Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Richard Dawkins stripped of 1996 Humanist of the Year Award...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    What would you call a couple sleeping with their child?
    If they are all sleeping where is the problem?

    I find the euphemism of sleeping with someone to mean having sex, completely nonsensical. If both [or all] individuals are sound asleep where is the harm?
    "It ain't necessarily so
    The things that you're liable
    To read in the Bible
    It ain't necessarily so
    ."

    Sportin' Life
    Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

    Comment


    • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
      Does he compare or does he contrast?
      I Corinthians 6.16 Do you not know that whoever is united to a prostitute becomes one body with her? For it is said, “The two shall be one flesh.
      Genesis 2.24 Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and clings to his wife, and they become one flesh.
      "It ain't necessarily so
      The things that you're liable
      To read in the Bible
      It ain't necessarily so
      ."

      Sportin' Life
      Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

      Comment


      • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
        Actually, it was humanity as a whole that "embarked on centuries of systematic slavery for centuries AND maintained racial discrimination long after"
        Indeed. But the “humanity” that embarked on centuries of systematic slavery for centuries AND maintained racial discrimination long after" in the West was Christian.

        What is also indisputable is that in the Christian-dominated areas is where, for the first time in human history that the practice of slavery was abolished
        That is after several centuries of slavery in Christian dominated areas. What took them so long?

        it was for the most part Christians who were leading the way in changing society's views towards these sort of things.
        Of course, it was Christians. Who else would it be given that virtually the entire population was Christian?

        So it wasn't, as you imagine, society changing and Christianity tagging along, but rather it was Christians gradually changing society's morals and values.
        It was society as a whole, which was dominated by Christianity, evolving and changing as social values evolved and changed - social values constantly change. In much the same way female emancipation successfully emerged as did civil rights for ALL citizens. Although the latter is still resisted in some quarters just as the abolitionists were resisted by entire segments of the population in the USA.
        “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by seer View Post

          60 million dead in the US alone since Roe isn't a truck load - correct - it is way, way more. In actual numbers of dead humans the Holocaust pales in comparison.
          Still with the hysterical hyperbole. You mean 50 million abortions whereas you dishonestly referred to killing offspring by the truck load”. "Offspring” refers to one’s child or children NOT insensate fetuses in their first trimester - which is when over 90% of abortions occur.
          “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Tassman View Post

            Still with the hysterical hyperbole. You mean 50 million abortions whereas you dishonestly referred to killing offspring by the truck load”. "Offspring” refers to one’s child or children NOT insensate fetuses in their first trimester - which is when over 90% of abortions occur.
            Most Christians (including Mormons), believe that life begins at conception. There is no distinction between a zygote and an adult human.

            The problem though, is there are billions upon billions of medically induced as well as natural abortions of "lives" or "spirits". Throughout history, how many lives were extinguished in utero, ranging from zygote to stillborn full term? I would guess Billions upon billions.

            The Bible makes no mention of this. I know, I know, argument from silence. But some silences are so loud, you just can't ignore them. Especially when 99.9 per cent of Heaven's population are going to those who were aborted. The Bible specifically states only a few will enter. Unless you're wanting to invoke Calvinism here. I suppose that could be argued...some of these aborted zygotes and fetus' didn't make it to Heaven because they wouldn't have repented and accepted Christ.

            There isn't even symbolic imagery in the Bible suggestive of this. It's a quite significant problem in my opinion.

            Last edited by Machinist; 05-10-2021, 05:53 AM.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Tassman View Post

              Still with the hysterical hyperbole. You mean 50 million abortions whereas you dishonestly referred to killing offspring by the truck load”. "Offspring” refers to one’s child or children NOT insensate fetuses in their first trimester - which is when over 90% of abortions occur.
              No it doesn't: Offspring : the product of the reproductive processes of an animal or plant . So is the fetuses the product of the reproductive processes?
              Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

                Despite the conclusion reached by many that Paul must have had a ‘healthy’ view of heterosexual sex and sexuality, the notion that Paul was opposed to passionate sex in marriage comes as something of a surprise for most modern and Protestant interpreters.

                However, it has been suggested by some scholars that rather than examining Paul’s writing through the lens of modern sexual attitudes and common sense we might do better to look structures and ideas within the ancient world in which the absence of sex and sexuality was not only possible but preferable. Those ideas and structures were to be found in the among some ancient medical writers as well as the philosophical ideas of the Stoics. Ancient medical writers saw the dangers of sexual desire but advocated control not elimination. The Stoic philosophers on the other hand viewed sexual desire as irrational and unnatural and held the view that a strong minded person could, and should, eliminate this desire along with all the other passions. This did not mean an end to sex and marriage, more importantly it was sex without desire. The person for whom the elimination of all desires and for whom happiness was not dependent upon those things that others wished for, would find complete freedom.

