Original Sin?

April 19th, 2015 at 10:38:16 AM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 346
Posts: 12545
Quote: FrGamble
I learn from watching you.


You should pay attention, too.

Quote:
This doesn't follow. Knowing something innately is not to know it precisely or even to have explicit knowledge.


To which you can follow with "it's not like knowing knowing," or some other ungrammatical catch-phrase. In the end it means you want to have it both ways, or, to be unkind about it, that you are weaseling out of your claim while clinging to it (and here I thought someone else had invented doublethink).

Quote:
Our innate sense of what is morally true and good protects us from these false interpretations of the Bible.


The Bible doesn't speak out against slavery. The Bible equates a wife with things considered property. There is no false interpretation and no room for error, only obfuscation on the part of Christian apologists standing for an indefensible position.

Quote:
No kind of deity at all. Whatever it was demanding human sacrifice you can be sure it was not God.


In the past you've claimed all pre-Christian deities were really partial or incomplete revelations of Jehovah (or Jesus?). If we take this at face value, then Jehovah-as-Baal liked to eat children. Perhaps, then, he wasn't "testing" Abraham's faith, but merely changed his mind.
Donald Trump is a one-term LOSER
April 19th, 2015 at 10:45:45 AM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 346
Posts: 12545
Quote: FrGamble
When I pointed out that the narrator, serving as the divine voice of the movie, makes it clear that I was correct she responded that she was free to think about it anyway she wanted and she disagreed with the author.


1) I said the narrator is a character in the movie, Red.

2) I further said Red can describe factually what he saw, but only speculate about Andy's inner state.

3) therefore when Red said "Andy did this," that's holy writ. When he says "Andy did this because of that," then it's only his opinion or best guess or even considered judgment, but certainly prone to error and open to interpretation.

Quote:
That is of course her pejorative,


I love to correct native English speakers: "Prerogative."

If you claim it was the spell checker, I'll do my best to refudiate(*) it ;)

(*) Not a real word.
Donald Trump is a one-term LOSER
April 19th, 2015 at 10:51:55 AM permalink
FrGamble
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 67
Posts: 7596
Quote: Nareed

To which you can follow with "it's not like knowing knowing," or some other ungrammatical catch-phrase.


So are you saying that if you know something than you explicitly and completely know it? That if you know something you can put it into action perfectly and can express it concisely and clearly? Surely you acknowledge that there are many things we know but do not fully understand or cannot completely express.



Quote:
The Bible doesn't speak out against slavery. The Bible equates a wife with things considered property. There is no false interpretation and no room for error, only obfuscation on the part of Christian apologists standing for an indefensible position.


The Bible does speak out against slavery and does not consider a wife property. Your false interpretations and bringing up a passage here and there are what anti-Christian apologists do to present an indefensible position.


Quote:
In the past you've claimed all pre-Christian deities were really partial or incomplete revelations of Jehovah (or Jesus?).


I have never claimed ALL pre-Christian deities lead us to Christ, you should pay attention too.
“It is with the smallest brushes that the artist paints the most exquisitely beautiful pictures.” (
April 19th, 2015 at 10:54:54 AM permalink
FrGamble
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 67
Posts: 7596
Quote: Nareed
I love to correct native English speakers: "Prerogative."

If you claim it was the spell checker, I'll do my best to refudiate(*) it ;)

(*) Not a real word.


I thought the word I used might fit for your tone towards any notion of sacrifice, that and I am a bad speller.
“It is with the smallest brushes that the artist paints the most exquisitely beautiful pictures.” (
April 19th, 2015 at 11:03:14 AM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 346
Posts: 12545
Quote: FrGamble
I thought the word I used might fit for your tone towards any notion of sacrifice, that and I am a bad speller.


That's a lame excuse. Even I know (and I do know it know it) that "pejorative" is an adjective and "prerogative" a noun. Therefore saying something's your "pejorative" makes as much sense as saying something is your blue.
Donald Trump is a one-term LOSER
April 19th, 2015 at 11:19:22 AM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 346
Posts: 12545
Quote: FrGamble
So are you saying that if you know something than you explicitly and completely know it?


I'm saying that if I innately knew g is more or less 9.8 m/s^2, and that f=ma, I wouldn't try to determine the weight of something by assuming a lower value of g, simply because that would lead to the wrong answer. And I'd know it would lead to such an answer. And I'd know that I know it. And I know that I know that I know it, too, even if I'd no idea why the value of g is approx. 9.8 m/s^2

Quote:
That if you know something you can put it into action perfectly and can express it concisely and clearly?


Absolutely.

Don't you?

Quote:
Surely you acknowledge that there are many things we know but do not fully understand or cannot completely express.


There are many things we know about and make use of, which we don't know exactly what they are. What is time? simply defining it is a headache. but we can measure it (BTW time is about he thing we can most precisely measure, to an astonishing number of decimal places), we can make us e of it and to a limited extent we can alter its flow.


Quote:
The Bible does speak out against slavery and does not consider a wife property.


I saw a meme today with the punch line "I'm a prostitute and a virgin." For some reason it just came to mind.


Quote:
I have never claimed ALL pre-Christian deities lead us to Christ, you should pay attention too.


