The Lord Commands: Kill Isaac

[Anywhere Else But Here]

I wasn't asking why. I was stating that god has a lot of opinions about orifices.

He has injunctions. God doesn't have opinions as such, he's the Absolute

There must be reasons behind the injunction, unless he's just an idiot pushing cosmic buttons. I'd call those reasons "opinions".

[The Parkus Empire]

He has injunctions. God doesn't have opinions as such, he's the Absolute

There must be reasons behind the injunction, unless he's just an idiot pushing cosmic buttons. I'd call those reasons "opinions".

More ends than opinions.

[Anywhere Else But Here]

There must be reasons behind the injunction, unless he's just an idiot pushing cosmic buttons. I'd call those reasons "opinions".

More ends than opinions.

If you pursue an end of your own volition, you must be of the opinion that it is an end worth pursuing, surely?

[The Parkus Empire]

More ends than opinions.

If you pursue an end of your own volition, you must be of the opinion that it is an end worth pursuing, surely?

If you're a human being. God's actions, unlike ours, are not a product of anything, they are eternal and unchanging, radiating ineffably from him.

[Anywhere Else But Here]

If you pursue an end of your own volition, you must be of the opinion that it is an end worth pursuing, surely?

If you're a human being. God's actions, unlike ours, are not a product of anything, they are eternal and unchanging, radiating ineffably from him.

I love this. They are eternal and unchanging, radiating ineffably from him, and they say...

"No anal."

Still sounds like an opinion to me. A really weird opinion, but an opinion nonetheless. We can all claim infallibility and dress our opinions up as magic fact. We can all use silly, vague prose to describe them. I think (certain) Irish accents are sexy. I can claim that's an eternal, unchanging fact that radiates ineffably from me (whatever the fuck that means). Doesn't make it true, though.

[The Parkus Empire]

If you're a human being. God's actions, unlike ours, are not a product of anything, they are eternal and unchanging, radiating ineffably from him.

I love this. They are eternal and unchanging, radiating ineffably from him, and they say...

"No anal."

Still sounds like an opinion to me. A really weird opinion, but an opinion nonetheless. We can all claim infallibility and dress our opinions up as magic fact. We can all use silly, vague prose to describe them. I think (certain) Irish accents are sexy. I can claim that's an eternal, unchanging fact that radiates ineffably from me (whatever the fuck that means). Doesn't make it true, though.

You're so dismissive because modern sexual mores see it as laughably unobjectionable. "Wow, haha, what's wrong with God? He's clearly not hip to contemporary values. " Well, keep in mind the sexual revolution caused an STD epidemic.

[Shrodashi]

I've made it a rule not to listen to the voices in my head, even if they back themselves up with visual and auditory hallucinations, and especially when they order me to kill people.

In this thought experiment, however, I will go off of the assumptions that a). this is not a hallucination and b.) I am indeed being addressed by an entity that created the world and believes itself to be God.

I would thus denounce the murderous demands of the Demiurge and embrace the goal of escaping the prison of fleshy matter he has trapped me within through the cultivation of virtue and the pursuit of wisdom.

[The Parkus Empire]

I've made it a rule not to listen to the voices in my head, even if they back themselves up with visual and auditory hallucinations, and especially when they order me to kill people.

In this thought experiment, however, I will go off of the assumptions that a). this is not a hallucination and b.) I am indeed being addressed by an entity that created the world and believes itself to be God.

I would thus denounce the murderous demands of the Demiurge and embrace the goal of escaping the prison of fleshy matter he has trapped me within through the cultivation of virtue and the pursuit of wisdom.

If flesh is imprisonment and chains, then why do you reject murder so much?

[Shrodashi]

I've made it a rule not to listen to the voices in my head, even if they back themselves up with visual and auditory hallucinations, and especially when they order me to kill people.

In this thought experiment, however, I will go off of the assumptions that a). this is not a hallucination and b.) I am indeed being addressed by an entity that created the world and believes itself to be God.

I would thus denounce the murderous demands of the Demiurge and embrace the goal of escaping the prison of fleshy matter he has trapped me within through the cultivation of virtue and the pursuit of wisdom.

If flesh is imprisonment and chains, then why do you reject murder so much?

