered.
    Because now that it's not a social stigma, people still attend in incredibly high numbers.

  4. #804
    IncGamers Member kamap's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    belgium
    BattleTag kamap* / kamap-2813
    Posts
    4,075

    Re: Off-Topic in the OTF

    I agree, that you both disagree.

    Barfgreen!
    *sploosh*

  5. #805
    IncGamers Member LozHinge the Unhinged's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Tech Support! TECH SUPPORT!!
    BattleTag FTITCTAJ
    Posts
    6,995

    Re: Off-Topic in the OTF

    I don't get it.

    I see a bunch of talk hereabouts about being buried alive. WTH?

    In my day, you got a stake through the heart and you were decapitated, with your head turned to face downwards in the coffin. This would happen post mortem, if you're lucky. Are you seriously telling me that people don't do this anymore? This isn't even about standards slipping ... where's your common sense, people?

    *grumble*

  6. #806
    IncGamers Member Ash Housewares's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Surrounded by Primitive Screwheads
    Posts
    21,989

    Re: Off-Topic in the OTF

    if you're not salting and burning the remains you're just asking for trouble

  7. #807
    IncGamers Member kamap's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    belgium
    BattleTag kamap* / kamap-2813
    Posts
    4,075

    Re: Off-Topic in the OTF

    Fry em with lots of garlic!

  8. #808
    IncGamers Member Stevinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    chicagoland
    Posts
    5,003

    Re: Off-Topic in the OTF

    Quote Originally Posted by jmervyn View Post
    Where did I say that?
    In this thread, in post 727, in respose to tech's asking if you knew any Atheists personally, you list your mom as the Atheist you knew personally ( you did not note any others). Then, in the same post you said they all had the propensity to be "Vicious Arseholes".

    Then, still in the same thread you say that Atheists are self-centered (though I have no idea why you think that's any more true of atheists than any other religious persuasion--again, i have to assume small sample size)

    In post 747, you said (incorrectly) that the atheist golden rule, if they're true to their beliefs, would be "do unto others, then split".

    "What goes around comes around" is a completely religious concept, where Atheists that are true to their belief would really practice, "Do unto others, then split"
    BTW, There's nothing religious about catching more flies with honey, and wikipedia says it was the buddhists that started the golden rule. I don't think they believe in gods. I don't think they say that gods are impossible though. Maybe an organized group of agnostics--on the aggregate. Who started it notwithstanding, I don't think you understand the golden rule. It's not karma, it's that people react to you. If you're a jerk to them, they'll be a jerk to you. "You reap what you sow". Karma is taking that idea and adding a religious/superstitious element to it. Anyway, on to the next one...

    In post 749, you again say it, even implying that this is an inherent trait due to a person's atheism. Again, the only example provided to us of soeone you knew very closely being your mom--so in essence, you're telling us what you think of her and her moral set. Interesting that the latchkey kid is so concerned about the atheists leaving. It's almost like you're setting us up to go there. Hmm, well I'll bite.

    An Atheist believes that there is no higher authority than themselves; theirs is by definition a self-centered universe. It doesn't mean they're inherently evil, or amoral, but it does mean that they believe in no "higher power" or "Nature's God" to which they must account.

    Therefore, their creed lends itself to situational (sliding scale) morality, because there is no absolute good or evil beyond what affects themselves. Maybe they don't want to live in a world where people screw each other over, but there's no reason above their own intellectual decision that they should not do so if the opportunity presents. Therefore, "do unto others, then split".

    In post 759, you accuse me of gloating, which has nothing to do with your opinion of atheists, but it does imply that you think Techno and I win our debates against you. I threw that in for fun.

    In post 769, Kegstegs quoted you saying:

    This, again, is proof not only of what raging gobshytes Atheists generally are, but of the truism "inside every leftist is a totalitarian screaming to get out".
    But when I go back to your post it seems to have been editted out. For those like me that had never heard the term "gobshyte" before, I googled it and here's the definition.

    http://www.thefreedictionary.com/gob****e
    gob·****e (gbsht)n. Chiefly British SlangA person regarded as mean or contemptible.