                Paul seems to have fallen between these two "stools" of thought regarding passion and sex. He clearly felt that, like the Stoics, a person should eliminate all desire even within marriage but he also leaned towards the ideas held by the ancient medical writers that for most people self sufficiency was unattainable, and therefore marriage was a means of guarding against those desires. In this he echoes the voices of numerous ancient moralists who advocated sex without passion as an ideal in marriage. An aphorism of Ps.-Phocylides sheds light on the influence of this anti-erotic tradition on Paul: “Do not deliver yourself wholly unto unbridled sensuality towards your wife, for ‘eros’ is not a god, but a passion destructive of all.” Paul expressed the unbridled character of love and the dishonorable loss of self-control that invariably followed with the key philosophical term: passion (πάθος]

                [see Frederickson D,Passionless Sex in I Thessalonians 4:4-5; Martin D, Sex and the Single Saviour: Gender and Sexuality in Biblical Interpretation]

                Everything here is built on assumption. NOWHERE does Paul condemn desire or passion within the context of Marriage. Even your reference to I Thessalonians 4:4-5 leaves out the fact that Paul is speaking of passion as it relates to sexual immorality - that IS the context.
                Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                Comment


                • Originally posted by seer View Post

                  Everything here is built on assumption. NOWHERE does Paul condemn desire or passion within the context of Marriage. Even your reference to I Thessalonians 4:4-5 leaves out the fact that Paul is speaking of passion as it relates to sexual immorality - that IS the context.
                  No it is based on know information of the ancient world and Paul's authentic letters which express his views about passion [and sex].

                  You have to remember that Paul thought the Parousia was imminent.
                  "It ain't necessarily so
                  The things that you're liable
                  To read in the Bible
                  It ain't necessarily so
                  ."

                  Sportin' Life
                  Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

                    No it is based on know information of the ancient world and Paul's authentic letters which express his views about passion [and sex].
                    No it doesn't. How much Paul was influenced by the Stoics concerning desire in marriage is not known. What we do know, by his own words, is that passion was condemned if it lead to sexual immorality.

                    You have to remember that Paul thought the Parousia was imminent.
                    That may be one of the reasons why he thought it was better not to marry - it has nothing to do with whether sexual desire in marriage is acceptable or not.
                    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Tassman View Post

                      Indeed. But the “humanity” that embarked on centuries of systematic slavery for centuries AND maintained racial discrimination long after" in the West was Christian.



                      That is after several centuries of slavery in Christian dominated areas. What took them so long?



                      Of course, it was Christians. Who else would it be given that virtually the entire population was Christian?



                      It was society as a whole, which was dominated by Christianity, evolving and changing as social values evolved and changed - social values constantly change. In much the same way female emancipation successfully emerged as did civil rights for ALL citizens. Although the latter is still resisted in some quarters just as the abolitionists were resisted by entire segments of the population in the USA.
                      Funny how a leftwing atheist can grumble about "what took you so long" wrt abolishing slavery when folks like him get in control they reinstitute slave labor. Can you say "re-education camp"? No? How about "gulag"? In 2018, the Global Slavery Index estimated that there are approximately 3.8 million people enslaved in China, and that number has been rising. What is wrong with you leftwing atheists? What is it about enslaving people that y'all find so compelling?

                      I find today's struggle against the mass murders regularly conducted today against the unborn as instructive. While most folks who call themselves Christian and even a number of denominations accept this abominable practice, those who oppose it are overwhelmingly Christian. Eventually, people will start waking up, and slowly but surely this atrocity to will start being erased from the earth.

                      I'm always still in trouble again

                      "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                      "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by seer View Post

                        No it doesn't. How much Paul was influenced by the Stoics concerning desire in marriage is not known.
                        His views echo the Stoics and he was from the Hellenised world.

                        Originally posted by seer View Post
                        What we do know, by his own words, is that passion was condemned if it lead to sexual immorality.
                        He condemned passion. Period.

                        Originally posted by seer View Post

                        That may be one of the reasons why he thought it was better not to marry - it has nothing to do with whether sexual desire in marriage is acceptable or not.
                        Precisely. For Paul the very human requirements of love, family, partner, were immaterial when set beside this great and imminent event. Far better [as far as Paul was concerned] to prepare oneself for this and put aside those minor and unimportant considerations. However, if some felt they really could not do well, then he permitted marriage and he never uses the word passion when writing about marriage.