Because murder would prevent the murdered individual from bettering themself, through virtue and wisdom and all that, as well as it simply being emotionally undesirable for me to go through the experience of having murdered an innocent.

I assume the Buddhists are against murder for similar reasons, sharing as they do a goal of escaping matter through enlightenment and a cycle of reincarnation (though the latter isn't particularly relevant here).

This assumes the to-be-murdered individual is innocent, and not preventing others from seeking wisdom by, say, murdering them - but that's another assumption I'm making to keep this thought experiment answerable and not go into tangents about self-defense.

[Anywhere Else But Here]

I love this. They are eternal and unchanging, radiating ineffably from him, and they say...

"No anal."

Still sounds like an opinion to me. A really weird opinion, but an opinion nonetheless. We can all claim infallibility and dress our opinions up as magic fact. We can all use silly, vague prose to describe them. I think (certain) Irish accents are sexy. I can claim that's an eternal, unchanging fact that radiates ineffably from me (whatever the fuck that means). Doesn't make it true, though.

You're so dismissive because modern sexual mores see it as laughably unobjectionable. "Wow, haha, what's wrong with God? He's clearly not hip to contemporary values. " Well, keep in mind the sexual revolution caused an STD epidemic.

Careful. Attempts by the zealous to use STDs rather than dogma often end in advocating lesbian separatism.

[The Parkus Empire]

You're so dismissive because modern sexual mores see it as laughably unobjectionable. "Wow, haha, what's wrong with God? He's clearly not hip to contemporary values. " Well, keep in mind the sexual revolution caused an STD epidemic.

Careful. Attempts by the zealous to use STDs rather than dogma often end in advocating lesbian separatism.

I'm not using anything in place of dogma. You are.

[Cedoria]

I know you SEE it as fortunate.

That does not make it so.

But since you're an atheist, your idea of what would be fortunate for Christianity is probably inimical to it, whether or not you realize it.

But I wasn't referring to it being fortunate to Christianity. I'm quite happy for it to be unfortunate to it.

I was more referring to it as being unfortunate for humanity that it hasn't changed. Middle-Ages religions tend to cause a lot of continuing damage unless they grow out of the nonsense.

I'm quite well aware that my opinions are probably unhelpful to Christianity. Unlike you, I don't care about what's good for it. If it's a question between the faith and the human race, I'd rather support what's going to work for the species.

[Cedoria]

I suggest you reread genesis and exodus

I've read them both multiple times and I will no doubt read them again. All disputation with God is about convincing him to spare someone. Every other sort of argument God doesn't tolerate.

So God is by your own admission a dictatorial half-wit?

[The Parkus Empire]

But since you're an atheist, your idea of what would be fortunate for Christianity is probably inimical to it, whether or not you realize it.

But I wasn't referring to it being fortunate to Christianity. I'm quite happy for it to be unfortunate to it.

I was more referring to it as being unfortunate for humanity that it hasn't changed. Middle-Ages religions tend to cause a lot of continuing damage unless they grow out of the nonsense.

Christianity is actually an ancient religion. Which lead to the illegalizing of gladiator fights, sex slavery and infanticde. Very backward of course. Unlike the modernist, mass mudering secular ideologies of the 20th Century

[Cedoria]

But I wasn't referring to it being fortunate to Christianity. I'm quite happy for it to be unfortunate to it.

I was more referring to it as being unfortunate for humanity that it hasn't changed. Middle-Ages religions tend to cause a lot of continuing damage unless they grow out of the nonsense.

Christianity is actually an ancient religion. Which lead to the illegalizing of gladiator fights, sex slavery and infanticde. Very backward of course. Unlike the modernist, mass mudering secular ideologies of the 20th Century

Christianity replaced those with heresy trials, Inquistions, Crusades and witch-burnings. That's not really a marked improvement. You don't have a high horse to jump on here.

Which ones?

I can see the rabbit hole you're about to jump down here, I've heard it all before, and it's as moronic as ever.

But maybe you'll surprise me this time. Tell me about these secular ideologies leading to mass murder?

[Albrenia]

But I wasn't referring to it being fortunate to Christianity. I'm quite happy for it to be unfortunate to it.

I was more referring to it as being unfortunate for humanity that it hasn't changed. Middle-Ages religions tend to cause a lot of continuing damage unless they grow out of the nonsense.

Christianity is actually an ancient religion. Which lead to the illegalizing of gladiator fights, sex slavery and infanticde. Very backward of course. Unlike the modernist, mass mudering secular ideologies of the 20th Century

Oh please. Don't try to say Christianity has the moral high ground over Humanism, as that's just plain silly.

[The Parkus Empire]

Christianity is actually an ancient religion. Which lead to the illegalizing of gladiator fights, sex slavery and infanticde. Very backward of course. Unlike the modernist, mass mudering secular ideologies of the 20th Century

Which ones?

I can see the rabbit hole you're about to jump down here, I've heard it all before, and it's as moronic as ever.

But maybe you'll surprise me this time. Tell me about these secular ideologies leading to mass murder?

The ones that lead to mass murder. Surely you're not asking me which ideologies were murderous during the 20th Century?

[Cedoria]

Which ones?

I can see the rabbit hole you're about to jump down here, I've heard it all before, and it's as moronic as ever.

But maybe you'll surprise me this time. Tell me about these secular ideologies leading to mass murder?

The ones that lead to mass murder. Surely you're not asking me which ideologies were murderous during the 20th Century?

Which secular ideologies were responsible? I have a sneak feeling I know the ones you are referring to. Neither of which were in any way secular, and I have my retorts ready when you present them. I was just giving you an opportunity not to make a fool of yourself by trying to assert the moral high ground over humanism through use of easily hacked to pieces strawmen.

I've seen this argument hundreds of times. It's as nonsense now as when anybody else argues it. If you want to argue faith as a moral high ground, recycling discredited trash is not the way to do it.

[The Parkus Empire]

The ones that lead to mass murder. Surely you're not asking me which ideologies were murderous during the 20th Century?

Which secular ideologies were responsible? I have a sneak feeling I know the ones you are referring to. Neither of which were in any way secular, and I have my retorts ready when you present them. I was just giving you an opportunity not to make a fool of yourself by trying to assert the moral high ground over humanism through use of easily hacked to pieces strawmen.

I've seen this argument hundreds of times. It's as nonsense now as when anybody else argues it. If you want to argue faith as a moral high ground, recycling discredited trash is not the way to do it.

Post-humanist ideologies aren't humanist.

[Cedoria]

Which secular ideologies were responsible? I have a sneak feeling I know the ones you are referring to. Neither of which were in any way secular, and I have my retorts ready when you present them. I was just giving you an opportunity not to make a fool of yourself by trying to assert the moral high ground over humanism through use of easily hacked to pieces strawmen.

I've seen this argument hundreds of times. It's as nonsense now as when anybody else argues it. If you want to argue faith as a moral high ground, recycling discredited trash is not the way to do it.

Post-humanist ideologies aren't humanist.

And what you just said is neither relevant nor an argument.

The shorter your posts get the more nonsense is concentrated in them. If you want to make this argument, you can try it, but you'll lose.

[The Parkus Empire]

Post-humanist ideologies aren't humanist.

And what you just said is neither relevant nor an argument.

The shorter your posts get the more nonsense is concentrated in them. If you want to make this argument, you can try it, but you'll lose.

That more killing came out of nationalism and Enlightenment than out of Orthodox Christianity? I don't think an argument is necessary.

[Internationalist Bastard]

You know, I'm curious more if people here would consider killing their child ok for any reason

[The Parkus Empire]

You know, I'm curious more if people here would consider killing their child ok for any reason

I don't consider killing okay for any reason

[Cedoria]

And what you just said is neither relevant nor an argument.

The shorter your posts get the more nonsense is concentrated in them. If you want to make this argument, you can try it, but you'll lose.

That more killing came out of nationalism and Enlightenment than out of Orthodox Christianity? I don't think an argument is necessary.

You didn't say that. Even if you did, you'd still likely be wrong.

The Enlightenment is not the 20th century, as you previously indicated. Try a few centuries back. You've shifted the goalposts without even attempting to argue your original non-point. That's very telling about how completely hollow you regarded it.

[Cedoria]

You know, I'm curious more if people here would consider killing their child ok for any reason

I don't consider killing okay for any reason

But if God were giving the order, to the best of your knowledge, you would?