So which ones do? Only the ones not involving human sacrifice? If so, then Jehovah really screwed up not letting on about the existence of the western hemisphere to his followers, seeing as human sacrifice was rampant there. Or maybe he screwed up not sending himself/his son there to begin with. Either way, you'd be astonished how many cultures outside the Americas resorted to human sacrifice. There is much controversy about whether Carthage did, and some indications than when in dire straits others did as well, including Rome.
Donald Trump is a one-term LOSER
April 19th, 2015 at 11:30:28 AM permalink
Dalex64
Member since: Mar 8, 2014
Threads: 3
Posts: 3687
Ok, meat on Friday.

Quote:
On the Fridays outside of Lent the U.S. bishops conference obtained the permission of the Holy See for Catholics in the US to substitute a penitential, or even a charitable, practice of their own choosing. Since this was not stated as binding under pain of sin, not to do so on a single occasion would not in itself be sinful. However, since penance is a divine command, the general refusal to do penance is certainly gravely sinful. For most people the easiest way to consistently fulfill this command is the traditional one, to abstain from meat on all Fridays of the year which are not liturgical solemnities. When solemnities, such as the Annunciation, Assumption, All Saints etc. fall on a Friday, we neither abstain or fast.

From https://www.ewtn.com/faith/lent/fast.htm/

Pennance is a devine command.
Not performing a devine command is sinful.
It was a devine command, and therefore sinful, to eat meat on fridays.
The rules have changed. The divine command was changed. What is considered sinful has changed. Morality has changed.
Men are making these changes. Men are deciding what is moral, and when.

If you want to say that men are making their decisions based on divine guidance, so be it. God can take credit for all of the good decisions, and man can take all of the blame for misinterpreting god when things are changed.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." Daniel Patrick Moynihan
April 19th, 2015 at 12:23:11 PM permalink
Dalex64
Member since: Mar 8, 2014
Threads: 3
Posts: 3687
This letter to Philemon?

http://biblescripture.net/Philemon.html/

The one where the introduction to the letter states
Quote:
While this letter of Paul to Philemon may be brief, it is quite important, for it urges the treatment of slaves with brotherly love, a principle that will ultimately put an end to slavery, the custom of the time.


When is the first time that slavery is labeled as sinful?

I found this, from 1435: https://www.ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/POPSLAVE.HTM/

So, I'm starting to fill in the gap between Peter (not Jesus) speaking to have one slave returned or freed, to its true meaning that all slaves should be freed, to this letter from the pope in 1435.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." Daniel Patrick Moynihan
April 19th, 2015 at 12:35:20 PM permalink
Evenbob
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 146
Posts: 25010
Quote: FrGamble
So this is why you refuse to entertain discussing sin outside of a connection to God?


If you don't believe in god, sin does
not exist, there can be no discussion.
What you're doing is using a trick they
use with children. A child says he doesn't
believe in unicorns. You say you understand,
so lets posit, if there were unicorns, what
color would their horn be. Soon you have
the child acting like unicorns actually do
exist. This is why religious people are so
dangerous. They don't respect others beliefs.
They will twist and turn their words to mean
whatever it takes to get the persons toe in
the door, then work on them till they are
doubting their own name. God does not exist,
so talking about sin is a vast waste of time.

Quote:
A music prodigy is evidence of reincarnation because in a previous life he played music. These fallacies are related to circular reasoning, see above.


It's not a fallacy, and it's straight line reasoning,
that's why it makes sense. A man had a life of
music, and remembers enough of it when he's
born in another body that he continues on in
music. I suppose your explanation would be god
gave him the talent, which is no explanation at
all, just a universal cop-out.

Quote:
This is why you are limiting yourself to defining sin as only regrettable actions that offend God.


The word 'regrettable' is yours, not mine. You
cannot offend a being that doesn't exist, the
whole argument is meaningless. And boring.
Like talking about a unicorns horn. Waste of
time.

Quote:
Anyone with a rudimentary knowledge of Christianity and the History of the Bible will know that the Bible was put together by the Catholic Church long before Protestants came unto the scene. .


'The word "apocrypha" means "of questionable authenticity." These are called non canonical books because when the canon of Scriptures (the sixty six books of the Old and New Testaments) was accepted by the early Christians, they recognized that these books (the apocrypha) contained spurious material and therefore were not inspired of God. Other names for these books are "hidden" or "deuterocanonical" books. These books are also called "pseudepigraphal", meaning "false writings", to designate them as spurious and unauthentic books of the late centuries B. C. and early centuries A. D. These books contain religious folklore and have never been considered inspired of God by biblical Christians from the earliest times of churches.... These books were not accepted by the Roman Catholic church until 1546 in the Council of Trent. Therefore for over 1300 years, since the inception of the Roman Church in the fourth Century, even they did not consider them inspired.' http://bible-truth.org/Apocrypha.html

You see this everywhere, the truth. Must seem
odd to you.
If you take a risk, you may lose. If you never take a risk, you will always lose.
April 19th, 2015 at 12:40:35 PM permalink
Dalex64
Member since: Mar 8, 2014
Threads: 3
Posts: 3687
Then they backslide, as I find two letters from one pope authorizing slavery

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanus_Pontifex/

You can get at both through the one link.

I thought I was closer, with a letter from the wife of a king speaking out about slavery in 851, but several hundred years later, though you were not allowed to enslave christians, you were still allowed to enslave non-christians. So we still hadn't fully realized "do unto others" at that point.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." Daniel Patrick Moynihan