|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
 Posted - 01/03/2004 : 22:40:04 [Permalink]
|
Woody wrote:quote:
Thank god for small favors.
Now that is funny.quote:
Where in his post did Hippy say he's challenging his faith?
He didn't. He said so over here, and I mentioned it earlier in this thread (before you posted). Did you read the whole four pages before you posted, or just the OP?quote:
He titled the folder 'Misconceptions about the bible' and all I did was make a comment (and not even to Hippy specifically ) and everyone's getting hysterical. Holly krist!
I found your comment to be unconstructive and rather rude, given the previous four pages of posts. I explained (again) why I think this discussion has merit, in a non-hysterical fashion, and you chose to ignore my main point, and continue on with yours. Then, I realized that this particular train probably won't ever stay on its rails for long, and basically admitted defeat. Good enough? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
 |
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 01/05/2004 : 07:52:46 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Gorgo
No one NEEDS superstition. We can all live - probably much better -without it.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Since I started off as a Christian, I waded through the Bible as I was evaluating its relavance and congruence with church doctorine. People remain theists because they have a need for something higher than themselves and a need for mysticism. Since atheists do not have these needs, it is logical they would not have theological constructs. It's just a different path.
The way I see it, atheists have no interest in any religious text as it has no relevance to their life. Not so much that it renders the document a collection of stories, but that it has no relavence to the individual.
[/quote]
Psychological needs are still needs, Gorgo. Just because you don't have such needs doesn't mean someone else can't or shouldn't have them. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Woody D
Skeptic Friend
Thailand
285 Posts |
Posted - 01/06/2004 : 01:12:11 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
Did you read the whole four pages before you posted, or just the OP?
What's an OP? I read the begging statement and answered it. Why should I read 4 pages when someone posts something I like to give my opinion before seeing what others say, as if I had been the 1st to read it and not be influenced. Then I can read other comments to see how they agree or disagree. Then comment on them separtly as needed.
quote:
I found your comment to be unconstructive and rather rude, given the previous four pages of posts
Too bad you feel that way.
Please, oh please tell me you are a teacher. Then I could maybe forgive you for saying a comment should be constructive. |
www.Carabao.net
As long as there's, you know, sex and drugs, I can do without the rock and roll.
Mick Shrimpton
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 01/06/2004 : 07:44:23 [Permalink]
|
Woody wrote:quote:
What's an OP?
In this context, it stands for "Original Post," the first post in this thread. Had I been talking about Hippy, it would have meant "Original Poster."quote:
I read the begging statement and answered it. Why should I read 4 pages when someone posts something I like to give my opinion before seeing what others say, as if I had been the 1st to read it and not be influenced. Then I can read other comments to see how they agree or disagree. Then comment on them separtly as needed.
Okay. So does it matter to you that the OP may have been clarified later in the thread, its real meaning being different from what you read (in general, not necessarily in this case)? Does it matter to you that the discussion may have drifted onto a completely different subject? Does it matter that your ideas about the OP may have already been expressed and discussed, the thread having moved on since then?quote:
Please, oh please tell me you are a teacher. Then I could maybe forgive you for saying a comment should be constructive.
My desire for constructive posts here is not something for which I think I need forgiveness. Quite the opposite, actually: having constructive threads here is one of my goals. If it happens more often than not, then instead of requiring the solace of people forgiving me, I'll be pretty happy. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
hippy4christ
Skeptic Friend
193 Posts |
Posted - 01/06/2004 : 14:22:30 [Permalink]
|
Woody:
As to your question: 'doesn't god care about the animals'
I can't find this in the Bible yet, but I'm under the impression that animals weren't eaten by people or other animals until after Adam and Eve's Sin. Either way, it is prophesied that when Jesus returns to rule the Earth that animals and people will live together peacefully, Isaiah 11:5-9. But in the meantime, animals were given to us for food, Genesis 9:2-3. I also believe that the clean and unclean laws still apply, but that's a minor issue. And also "A righteous man regardeth the life of his beast:" Proverbs 10:12. So I believe that those who have animals should treat them well, even when they kill them. Most animals can be killed so that they never see it coming and never know the difference until they arrive in Animal Heaven(if there is any such thing). Now, many people will slaughter cows in assembly lines, and that's wrong because the cows know what's going on and they get freaked out right before they die, and that's not cool.
Hippy |
Faith is believing what you are told, whether it's by a priest or a scientist. A person's scientific beliefs are ones based on personal observation and experimentation.
Lists of Logical Fallacies |
|
|
|
Renae
SFN Regular
543 Posts |
Posted - 01/06/2004 : 15:58:21 [Permalink]
|
So basically, Hippy, the animal killing issue is YET ANOTHER issue on which the Bible says TWO CONFLICTING THINGS.
quote:
Most animals can be killed so that they never see it coming and never know the difference until they arrive in Animal Heaven(if there is any such thing).
Don't make me post vegetarian propaganda on yer ass, Hippy. There is evidence that chickens and cows feel fear before they're slaughtered--not to mention physical pain. If you don't believe me, I'll post some links and some reference books.
Or, hell, just go look into the eyes of a beloved pet. That will teach you more about love than anything in the Bible.
PS I'm not even gonna comment on the "animal heaven if there is such a thing" line. If there's a heaven for Ted Bundy, then there's most certainly a heaven for my precious innocent dead furbabies.
|
|
|
|
ivanisavich
Skeptic Friend
67 Posts |
Posted - 01/06/2004 : 20:12:14 [Permalink]
|
Although people should have respect for animals and they should not mistreat them, there is no problem with eating them for food and killing them for such purposes. There is nothing in the bible that says we should not eat animals because it could put them through pain, but as stated above (with biblical reference), we certainly shouldn't abuse animals recklessly. So, God certainly "cares about the animals", but he has also provided them to us as possible food sources, and therefore our killing of them is accepted by him for those purposes. Any other ideas on the subject are simply peoples' opinions, which I have no problem with.
Also, if you follow the New Testament, the clean and unclean laws no longer apply.
quote:
(Acts Chapter 10 verse 11)
On the morrow, as they went on their journey, and drew nigh unto the city, Peter went up upon the housetop to pray about the sixth hour. And he became very hungry, and would have eaten but while they made ready, he fell into a trance, and saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending upon him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air. And there came a voice to him, "Rise, Peter; kill, and eat." But Peter said, "Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean." And the voice spake unto him again the second time, "What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common."
This passage describes how Peter refused to eat food that was "unclean", but then how God rebuked him and told him to eat what He put before him.
Jesus also comments on the clean/unclean dillemma when he tells the pharasees that it is not what goes into the mouth that matters, but instead what comes out (I can find the verse if you really want it)
So, hopefully that clears up a couple of "misconceptions about the bible" (ie, that clean and unclean laws still apply) |
|
|
|
ivanisavich
Skeptic Friend
67 Posts |
Posted - 01/06/2004 : 20:14:38 [Permalink]
|
quote:
the animal killing issue is YET ANOTHER issue on which the Bible says TWO CONFLICTING THINGS.
Which two conflicting things are those? I can't see any conflictions within the Bible on this subject. |
|
|
|
ivanisavich
Skeptic Friend
67 Posts |
Posted - 01/06/2004 : 20:19:49 [Permalink]
|
Before I logoff, I just want to have something else clarified as well...
quote:
the animal killing issue is YET ANOTHER issue on which the Bible says TWO CONFLICTING THINGS.
Which other issues do you see the Bible conflicting within itself on? Just curious...because there are lots of conflicting issues between what people think and what the Bible says, but the Bible is pretty rock-solid and non-intercontradictory (new word?  ) when it comes to stating it's own opinions. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
|
|
Woody D
Skeptic Friend
Thailand
285 Posts |
Posted - 01/07/2004 : 03:13:39 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
Okay. So does it matter to you that the OP may have been clarified later in the thread, its real meaning being different from what you read (in general, not necessarily in this case)? Does it matter to you that the discussion may have drifted onto a completely different subject? Does it matter that your ideas about the OP may have already been expressed and discussed, the thread having moved on since then
To all that I answer. Nope! It doesn't matter. Until I get to that part of the folder.
I would like the same oppertunity as everyone else who read and commented on the beggining statement(s) then I will address the others that posted after that as I have time to read them. If someone doesn't want to follow that, it's their every right not to read posts that come in late to the conversation (that refer back to the orginal post) once it's 'moved on'. |
|
|
|
Woody D
Skeptic Friend
Thailand
285 Posts |
Posted - 01/07/2004 : 03:25:49 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Renae
So basically, Hippy, the animal killing issue is YET ANOTHER issue on which the Bible says TWO CONFLICTING THINGS.
quote:
Most animals can be killed so that they never see it coming and never know the difference until they arrive in Animal Heaven(if there is any such thing).
Don't make me post vegetarian propaganda on yer ass, Hippy. There is evidence that chickens and cows feel fear before they're slaughtered--not to mention physical pain. If you don't believe me, I'll post some links and some reference books.
Thank YOU Renae, I had the same reaction reading what Hippy said. While I do thank him for trying to, I feel honestly answer the questions and don't want to be negitive toward him personaly, it does seem a tad bit confusing hearing what the bible says about the subject.
quote:
Or, hell, just go look into the eyes of a beloved pet. That will teach you more about love than anything in the Bible.
PS I'm not even gonna comment on the "animal heaven if there is such a thing" line. If there's a heaven for Ted Bundy, then there's most certainly a heaven for my precious innocent dead furbabies.
Renae, even if you are a female, I love you, man! Anyone one who can say things like that really has 'it all together'.
Thanks Luv.
Snake
ps. the part about looking into our pets eyes, geesss, I'm all teary eyed reading that. Thank you, thank you. Woody (the Cocker) thanks you too.
Forgot to add that I do respect that Hippy cares that animals not be killed 'inhumanly'. |
| Edited by - Woody D on 01/07/2004 03:30:08 |
|
|
|
Woody D
Skeptic Friend
Thailand
285 Posts |
Posted - 01/07/2004 : 03:37:45 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ivanisavich
So, God certainly "cares about the animals", but he has also provided them to us as possible food sources, and therefore our killing of them is accepted by him for those purposes. Any other ideas on the subject are simply peoples' opinions, which I have no problem with.
What do you think about canibalism? Humans are animals too. |
|
|
|
Renae
SFN Regular
543 Posts |
Posted - 01/07/2004 : 06:25:22 [Permalink]
|
Thanks, Woody. It takes a true animal lover to even GET what I wrote, let alone appreciate it.
Ivan, people using the Bible to justify torturing and eating animals is a hot-button issue of mine. It's hard for me to stay rational when I talk about it. Keep in mind, I do eat poultry and fish, but I do it with guilt, and I see no justification for my doing it other than it's best for me (Argument from Selfishness).
I thought that God preached, above all else, love. It isn't loving to harm a being which can feel physical and emotional pain. In fact, it's purely selfish. To say that animals were put here for us to eat is ex post facto arguing: it's justifying one's actions after the fact.
Ever think that maybe God gave us animals in order to learn about unconditional love, honoring the trust that is given to us, gentleness, kindness, or protectiveness? Of course, that can't possibly be true, because there's not a Bible passage that says that specifically, right? (sarcasm)
But this isn't the place to debate vegetarianism; that's a whole 'nother thread.
I can post some Bible contradictions, Ivan. But you'll invariably respond with a tortured rationalization, or yet another quote which, in your mind, trumps mine. Or worse, I'll get the smug, 'You don't understand' crap I usually get from Christians. Which is why, IMO, arguing the Bible is a self-serving and pointless exercise.
So I suggest you do your own google on "Bible contradictions" and see what you can find.
|
|
|
|
Renae
SFN Regular
543 Posts |
Posted - 01/07/2004 : 06:35:50 [Permalink]
|
I need to add:
As Woody said, I mean no negativity toward Hippy or Ivan, who both make valid points.
I happen to feel passionately about a few issues, is all. Blame it on the estrogen.  |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
