Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Have you done any looking into as to what that "entire race of people" consisted of?
Nope. Try again. And thanks! Thanks for taking the time to not only counter my points [which, having been made over more than just one post you seem to have missed] with your usual adroitness, but by having done so, you show that you're willing to then not only double down in dogmatic fashion such as you atheists all too often do but to even triple down, if needed.
Yeah, I can see why you'd need to do so, as flimsy as your position is.
Do you study Ethics in any capacity, Bradskii? Or do you just want to give the impression to passerbys that your more or less 'Intuitionist' perspective on Ethics is somehow a simple, straight forward, self-evident moral tell-all to any and everyone who takes umbrage with your presumptions and your resulting moral (and psychological?) evaluations.
When you believe that the Biblical God actually exists and the ramifications of the Great Flood narrative become a live option for you and something over which to be concerned, you let me know and we'll have a chat about it.That some people accept that God can justifiably drown every person on the planet certainly raises questions about what else they would consider to be justified. Is there anything that actually couldn't be acceptable?
It might be justifiable in human terms, but are we talking on the level of Internalism or Externalism when we inquire into this possibility?You write a lot but don't say much. And getting a direct answer from you makes me think I should have taken up dentistry. But let's give it a go: On the assumption that it happened, do you personally think it could be justified?
When you believe that the Biblical God actually exists and the ramifications of the Great Flood narrative become a live option for you and something over which to be concerned, you let me know and we'll have a chat about it.
It's not the God who's the immediate problem; it's His fan club.
With Him as a role model, the OP makes a lot more sense -- who knows what they'd happily do in His name?
Suit yourself.As I said, if you do justify that then you could justify anything. And that's probably the most chilling statement one could make.
Can't say as I do.And may I add it is not a very fine man that doesn't recognize your avatar.
Should I switch my avatar to Norma McCorvey, so you guys will appreciate it more?With Him as a role model, the OP makes a lot more sense -- who knows what they'd happily do in His name?
I would disagree on that. For one thing, he was real. It is a bit of a shame that anyone that tries to debate science does not recognize the man immediately.Can't say as I do.
He must not be as famous as mine.
Academia used to think it was Ham that was cursed, until they realized that it was Canaan, not Ham, that was cursed.The old bogeyman of the so-called "Curse of Ham" is a typical case in point of a biblical trope that has been misread and misapplied, only to contribute to racist attitudes and, as in centuries gone past, even to the perpetuation of social constructs like Antebellum slavery.
Interesting word Omnicide, I thought it might have referred to the cancellation of Omni Magazine the well known science/science fiction publication of the late 20th century renowned for its bizarre covers.
Richard Feynman was interviewed by Omni magazine and was promptly shamed by his mum.
I have no idea who that guy is. Not a clue.I would disagree on that. For one thing, he was real. It is a bit of a shame that anyone that tries to debate science does not recognize the man immediately.
Just say NO.You were about to tell us that -- and why it justified omnicide.
Academia used to think it was Ham that was cursed, until they realized that it was Canaan, not Ham, that was cursed.
Canaan, as you know, settled in what is now the Promised Land.
So now academia has to try and make us look racist some other way.
Thus this thread.
Yes.On the assumption that it happened, do you personally think it could be justified?
Love their enemies?With Him as a role model, the OP makes a lot more sense -- who knows what they'd happily do in His name?
Ya -- the KKK comes to mind.There are some more cultic pseudo-Christian racist groups still today who refer to these passages to buttress their racist claims.
On paper, yes.You do realize that the flood myth was refuted over 200 years ago, don't you?
It's perfectly consistent given the articles published in Omni stuck to the bare facts.Well, y'know, I suppose it should be considered a huge honor to appear in a Bob Guccione publication.
Right?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?