Subject:
|
Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sun, 1 Dec 2002 14:36:20 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2192 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Brendan Powell Smith writes:
<snip one of the better posts around here lately>
Hey Rev,
I think you're on to something with your reasoning that if it's ok to have
missionaries in the pro christian direction it's just as OK to have
anti-missionaries in the anti christian direction. That does seem to be
conveniently overlooked. However many atheists or agnostics (including
myself) don't want to see lots of atheistic zealotry... they just want the
state not to take a position on the topic, and want society not to enforce
one belief system on all.
I think you're ALSO on to something when you point out that most of the
views of the bible you get in sunday schools and from the preacher's pulpits
of the world have been quite sanitized to the point of hiding all the bad
stuff completely (cue still pic of Jesus walking hand in hand with many
little children on a field of clouds and daisys...).
Great line of discussion. (1)
However I have to wonder about your assertion that it's easier to disprove
the existance of god than it is to prove that slavery is evil... Aren't they
questions in totally different realms? One is concerned with proving a
physical negative (always hard to prove the negative) and the other with
proving a moral positive...
I would say they're so different that easier/harder don't apply at all. Is
it easier to write a symphony than to invent a new kind of internal
combustion device? Those are more similar but still would be meaningless
comparisions.
1 - And to think, it all came from a snicker (1) at a hopelessly credulous
post from someone that wasn't very good at checking their assumptions. So
forgive me if I'm rather proud of having started it rather than planning on
hanging my head in shame...
2 - not snigger, mind you, there's a significant difference in meaning, but
one that is conveniently overlooked by rabble rousers and those who lie by
distortion and omission.
++Lar
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
|
| (...) Here's the trick. I don't believe that the concept of objective morality makes any sense (that things or actions can be objectively good, bad, right, or wrong). Hence the difficulty in proving that something like slavery is objectively evil. I (...) (22 years ago, 1-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
|
| (...) I don't feel it is is necessary to change everyone to my point of view, and in fact, it wouldn't particularly bother me if no one's religious views were ever changed by The Brick Testament. It would at best be a small comfort to know that (...) (22 years ago, 1-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
205 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
