|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
 Posted - 09/06/2012 : 01:02:50 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Doctor X
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
I am utterly too cowardly to answer the question.
|
Indeed.
--J.D.
|
Deliberately misquoting now? Childish. |
 |
| Edited by - On fire for Christ on 09/06/2012 01:03:17 |
 |
|
|
Doctor X
Voluntary Exile
151 Posts |
Posted - 09/06/2012 : 01:03:41 [Permalink]
|
Now that he has essentially admitted he had no basis to dismiss Collins' quote, he has basically admitted he lacks the courage to identify the source of his morality.
That, rather, is that.
--J.D. |
His secrets are not sold cheaply.
It is perilous to waste his time. |
|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 09/06/2012 : 01:04:51 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Doctor X
Now that he has essentially admitted he had no basis to dismiss Collins' quote, he has basically admitted he lacks the courage to identify the source of his morality.
That, rather, is that.
--J.D.
|
That's what just happened? |
|
|
|
|
Doctor X
Voluntary Exile
151 Posts |
Posted - 09/06/2012 : 01:05:59 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
Deliberately misquoting now? Childish.
|
Really all you have done up to now, son: that is the heart of the argumentum ad veritatem fallacy.
Well, you have also demonstrated your ignorance of a subject and your cowardice regarding the source for your unsubstantiated assertions.
We have also come to suspect your commitment to Sparkle Motion.
Yet, on the contrary, I rather summarized you quite accurately. You know what you must do to demonstrate otherwise, son.
--J.D. |
His secrets are not sold cheaply.
It is perilous to waste his time. |
|
|
|
Doctor X
Voluntary Exile
151 Posts |
Posted - 09/06/2012 : 01:07:28 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
Originally posted by Doctor X
Now that he has essentially admitted he had no basis to dismiss Collins' quote, he has basically admitted he lacks the courage to identify the source of his morality.
That, rather, is that. |
That's what just happened?
|
Perhaps we need a space ship to help you catch up. . . .
Nevertheless, as stated, you merely need to answer the questions to demonstrate otherwise.
Yet you do not.
It really is not terribly complicated.
--J.D. |
His secrets are not sold cheaply.
It is perilous to waste his time. |
|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 09/06/2012 : 01:07:32 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Doctor X
Yet, on the contrary, I rather summarized you quite accurately. You know what you must do to demonstrate otherwise, son.
--J.D.
|
Now you are baiting me? This is getting more and more pathetic. |
|
| Edited by - On fire for Christ on 09/06/2012 01:07:51 |
|
|
|
Doctor X
Voluntary Exile
151 Posts |
Posted - 09/06/2012 : 01:16:12 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
Now you are baiting me? |
Ipse dixit yet incorrect again. If you consider expecting you to back up your claims and engage in "well thought out" arguments to be "baiting" we will simply note you remain consistent in your ignorance of argument.
| This is getting more and more pathetic. |
Your continued avoidance? Yes. Perhaps if you danced a bit more, made this more sporting? What? What?
Or . . .
. . . you could . . .
. . .
. . . wait for it . . .
. . . answer either of the questions.
Or, I suppose, you can continue to appear rather "pathetic," yes.
--J.D. |
His secrets are not sold cheaply.
It is perilous to waste his time. |
|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 09/06/2012 : 01:22:02 [Permalink]
|
Back up my claims (which ones exactly?), when you haven't backed up a single thing you've said and repeatedly refused to expand on a quote I found irrelevant after I asked for clarification (somehow asking you to expand on something is a "dismissal"), nah, I think I said enough earlier in the thread. Wouldn't want to recapitulate. Maybe read it a few more times, let it sink in.
You know, I was actually learning something about Atheist morality until this guy came along. |
|
| Edited by - On fire for Christ on 09/06/2012 01:22:51 |
|
|
|
Doctor X
Voluntary Exile
151 Posts |
Posted - 09/06/2012 : 01:27:40 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
Back up my claims (which ones exactly?), . . . |
If an unkind man afflicted with your tendency to prevaricate, I would advise you to "read the thread."
Yet, I am kind.
