Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Amaleq13 · 07-12-2004, 11:29 PM

Whether it constitutes a surrender or not is up to the readers but since the previous post had no relevance to Biblical Criticism & History, I'm turning in the ticket. Please return your trays to their upright and locked position.

lpetrich · 07-13-2004, 08:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ed

An atheist converting is more of a supernatural event than the river parting. "Big miracles" were used to establish the canon. But as I said someone converting esp. an atheist is an even bigger miracle.

LOL. This is FSTDT material!

And said where? And why is converting to some religion supposed to be a miracle?

Quote:

I was initially impressed with his miracles of nature but he also has established an amazing chain of events not necessarily supernatural, that have demonstrated his powers to me. And I have experienced a supernatural relationship with Him.

Whatever those "demonstrations" are. Parting a local river? Raining manna from heaven?

And what kind of a "relationship" is it? Anything like the relationship of Hillary Clinton to Eleanor Roosevelt?

Note: FSTDT is Fundies Say The Darnedest Things!

Ed · 07-13-2004, 09:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack the Bodiless

Ed:
Quote:
A well trained swordsman would end up disembowelling a well trained swordswoman almost everytime. Sorry to burst your bubble.

jtb: A man would probably beat a woman if they were otherwise precisely equal in skill.

Do you really believe that ancient armies armed only their best swordsman, who then did all the fighting in a series of one-on-one duels?

It is a FACT that the Celts has female warriors. And any marauder tackling a trained female warrior runs a very serious risk of meeting a superior opponent and getting himself killed. Even if he's the best swordsman in the world, he could still be killed by TWO expert female warriors.

Not if he was "The Gladiator"!

Quote:

jtb: Please explain why their border patrols stopped and interrogated marauders, asked them their business, and allowed them to pass if they were after UNMARRIED Hebrew women.

Ed: Huh? I never said that is what they did. They didn't really have what we would call border patrols. And ALL marauders would be attacked if they were known to exist. I was just saying that if some marauders made it into Israel then unmarried women would be very vulnerable to attack.

jtb: ...If they lived alone, perhaps. But you're still implying that the "morally superior" Hebrews would stand aside and allow marauders to attack unmarried women living among them.

How? I said above that if the Israelites knew the woman was being attacked then they would respond, but remember they didnt have cell phones back then.

Quote:

jtb: ...So those killed by Nazis are "more dead"? Or do they go to a lower circle of Hell?

Please explain why being killed by Nazis is worse than being killed by Hebrews.

Ed: Because God would have let most of them live fairly long lives and die of natural causes. God only killed using hebrews those peoples that occupied the Promised Land.

jtb: ...Huh?

The Hebrews supposedly slaughtered all the male children, and all the females they didn't want for themselves!

And this differs from the Holocaust... how, exactly? Because the Nazis didn't want Jewish girls?

This differs from the Holocaust because it was time for the Canaanites to die, it was not time for the jews to die.

Ed · 07-14-2004, 08:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack the Bodiless

This is what I said before:

So here's a little exercise for you, Ed.

If you STILL wish to argue that Pharaoh initially hardened his own heart in Exodus 7:13, then you need to explain why this happened "as God had said".

This is a reference to Exodus 7:3, where he clearly said that HE would harden Pharaoh's heart.

If you still wish to pretend otherwise, then YOU must provide the Biblical verse in which God said, prior to Exodus 7:13, that PHARAOH was going to harden HIS OWN heart.

No, in Exodus 7:3 God just predicts that He would harden Pharoah's heart at some indefinite point in the future.

Jack the Bodiless · 07-15-2004, 02:50 AM

Quote:

No, in Exodus 7:3 God just predicts that He would harden Pharoah's heart at some indefinite point in the future.

That "point in the future" is Exodus 7:13, where God hardens Pharaoh's heart as he said he would in Exodus 7:3.

You have failed to answer my challenge.

(I will occasionally come back here, just to see if you have the honesty to admit that you were wrong)

Ed · 07-15-2004, 09:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack the Bodiless

Ed: Where did such an innate moral sense come from? If atheism is true then it is unlikely that such a thing exists. Because how can the moral come from the amoral?

jtb: Evolution and social conditioning

No, that still does not answer the question, remember those things just ARE, they are not OUGHTS.

Jack the Bodiless · 07-16-2004, 01:27 AM

Yes, it DOES answer the question.

"Where did such an innate moral sense come from?"

Evolution and social conditioning.

"How can the moral come from the amoral?"

Evolution and social conditioning.

Still waiting for your admission that you were wrong about who hardened Pharaoh's heart, Ed...

Ed · 07-17-2004, 08:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amaleq13

Originally Posted by Ed
The question is why do all humans have an innate sense of morality whether they are theists or not?

amaleq: What evidence is there of an "innate" sense of morality rather than a learned morality? Children have to be taught what is considered right and what is considered wrong. Infants are, to all appearances, entirely amoral and considered solely with fulfilling their basic needs.

All major societies down thru history have considered certain core things morally wrong such as murder, dishonesty, torturing babies, and etc. This is evidence that there is an innate sense of morality among most normal humans.

Quote:

Ed: As I said above, how does an "is" become an "ought"?

am: After it has been directly taught or indirectly modeled.

After what has been? You need to go back further. I am referring to the origin of the concept of morality itself.

Quote:

Ed: And how can morality come from amorality?

am: Reinforcement of the learning through rewards and punishment appears to be the standard methodology.

That assumes that there exists a morality to reinforce. If atheistic evolution is true then there is no explanation for the existence of morality.

Ed · 07-17-2004, 08:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lpetrich

(on "male grammar" vs. "female grammar"...)
Ed: No, males and females brains operate basically the same but each sex has different strengths and weaknesses in those operations.

lp: Even if that is the case, does that justify crude stereotyping and treating women as second-class citizens?

Just because someone has a different role does not make them 2nd class citizens. Just because you are an employee and your boss is your employer does not make you a 2nd class citizen.

Quote:

Ed: Except for female community leaders, there are female poets and bards in the scriptures. (Miriam)...

lp: Who else?

I will have to do some research.

Quote:

(priestesses leading people the wrong way...)
Ed: Because generally God best reveals his teachings thru men.

lp: And why is that supposed to be the case? One ought not to need any human conduit.

We don't know why he chose humans to convey his message.

Ed · 07-18-2004, 07:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amaleq13

Originally Posted by Ed
Because generally God best reveals his teachings thru men.

amaleq: Please define how you are using "best" here.

Also, do you have any evidence to support your earlier claim about "inherent morality"?

Best means optimal. See above about all major societies.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-12-2004, 11:29 PM	#351
Amaleq13 Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Eagle River, Alaska Posts: 7,816	Whether it constitutes a surrender or not is up to the readers but since the previous post had no relevance to Biblical Criticism & History, I'm turning in the ticket. Please return your trays to their upright and locked position.

07-16-2004, 01:27 AM	#357
Jack the Bodiless Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: UK Posts: 5,815	Yes, it DOES answer the question. "Where did such an innate moral sense come from?" Evolution and social conditioning. "How can the moral come from the amoral?" Evolution and social conditioning. Still waiting for your admission that you were wrong about who hardened Pharaoh's heart, Ed...

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.