1. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    13644
    02 May '12 09:34
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    well you do come across as a lunatic so maybe you spontaneously appeared on the moon
    maybe
  2. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    02 May '12 10:14
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    The fact that the bible does not mention bacteria, perhaps the earth's most prevalent and widespread form of life, is a proof that the bible is not a scientific book but a philosophy book. a moral system.
    If that's what it is, its a terrible moral system. But I don't agree that that is what it is. The Bible is a collection of books written for different purposes. Some are clearly intended to be historical records, some are poetry, some are theology, and some are a combination of the above and other things. There is even one that is just the ramblings of a lunatic.
  3. Joined
    04 Feb '05
    Moves
    29132
    02 May '12 10:24
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    If that's what it is, its a terrible moral system. But I don't agree that that is what it is. The Bible is a collection of books written for different purposes. Some are clearly intended to be historical records, some are poetry, some are theology, and some are a combination of the above and other things. There is even one that is just the ramblings of a lunatic.
    it's a moral system for that time

    and actually quite "moral" considering what them savages were doing before.

    and yes, you are right, your definition is more precise.

    i was just trying to make a point that to consider the bible to be a science book is folly. both for religious zealots and angry atheists trying to bash christianity on account of jesus not mentioning string theory and trying to simplify the origin story in order to quickly get to the important part(be nice with each other ya aholes) before he gets killed.
  4. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    02 May '12 10:26
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    If that's what it is, its a terrible moral system. But I don't agree that that is what it is. The Bible is a collection of books written for different purposes. Some are clearly intended to be historical records, some are poetry, some are theology, and some are a combination of the above and other things. There is even one that is just the ramblings of a lunatic.
    no so, the provision for a thief to repay what they stole through work is vastly superior
    to the system of incarceration in the west or cutting the perpetrators hands off as in
    Arabia and elsewhere. The former places the burden on society rather than the
    individual themselves and the latter fails to take into account the magnitude of the
    crime. Simply because you dont understand the meaning of a passage does not make
    it the ramblings of a lunatic, it simply means you cannot understand the passage.
  5. Joined
    04 Feb '05
    Moves
    29132
    02 May '12 10:48
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    no so, the provision for a thief to repay what they stole through work is vastly superior
    to the system of incarceration in the west or cutting the perpetrators hands off as in
    Arabia and elsewhere. The former places the burden on society rather than the
    individual themselves and the latter fails to take into account the magnitude of the
    cri ...[text shortened]... oes not make
    it the ramblings of a lunatic, it simply means you cannot understand the passage.
    yes, because there is a wonderfully nice and fluffy sentiment behind "stone a little girl to death if she doesn't bleeds on the sheet in her wedding night"
  6. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    02 May '12 11:48
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    it's a moral system for that time
    Nevertheless, a terrible one (as you essentially admit by placing it in time and trying to compare it to others).

    and actually quite "moral" considering what them savages were doing before.
    I don't believe you. Can you give us a list of moral systems prior to that time and explain why they were worse? What exactly were 'them savages' doing prior to that time?

