Why do/don't you believe in a higher power? (Any HP)

[Australian rePublic]

Which one? I don't remember every post I replied to

This.

Ignoring the fact that I called a liar, yea sure, why not?

[The New California Republic]

The irony is that he totally gets the Bible is difficult... when he wants to. Any time you bring up a passage that even hints at something he doesn't like "that's a mistranslation."

No I said that the mistranslated parts are irrelevant details.

Just because you dismiss them as irrelevant details doesn't mean that they are.

[Genivaria]

The irony is that he totally gets the Bible is difficult... when he wants to. Any time you bring up a passage that even hints at something he doesn't like "that's a mistranslation."

No I said that the mistranslated parts are irrelevant details. For example, Noah's flood might not have actually lasted 40 days, but that's irrelevant to the main story, which is love. I feel like I've discussed this before. If not, I'd be happy to make a post about it

The story of the flood is not about 'love', you cannot attach love to genocide.

[The New California Republic]

This.

Ignoring the fact that I called a liar, yea sure, why not?

You called an author a liar, on the basis of absolutely nothing. Right. That is a non-answer. Glad that has been made clear.

[Australian rePublic]

No I said that the mistranslated parts are irrelevant details.

Just because you dismiss them as irrelevant details doesn't mean that they are.

Why is the chronology of a flood relevant to loving one's neighbour? Why does it matter if the stars or the Earth was created first, when it comes to loving thy neighbour. I don't get it

[Genivaria]

Ignoring the fact that I called a liar, yea sure, why not?

You called an author a liar, on the basis of absolutely nothing. Right. That is a non-answer. Glad that has been made clear.

He might be referring to me calling out that he lied.

[The New California Republic]

No I said that the mistranslated parts are irrelevant details. For example, Noah's flood might not have actually lasted 40 days, but that's irrelevant to the main story, which is love. I feel like I've discussed this before. If not, I'd be happy to make a post about it

The story of the flood is not about 'love', you cannot attach love to genocide.

I mean, who wouldn't think that a story about killing off almost the entirety of the Earth's populace is about love?

/s

[Page]

The irony is that he totally gets the Bible is difficult... when he wants to. Any time you bring up a passage that even hints at something he doesn't like "that's a mistranslation."

No I said that the mistranslated parts are irrelevant details. For example, Noah's flood might not have actually lasted 40 days, but that's irrelevant to the main story, which is love. I feel like I've discussed this before. If not, I'd be happy to make a post about it

Why would the divinely inspired word of God give an erroneous number of days?

[Australian rePublic]

Because those books were written an extremely long time ago by men. Interpretation and translation issues aside, you can hardly trust what men who supposedly had divine revelation say about God. The whole point of the argument is that god could much more easily have an active presence in the world without violating free will. He could communicate in much more overt ways than the bible. But you're not listening to that point at all. You're just like "well he did 2k years ago. Why isnt that good enough?"

The irony is that he totally gets the Bible is difficult... when he wants to. Any time you bring up a passage that even hints at something he doesn't like "that's a mistranslation."

I don't like genocide, but I didn't gloss over that.

[The New California Republic]

Just because you dismiss them as irrelevant details doesn't mean that they are.

Why is the chronology of a flood relevant to loving one's neighbour? Why does it matter if the stars or the Earth was created first, when it comes to loving thy neighbour. I don't get it

What are you talking about? Why are you putting the flood and loving one's neighbour together?

[Australian rePublic]

No I said that the mistranslated parts are irrelevant details. For example, Noah's flood might not have actually lasted 40 days, but that's irrelevant to the main story, which is love. I feel like I've discussed this before. If not, I'd be happy to make a post about it

Why would the divinely inspired word of God give an erroneous number of days?

"40 days and 40 nights" is a Hebrew expression which means "a really long time". It's a figure of speech, just like in English, where "Raining cats and dogs" involves no fury animals whatsoever

[The Supreme Magnificent High Swaglord]

Just because you dismiss them as irrelevant details doesn't mean that they are.

Why is the chronology of a flood relevant to loving one's neighbour? Why does it matter if the stars or the Earth was created first, when it comes to loving thy neighbour. I don't get it

It depends on whether you're looking at things from the perspective of a "pure" theologian or whether you're looking at things from the perspective of a "pure" moral philosopher. Of course, a religion without theology would better be described as a civic religion or moral system, a religion without morals would be better described as a metaphysical system or else a very strange religion indeed.

Do I make any sense?

[Free Arabian Nation]

Just because you dismiss them as irrelevant details doesn't mean that they are.

Why is the chronology of a flood relevant to loving one's neighbour? Why does it matter if the stars or the Earth was created first, when it comes to loving thy neighbour. I don't get it

Because the bible is much more than just loving thy neighbor?

It has rituals and rules about killing witches, sorcerers, prostitutes, and unborn babies (if it was contracepted from cheating), a "how to" about marry your rape victim, god commanding slaves to obey their earthly masters, god making rules about how to beat your slaves, what kind of foods you can eat, what kinds of drinks you can drink, and about cutting the skin off your penis.

Then you get to the lovey-dovey hippy stuff Christians like to point to when someone brings up something bad.

