Breton Thief Oriana Posted February 22, 2004 Share Posted February 22, 2004 Yeah, there is allways the possibillity of broadening the debate terms so that it can't be decided, but with the current ones, he is bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hundinman Posted February 24, 2004 Share Posted February 24, 2004 It's not out of context. The discussion as it happened in this debate: me: would you sacrifice children?him: yesme: even though it's done in the most evil way?him: yes, and I don't think it's murder either How is that out of context? He admitted that he would do it, and tried to justify it. And you're right I'm trying to make him look bad. I'm making sure there's no chance he can just forget about his confession because few people are going to read this thread. I want it to be very clear where his sense of morality is, and where the morality of his religion is. Religion is his favorite argument to make, I'm making sure he can't pretend that him and his religion are perfect and good. wow you must be pretty darn desperate if you have to publicize veryithing I say to make me look stupid. Well, Dark0ne has just made you look stupid as a moderator and so has Tindruel (sorry about spelling dude!). You must be ashamed. Back to your signature: You did not include what the debate is about. you didn't just ask me if I would sacrifice children. I mean, people might think that we were having a duscussion about somethiong totally random and you brought up the STUPID question would you sacrifice children in the most painful way possible if given the cjance? I did not say that, if given the damn chance I would sacrifice children. We had a HYPOTHETICAL situation going on. Well, if you do not change your attitude then I am out. Not because you have proven me wrong (you have only stubbornly believed your oh-so wrong beliefs)but because I refuse to debate with such a naive jerk who is going to HELL and seems to not give a damn!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! So, qoute that and put it in a sig if that is the only way you know to make me stupid. I have better and more MATURE ways. If I could, I would start a poll to see how many members want you off of here and I think the majority would be: GET PEREGRINE THE HELL OUT OF HERE, FAST!!!!!!!! HM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hundinman Posted February 24, 2004 Share Posted February 24, 2004 1) It is only possible to make a just and correct jugdment when the person jugding knows all the facts. WRONG. It is only possible to make a just and correct judgement when one knows all the relevant facts. If I shoot you in front of a hundred witnesses and hand the court a signed confession, it is irrelevant if the judge/jury do not know what color shirt witness #89 was wearing. They can still come to the same (just and correct) conclusion that I am guilty of murder. 2) Since we do not know all the facts, we can go on discussing and debating and we will never reach a correct judgment of god. WRONG. See above. We can make judgements based on partial facts if we know the relevant facts. And in the case of God, we know that he commits evil acts. The evidence of these acts is as unarguable as in my murder case from the previous example. That is all we need to make the judgement of "immoral barbaric murderer." 3) Since god is defined as allknowing, he is the only being existing which is capable of making a correct and just jugdment or action. Wrong. See above. God can make judgements, and so can we. 4) The possibility to do something doesn't mean that this possibility will happen. God is the only being capable of making a just/correct judgment or action. This doesn't mean that he makes a just/correct jugdment or action. He could choose to do otherwise. Ergo, he posses the possibility to be either bad or good. Concession accepted, thank you for arguing my side for me. God can not be assumed to be completely good, since he has the option to choose evil. And he does choose evil acts, therefore he is evil. 5,6,7 All of these arguments are based on a flawed argument. If 1-4 are not true, these can not be true either. And in conclusion, stop dodging the point of the debate. It is stated in the initial conditions that we can judge God. Stop arguing that we can't judge God and make an argument related to his morality, or concede. where are these conditions that say we can judge God? I asked before BUT THE ARGUMENT WAS AVOIDED BECAUSE THERE MIGHT NOT BE A INITIAL CONDITION CRAP THINGY! does anyone know whta he is talking about because I would like to see it. see that? he only brought the post back so that he could try and shoot it down. he was not helping you Darnoc, do not be thankful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rynos Posted February 24, 2004 Share Posted February 24, 2004 Umm... right.... Hundinman- #1. IIRC, as I do not have time to go back and look, you were asked or said that it is okay to sacrafice young children if it was to god... #2. You are blowing things up and might get this debated closed due to irresponsible actions and childish behavior... #3. Peregrine reposted Darnoc's post because it was erased in the server down thing. He had put out his opinion for everyone to read and sence it got erase Peregrine reposted it and added comments like it never got erased... Darnoc should be thankful because that was his opinion and Peregrine countered with his opinon. Also this post IMHO has gone horribally off topic and even though I have nothing to contribute to it would like to see it stay open for pure intrest of peoples opinions and statements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breton Thief Oriana Posted February 24, 2004 Share Posted February 24, 2004 *SLAPS FOREHEAD IN SIGHTING STUPIDITY* dude, this is getting stale. By the terms and conditions of the debate, which say 1. everything in the bible is to be held as the fortold truth, and 2. we as humans have the authority to judge god, god is immoral. If you want to prove that he is good, make a new thread with new terms and conditions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted February 24, 2004 Author Share Posted February 24, 2004 where are these conditions that say we can judge God? I asked before BUT THE ARGUMENT WAS AVOIDED BECAUSE THERE MIGHT NOT BE A INITIAL CONDITION CRAP THINGY! does anyone know whta he is talking about because I would like to see it. Are you illiterate or are you just ignoring anything that doesn't fit your fanatical delusions? FROM MY SECOND POST IN THIS THREAD:So yes, I agree that the debate is flawed, for the second reason you give: God is a human invention. But to allow a discussion of the initial argument, I'm making two assumptions. 1) The bible is an accurate historical account of God's actions.2) We can judge God, and he is subject to the same morality as the rest of us. I have said this over and over again, and justified my actions elsewhere. If you pay that little attention to the debate, you shouldn't be posting here. =================================================== wow you must be pretty darn desperate if you have to publicize veryithing I say to make me look stupid. Well, Dark0ne has just made you look stupid as a moderator and so has Tindruel (sorry about spelling dude!). You must be ashamed. Dark0ne has done absolutely nothing. Every point he made, I have countered. And his comments about poor posting/debating were directed at everyone in this thread. Did you conveniently ignore this fact? If you consider me "owned" by that post, you're no different. And yes, I have to publicize your fanatic delusions. Every debate you post in, you assume your christianity gives you a superior case. My intent was to make it very clear just what your position is. And to make sure you couldn't just burry your flaws and pretend your religion is anything but evil. And there is no excuse for posting personal attacks on me where people can't see them. One, that's abuse of the report function. And two, you're a coward for trying it. If you've got something to say, don't sneak around and beg sympathy from the mods. You did not include what the debate is about. you didn't just ask me if I would sacrifice children. I mean, people might think that we were having a duscussion about somethiong totally random and you brought up the STUPID question would you sacrifice children in the most painful way possible if given the cjance? Your point? It all comes down to one simple basic fact. If it was God's will, you would sacrifice children. To you, human morals mean nothing compared to the will of your imaginary God. How I obtained the answer is irrelevant, you clearly stated that you would do exactly what I quoted. And don't complain that I'm being unfair. I was very careful to make sure you understood exactly what the question was, and even asked it again so you could change your answer. You believe exactly what I posted. If your beliefs embarass you, change them instead of whining. I did not say that, if given the damn chance I would sacrifice children. And I never said you did. My signiature mentioned the question "would you sacrifice children if God told you to." You answered yes multiple times. Well, if you do not change your attitude then I am out. Not because you have proven me wrong (you have only stubbornly believed your oh-so wrong beliefs)but because I refuse to debate with such a naive jerk who is going to HELL and seems to not give a damn!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And you're a blind, ignorant, delusional fanatic. No matter how much evidence is presented to you, you still cling desperately to your imaginary friend "God". So please, leave. Go back to your bible and keep telling yourself it's the only truth. Meanwhile the rest of society has outgrown your primitive myths and has no need for them. So, qoute that and put it in a sig if that is the only way you know to make me stupid. Consider it done. There is now no question that you are a religious fanatic. If I could, I would start a poll to see how many members want you off of here and I think the majority would be: GET PEREGRINE THE HELL OUT OF HERE, FAST!!!!!!!! Go ahead, make the poll. And while you're at it, take a look at the "what do you think of forum members" thread. I see an unusual lack of angry comments for a forum that wants me gone. ============================================= see that? he only brought the post back so that he could try and shoot it down. he was not helping you Darnoc, do not be thankful. Thanks for posting without thinking and making yourself look even more foolish. I reposted his post exactly as it had been written before the server problems, since I had left a window with this thread open before the server died. And if my only goal is to shoot it down, why didn't I follow it up immediately with my attacks? ============================================= In summary, Hundinman, personal attacks are over. Either start debating in a civilized manner or accept your strikes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malchik Posted February 24, 2004 Share Posted February 24, 2004 Oh lordy, lordy, isn't this going round in ever deceasing circles? Will it be like the Oozalum bird (sorry I can't spell it) and disappear up itself? Will somebody please answer my question. God is all knowing, all powerful and all merciful. He created everything to be as it is. (This statement has been taken as read by both sides early on in the debate.) Therefore, for whatever reason, he created unbelievers to be unbelievers and made them to make every single 'choice' they make. What then would you humble religious types consider to be a just treatment for them at the hands of their creator when they die? I suspect the reason nobody answers is because there is only one possible answer. He will treat them all equally. And the logical conclusion to that is.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breton Thief Oriana Posted February 24, 2004 Share Posted February 24, 2004 Therefore, for whatever reason, he created unbelievers to be unbelievers and made them to make every single 'choice' they make. What then would you humble religious types consider to be a just treatment for them at the hands of their creator when they die? At which point he would be either immoral or insane because he would be sending people to hell for no reason. EDIT: Oh, sorry, reflex ;) 2nd EDIT: If I could, I would start a poll to see how many members want you off of here That actually sounds intreiguing (Forgive my SP errors). But, I'm sure more people would want to keep him here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThetaOrionis01 Posted February 24, 2004 Share Posted February 24, 2004 @ Darnoc First, the definition of "sin". "Sin" is not action, it is power. "Sin" can be compared to a genetic disease and Adam was the first person to be infected. He passed a long this disease and so we all are infected with "sin". Because we have "sin" we will all die. Death is not a punishment, but a result of our infection with "sin". Only one person is guilty: Adam, the first human being. (Romans 5,12) In order to heal us, god created an "antigene". But before someone can take medicine wilingly, this person must know that he/she has a disease. So god created the law. God knew that no one could furfill this law to 100% because every human being is infected with sin and one symptome of this disease is that we are forced to do things against the law of god. Those actions are called "sins". The reason for this law is that we can learn that we are infected. We should look at the law of god and then say "Hey, I am guilty! I broke the law!" When we realize this, we are ready to take god's antigene. However, it was once again god who created this 'sin-disease'. Would you consider biological warfare - to continue the analogy - immoral? I would. And attaching a condition to the cure 'if you want to be healed, you must believe' - is that not blackmail? Again, another highly immoral act. However you look at it - if god is all-knowing and all-powerful he is also highly immoral. re hundinman's post: So, qoute that and put it in a sig if that is the only way you know to make me stupid. I have better and more MATURE ways. If I could, I would start a poll to see how many members want you off of here and I think the majority would be: GET PEREGRINE THE HELL OUT OF HERE, FAST!!!!!!!! How much more childish is this going to get? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark0ne Posted February 24, 2004 Share Posted February 24, 2004 *click* This was a discussion bound to spark pathetic arguments which cannot be swayed either way. The fact remains; you're either Christian, Undecided, or not Christian. I don't like the idea that people are trying to "convert" or even evangelise people either way of the fence on my forums, intentional or not. I don't like people being told their religion is rubbish or the god isn't what he says he is. Likewise I don't want people debating that "such and such an action (i.e. war) is right because God said it is". Its a debate killer and cannot be debated without repitition of this thread. I'll have no more of it. I'm not Christian but I have respect for those who are and respect not to question them if they don't start questioning me. I'll have no more "God is this" or "Christianity is that" arguments on these forums, thanks. Take it to PMs or MSNM or something, not here. If someone answers a question with "I believe such and such is right because God agrees with it" you either argue your point or you don't post. If your only reason an action is right is because it says so in the Bible, don't bother posting. These discussions are fine among friends, relatives and people you know. They never work out fine on forums, with users of varying ages who don't know each other - its taken far too personally. As for sacrifices...God asked Abraham to sacrifice his son Isaac, only to stop him just as he was going to do it to prove Abraham's absolute loyalty and faith in God. I respect that, it should not be mocked. Hundinman's answer to your hypothetical question, Peregrine, was just and understandable from any Christian who knows this story well - I don't believe its right for you to question his faith just as its not right for Hundinman to think you any less of a human for not believing in his faith. Your signature DID lead the reader into believing Hundinman was some malicious child killer and did not explain the full hypothetical situation. Its changed now, with Hundinman's permission, so lets not see a repeat. Hundinman, you've shown immaturity on your own behalf and a lack of foresight of where this discussion was heading; you PM'd me about it, which was the correct thing to do, but do not threaten people with "you're not popular here" and "I wish you were off these forums"...it doesn't help your case (nor would creating a poll slamming one of my moderators). Case closed, hopefully never to open again. Peregrine, you may reply to this thread with your response. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.