                        Of course when the Parousia did not occur and continued not to occur some adaptations had to be made. However the notion of perpetual virginity as being the ideal state runs through Christian texts and later the writings of various ECFs. Read some of the Apocrypha or the writings of Jerome or Augustine.



                        "It ain't necessarily so
                        The things that you're liable
                        To read in the Bible
                        It ain't necessarily so
                        ."

                        Sportin' Life
                        Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                          His views echo the Stoics and he was from the Hellenised world.
                          Not all his views echo the Stoics, and Paul never actually references Stoicism. And as far as I know no Stoic reference Paul. You are again making assumptions without evidence. Never mind the fact that Paul often uses desire in a good sense.

                          https://www.biblegateway.com/quickse...=all&bookset=9

                          He condemned passion. Period.
                          That is false - he only condemns it as it leads to sexual immorality or sin. He never says a thing about desire in marriage. And you have not shown otherwise!

                          Precisely. For Paul the very human requirements of love, family, partner, were immaterial when set beside this great and imminent event. Far better [as far as Paul was concerned] to prepare oneself for this and put aside those minor and unimportant considerations. However, if some felt they really could not do well, then he permitted marriage and he never uses the word passion when writing about marriage.
                          And he never condemns passion in marriage. Only as it leads to sin.

                          Of course when the Parousia did not occur and continued not to occur some adaptations had to be made. However the notion of perpetual virginity as being the ideal state runs through Christian texts and later the writings of various ECFs. Read some of the Apocrypha or the writings of Jerome or Augustine.
                          It is true that an unmarried person can devote more time and energy to God than a married person. But that has nothing to do with the question at hand.
                          Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Machinist View Post
                            If a fetus is a "life", then it must have a spirit or soul.

                            Which, in Christian teachings, to be absent of the body is to be present with the Lord.

                            Where are these billions of lives (spirits) going after they're aborted?

                            The Bible only speaks of "few entering".
                            Obviously they will go to heaven since they have not sinned.

                            When Jesus said only a few will enter, he was talking about those living on earth (already born) and their life choices. It is easy to reject salvation because men love sin.

                            Matthew 7:13 “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it."

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Sparko View Post

                              Obviously they will go to heaven since they have not sinned.

                              When Jesus said only a few will enter, he was talking about those living on earth (already born) and their life choices. It is easy to reject salvation because men love sin.

                              Matthew 7:13 “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it."
                              Yeah that's one way to reconcile it. It's like one of those hidden details that you never think of, like the number of clean animals on the Ark was actually 7 and not 2. Yet all depictions in art have animals going in 2 by 2, not seven by seven.

                              It's quite staggering to think of all the zygotes that have naturally aborted.

                              "Around half of all fertilized eggs die and are lost (aborted) spontaneously, usually before the woman knows she is pregnant. Among women who know they are pregnant, about 10% to 25% will have a miscarriage".

                              You just never see this depicted in art, and never once is this mentioned in the Bible. We're talking Billions and Billions and Billions, perhaps Trillions of people will be in Heaven and none of them actually were even born.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Machinist View Post

                                Yeah that's one way to reconcile it. It's like one of those hidden details that you never think of, like the number of clean animals on the Ark was actually 7 and not 2. Yet all depictions in art have animals going in 2 by 2, not seven by seven.

                                It's quite staggering to think of all the zygotes that have naturally aborted.

                                "Around half of all fertilized eggs die and are lost (aborted) spontaneously, usually before the woman knows she is pregnant. Among women who know they are pregnant, about 10% to 25% will have a miscarriage".

                                You just never see this depicted in art, and never once is this mentioned in the Bible. We're talking Billions and Billions and Billions, perhaps Trillions of people will be in Heaven and none of them actually were even born.
                                Rev 7 - 9 After this I looked, and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and before the Lamb. They were wearing white robes and were holding palm branches in their hands. 10 And they cried out in a loud voice:

                                “Salvation belongs to our God,
                                who sits on the throne,
                                and to the Lamb.”


                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by seer, 07-20-2021, 12:05 PM
                                94 responses
                                372 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Stoic
                                by Stoic
                                 
                                Started by rogue06, 07-16-2021, 07:39 AM
                                52 responses
                                253 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Cow Poke  
                                Started by Mountain Man, 07-05-2021, 04:27 PM
                                74 responses
                                445 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by tabibito, 06-30-2021, 02:53 AM
                                50 responses
                                325 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by seer, 05-12-2021, 05:35 AM
                                662 responses
                                4,230 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Tassman
                                by Tassman
                                 
                                Working...
                                X