Ethics & Morality?? America Is An Overflowing Sewer Of Sin And Filth (3)

[Wyzaard]

Open your mind and if you criticize our Faith you must do so from having an amount of grounding in what we are even saying.

Really... why must we have this grounding? Why is it meaningful for you to dejure exclude our criticisms merely because they are critical, presuming your truths before any support for them?

Sorry, I'm not buying it.

 

[Wyzaard]

How can I be lying to myself?

Are you claiming omniscience?

 

[Skaloop]

That's fine with me. You may just be one of the many who will not come. You can never say that you didn't know or that no one told you about Jesus. My conscience is clear.

True, I can't say I wasn't told. But I can say I wasn't told in a convincing or welcoming manner. Your testimonies and conduct in this thread alone are clear examples of that. Instead of openly and honestly answering our questions, you equate us with swine not worthy of your "pearls." That's not a good way to win someone over.

Also, a word of advice: You should be more discerning when using the report button. You've reported me several times. No disciplinary action has been taken by the mods for any of them, and I can only assume it is because my words were not deemed violations. Continue to cry wolf and a legitimate reportable offense may get lost in the shuffle.

 

[Wyzaard]

No one can stand that Judgment, because God says that when we break just one law, we are gulity of breaking all of them.

Well that's just silly... when does human law ever run this way?

 

[Floatingaxe]

True, I can't say I wasn't told. But I can say I wasn't told in a convincing or welcoming manner. Your testimonies and conduct in this thread alone are clear examples of that. Instead of openly and honestly answering our questions, you equate us with swine not worthy of your "pearls." That's not a good way to win someone over.

Mounting scorn from your side merited that designation. It is a biblical admonition. Nothing wrong with it.

Watch your tone, then. You tend to vileness now and then.

 

[Floatingaxe]

Still isn't justice -- break one law, break them all.

Yes, it is just. It shows that our hearts are sinful and that we need a Saviour. We cannot enter the presence of God until we have His righteousness.

 

[Floatingaxe]

Well that's just silly... when does human law ever run this way?

Human law is not God's Law. He isn't silly.

1 Corinthians 1:18
The message of the cross is foolish to those who are headed for destruction! But we who are being saved know it is the very power of God.


1 Corinthians 1:25
This foolish plan of God is wiser than the wisest of human plans, and God’s weakness is stronger than the greatest of human strength.

1 Corinthians 2:14
But people who aren’t spiritual can’t receive these truths from God’s Spirit. It all sounds foolish to them and they can’t understand it, for only those who are spiritual can understand what the Spirit means

1 Corinthians 3:19
For the wisdom of this world is foolishness to God. As the Scriptures say,
“He traps the wise
in the snare of their own cleverness.”

 

[Skaloop]

Yes, it is just. It shows that our hearts are sinful and that we need a Saviour. We cannot enter the presence of God until we have His righteousness.

Would life in prison be a just punishment for exceeding the speed limit? Break one law (speeding), break them all (murder). That's your argument.

Now, one question I do have (an no vileness behind this one, I promise) is why exactly we need a saviour. So our hearts are sinful; why does that require a physical saviour? And how exactly does that saviour make up for our sinful nature?

 

[Floatingaxe]

Don't forget that revelation says the number of saved will only be 14400 or some such number

If you knew the scriptures, you would know that the number is 144,000 and they are Jews who witness about Jesus Christ during the Tribulation. It is the Jehovah's Witness who believes that only 144,000 people will ever get into heaven.

 

[Verv]

Yes, that´s a very common method of protecting one´s claims against criticism (and a method that´s often used by charlatans, at that)..
"The stupid ones will disagree with me (so if someone disagrees with me I´ll simply conclude they are stupid and take the disagreement as a confirmation of my claims.)".
Now, unless you allow the reverse conclusion ("Whenever someone laughs out loud they are stupid and have just been exposed to the Tao.") you haven´t made one step forward in your attempt to demonstrate that this is what happened here.
After all, there are a lot of cases where laughter is the response of a wise, knowledgeable, intelligent or well informed man towards something very stupid that he.has just been exposed to.

You got it wrong. It is simply similar words to the Christian passage and attests to the notion that you do not understand it and you do not even try to understand it. In fact, you purposefully misinterpret Biblical scripture and just write it off as worthless while not looking at the meaning of it.

You look past everything and do not try to understand it. What do you call that?

So do I.



That one obviously doesn't apply to me.



Neither do I. Not generally.



Neither do I.



Neither do I.



Neither do I.



Neither do I, and so do I.

So how exactly am I a moral anarchist? How exactly am I embracing destruction? What sins am I justifying? How am I denying society's rules when I follow the law of the land? I treat others well, I commit no crimes, and I love my family, friends, and country. I live a good life. How can you call that destructive?

I do not know you at all. I cannot comment. And by and large, it is irrelevant to me.

Intent is also a significant part of what I believe in. I do not even know your intent.

What is your moral intent?

 

[KalithAlur]

"morality obligates me to be an anarchist"

- Jebidiah Wilson

empiricism concerns attempting to come closer to the truth by experimentation.

philosophy concerns attempting to come closer to the truth by logic.

religion concerns attempting to come closer to the truth by obeying and chasing religion.