    [Perhaps ultimately from obsolete gob****e, wad of expectorated chewing tobacco or tobacco juice : gob + dialectal ****e, excrement (from Middle English ****en, to defecate, from Old English *sctan; see skei- in Indo-European roots).]
    The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2009. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.


    gob****e[ˈgɒbˌʃaɪt]nSlang a stupid person[from gob3 + ****e excrement; see ****]
    Usage: This word was formerly considered to be taboo, and it was labelled as such in previous editions of Collins English Dictionary. However, it has now become acceptable in speech, although some older or more conservative people may object to its use


    Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged © HarperCollins Publishers 1991, 1994, 1998, 2000, 2003
    Not a nice thing to say about your mom.

    In post 774, you don't deny that I win simply by claiming victory. If that works, i may try it more often. Sorry, back to topic.

    In 775, you post a poem or something that's in latin. Now it might not be bad, but so far in this thread, all the new words I've learned were insults, so i'm throwing this in just to be safe.

    For ha-ha's here's the translation:

    Nothing exists but natural phenomena.
    Thought is a property or function of matter.
    Death irreversibly and totally terminates individual organic units.
    There are no forces, phenomena, or entities which exist outside of or apart from physical nature.
    There are no forces, phenomena, or entities which transcend nature.
    There are no forces, phenomena, or entities which are supernatural.

    Nor can there be.
    See, my problem with this is that if a god exists (or souls), then it's not supernatural--it's part of the universe and nature. i mean I don't think it can magically do whatever it wants, because it would need to have some way to affect matter. If it can affect matter, then it's not "Other realmy". If it can't affect matter, then it's not really a god. So this whole deal is pretty meaningless to me.

    Chapter & verse, please, with links, or you're proven a massive pedo-bear arsehole who sucks donkey dongs when you're not engaged in doing unspeakable sex acts with gophers and newts.
    The gopher was 18 in gopher years! At least she said she was.


    Or you could just apologize, abjectly, but you've never been man enough before to do that.
    How about this, I had no intention of hurting your feelings (never have--I think our barbs are funny). I was merely reacting to what you're putting out there. If you think your weirdness about how you think I treat women, how you're so concerned about atheists leaving has nothing to do with you being a latchkey kid, then laugh, and let's move on. If I hit a chord, well, perhaps you should reconsider how people who aren't christian feel about you telling them that we must all have some weird guilt about not being christian. Of all that I feel guilty about, that's not one of them. I hope you don't see that as a personal attack--I thought we had something of an understanding, which is why I have defended you rather than reported you to the greens. Even when you're mean.


    How & why would I ever be so incredibly stupid as to do so? Though I strongly suspect your view of the Religious has more to do with your mentor Jon Stewart than any reality.
    I thought he was J-ewish. Who knew?

    I'm stating that the principle of Atheism, as I prescribed it (a belief in NO god) falls under the definitive category that "Vox Day" states: "because I'm an *******". You like to dodge that definition, but you're not very good at it; you have a distinct antagonism for anyone professing or even considering faith.
    I didn't say there's no god, i said that the christian god is clearly not an accurate representation of the universe. Or morelikely, I may have said the christian god is not real/true. That's what I think. I have no interest in delving into Islam, because my morals don't coincide with it. If Allah turns out to be real, well then we're all "fecked" as you like to say.

    Yet you apparently regard your comprehension as comprehensive. That's pretty feckin' arrogant in my book, and you believe I wrote the book on arrogance. As far as I recall, you never read anything by C.S. Lewis or anyone else on the subject; you didn't even know The Screwtape Letters when I recommended them. For someone to reject a faith based on personal experience rather than actual understanding is... shallow, to say the least.
    Comprehensive in the sense that I completed the entire catholic program and learned everything they teach to a typical catholic. As far as the Baptist group, I did not pursue being re-baptized, but I attended their bible study religiously. Pun intended.


    So you work like a dog, every day, because the bank's floor manager ISN'T watching? You smell, you're so full of it. You never had instruction on MacGregor's theory X and Y, so here's a pocket summary: people have both good and evil elements, follow both elements, and relying too much on a single element is stupid.
    When I was at the bank, I was the floor manager whenever my boss was out soliciting (which was a lot). I worked hard for bonuses, and because i generally liked my bosses. Also, because I didn't realize the harm I was creating. Also, because my dad taught me to take things like duty and responsibility seriously. i was entrusted with making sure certain things happened in a certain way. That's what they paid me for. It was my duty to do so. When they do it right, you think you're in charge of something, you want to take care of it. As time went on, the amount of control I had over my branch dwindled, and eventually I did feel like a mindless drone. Switching banks helped for a little. But really, you have to reach fairly high in an organization to not eventually be micromanaged. It's the natural order of things. When you're growing they want entrepreneurs, when the market is shrinking, they want to cut costs so they watch all that you do.

