HOME | DD
pitnerd — They were the 99%
#bible #noah #thegreatflood #noahandtheflood #biblical #flood #theflood
Published: 2015-03-21 17:06:52 +0000 UTC; Views: 1833; Favourites: 36; Downloads: 9
Redirect to original
Description
Cool, someone found this and made a meme. My power and influence are complete.Related content
Comments: 175
I knew you would continue to sidetrack, especially with the suicide comment. I think you missed the point I was trying to make there.
And it's a little late to try to recant putting words in my mouth. You've done little else this whole time.
Perhaps I'm not articulating this properly on my end, but you're leaping to some pretty dramatic conclusions.
Fear is a tool to enforce social order. That's the fact.
Morality discourages the urge from fearing repercussions of social order in the first place.
Capice`...?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Fear can work, but would you want to live in a society ruled by fear? Most would call that tyranny. Just because it worked in Stalinist Russia doesn't mean you'd want to apply it to society at large.
I can raise obedient children by beating them to within an inch of their lives, its a model of parenting that works but that's not the kind of kids or society any sane person would want to bring up.
Morality takes away the fear of punishment? You just torpedoed your own argument.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I did not because you don't understand my argument X_X
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Nothing says "love and forgiveness" like murdering the entire population bar a dozen or so, and relying on incest to repopulate the earth.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
again? are you referring to Noah and adam and eve? that's a rather literalistic interpretation you've got there.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Even if you insist on thinking that Adam and Eve were actual people, it's more likley that they were the first spiritually aware humans. Sort of like that one last mutation before we truly became homo sapiens. And as for Noah, remember that when an ancient person refers to "the whole world" they're talking about the world they knew about, which in this case did not go beyond the land surrounding the Mediterranean sea.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
...did... did you just admit you were wrong? are you trying to break the internet!?!?!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
...what's wrong with admitting when you're wrong?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Absolutley nothing. I thought it would be obvious that I was making a joke.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I know. I was adding onto the joke.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Or murdering all the firstborn of a country because their king is stubborn. And he's stubborn because you made him to be.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Wrong, sir. Wrong. God makes us but he doesn't control our choices.
Ramses was offered a choice.
And considering the Hebrew people were enslaved for far longer than African-descended people in America, I'd have thought you'd be on the side of the emancipator.
Buuuuuuuut the Emancipator in this case is God, acting through an agent on Earth, so.... fuck 'em, right?
Bullshit.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Exodus clearly and unequivocally states that God hardened Pharaoh's heart so that he would not be moved to mercy.
Never challenge an atheist on the Bible: He's read it, and you haven't.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
What passage in what version?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
What version? Isn't the Bible supposed to be the truth? When was the last time you heard of a version of the truth?
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
That proves that you know nothing about the Bible. There are hundreds of different translations.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
It depends on who you ask.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Yes, Ramses was offered a choice. And then god punishes everyone in the entire country for it. I don't even want to know what kind of mental wrestling it takes to not make him out to be a psychotic, sadistic mass murderer. "Emancipator", indeed...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Oh, I don't know...
... it's often been the position of folk on your side that the murders of police officers and white people who have not a racist bone in their body is either business as usual or 'social justice'.
Really, God was just exacting a little Social Justice on Egypt because of all the wrong done to the Hebrews.
Isn't that delightful to you? ^_^
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Your sarcastic attempt to derail the discussion does nothing to change that god, according to the bible, is a mass murderer of the innnocent.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Can you really claim that racist slaveowners are innocent?
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
The reason the world was rebooted is because there was *no* innocence left, save a handful.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
No, I was talking about Egypt. But go ahead, please tell me how all the world including little babies was sinful, and the logical thing was to kill everything.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
One can only conclude, given the pattern of promises and developments that God Himself is learning how to be God.
Eventually he realized he had to stop stamping on the reboot button and work with humanity. Thus, the Ten Commandments came.
A set of laws so profound that they became the foundation of Western law.
Unless of course the story was metaphorical in nature and intended to be taken as parable.
If that's the case, then I again cite the historically recurring 'trope' of the cycle of death and rebirth.