I will remind you to "back up" your claim regarding Collins. Specifically, you have yet to list the differences. Shall I requote you again? It seems to upset you when I do, for some reason.
| when you haven't backed up a single thing you've said. . . . |
Other than quote you directly. Yes, I know, your words embarrass you. I suggest you spend a bit more time and effort--even . . . add some honesty--in your fabrication of them.
He then plays Drama Queen a bit more.
You know, I was actually learning something about Atheist morality until this guy came along.
|
No, you did not. You merely ignored what you did not "wike" and scurried away into your preconceived notions. Hence your argumentum ad hominem.
Hence your cowardice with regards to identifying the source of your morality.
We already know you are embarrassed you proved the fool regarding the other point.
This is not terribly complicated.
--J.D. |
His secrets are not sold cheaply.
It is perilous to waste his time. |
|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 09/06/2012 : 01:41:09 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Doctor X
I will remind you to "back up" your claim regarding Collins. Specifically, you have yet to list the differences. Shall I requote you again? It seems to upset you when I do, for some reason.
|
I "claimed" that I found the quote irrelevant (if that can be called a claim at all, more of an opinion) since infanticide, mass murder and human sacrifice are different things done in different ways for different purposes and asked you to expand on it, which you still have not done. How can I back that up any further? I'm not sure.
Other than quote you directly. Yes, I know, your words embarrass you. I suggest you spend a bit more time and effort--even . . . add some honesty--in your fabrication of them.
|
Or I could just continue to let you fabricate my words. That's one of your tactics right?
No, you did not. You merely ignored what you did not "wike" and scurried away into your preconceived notions. Hence your argumentum ad hominem.
--J.D.
|
What are my preconceived notions? Since you already know so much about me. It's a wonder really that you need to ask me anything.
|
|
| Edited by - On fire for Christ on 09/06/2012 01:42:46 |
|
|
|
Doctor X
Voluntary Exile
151 Posts |
Posted - 09/06/2012 : 01:47:00 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
I "claimed" that I found the quote irrelevant (if that can be called a claim at all, more of an opinion) since infanticide, mass murder and human sacrifice are different things done in different ways for different purposes and asked you to expand on it, . . . |
No, you did not. You simply stated it was "irrelevant" and then claimed they were different. I then asked you if that is actually true--a question rhetorical, to be sure--which you avoided. I then suggested that, if you bothered to read the full paper, you would understand the problem with that claim.
Nevertheless, you persist in your refusal to explain the difference you claim exist.
| How can I back that up any further? I'm not sure. |
As I state previously: simply list the differences you believe exist.
He blathers on a bit as per usual without answering the question as to the source of his morality.
--J.D.
[Edited for the codes . . . the codes. . . .--Ed.] |
His secrets are not sold cheaply.
It is perilous to waste his time. |
| Edited by - Doctor X on 09/06/2012 01:48:29 |
|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 09/06/2012 : 01:55:59 [Permalink]
|
| No, you did not. You simply stated it was "irrelevant" and then claimed they were different. |
I see so you're disputing that they are different. Now I follow you.
So you want more detail other than that they are done in different ways for different purposes? I thought that would be sufficient.
I believe in this topic infanticide was brought up in reference to infants being killed due to hardship and inability to support the child, but it can mean any killing of an infant. Obviously this differs from human sacrifice which is a ritualistic killing, which can be carried out on someone of any age. Mass murder is obviously different to infanticide but not mutually exclusive. It can be ritualistic, but is not necessarily, in this topic the context was the razing of a conquered city.
Also I don't really get why the date of the human sacrifices was relevant. If you remember the topic at that point in the thread was situational ethics. Put in a bronze age scenario would you consider those acts to be as immoral as they are today. The Jewish religion was already established in the bronze age, so it doesn't really change anything.
Another thing about Ayame Tan's comment he never really addressed was how he said that game theory played a part in morality. You do a good act to benefit yourself in the long run. I said his comment sounded like long-term selfishness. Then he brought up the whole money burning argument as if I was the one who arrogantly introduced this notion that atheists were all selfish. I really feel this was another reason why I was angry and insulted him. |
|
| Edited by - On fire for Christ on 09/06/2012 02:00:27 |
|
|
|
Doctor X
Voluntary Exile
151 Posts |
Posted - 09/06/2012 : 02:22:50 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
I see so you're disputing that they are different. |
Not necessarily. I am asking you if you really think they are different. Hence my question: "are they?" A question rhetorical, perhaps, yet a sincere question nonetheless.
| I believe in this topic infanticide was brought up in reference to infants being killed due to hardship and inability to support the child, but it can mean any killing of an infant. Obviously this differs from human sacrifice which is a ritualistic killing, which can be carried out on someone of any age. |
The human sacrifice practiced by the YHWH cult was, primarily, infant sacrifice.
