FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB Philosophical Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 05:55 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 02-18-2003, 01:34 PM   #231
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 3,425
Angry

Quote:
Originally posted by Radorth
Maybe you don't know how disrespectful, and condescending you come across. You are accusing a Christ I believe in of all kinds of evil motives with no evidence whatsoever. I think I've been incredibly patient with your psychoblather. You either did not read the thread or are insincere as well, because you ask questions which have been asked and answered many times already. At that point, tolerant people stop ragging on it and agree to disagree. Not you. You ask even more inane questions like "Is rape OK?" You choose to keep blathering on, and that is why you are hearing sarcasm.

Rad
I'M being condescending and disrespectful?!?! I realise that you have made responses to our questions, and I am sure other posters have realised this too. But we dare to argue against your views, and you recommend that we 'study Zen' (even though that has little to do with the bible), because we are not qualified to challenge your views.

If you'd like to quote me when I was condescending and disrespectful, Radorth, I will apologise if your concerns are justified.

Quote:
The moment we determined to "eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil" we began to invent sin. Our needs were no longer met by God, whom we decided was kidding us, and began to invent our own ways of filling legitimate needs. There is a domino effect. God says male and female making a lifetime commitment is the best way to fulfil emotional and sexual needs. We try other things. God says adultery is wrong, but bad marriages leave us in need, so we find what we think we need elsewhere. We blame others for all these problems, when actually 90% of all problems are caused by us. We tell one lie and have to invent another to cover up that one.
No, Adam and Eve decided to eat from the tree of knowledge (if it ever existed). None of us alive today had anything to do with it.

According to the bible, god decided what would and what would not be a sin. By inventing the concept of sin, he created sin. He is the one creating excuses and rules for us to live by. Not everyone wants a relationship with one other person for life. How can your god judge what is best for us, when he is NOT us?

It's what he THINKS is best for us, but as he is not us, he is making a value judgement. How easy it is for him to tell us to do or not do something, when he does not have to experience it himself.
winstonjen is offline  
Old 02-18-2003, 09:19 PM   #232
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,872
Default

Quote:
Shoveling snow is something we often have to do in my part of country while we await your misunderstood sungod to rise again and be victorious over darkness.
Oh yeah?!!! And you're a big giant poopy head!

Quote:
I do wish he`d hurry up because my back is killing me
That's nothing. I had to hold three....er never mind.

Rad
Radorth is offline  
Old 02-18-2003, 09:27 PM   #233
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Scotland, UK
Posts: 602
Default Gabberloony in Judaic Myth

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So why do you figure life expectancies drop off from 900 to 50 years over time according to the Bible?

[i] The ridulous supertition that people actually lived 900 years is a sign of significantly impaired thinking. It is a lie in the absolute sense and a really wacky myth. There is not a shred of evidence that humans ever lived 900 years. The wear and tear on the joints of the hips, knees and spinal column would leave scattered shards of calcifcations surrounding fused joints making mobilisation impossible. The yearly normal attrition of brain neurons tht occurs in normally older people at age 90 pr 100 would at 900 years leave a brain without neurons and only astrocytic scar cells in a brain atrophied to the size of a large grape, would mean that those 900 year old wankers would have the intelligence of a large rabbit.

In conclusion, I fail to see that an inelligent person could seriously believe that primitive stone age people lived that long in the absense of modern antibiotics, cholesterol lowering drugs. At the most a rare individual many have reached 100-110 maximum, the average life expectance was more like 35 not 50.

I wish people would read some history books and science before placing confidence in Bible lies and faerie tales.

Fiach
Fiach is offline  
Old 02-18-2003, 09:32 PM   #234
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Scotland, UK
Posts: 602
Default Jesus is imaginary.

Rad:

"You are accusing a Christ I believe in of all kinds of evil motives with no evidence whatsoever.'

I'll take it a step further. I don't accuse Chist of anything such as evil motives with no evidence whatsoever. Jesus Christ is imaginary with no evidence whatsoever that he existed. He is just a story, and a badly written, irrational one at that.

Fiach
Fiach is offline  
Old 02-18-2003, 09:59 PM   #235
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,872
Default

Quote:
I'M being condescending and disrespectful?!?!
Yes you are. You have asked me at least five completely inane questions. You treat me like a moron whether you know it or not. I've been doing this a long time and I know people after five posts. Tell the truth. You think "fundies" are idiots. Right?

Quote:
If you'd like to quote me when I was condescending and disrespectful, Radorth, I will apologise if your concerns are justified.
I don't know if it's worth it. Is the following what you would say to a Christian anywhere but on the web?