When trying to change yourself for the better, if you look back, you stray.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
God, according to the good book itself, is perfect and unchanging. "God learning to be god" would not only be a cop-out excuse, but inconsistent with the perfect, infallible word of god, you know? And either way, it's still an act that only a megalomaniacal psychopath would pull.
When did he ever stamp the reboot button? In what universe is the reboot button not better than genocide and suffering on a worldwide scale?
Actually, no. No, they were not. The western laws were influenced by christianity, but also varied greatly from one culture to another in the manner you'd expect of religion adapting to its time and culture. Christian law, for that matter, was horribly draconian, intolerant and oppressive, much like the religious laws we see in certain arabic countries today. Our values of today, we got in spite of christianity, not becuse of it.
You knew I was talking about Egypt; you addressed the subject directly, and then you changed the subject to the flood out of nowhere. Either your memory is terrible, or you're being dishonest, and either way you paint a less than flattering picture of christian apologism. As for Egypt itself, no amount of rationalization can turn that into anything less than divine terrorism and mass murder.
I shall leave you with a Discworld quote:
“I have told this to few people, gentlemen, and I suspect I never will again, but one day when I was a young boy on holiday in Uberwald I was walking along the bank of a stream when I saw a mother otter with her cubs. A very endearing sight, I’m sure you will agree, and even as I watched, the mother otter dived into the water and came up with a plump salmon, which she subdued and dragged on to a half-submerged log. As she ate it, while of course it was still alive, the body split and I remember to this day the sweet pinkness of its roes as they spilled out, much to the delight of the baby otters who scrambled over themselves to feed on the delicacy. One of nature’s wonders, gentlemen: mother and children dining upon mother and children. And that’s when I first learned about evil. It is built into the very nature of the universe. Every world spins in pain. If there is any kind of supreme being, I told myself, it is up to all of us to become his moral superior.”
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Would you make up your damned mind already?
If you're an atheist, then stop talking about this because it doesn't concern you.
If you do believe in God and you're just throwing a fit about the woes you see, then I advise you read a book called 'The Shack.'
M'kay?
M'kay.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I don't know, would your book?
As an ex-christian, anti-theist, atheist agnostic it does concern me.
Any god who looks at the world we have and goes "eh, let's not do anything about all this needless suffering" is not a god worth worshipping, ever.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Daddy issues, much?
God didn't put us here to give us life on a silver platter. The one place that happened, we were kicked out of because we disregarded the rules.
Now that we're here, he's given us advice on how to get along and time and again we *willingly choose to ignore it*.
If you had a kid who perpetually disobeyed you, wrecked your house and spat on your name when you didn't coddle them, how would you feel?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Not that you would have any idea.
More excuses- that still does not explain needless suffering. It still does not explain why children are allowed to die to preventable diseases, parasites, natural disasters... no, a god that punishes everyone for a mistake that a few made, to a point where children die by the thousand every day, is a moral monster.
We were given no such advice. Suffering happens every day, suffering that has no justification. When a mother of three is raped and murdered, where is god then? When a small african child goes blind from a parasite that evolved specifically to eat its eyes, where is god then? When a hurricane indiscriminately kills hundreds, and wrecks the livelihoods of thousands, where is god then? His only excuse is non-existence.
That's yet another "we deserve it" fallacy. This is needless suffering, people enduring pain and death who did nothing to deserve it. And even if this warped logic was acceptable, it would still be wholly disproportionate retribution.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Touched a nerve...? I had the feeling... It's a common theme among atheists.
That's also all operating under the assumption that the Bible is literal.
It is, after all, the human interpretation.
But even if it is, then tell me...
... if God did all of that, looked after us and tended to our every need, what would the point of life here be?
Nothing worth doing was ever easy.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Um, no. You made an assumption about my personal life without knowing the first thing about me. That makes a body testy, because it falls right under personal attacks territory, close enough to an ad-hom.
"Not literal" is an excuse. The moment something is disproven, suddenly it's an allegory instead...
...and of course, that has nothing to do with the argument I made there, about human suffering.
" looked after us and tended to our every need, what would the point of life here be?"
What, there's no inbetween, between: "everything is perfect", and "people dying and suffering completely needlessly by the thousands, every day"? If a fair god existed, one that was actually omnibenevolent as it is claimed, then he would not allow pointless suffering. Instead, he does. Instead, we have a world where thousands of children die every day, where preventable diseases ravage poor countries, and rich countries do nowhere near enough to help those worse off. We have a world with war, rape, murder, slavery, wanton destruction, where suffering and death strikes indiscriminately whether you are a sinner or a saint. Does that sound like a fair world to you, one that a benevolent god would endorse? Tell me, what about man's supposed rebellion justifies letting this happen?
Your god, if he exists, is a moral monster, one that is content to watch the worst of suffering without lifting a finger to ease people's pain. If he exists, he should be begging our forgiveness.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Considering how much gets assumed about me, namely that I'm orthodoxy and fundamentalist, mostly by atheists, you'll forgive me a little assumption or two of my own.
And it's exceedingly immature to levy upon God all the woes of the world when it's the hand of man behind those woes.
God set us up, gave us a roadmap and facepalms thunderclaps as he sees us all fighting over the roadmap, some tearing it up and making excuses, some making alterations and saying that everyone should listen to them and so on and so forth.
I have faith in God, but I have no faith that even if we found a single guiding principle and all of us cooperated, you wouldn't still have some bone to pick with God.
You'd still say 'Well we had a long, violent time in history prior to unification, so God sucks because of that.' or something to that end. God himself could come from on high and wipe out poverty, disease and war and you'd still spit at his feet.
Look, I get it. Either your life sucks and you're pissed about it or you feel bad for other people's lives sucking and you want your scapegoat.
The problem lays with people doing shitty things to eachother.
God said 'Don't do shitty things to eachother'.
We didn't.
And God shrugged.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Two wrongs do not make a right.
No. If he is omnipotent, then everything is logically his responsibility.
God "sets us up", but doesn't give man an understanding of sin- and then punishes man for doing wrong when man has no understanding of morality. He blames us for his own mistake. That is by no means a fair god.
A god that claims both omnipotence and omnibenevolence, yet allows children to die by the thousand because "man fucked up"- that is an evil god. That is a bone to pick.
Uhm, yeah... humanity is two hundred thousand years old, and our history is full of misery and suffering. God suddenly showing up, after having done nothing about it for all that time, does not really make it all right.
"God said 'Don't do shitty things to eachother'."
No, he did no such thing. He said "do not eat this fruit because I said so". Then he punished every human being who would ever live for the ignorant mistake of two people with no understanding of what they did. God had moral responsibility in that case, and he chose to blame it on us.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
The point us for us to *learn*, dude.
He told us how to do it and we continue to *choose* not to do it.
This is still just sound and fury about how you wish you were coddled.
He can't just *give* us the knowledge because we wouldn't know what to do with it. We have to earn it and own it.
Read 'The Shack.' Trust me.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Perhaps.
No, he blamed us for his own mistake, showing us nothing.
...no. Good god, can you see no shade between "everything is perfect" and "everybody suffers"? Are you actually incapable of seeing the literally infinite amount of stages between those two? How, good non-existent lord, how can you not see that needless suffering is needless, and unjustified under the rulership of a benevolent deity?
More BS rationalizations. Were god just and good, he would not let good people suffer and die for no reason at all.
If it's the same christian apologia I've heard a thousand times before, then no thanks. I've seen it all, and none of it stands up to rational thought.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Have I mentioned that I don't take the Bible literally?
And yeah, good, innocent people die sometimes for no reason at all, but thinking on the larger scale, they're just moving along down the road, past where we can see.
I've always believed in God and thank him for every day.
And no, the Shack isn't 'Christian apologia'. It's pretty unconventional.
Read it. Trust me.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
That doesn't change this discussion at all.
What sort of nonsense is that? Needless suffering keeps happening, and this is not consistent with a benevolent deity.
I wonder if the starving children in Africa have quite so much to thank him for. Or rape victims. Or people born with AIDS. Or natural disaster refugees...