I think we should utilize all three of the above. Use logic and experimentation to test religious belief, hmm,....,.... ?

If you're as brilliant as me, you'll quickly realize that eternal torture is a just punishment for any crime if you deny my offer, which is free by the way what i'm offering you doesn't cost a cent.

Anybody who believes you suffer eternal torture if you don't accept the salvation of Jesus Christ is worshiping the Antichrist.

 

[quatona]

You got it wrong. It is simply similar words to the Christian passage and attests to the notion that you do not understand it and you do not even try to understand it. In fact, you purposefully misinterpret Biblical scripture and just write it off as worthless while not looking at the meaning of it.

Yes, I did understand that it was meant to say that. I just told you that this is an age old method to affirm unsubstantiated claims.

You look past everything and do not try to understand it. What do you call that?

I call that claim:
1. An ad hominem fallacy
2. A poisoning the well fallacy
3. Circular reasoning
4. A disingenious method of defending extraordinary claims
5. A shameless attempt at mind reading

 

[Floatingaxe]

Anybody who believes you suffer eternal torture if you don't accept the salvation of Jesus Christ is worshiping the Antichrist.

That is anti-Christian hogwash.

 

[quatona]

That is anti-Christian hogwash.

...in the eyes of those who aren´t indwelled by the HS.

 

[Skaloop]

Intent is also a significant part of what I believe in. I do not even know your intent.

What is your moral intent?

Basically, to live a happy and fulfilling life in the company of those I love (and who love me) without harming others.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

If you knew the scriptures, you would know that the number is 144,000 and they are Jews who witness about Jesus Christ during the Tribulation. It is the Jehovah's Witness who believes that only 144,000 people will ever get into heaven.

hey, if the Bible is allowed to drop a zero here and there and still be considered inerrant, I don't think I'm doing to bad

 

[Verv]

Basically, to live a happy and fulfilling life in the company of those I love (and who love me) without harming others.

Well, sorry. I still do not know what you are all about. It sounds really lovely and delightfully vague, as one sided as the plot of The Little Engine That Could.

I could ask a thousand questions to get the ball rolling but I will just wait for another time.

Yes, I did understand that it was meant to say that. I just told you that this is an age old method to affirm unsubstantiated claims.

I call that claim:
1. An ad hominem fallacy
2. A poisoning the well fallacy
3. Circular reasoning
4. A disingenious method of defending extraordinary claims
5. A shameless attempt at mind reading

All right, I call that list grasping at straws.

It is meant to say that you distort what is going on and almost purposefully do not even try to see what we are saying. But that is your decision so go for it.

"morality obligates me to be an anarchist"

- Jebidiah Wilson

empiricism concerns attempting to come closer to the truth by experimentation.

philosophy concerns attempting to come closer to the truth by logic.

religion concerns attempting to come closer to the truth by obeying and chasing religion.

I think we should utilize all three of the above. Use logic and experimentation to test religious belief, hmm,....,.... ?

If you're as brilliant as me, you'll quickly realize that eternal torture is a just punishment for any crime if you deny my offer, which is free by the way what i'm offering you doesn't cost a cent.

Anybody who believes you suffer eternal torture if you don't accept the salvation of Jesus Christ is worshiping the Antichrist.

First, you are unaware of St. Augustine's overall view on the matter which is very relevant to what you are discussing. You are pretending that the religious belief in 'chasing a religion' (seemingly implying we never even have it) and obeying it (as if we have no choice to obey or disobey, you have obviously chosen not to obey but that is different).

And yes, all day long you can try to look for things with science and logic about religion. It has served us well.

Christianity is a profound philosophy . St. Augustine was motivated to philosophy to understand God, to understand nature; philosophy is the love of wisdom in Greek, and it is what St. Augustine pursued.

The Bible even refers to the Holy Words of God in Greek passages as Logos, which can also mean reason and rationale; everything is very meaningful about it.

You are undercutting it and not treating it like how it should be treated.

 

[quatona]

It is meant to say that you distort what is going on and almost purposefully do not even try to see what we are saying. But that is your decision so go for it.

I could say the same thing about you. Such ad hominems don´t help the discussion.

 

[Ohioprof]

You aren't getting it. I do have that absolute proof. It's the Bible, which is His Word.

I have absolute proof that God is I AM because He gave us His Word. There is no doubt about that.

The Bible is not absolute proof of anything. You have chosen to believe that it is. The authority of the Bible is entirely dependent on people's belief that the Bible is true and is the word of God. You are free to believe that, of course, just as I am free to believe that the moon is made of green cheese. But it's only a belief, a belief that not everyone shares.

 

[Skaloop]

Well, sorry. I still do not know what you are all about. It sounds really lovely and delightfully vague, as one sided as the plot of The Little Engine That Could.

I could ask a thousand questions to get the ball rolling but I will just wait for another time.

Well, yeah it's vague. The question was vague.

Go ahead and ask some more specific questions about my "moral intent." I'm definitely game for it, if only to see what exactly you're driving at.