Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 7, 2013 12:21:20 GMT 10
"Even so, its unfair to judge an entire religion or philosophy based on it's abuse."On the other hand, if the "intermediaries" of your God commit such acts, doesn't that tend to add to the weight of evidence that your religion is a load of codswallop? Exactly Earl. And I say the whole thing is false in any case and nothing more than a means of control and abuse. I say that Hillsong and all the Christian Churches are false and mass manipulators of the weak minded, and of course in the old days they used to burn heretics for saying their religion is false and that was a weakness not a strength. I say Christianity is false and lies and a gross psychological abuse of its members and nothing more. So the sexual abuse of children does reflect on the entire organisation - because the entire organisation is corrupt from start to finish. The sexual abuse of children is only one indication of the corruption and the power they have over the weak minded sheep who believe their lies.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 7, 2013 12:25:22 GMT 10
Matthew 18:6 I don't think that's codswallop But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neckThey have been raping children for hundereds and thousands of years - and nobody cares - only now do we have a Royal Commission - when its been going on the whole history of this country. In all Churches.
|
|
|
Post by pim on May 7, 2013 17:03:47 GMT 10
Agree with the above, but that doesn't change the fact that Matthew 18:6 isn't codswallop
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 7, 2013 21:16:45 GMT 10
Matthew 18:6
King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.) But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.
codswallop Web definitions folderol: nonsensical talk or writing.
Everything in the Bible is codswallop.
Priests have been abusing children for 2,000 years - nothing was ever done.
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on May 9, 2013 10:50:29 GMT 10
"Even so, its unfair to judge an entire religion or philosophy based on it's abuse."On the other hand, if the "intermediaries" of your God commit such acts, doesn't that tend to add to the weight of evidence that your religion is a load of codswallop? By what standard would a moral relativist use to define those acts as wrong, exactly?
|
|
|
Post by slartibartfast on May 10, 2013 0:20:51 GMT 10
Game, set, match.
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on May 10, 2013 8:59:55 GMT 10
The fat lady appears to have Laryngitis. abuseSynonyms: corruption, crime, debasement, delinquency, desecration, exploitation, fault, injustice, misapplication, misconduct, misdeed, mishandling, mismanage, misuse, offense, perversion, prostitution, sin, wrong, wrongdoing a)I expect that you'd use the term 'abuse' with a negative sentiment. Mainly that you believe people ought not abuse others.. --Is that not a moral judgement? IOW--A behavior that you believe no one ought to engage in? Yes or no? (And on a side note, you really ought to stop claiming your conclusions are based in logic. I've studied logic enough to know that Logic claims are descriptive, not prescriptive. They describe the way things are, not the way things 'ought' to be. Stop misusing it as your personal escape hatch. --That parachute is now a knapsack.) b)I also think you expect everyone to agree that it is negative, that's absolutism. Thus making your claim a moral absolute.You keep trying to move the goalpost, but you are blatantly making moral claims, and dishonestly trying to label them as something else, so you don't have to own your errors. But there is really no point in telling a moral relativist that they shouldn't be dishonest, is there? ;D
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on May 10, 2013 9:07:48 GMT 10
It's easy to make moral relativists contradict themselves. --You just have to make them angry, and then ask them what they are getting so angry about. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on May 10, 2013 9:38:43 GMT 10
I didn't say you were angry. I'm merely pointing out that anger is indicative of injustice. And feelings of injustice are indicative of a moral standard.
|
|
|
Post by jody on May 10, 2013 10:55:29 GMT 10
Yes buzz and that means 94% don't!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2013 11:01:29 GMT 10
Yes buzz and that means 94% don't!! pardon?
|
|