I have no problems with the "Abrahamic Faiths", but please do not preach this kind of stuff

(OK, rant over, I'm gonna go take a shower)

[Australian rePublic]

Ignoring the fact that I called a liar, yea sure, why not?

Yo u called an author a liar, on the basis of absolutely nothing. RIGHT. That is a non-answer. Glad that has been made clear.

Sorry. I meant to say "Ignoring the fact that I called Hitler a liar". Geez, that was an embarrasing typo. I make a lot of typo, there's a chance I'm dislexic...

You called an author a liar, on the basis of absolutely nothing.

Now you're forcing me to bring up Hitler again...
Well that's the pot calling the kettle black

[Australian rePublic]

Why is the chronology of a flood relevant to loving one's neighbour? Why does it matter if the stars or the Earth was created first, when it comes to loving thy neighbour. I don't get it

Because the bible is much more than just loving thy neighbor?

It has rituals and rules about killing witches, sorcerers, prostitutes, and unborn babies (if it was contracepted from cheating), a "how to" about marry your rape victim, god commanding slaves to obey their earthly masters, god making rules about how to beat your slaves, what kind of foods you can eat, what kinds of drinks you can drink, and about cutting the skin off your penis.

Then you get to the lovey-dovey hippy stuff Christians like to point to when someone brings up something bad.

I have no problems with the "Abrahamic Faiths", but please do not preach this kind of stuff

(OK, rant over, I'm gonna go take a shower)

An actual intelligent post on the matter

[The New California Republic]

Now you're forcing me to bring up Hitler again...
Well that's the pot calling the kettle black

How did I force you to post on that subject? Ignoring my post was a valid option.

[Free Arabian Nation]

Because the bible is much more than just loving thy neighbor?

It has rituals and rules about killing witches, sorcerers, prostitutes, and unborn babies (if it was contracepted from cheating), a "how to" about marry your rape victim, god commanding slaves to obey their earthly masters, god making rules about how to beat your slaves, what kind of foods you can eat, what kinds of drinks you can drink, and about cutting the skin off your penis.

Then you get to the lovey-dovey hippy stuff Christians like to point to when someone brings up something bad.

I have no problems with the "Abrahamic Faiths", but please do not preach this kind of stuff

(OK, rant over, I'm gonna go take a shower)

An actual intelligent post on the matter

Weird snark, but OK

[Australian rePublic]

Now you're forcing me to bring up Hitler again...
Well that's the pot calling the kettle black

How did I force you to post on that subject? Ignoring my post was a valid option.

If I ignore your post, then you'll whinge about me ignoring and/or carry on about how your logical fallacy strawman was correct

[The New California Republic]

Because the bible is much more than just loving thy neighbor?

It has rituals and rules about killing witches, sorcerers, prostitutes, and unborn babies (if it was contracepted from cheating), a "how to" about marry your rape victim, god commanding slaves to obey their earthly masters, god making rules about how to beat your slaves, what kind of foods you can eat, what kinds of drinks you can drink, and about cutting the skin off your penis.

Then you get to the lovey-dovey hippy stuff Christians like to point to when someone brings up something bad.

I have no problems with the "Abrahamic Faiths", but please do not preach this kind of stuff

(OK, rant over, I'm gonna go take a shower)

An actual intelligent post on the matter

There are plenty of intelligent posts here. If you dismiss them out of hand then that doesn't magically make them cease to exist.

[Australian rePublic]

An actual intelligent post on the matter

There are plenty of intelligent posts here. If you dismiss them out of hand then that doesn't magically make them cease to exist.

But I've addressed most of them, but we kept running around in circles

[The New California Republic]

How did I force you to post on that subject? Ignoring my post was a valid option.

If I ignore your post, then you'll whinge about me ignoring and/or carry on about how your logical fallacy strawman was correct

Again I don't see where any of that means I'm forcing you to post. And I don't see the strawman that you are talking about.

[Australian rePublic]

If I ignore your post, then you'll whinge about me ignoring and/or carry on about how your logical fallacy strawman was correct

Again I don't see where any of that means I'm forcing you to post. And I don't see the strawman that you are talking about.

The strawman of assuming that I was comparing all atheists to Hitler

[The New California Republic]

Again I don't see where any of that means I'm forcing you to post. And I don't see the strawman that you are talking about.

The strawman of assuming that I was comparing all atheists to Hitler

That really wasn't what I was talking about, but alright.

[New Legland]

No I said that the mistranslated parts are irrelevant details. For example, Noah's flood might not have actually lasted 40 days, but that's irrelevant to the main story, which is love. I feel like I've discussed this before. If not, I'd be happy to make a post about it

Love. God drowned everyone because he loved them.

Haven't you ever heard of tough love? I don't know about you, but the first thing I do when my children misbehave is fucking shove their heads in the toilet so they survive within an inch of their own life. If that seems a bit too harsh, don't worry! It was only a last resort. /s (just in case it wasn't obvious enough)

[Australian rePublic]

The strawman of assuming that I was comparing all atheists to Hitler

That really wasn't what I was talking about, but alright.

No, I was pointing out your hypocracy. You said that I called the author a liar on the basis of nothing (which is true, but only because of a typo), yet you called me a liar because I rejected that "Hitler is atheists=atheists are Hitler". You baselessly called me a liar for that, then point out me baselessly calling someone a liar. That makes you a hypocrite