    both for religious zealots and angry atheists trying to bash christianity on account of jesus not mentioning string theory and trying to simplify the origin story in order to quickly get to the important part(be nice with each other ya aholes) before he gets killed.
    My biggest concern is that Jesus did not directly speak out against a lot of immoral practices (slavery, stoning for adultery etc).
  7. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    02 May '12 11:532 edits
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    yes, because there is a wonderfully nice and fluffy sentiment behind "stone a little girl to death if she doesn't bleeds on the sheet in her wedding night"
    FAIL, please note the provision for theft is not the same as alleged punishment for non
    bleeding on wedding night, making your assertion not only irrelevant but completely
    fallacious, cmon Zippy you know better than that, try to actually address the content of
    the post.
  8. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    13644
    02 May '12 13:30
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    If that's what it is, its a terrible moral system. But I don't agree that that is what it is. The Bible is a collection of books written for different purposes. Some are clearly intended to be historical records, some are poetry, some are theology, and some are a combination of the above and other things. There is even one that is just the ramblings of a lunatic.
    Whatever you think the Holy Bible is means nothing to me. The truth however does. The writings of the Holy Bible identifies it as a collection of holy scriptures written by inspired holy men of God. That is the real truth. HalleluYah !!! 😏
  9. Joined
    04 Feb '05
    Moves
    29132
    02 May '12 13:50
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    FAIL, please note the provision for theft is not the same as alleged punishment for non
    bleeding on wedding night, making your assertion not only irrelevant but completely
    fallacious, cmon Zippy you know better than that, try to actually address the content of
    the post.
    it does however have relevance to how you retorted to twhite that the bible is indeed an awesome moral system. or were you simply mentioning the fact that among 100 evil (by nowadays standard) there is something that is reasonable?
  10. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    02 May '12 14:17
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    it does however have relevance to how you retorted to twhite that the bible is indeed an awesome moral system. or were you simply mentioning the fact that among 100 evil (by nowadays standard) there is something that is reasonable?
    I merely provided an example of a superior and practical method of dealing with the
    matter of theft as outlined in the Bible, which is an issue of morality. You have still yet
    to state anything in relevance to that and instead made an irrelevant reference to some
    other moral issue as if it negates the point i was making when it does nothing of the
    sort and some more irrelevant reference to whitey as if it too invalidates the claim i
    was making when indeed it does nothing of the sort. You need to address the actual
    point the proposer is making for it to be of any relevance, otherwise you end up aiming
    your blows into space.
  11. Joined
    04 Feb '05
    Moves
    29132
    02 May '12 14:53
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    I merely provided an example of a superior and practical method of dealing with the
    matter of theft as outlined in the Bible, which is an issue of morality. You have still yet
    to state anything in relevance to that and instead made an irrelevant reference to some
    other moral issue as if it negates the point i was making when it does nothing of ...[text shortened]... er is making for it to be of any relevance, otherwise you end up aiming
    your blows into space.
    by your reasoning, whenever someone mentions someone is wrong, or evil, i can point out "well there was that one time when he was right or not evil". equally pointless, but i am technically correct.



    get it through your skull. twhite said the bible is a flawed moral system. you didn't address that claim of his (because duh, you can't). instead you mentioned one example where the bible suggests something civilized. nobody is arguing that the bible is 100% evil. only religious fanatics such as yourself are arguing that it is 100% correct and awesome.
  12. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    02 May '12 15:013 edits
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    by your reasoning, whenever someone mentions someone is wrong, or evil, i can point out "well there was that one time when he was right or not evil". equally pointless, but i am technically correct.



    get it through your skull. twhite said the bible is a flawed moral system. you didn't address that claim of his (because duh, you can't). instead you men ...[text shortened]... l. only religious fanatics such as yourself are arguing that it is 100% correct and awesome.
    and you have still failed to address the actual point i was making, i provided not only
    an example of a Biblical moral system, but a superior one to the present system, you
    attempted to negate this with some irrelevancy and the point still remains unanswered.
    It was a complete non sequitur

    Ralph Wiggum: Martin Luther King had a dream. Dreams are where Elmo and Toy Story
    had a party and I was invited. Yay! My turn is over!

    Zippy: your example cannot be moral because it mentions elsewhere that you could be
    stoned to death for a completely different and unrelated moral crime.

    what i think about the Bible and whether its 100 percent morally sound is also
    irrelevant. Simply because you deem the Bible immoral in some parts doesn't
    mean that its immoral in all parts, does it.
  13. Standard memberSwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    2014.05.01
    Joined
    11 Apr '07
    Moves
    92274
    02 May '12 15:15
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    If that's what it is, its a terrible moral system. But I don't agree that that is what it is. The Bible is a collection of books written for different purposes. Some are clearly intended to be historical records, some are poetry, some are theology, and some are a combination of the above and other things. There is even one that is just the ramblings of a lunatic.
    Just one? 😵
  14. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    02 May '12 15:31
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    Simply because you deem the Bible immoral in some parts doesn't
    mean that its immoral in all parts, does it.
    And once again, you are arguing with phantoms.
  15. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    02 May '12 15:37
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    And once again, you are arguing with phantoms.
    if you can actually address the point i was making, you may do better, your
    irrelevancies are just that, irrelevant.
Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree