Political Forums  

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Philosophy and Religion > Religion > Atheism


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old November 19th, 2012, 12:16 PM   #71
Senior Member
 
imaginethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Western Slope, Colorado
Posts: 60,495
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bookworm View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by imaginethat' timestamp='1353351414' post='439064

[quote name='Nienna' timestamp='1353317106' post='439035']

[quote name='imaginethat' timestamp='1353308648' post='439025']

I've made NO comment on my opinion of Stalin's morality. I've said, and I'm correct, that he had a set of morals.



As far as I'm concerned, Hitler gets way too much airtime as the greatest perpetrator of evil in the 20th century. Stalin and Mao way, way outrank him.


How do you know Stalin and Hitler has morals? If you are correct in this claim you should be able prove this with the same way that you found proof to convince you that they did.

What I am asking for is the same evidence which convinced you that this claim is true since I am not convinced that they had morals, and certainly don't believe everyone has morals.



Now we know the dictionary definition so we don't need that, what we need is evidence that Stalin and Hitler differenciated between good and evil, or evidence that they know they are right or that their standards is what they claim to have if they have any.



The bible does not teach that everyone has morals and it is the book I know with the most moral codes, so I am curious where you get this idea from.

If everyone has morals is it difficult to see how God can be good and claim some people will go to hell isn't it?


Hell? Are you referring to the unbiblical doctrine of eternal hell? I have Christian Universalist beliefs, so I totally reject the concept on an eternal hell, but one needn't hold universalist beliefs to reject the eternal hell doctrine. It isn't in the Bible. It takes just a little work to discover this for oneself. I'm blown away by how few are willing to do a little work to discover this for themselves.

[/quote]Oh, you and your universalism again. You'll notice that she didn't use the word "eternal," did she? She only used "hell," and there are a number of words in the Bible that are legitimately translated as hell.

Besides, I started to examine a list of 100 reasons you linked to in the past for why universalism should be believed, and you refused to discuss them with me. You simply believe it because you wish you believe it, but are unwilling to discuss the opposing points to your framework.

[/quote]



That's not how I remember it. I remember discussion, in several threads, lengthy discussion over "aion" and its derivatives and how the translation from Greek to Latin is where the error crept in. Lots of discussion on this very point here.



So, what's your legitimate point here? You want to discuss the 100 reasons? Here ya go.
imaginethat is online now  
Old November 19th, 2012, 12:30 PM   #72
Eyes Wide Open
 
waitingtables's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NJ
Posts: 44,991
Quote:
Originally Posted by imaginethat View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by locke23' timestamp='1353281593' post='438963

[quote name='Nienna' timestamp='1353278757' post='438949']

[quote name='imaginethat' timestamp='1353277895' post='438947']

As for Locke, I think you've got to join his secret society before he shares his moral beliefs.


Well then he should keep his arrogant claim of "a ton of morals" to his secret society or accept being called immoral, cowardly, arrogant, dishonest or whatever people put on for accusation against such an immoral thing to do.



It is not moral to make such an lofty claim and then refuse to back it with even one thread of evidence, especially when you have boasted of great achievement while claiming not to care for freedom and being willing to force which is about one of the most immoral claims you can make.
So if I were to tell I had a certain book, I'd have to rush to my house and bring it along with the info on my purchase of cette book to you? And the same or everything else? Otherwise I'm a coward, correct? It's not a smart move to call a man of the military a coward, too.

[/quote]



You're no man of the military, and we both know it.



You are dishonest about who you are, and we both know that, too.

[/quote]



So why do you keep it a secret? Let everyone else know too.
waitingtables is offline  
Old November 19th, 2012, 12:33 PM   #73
Eyes Wide Open
 
waitingtables's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NJ
Posts: 44,991
quote Nienna:

Quote:
That you neglected to argue my 7 points I suppose means you concede the argument on those points? You are a waste of time debating, you are too ignorant to know the meaning of what you say and too arrogant to believe in evidences, learn or concede being wrong. It is amazing that you think you know so much about religion considering your lack of experience, evidence, faith and ability to understand it.


In the U.S.A., we call this kind of statement, the pot calling the kettle black. Pot meet kettle.
waitingtables is offline  
Old November 19th, 2012, 12:41 PM   #74
Senior Member
 
imaginethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Western Slope, Colorado
Posts: 60,495
Quote:
Originally Posted by waitingtables View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by imaginethat' timestamp='1353309339' post='439029

[quote name='locke23' timestamp='1353281593' post='438963']

[quote name='Nienna' timestamp='1353278757' post='438949']

[quote name='imaginethat' timestamp='1353277895' post='438947']

As for Locke, I think you've got to join his secret society before he shares his moral beliefs.


Well then he should keep his arrogant claim of "a ton of morals" to his secret society or accept being called immoral, cowardly, arrogant, dishonest or whatever people put on for accusation against such an immoral thing to do.