Adult sacrifice, indeed, the ritual genocide that is the #1495;#1512;#1501;-—#7717;rm--"#7717;erem"--was done for similar and different reasons--which I can get into if asked. The texts celebrate it, even demand it.
[Font does not render. Consider it chrm or "cherem" where ch represents "chet."--Ed.]
| Also I don't really get why the date of the human sacrifices was relevant. |
Apologists for the YHWH cult rather preferred to pretend "someone else" did it. That it was "done during a different time," that "their people," their "sources" did not practice it. This is not the case.
With respect to the genocidal sacrifice that is the "#7717;erem," there have been various other apologies which I will not dignify. Perhaps one of the scholars Collins' cites summarizes the issue:
| One cannot but conclude that many scholars are simply incapable of seeing their God [Sic--Ed.] as one who demands and receives humans in exchange for victory, because of world-views shaped by the normative theological expectations of their own religious traditions, (Niditch) |
The incapability has led to some truly horrific apologies to write the least. That may seem a horrid tangent, but it plays directly into the second question.
| If you remember the topic at that point in the thread was situational ethics. Put in a bronze age scenario would you consider those acts to be as immoral as they are today. |
Iron age.
| The Jewish religion was already established in the bronze age, . . . |
Iron age and, no, it was not--hence the arguments regarding it within the texts. Indeed, the sacrificial texts rather underscore such differences. May seem a bit off topic again, I grant you; however, it will return to the larger question.
| . . . so it doesn't really change anything. |
Actually, it does, but that requires you to answer the second question.
| Another thing about Ayame Tan's comment he never really addressed was how he said that game theory played a part in morality. |
And this makes him an "idiot?"
I really feel this was another reason why I was angry and insulted him.
|
Fair enough. Best to dispense with anger for it only obscures the issue.
Now to the question of relevance: what Collins stated would have "shocked" scholars even twenty years ago: scholars who preferred to believe that "nasty things" were perpetrated by "other people" and "other cultures," and, more importantly, "other religions." That was not the case.
That religions have history, that they change, that they develop, that they argue with one another, rather calls into question any certainty one can claim about them with respect to human morality.
For as you ask, would something be moral in a particular time and place?--Sitz im Leben to use the "highfalootin' scholarly term." To which I would ask again, what is the basis of your morality.
The answer to that is critical.
--J.D.
Reference:
Niditch S. War in the Hebrew Bible: A Study in the Ethics of Violence. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993. |
His secrets are not sold cheaply.
It is perilous to waste his time. |
| Edited by - Doctor X on 09/06/2012 02:29:30 |
|
|
|
Doctor X
Voluntary Exile
151 Posts |
Posted - 09/06/2012 : 02:25:23 [Permalink]
|
I see the fonts do not quite work. Will make citation difficult . . . which reminds me . . . I FAIL'd to cite Nidith!
First, a test: #7952;#947;#974; #949;#7984;#956;#953;
Well . . . THAT makes discussion of meaning rather difficult.
--J.D. |
His secrets are not sold cheaply.
It is perilous to waste his time. |
| Edited by - Doctor X on 09/06/2012 02:26:21 |
|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 09/06/2012 : 02:33:54 [Permalink]
|
Right, I wish you had expanded on that when I asked in the first place.
I feel you were somewhat harsh in expecting me to derive all that from your brief quote.
OK most of the events of the Torah took place in the Iron age. My mistake.
Since you seem to somewhat civil in your latest post I'll answer your question, I receive my morality from the Lord of Lords and the King of Kings Jesus Christ. |
|
| Edited by - On fire for Christ on 09/06/2012 02:34:42 |
|
|
 |
|
What would you say to this argument about atheists
