Original Sin?
April 19th, 2015 at 10:38:16 AM permalink | |
Nareed Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 346 Posts: 12545 |
You should pay attention, too.
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).
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.
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 |
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.
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 |
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.
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.
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 |
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 |
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 |
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
Absolutely. Don't you?
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.
I saw a meme today with the punch line "I'm a prostitute and a virgin." For some reason it just came to mind.
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.
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
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 |
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.
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.
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.
'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 |