Jump to content

The Scenario Ranking Contest Has Begun!


Recommended Posts

...you hate me, ADoS?

 

I always thought it was most likely that Cain married his sister - maybe a neice. Marriage within the family was commonplace in early Old Testament times (Abraham married his half-sister, for example), and it was never forbidden until the time of Moses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Fundie" is short for "fundamentalist" which is a person who not only is very religious, but also who dislikes people who are not of their religion, and takes their religion to be absolute, undeniable truth, even when offered evidence to the contrary. The simple fact that you play these games without freaking out about the magic and the fact that you don't hate TM (even though he may say you do) shows that you are not a fundie.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Terry Pratchett's books show what terrible things gods can deny you. In one book, there was a god who denied his believers chocolate! *gasp*

The moral of this post is: If someone denies you chocolate(or something else that you love) ignore them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah. So a fundie is someone who acts towards non-believers the same way you do to fundies. wink

 

I'm pretty sure the Terry Pratchett thing was only meant as a joke. After all, what sense would there be in quoting Pratchett to make a serious point? BoE's good, but it's better to keep a good relationship with your mother. There are other games, but you've only got one of her.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
I'm pretty sure the Terry Pratchett thing was only meant as a joke. After all, what sense would there be in quoting Pratchett to make a serious point?
I was joking . His books are so random, it would take several thousand lawyers several years to find out how you could make a serious point. That was an exaggeration and I have nothing against lawyers. My aunt's one.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Imban's definition of fundamentalism is much more on-target, really. I find them rather frustrating because the whole philosophy makes little sense if you know anything about state of textual scholarship of the Bible (which was charitably described in an introduction as being in a state of "flux"), but I try to let them have their views as I have mine. Also their literal interpretations are literal based on what the Bible says in English, which is obviously problematic in itself, and discussion is rather useless, because they tend just to say "The Bible says so," rather than "[x chapter and y verse] says so."

 

Intolerance is intolerance, regardless of whether it is based in a traditional religion or in atheism. I try not to judge each fundie that I meet by every other fundie that I've ever met, but it becomes hard after meeting a lot that all behave the same way. Still, I try to keep an open mind.

 

Creator, I find you much more tolerable than most people with as strong religious beliefs as you because you don't try to call down the hellfire and damnation as soon as you enter a discussion. Fundies have been known to shout things like "YOU ARE DOING THE DEVIL'S WORK! YOU ARE GOING TO HELL!" when they are refused a donation -- they are rather irritating around campus here, for sure. You actually seem genuinely relieved to discuss issues without anger, which is why I would care to have a real discussion with you, which I wouldn't with most religious people.

 

Er, there was some point to this, but it was lost somewhere along the line.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I know people like that. They can get on my nerves, too. There's this little mind game I play with other Christians:

 

Me: "Can God do anything?"

Them: "Yeah, of course."

Me: "Can he make a rock so big that he can't move it?"

 

Most laugh, but a few get angry for some reason. :p

 

I tend to think people like that understand what 'the rules' are, but don't really think about why they exist. They lose sight of the fact that we are ALL people and we are ALL loved children of God, regardless of whether we return that love or not. Which is strange, because it's one of the most fundamental parts of Christianity.

 

Personally, as a writer, I make every effort to be able to see and understand every point of view. After all, everyone is right from their own perspective. I also have a very strange selection of Christian friends. Loads of divorcees, a lot of former drug addicts, and a murderer. I feel kinda out of place at church, because I don't have any tattoos. :p

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, fine. Instead, I'll say I dislike cleegflorblies. That's the new name for the thing I described. Creator is not a cleegflorblie.

I suppose "hate" was the wrong word though. I suppose it would be better said as "Cleegflorblies annoy me."

Note that I am agnostic, not atheist. TM is atheist, but also a cleegflorblie.

Cleegflorblie. Ha.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, Creator, He could. He could turn the entire universe into a rock.

 

By so doing, He created a rock. And then He can't move it, because there's nothing else in creation for Him to move it in relation to.

 

Anyway, it's already been discussed by a lot of prominent people - God can remain omnipotent and yet incapable of doing things that are logically impossible.

 

For some things God cannot do, however. God cannot make 2 plus 2 equal 95 in our standard base-10 arithmetic system. God cannot sin. As explained in a much better thought-out paper than this statement, there are no limits to God's power, but God cannot do things that cannot be done with an application of power.

 

---

 

Why are we having a theological discussion here?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be simpler and more easily visualised for Him to just increase the size of the current universe and create a small pebble in it, so that He could move the previously-universe-sized rock in relation to the smaller pebble.

 

However, that's not the point. I was just showing that God could create a rock so big that He could not move it (at least, immediately) without infringing on His omnipotence, using just a semantic argument.

 

Point is, while it can be an amusing question, it's hardly a 'disproof of God', even without having to resort to "well, because!" arguments.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But God doesn't kill people just for fun, he does it is part of his plan for the world.

 

And his plan is sinless and a persons isn't, so that doesn't justify someone going out and killing someone because it was part of their plan, either.

 

Oh well, go back to your conversation; I'm finding it quite interesting. smile

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...