Quote:
Ah, so your god supports the covering up of priestly pedophillia.
Which was after I tried to explain how and why God might cover our sins, but I used a compound sentence too many I guess. Do you even read what is posted to you?

You asked me if I thought nudity was OK, and I gave you Paul's response to such questions. I should have known better, because you answered with this cynical and rhetorical crap:

Quote:
So is rape OK?
That's condescending and disrespectful where I come from. It tells people you haven't the slightest interest in discussing anything with them.

My sarcasm is completely justified. Go read what I wrote to Dr. Rick after he asked an intelligent question. Read how I respond to Kirby or Sneddin. Read what I have said about Will Durant and H.G Wells who have done as much harm to our "myth" as 200 of your ilk will do in their whole lifetimes. Those two are honest skeptics, compared to whom you are a lazy-minded cynic.

Rad
Radorth is offline  
Old 02-18-2003, 10:07 PM   #236
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,872
Default

Quote:
He is just a story, and a badly written, irrational one at that.
Blah blah. Go read Durant sometime and see how it's done.

On second thought, don't read Durant. You might come up with a convincing argument. I should start complimenting you and Winstonjen more. You'd think you were convincing somebody, and I would be facilitating the spread of the Gospel.

Rad
Radorth is offline  
Old 02-18-2003, 10:08 PM   #237
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 3,425
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Radorth
Yes you are. You have asked me at least five completely inane questions. You treat me like a moron whether you know it or not. I've been doing this a long time and I know people after five posts. Tell the truth. You think "fundies" are idiots. Right?
Not all of them, but the majority of the ones I have observed, are. Sad to say, to me, you are one of them. You assert my questions as 'inane'. And yet you do not give me, or anyone else, any reasons why.



Quote:
I don't know if it's worth it. Is the following what you would say to a Christian anywhere but on the web?
Yes, because they seriously need to ask questions about the practices their church engages in.



Quote:
Which was after I tried to explain how and why God might cover our sins, but I used a compound sentence too many I guess. Do you even read what is posted to you?
Of course, otherwise I would not have quoted you.

Quote:
You asked me if I thought nudity was OK, and I gave you Paul's response to such questions. I should have known better, because you answered with this cynical and rhetorical crap:



That's condescending and disrespectful where I come from. It tells people you haven't the slightest interest in discussing anything with them.
I get the same message from you. You dodged questions in this topic, and many others (Where was god, Farthing candles and Suns to name but two).

Quote:
My sarcasm is completely justified. Go read what I wrote to Dr. Rick after he asked an intelligent question. Read how I respond to Kirby or Sneddin. Read what I have said about Will Durant and H.G Wells who have done as much harm to our "myth" as 200 of your ilk will do in their whole lifetimes. Those two are honest skeptics, compared to whom you are a lazy-minded cynic.
Rad
Your myth is not damaged only in your eyes. In recent centuries, fewer and fewer people believe the story of Jesus. Surely that is damage because the adherents to your religion are lessening in number.
winstonjen is offline  
Old 02-18-2003, 10:12 PM   #238
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,872
Default

Quote:
Not all of them, but the majority of the ones I have observed, are. Sad to say, to me, you are one of them.
Thank you. You think I'm an idiot, and you talk to me like an idiot. Actually, you don't have the slightest notion what I think. You are simply wise in your own eyes. How old are you? About 23 or so?
Radorth is offline  
Old 02-18-2003, 10:16 PM   #239
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,872
Default

Quote:
Surely that is damage because the adherents to your religion are lessening in number.
Sure, when you have people like Durant asking intelligent questions instead of making up wacko stories of their own based on even less evidence. You missed the point.

Rad
Radorth is offline  
Old 02-18-2003, 10:27 PM   #240
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Gone
Posts: 4,676
Default I don`t get this

Radorth,
We`ll get back to what you said about sin later. Theres something about you that makes even less sense to me than Jesus being killed over sins.

Whats the deal with Wells and Durant? Why do you constantly keep bringing them up when they clearly do not agree with you about Jesus being God?
Why aren`t you emailing them with your gripes instead of taking it out on us if they supposably have much betters arguments worthy of your consideration?

Why does it matter if those two guys thought Jesus was probably a real guy? They still don`t think he was a divine god so what does it matter to you if they think he lived or not?
I really don`t understand why you have put these two unbelievers up on a pedestal.
And if you admire them both so much,how come you don`t believe what they say?
Yellum Notnef is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:36 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.