    An interesting question. I'm glad you asked.

    Anyway, now it's pretty much the same, but the work is crappier. I'm still supporting rampant consumerism (you have to a little in capitalism--you don't make money if no one buys your stuff), but at least now I'm far less of a parasite than bankers are. I managed to quit selling insurance/financial planning on the side, to put more time into something I hate less. I hated selling insurance, but at least I was doing it honestly.

    Do you take that shovel to bed with you when you sleep? Christians can't throw out parts they dislike, where Atheists have no requirement to keep any standards - theirs is truly "do as thou wilt", and feck the "harm none" bit if you can get away with it.
    Um, as a guy who says he's some expert on the bible, you sure missed a lot of leviticus.

    But I will pull back and say this instead. There is nothing extra holding a christian back from doing evil that isn't also holding the non-believer back. THe christian says I shouldn't do that because i was told as a kid that god said that was wrong. The non-believer says i shouldn't do that because I learned as a kid that was wrong. It's the same difference, except I determined what was right and wrong by taking a lot of viewpoints (some of them religious) and making my own moral set, which I think focuses more on what is important than either of the denominations i studied. Yes we come to the same conclusions on what is moral often, but we differ a bit too.

    Honestly, I think most christians do the same thing, and then simply back up and claim that god said this was the best way. I see culture as something that evolves over time generally seeking the morals and values that will make us more stable and survivable. Over time, tolerance, justice and liberty are things that make us a better society and they seem to emerge over time and with increases in productivity. So i actually think it's a positive thing that christians do this, become if their morals didn't change, we'd still have slaves and silly rules about all sorts of things.


    Dinner's ready. It's more important, because you're not interested in hearing.

    Because now that it's not a social stigma, people still attend in incredibly high numbers.
    When was going to church a social stigma? If anything it's becoming more so rather than less so. And i don't think 40% is "incredibly high" when you take a long term perspective.

    Also, about a third of the population works on sunday, and I don't have stats for this, but I think another very large percentage buy or sell things. I know most retail stores consider sunday their second busiest day (after saturday). So as far as keeping holy the sabbath, I would venture to say most people don't. And since you're also not supposed to hire people to do your business on sundays, I'd say a large percentage of people who own stock are also cheating (since they invariably own at least one retailer open on sundays).

    *****

    http://www.businessweek.com/articles...on-the-weekend
    http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/money...time-use_n.htm

    Exodus 20:8-11 <---written in stone
    Jeremiah 17:19-27 <--basically no work, buying or selling.
    Exodus 35:1-3 <---Moses was pretty serial about it.
    Numbers 15:32 <---yikes!
    Genesis 2:3 <---God was pretty proud of getting everything done so quickly
    Nehemiah 10:31 <---no buying things
    Mark 2:23-27 <---so the rule is if you're cold, too back so sad--get wood and you're smited (no pun intended), but if you're hungry, go ahead and snag the priest's lunch.

  9. #809
    IncGamers Member jmervyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    12,933

    Re: Off-Topic in the OTF

    Quote Originally Posted by Stevinator View Post
    In this thread, in post 727, in respose to tech's asking if you knew any Atheists personally, you list your mom as the Atheist you knew personally ( you did not note any others). Then, in the same post you said they all had the propensity to be "Vicious Arseholes".

    Then, still in the same thread you say that Atheists are self-centered (though I have no idea why you think that's any more true of atheists than any other religious persuasion--again, i have to assume small sample size)

    In post 747, you said (incorrectly) that the atheist golden rule, if they're true to their beliefs, would be "do unto others, then split".
    Ok, so you're not going to actually apologize, and are throwing up a bunch of scurrilous claims trying to defend your conduct. Well, it may take me a while to craft your new Avatar. Here's my starting point:


    Quote Originally Posted by Stevinator View Post
    Karma is taking that idea and adding a religious/superstitious element to it. Anyway, on to the next one...
    Ok, that's two crap attempts at proving me wrong. Care to try for a third?
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevinator View Post
    Interesting that the latchkey kid is so concerned about the atheists leaving. It's almost like you're setting us up to go there. Hmm, well I'll bite.
    Swing and a miss.
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevinator View Post
    it does imply that you think Techno and I win our debates against you.
    Strike two.
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevinator View Post
    Not a nice thing to say about your mom.
    Strike three, and ejected from the park for trying to fondle the gopher. My Mom does not even maintain the pretense of agnosticism, and she certainly wouldn't claim to hold atheist (or Atheist) belief.
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevinator View Post
    See, my problem with this is that if a god exists (or souls), then it's not supernatural--it's part of the universe and nature. i mean I don't think it can magically do whatever it wants, because it would need to have some way to affect matter. If it can affect matter, then it's not "Other realmy". If it can't affect matter, then it's not really a god. So this whole deal is pretty meaningless to me.
    Sucks to be you then.
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevinator View Post
    How about this, I had no intention of hurting your feelings (never have--I think our barbs are funny). I was merely reacting to what you're putting out there.
    Oh, sure, your conduct (along the lines of what Dredd warned me off in the other thread) was MY FAULT. You're a piece of work, you know that? Of course my feelings aren't hurt; I've got my big boy pants on. However, don't try for a feckin' second to defend your resorting to "Yo Momma" level because you don't have a Goddamned shred of decency or ability to defend your views.
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevinator View Post
    Of all that I feel guilty about, that's not one of them.
    How to explain your truly insane and irrational beliefs about the power of the Christian Churches, then? Particularly when you cite how definitively their influence has waned in the last forty years! What to do, what to do?
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevinator View Post
    I thought he was J-ewish. Who knew?
    "Racially", like much of the American portion. I have met significant numbers of Catholics here who are much the same.
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevinator View Post
    I didn't say there's no god, i said that the christian god is clearly not an accurate representation of the universe. Or morelikely, I may have said the christian god is not real/true. That's what I think.
    Sorry, you don't earn a merit badge for Equivocation. Your previous statements were that God is not real, and that ALL people who were religious were insane. You didn't specify type of belief, or degree, or creed. You repeatedly doubled down on calling them insane - "nutbags" was your preferred term, IIRC.
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevinator View Post
    An interesting question. I'm glad you asked.
    I didn't, but at least it kept you away from the gophers and children.
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevinator View Post
    Um, as a guy who says he's some expert on the bible, you sure missed a lot of leviticus.
    I know you can't be as stupid as to ignore where we've discussed OT < NT in previous threads. Leviticus is OT, seeing you don't realize it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevinator View Post
    The non-believer says i shouldn't do that because I learned as a kid that was wrong.
    First, the non-believer probably didn't learn that as a kid. It certainly wouldn't have been some moral talk from Mumsie or Dadsie; far more likely to have been some of the pap being plastered on the school hallways by a desperate Dept of Ed trying to figure out how to keep the kids under control. More importantly, though, the non-believer is just as likely to further think "i shouldn't do that because I learned as a kid that was wrong but now I'm older, wiser, and really want to do it so what's stopping me?"
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevinator View Post
    I see culture as something that evolves over time generally seeking the morals and values that will make us more stable and survivable.
    Ergo, a Progressive, and someone who denies reality despite overwhelming evidence.
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevinator View Post
    When was going to church a social stigma? If anything it's becoming more so rather than less so.
    Sigh. <NOT> attending, so that the neighbors had something to gossip about. The sort of stuff you and Techno identify that actually has a smidgen of legitimacy. People ought to attend church because of their fealty, not because the Bumgartners would notice if they didn't.
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevinator View Post
    And i don't think 40% is "incredibly high" when you take a long term perspective.
    It's remarkably high when you realize that people don't care about the Bumgartners. Note that only one of your citations is from the NT, and pretty much proves my point regardless of your illogical summary.

    23 One Sabbath Jesus was going through the grainfields, and as his disciples walked along, they began to pick some heads of grain.
    24 The Pharisees said to him, “Look, why are they doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath?”

    25 He answered, “Have you never read what David did when he and his companions were hungry and in need? 26 In the days of Abiathar the high priest, he entered the house of God and ate the consecrated bread, which is lawful only for priests to eat. And he also gave some to his companions.”