It is not moral to make such an lofty claim and then refuse to back it with even one thread of evidence, especially when you have boasted of great achievement while claiming not to care for freedom and being willing to force which is about one of the most immoral claims you can make.
So if I were to tell I had a certain book, I'd have to rush to my house and bring it along with the info on my purchase of cette book to you? And the same or everything else? Otherwise I'm a coward, correct? It's not a smart move to call a man of the military a coward, too.

[/quote]



You're no man of the military, and we both know it.



You are dishonest about who you are, and we both know that, too.

[/quote]



So why do you keep it a secret? Let everyone else know too.

[/quote]



I think it'd be better to give Locke a chance to come clean.
imaginethat is online now  
Old November 19th, 2012, 12:43 PM   #75
Eyes Wide Open
 
waitingtables's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NJ
Posts: 44,991
Why?
waitingtables is offline  
Old November 19th, 2012, 12:46 PM   #76
Senior Member
 
imaginethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Western Slope, Colorado
Posts: 60,495
Quote:
Originally Posted by waitingtables View Post
Why?


Respect?
imaginethat is online now  
Old November 19th, 2012, 01:02 PM   #77
Eyes Wide Open
 
waitingtables's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NJ
Posts: 44,991
How is it respectful to allow someone to pretend they are someone else on a message board? Sounds like protecting a puppet. Does he deserve respect?
waitingtables is offline  
Old November 19th, 2012, 01:13 PM   #78
Senior Member
 
Bookworm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,817
Quote:
Originally Posted by waitingtables View Post
How is it respectful to allow someone to pretend they are someone else on a message board? Sounds like protecting a puppet. Does he deserve respect?
I don't know if there actually is pretending going on, but IT did challenge the supposed pretending by making the statement that Locke is "no man of the military." People pretend all the time, and IT is under no obligation to support his charge with facts, though it does seem odd to make the charge without also supplying the rationale. The charge itself sounds disrespectful, so I'm not sure how providing the support for the charge becomes any more disrespectful.
Bookworm is offline  
Old November 19th, 2012, 01:28 PM   #79
Senior Member
 
locke23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 4,885
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nienna View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by locke23' timestamp='1353283624' post='438977

How in the world did I boast? I said that I had morals, in response to you and others saying that people like me don't have morals.


No you are lying again. You said you had a TON of morals, there is quite a difference. Besides what kind of response is it to claim you have morals without showing any? That would only give greater validity to the claims made against you that you don't have morals since you have not shown and have not done so willingly.



On top of that you continue boasting and lying with comments like "I have more ethical beliefs than you could possibly imagine". You are boasting of having a TON of something good without showing a single evidence of it, and still you continue boastfully claiming you know what I can imagine and that your ethics are more so which elevates you above me.



That you continue to boast claiming to be serious when you tell people to "F off" as if that is a quality. And in all of this you are behaving immorally while claiming to have a TON of morals.



Are you aware that humility is a moral quality? Surely you know honesty is don't you? For honesty differenciates between right and wrong in opposition to dishonesty, like humility does in opposition to pride or boasting.
How the hell did your teachers and parents stand you? God, you're annoying, and stupid beyond comprehension. I responded to you, won e argument, proved that I didn't lie, and was overall polite even though you continuously offended me and were extremely rude. I'm done with this, go get an education and a life.
locke23 is offline  
Old November 19th, 2012, 01:30 PM   #80
Senior Member
 
locke23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 4,885
Quote:
Originally Posted by imaginethat View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by locke23' timestamp='1353281593' post='438963

[quote name='Nienna' timestamp='1353278757' post='438949']

[quote name='imaginethat' timestamp='1353277895' post='438947']

As for Locke, I think you've got to join his secret society before he shares his moral beliefs.


Well then he should keep his arrogant claim of "a ton of morals" to his secret society or accept being called immoral, cowardly, arrogant, dishonest or whatever people put on for accusation against such an immoral thing to do.



It is not moral to make such an lofty claim and then refuse to back it with even one thread of evidence, especially when you have boasted of great achievement while claiming not to care for freedom and being willing to force which is about one of the most immoral claims you can make.
So if I were to tell I had a certain book, I'd have to rush to my house and bring it along with the info on my purchase of cette book to you? And the same or everything else? Otherwise I'm a coward, correct? It's not a smart move to call a man of the military a coward, too.

[/quote]



You're no man of the military, and we both know it.



You are dishonest about who you are, and we both know that, too.

[/quote]Yes I am, and we both know it.
locke23 is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Philosophy and Religion > Religion > Atheism

Tags
atheists



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What Atheists Are dusty Atheism 341 November 26th, 2012 01:43 PM
Atheists Don't Have No Songs Bookworm Atheism 1 December 27th, 2011 05:51 PM
Atheists in Foxholes tadpole256 Religion 0 August 5th, 2010 01:50 PM
Atheists MUST Leave tadpole256 Religion 19 September 12th, 2009 12:49 PM
God Prefers Atheists tadpole256 Religion 2 November 11th, 2008 02:39 PM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.