Fundamentalism and Intellectualism

[Split Rock]

Like I'm fond of saying, if you guys ran the world like you interpret the Scriptures, we would be either burning at the stake, hanging from a rope, serving as slaves, or hiding in fear of our lives.

Sounds like a good part of the Middle Ages in Europe... when the Church was at the apex of its political power.... doesn't it?

 

[Split Rock]

--- Bingo!

Were those women in 1692 murdered or executed?

In your opinion.

Personally I would consider they were murdered. However, at the time their deaths were executions justified by scripture. A witches' body needed to be purified by fire or else their soul would be lost forever. If the witch-hunter received good gold in return for his services, so much the better.

 

[Bombila]

I say put them in a foxhole --- the agnostic would probably convert first, the atheist shortly thereafter.

I've participated for the past ten months in a long conversation with an atheist dying by inches of cancer, and well aware that he was going to die. He died last week, a good man, loved and liked, and at no point did he convert or consider converting, nor did he ask for prayers, and accepted people saying they would pray for him politely, as one does if offered any kind of good wishes.

If that isn't an example of your proverbial 'atheist in foxhole', I don't know what is.

 

[atomweaver]

--- Bingo!

Were those women in 1692 murdered or executed?

In your opinion.

... I smell a "no True Scotsman" fallacy at the end of this particular discussion...

 

[MoonLancer]

Fair enough --- so if you were in charge of running the world, and you ran it according to the Bible --- you would demand that witches be burned?

Simply put, I would not run a world according to the bible. EVER. I love this world too much.

 

[MoonLancer]

--- Bingo!

Were those women in 1692 murdered or executed?

In your opinion.

The 10 commandments say do not murder. yet the ot is full of murder. Try as you might, Killing little children to save them from sin is not moral. It says do not murder, yet it also says witches must die. And please arguing that die and murder are not the same things in these contexts is really un becoming of honestly.

 

[Catherineanne]

Hmmm... Would you say that if I believe that fairies (The fey people) do not exist, that such a position constitutes a Faith with a doctrine all its own?

This is not about what I would or would not say. The dictionaries are clear enough.

However, if there were such a thing as afeyism, then yes. That would be a position that asserts that fairies do not exist; and doctrine could be formulated from such a belief.

Meanwhile atheism is well defined; you can check for yourself.

 

[Catherineanne]

I've participated for the past ten months in a long conversation with an atheist dying by inches of cancer, and well aware that he was going to die. He died last week, a good man, loved and liked, and at no point did he convert or consider converting, nor did he ask for prayers, and accepted people saying they would pray for him politely, as one does if offered any kind of good wishes.

If that isn't an example of your proverbial 'atheist in foxhole', I don't know what is.

You have my condolences, Bombila. I am very sorry you have lost your friend.

 

[Catherineanne]

Simply put, I would not run a world according to the bible. EVER. I love this world too much.

I agree. The Bible may be many things, but as a 'how to govern' textbook it is a complete non starter.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Fair enough --- same question to you, then:

If you ran the world according to the Bible, would you demand the execution of witches?

Yes I would -- as would anyone else who insists on running the world "according to the Bible."

 

[jpcedotal]

I've participated for the past ten months in a long conversation with an atheist dying by inches of cancer, and well aware that he was going to die. He died last week, a good man, loved and liked, and at no point did he convert or consider converting, nor did he ask for prayers, and accepted people saying they would pray for him politely, as one does if offered any kind of good wishes.

If that isn't an example of your proverbial 'atheist in foxhole', I don't know what is.

I wonder what your friend would add to this thread from the afterlife?

 

[Nathan Poe]

--- Bingo!

Were those women* in 1692 murdered or executed?

In your opinion.

"Opinion" is irrelevent -- according to the law and the Bible, they were executed.

My opinion, insofar as it is relevent, is that the law was idiotically conceived and unfairly enforced -- but in a world run according to the Bible, what else can you expect?

*BTW, AV -- men were executed too.

 

[Hespera]

I wonder what your friend would add to this thread from the afterlife?

That is an "if" not a "what".

 

[AV1611VET]

For my opinion anyone killed in the name of god, the bible, religion in general was murdered. The bible is full of it. You tell me if they were all murdered or executed.

Your answer doesn't fit the question, Hespera.

In your opinion, were the women in 1692 executed or murdered?

 

[MoonLancer]

I wonder what your friend would add to this thread from the afterlife?

the fact he has not, tells more then your willing to wonder.

ps Bombila, apologies if using your friend is this way offends you. and also sorry for your loss

 

[Skaloop]

This is not about what I would or would not say. The dictionaries are clear enough.

However, if there were such a thing as afeyism, then yes. That would be a position that asserts that fairies do not exist; and doctrine could be formulated from such a belief.

Meanwhile atheism is well defined; you can check for yourself.

Your reliance on dictionary definitions suggests that you see them as prescriptive, telling us how words are to be used. But they are also descriptive, telling us how words are actually used. And they are often well behind on that sort of thing.

Take the word "cool." Way back when, the dictionary definition would have been something like "at a low relative temperature." Later on, the populace began to use it to describe someone or something that was fashionable/trendy/popular. Like, a cool dude. But you wouldn't find that definition in any dictionary. So if someone called their friend a cool guy, would you point to the dictionary and say "clearly he means his friend is at a below-normal temperature, even if he explicitly tells me otherwise, because that's the dictionary definition."

I am an atheist. I do not "believe there is no god" but I do "not believe there is a god." I am also agnostic, in that I admit I cannot know with 100% certainty that some sort of god doesn't exist. Call it 99% sure. For the specific God of the bible, 99.9%. But still, technically, an agnostic, since I don't claim to know for sure. I am also an atheist, since I don't believe that there is one at this time.

Most atheists will admit they are agnostic as well. Theists are also agnostic, since they cannot be 100% certain, but most seem to be loathe to admit that.

 

[AV1611VET]

Personally I would consider they were murdered.

Then, in your opinion, it was done in spite of the Bible --- wasn't it?

However, at the time their deaths were executions justified by scripture.

Not if it was murder --- the Bible does not justify murder.

A witches' body needed to be purified by fire or else their soul would be lost forever.

That doesn't explain the 19 women who were hanged.

 

[AV1611VET]

If that isn't an example of your proverbial 'atheist in foxhole', I don't know what is.

A man 'dying by inches of cancer', hoping that the next treatment will cure him, and a man in a foxhole, wondering what's keeping him alive, are two different things.

 

[AV1611VET]

... I smell a "no True Scotsman" fallacy at the end of this particular discussion...

A lot of stuff runs on that "fallacy" --- legal tender, science, generic vs brand products.

 

[AV1611VET]

The 10 commandments say do not murder. yet the ot is full of murder. Try as you might, Killing little children to save them from sin is not moral. It says do not murder, yet it also says witches must die. And please arguing that die and murder are not the same things in these contexts is really un becoming of honestly.

In your opinion, were those women who died in 1692 executed or murdered?

If you say they were murdered, do you think then that it was done in spite of the Bible, or in respect to the Bible?

Again, in your opinion.