Googles it, premise didn't seem at all interesting.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Pirate the book if it makes you feel better, but do read it. It's not 'Left Behind' or any such theological force-feeding. It's parable.
It's strange that you keep on belting out other tragedies with odd frequency. You're trying to make excuses for how you feel because something happened to you and you're using others' suffering as allegorical to your own. I won't drag out whatever it is that happened to you, but you're sounding like a broken record.
On the topic of Africa, it's us superstitious, sky-god-fearing twits that go there to dig wells, build and staff hospitals, establish farms for the people and so on, all to ameliorate the suffering. God works through us to do just that.
God gave us free will, and disease and natural disasters aside (Which we can prepare for and deal with), the majority of mankind's woes are suffered at the hands of our fellow man. Not at the hands of God.
It's not that post-Garden of Eve is punishment.
I for one, think Catholics are insane for the fervent belief in Original Sin. Original Sin to me is a fallacy.
But Adam and Eve *chose* free will.
Read the book. www.amazon.com/The-Shack-Wm-Pa…
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I've a million things to do. Why should I read christian propaganda on top of that?
You know no such thing, and I find your assumptions offensive. More offensive, of course, is the point that people suffer tragedies and pain and death all the time, and you attempt to dismiss this as me wanting to be "coddled". What about children not dying by the thousands, I wonder, is "coddling"? Stop making these ad-hom attacks, address the points, or just admit that being intellectually consistent and honest isn't something you are capable of when it comes to a religious debate.
And that would be a relevant point if we were discussing who was doing what sort of charity. But we're not. So yeah, irrelevant. And if that's "god working through us", then he's putting a band-aid on a gaping wound- and that's supposed to make it okay?
Free will is incompatible with the notion of an omnipotent creator. Furthermore, the "free will" defense does nothing to rebuke pointless suffering. Indeed, under "free will", the freedom to do evil is more important than the personal freedom not to do evil- when a rapist strikes his victim, is his free will the more important one? Because it would seem that way.
Original sin is a basic pillar of christianity, I'm afraid. Without original sin, there is no need for Jesus to exist; without original sin you cannot be considered christian.
And no, Adam and Eve did not choose out of free will. They were tricked, and because they had no notion of what it meant, they fell. And rather than accept responsibility, god chose to blame them- them, and everyone who would ever come after them. What an asshole.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Right, Shutting this down now. *I'M* expected to listen to you, to read your materials, to chuck MY faith in the bin, but when that same is asked of you, with all the arrogance I've come to expect from the classic militant atheist, you refuse to look at something that might shake your absence of faith.
Not even reading all your post here because you've just chucked out the source of answers.
You're a damned liar too. If your time was so precious to you, you wouldn't be spending it arguing with someone about theology on the internet. I consider my time precious too, but I opted to try and rekindle a spark in your heart with that book. But as zealous as you have made a habit of accusing those of faith while pissing on their belief for the sake of pissing on it, you refuse to look at other possibilities.
I think that'll be all, but if you really must get your last word in, go right ahead. I'm sure there's not more constructive things you could be doing.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
When did I ever expect you to read "my materials"? Did I post a single link in this conversation? Did I urge you to go read the god delusion? The only one here who is pushing anybody to read anything is you.
What a cheap and convenient way of not answering a rationally laid out argument.
Right. A few minutes spent wording a reply, that is comparable to the hours it takes to read a book. Sorry, not seeing the logic there.
You've consistently dodged my arguments, used irrelevant non-refutation points, resorted to ad hominems, and made several unfounded assumptions about my character. You've been disingenuous, and deeply intellectually dishonest. You paint a very poor picture of christianity, I'm afraid.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Dodged your arguments? All you said was 'No matter which way you slice it, God's a dick' and I attempted to repudiate it from multiple points of view and none of them were to your satisfaction because I'm not convinced you acknowledged and considered anything (Particularly after rehashing the same point twice). When I deferred you to a more articulated work addressing the very things you've brought up, you called it propaganda.
And when I say 'you' I apologize for my lack of specificity on that note, I meant atheism in general. I'm expected to watch 'Religuous', 'Letting go of God', 'The Unbeleivers' and 'The God who wasn't there' while I was in college and if I still have my faith afterwards, well, I'm just a lost cause too dedicated to my magical skygod. You people (Fairly so) wanted to have your viewpoint taught in school. Then you manipulated, bitched, moaned and whined your way into having it be the *only* viewpoint in school.
Now you're smugly saying that *I* paint a bad picture of Christianity when I'm not even solely Christian! I'm Christian, Sufi, Taoist and Reiki with a smattering of Buddhism. Why? Because there's wisdom in all of it and it's foolish to turn your back on whole pieces of the overall puzzle.
And if you want to talk about assumptions of character... GKR, I can tell you more than a few tales of being branded and bullied back in college and around the net.
Something tells me that no argument I could present would change your mind.
But this guy might push you... ehyde.wordpress.com/2012/10/28…
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You never once addressed needless suffering, each time dismissing it one way or the other. All you ever did was assert that "no, everything is humanity's fault" without doing anything to back that up.
I stand for me. Whatever you think of new atheism, it's got nothing to do with this discussion- and to be frank, what part of new atheism has ever tried to force books and movies on anybody?
And what the dickens is it supposed to mean, "having it be the only viewpoint in school"? Schools should be religiously neutral. Anything else is giving privilege to one religion or the other. Do you refer to the way religion isn't given special treatment in science classes, or the way people actually enforce the separation of church and state?
Then you paint a poor picture of religiosity in general; you argue without honesty or consistency, using strawmen and personal attacks.
"I can tell you more than a few tales"
...so what? That doesn't make it okay for you to resort to personal attacks.
Something tells me the exact same about you. For the record, evidence would change my mind- it's just that you don't have any.
The trouble for the Naturalist comes into play when one considers the event of human thought. Since thoughts are events, all of our thoughts should be fully explainable in mechanistic terms and not according to a person’s free-agency. But any thought which is not guided by what is “true” but guided rather by mechanistic, physical necessity is not rational. Hence, Naturalism, philosophically speaking, slits its own throat.
What utterly pretentious bogus that is. "We think, therefore atheism is not"? Not only does he generalize physicalism with atheism, but the argument is utterly nonsensical- he asserts that because thoughts are physical, they are not rational- and therefore, naturalism cannot make sense? That makes no sense. We know thoughts are caused by the physics of our brains. And thoughts are not "events" more than anything else in this world is. This is third-grade pseudo-philosophical bullshit at its finest. This isn't even a refutation of atheism- he specifically targets naturalism instead. Is the argument "rationality cannot exist, therefore god"?
any notion of good and evil, right and wrong, love and hate, etc., must also be treated as mythical
"I don't like the implications that I made up myself, therefore atheism must be wrong"
Actually, all that naturalism means is that we're stuck with our one universe. Morality still exists, as does a moral basis. Love, hatred, such emotions? Solidly documented physical effects on the body. The ignorance and bias of this author is nothing short of stunning.
EVIDENCE. Bring evidence, or forever stay an intellectual failure.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
So that's it then. You want me to make something faith-based into something physical.
Listen, I've just suffered a major blow tonight and I'm feeling intensely horrible. I'm sure you're tempted to say 'Where's your God now?' with all the smugness in your being, but I can tell you that he's right here with me because I don't spit on his name and blame him for things we asked him to recuse himself from by choosing free will.
You call me an intellectual failure because I believe in God, regardless of all other facts about me as a person.
I understand your need to bully and pick on people after whatever happened to you to turn you away.
But kindly contain your misery to yourself.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
...no, I expect you to actually address the problem of suffering.
No, I wouldn't do that. I try not to be an asshole like that. If you don't want to debate anymore, just say so- I won't push it.
But for fuck's sake, stop calling me smug just for having a strongly stated opinion.
I said provide evidence or be an intellectual failure.
Jesus christ, more of the personal attacks... nothing "happened" to me, I just like debating. It's pretty damn telling that you keep doing this instead of making a logical case for yourself.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
<= Prev | | Next =>