    27 Then he said to them, “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath."

  10. #810
    IncGamers Member Stevinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    chicagoland
    Posts
    5,003

    Re: Off-Topic in the OTF

    Quote Originally Posted by jmervyn View Post
    Ok, so you're not going to actually apologize, and are throwing up a bunch of scurrilous claims trying to defend your conduct. Well, it may take me a while to craft your new Avatar. Here's my starting point:
    I'll do it but you have to secksy up the pic.


    Ok, that's two crap attempts at proving me wrong. Care to try for a third?
    Swing and a miss.
    Strike two.
    Strike three, and ejected from the park for trying to fondle the gopher. My Mom does not even maintain the pretense of agnosticism, and she certainly wouldn't claim to hold atheist (or Atheist) belief.
    Sucks to be you then.
    I'm confused. Either your mom is an atheist, and by your logic she's a terrible awful no good person, and I feel bad for you, or she's actually a sweet old god fearing lady, and I completely misread your statements. If the latter is true I apologize for my lack of reading comprehension. If the former is true, you need to examine your thoughts on non-believers, and realize it is entirely possible that she's a sweet old non-believing lady, who if not completely driven insane must have a level of patience bordering on the supernatural (which she then may or may not beleive is even possible).

    It's not abuse if I'm the one defending your mom. Your own arguments are creating a whirlwind of self-flagellation. You see it's customary when making a "yo mamma" joke to include some type of insult aimed at the insultee's mom. I certainly didn't. I just repeated what I had thought I had read.



    Oh, sure, your conduct (along the lines of what Dredd warned me off in the other thread) was MY FAULT. You're a piece of work, you know that? Of course my feelings aren't hurt; I've got my big boy pants on. However, don't try for a feckin' second to defend your resorting to "Yo Momma" level because you don't have a Goddamned shred of decency or ability to defend your views.
    Well good, because I certainly did not intend to insult you, but instead point out the implications of your stereotyping.



    Sorry, you don't earn a merit badge for Equivocation. Your previous statements were that God is not real, and that ALL people who were religious were insane. You didn't specify type of belief, or degree, or creed. You repeatedly doubled down on calling them insane - "nutbags" was your preferred term, IIRC.
    nutbars, and that was in reference to relying on faith to interpret reality. Again, faith by definition is irrational.



    I didn't, but at least it kept you away from the gophers and children.




    I know you can't be as stupid as to ignore where we've discussed OT < NT in previous threads. Leviticus is OT, seeing you don't realize it.
    First, the non-believer probably didn't learn that as a kid. It certainly wouldn't have been some moral talk from Mumsie or Dadsie; far more likely to have been some of the pap being plastered on the school hallways by a desperate Dept of Ed trying to figure out how to keep the kids under control. More importantly, though, the non-believer is just as likely to further think "i shouldn't do that because I learned as a kid that was wrong but now I'm older, wiser, and really want to do it so what's stopping me?"
    The same thing stops them both. It's wrong.



    Ergo, a Progressive, and someone who denies reality despite overwhelming evidence.
    I think progressives had some sort of goal in mind. Some utopia that can never be. I couldn't begin to tell you what that utopia would look like. It would certainly look more like today than any other time, but I don't think we can or should plan a society top to bottom.

    Sigh. <NOT> attending, so that the neighbors had something to gossip about. The sort of stuff you and Techno identify that actually has a smidgen of legitimacy. People ought to attend church because of their fealty, not because the Bumgartners would notice if they didn't.
    It's remarkably high when you realize that people don't care about the Bumgartners. Note that only one of your citations is from the NT, and pretty much proves my point regardless of your illogical summary.
    Hmm. So you're not just throwing out snippets here and there you don't like, you're throwin out half the bible. Even Jefferson didn't go that far, at least he left the stories.

    This explains why you'd be mean to your mom. Exodus 20:12 is in the old testament. (Sorry, couldn't resist)



    23
    One Sabbath Jesus was going through the grainfields, and as his disciples walked along, they began to pick some heads of grain.
    24 The Pharisees said to him, “Look, why are they doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath?”
    25 He answered, “Have you never read what David did when he and his companions were hungry and in need? 26 In the days of Abiathar the high priest, he entered the house of God and ate the consecrated bread, which is lawful only for priests to eat. And he also gave some to his companions.”

    27 Then he said to them, “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath."
    Oh so you and Jesus and I all agree that all the pomp and circumstance is largely irrelevant? Fancy that.


    Yes I expected that--I've read Mark, and I've quoted that same passage. Probably here.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •