Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,902 Year: 4,159/9,624 Month: 1,030/974 Week: 357/286 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


EvC Forum ⇒ Side Orders ⇒ Coffee House ⇒

How low can you go - or how fundie xianity and jihadist islam are the same

Thread ▼ Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev12
Author Topic:   How low can you go - or how fundie xianity and jihadist islam are the same
Dogmafood
Member (Idle past 378 days)
Posts: 1815
From: Ontario Canada
Joined: 08-04-2010

Dogmafood Posts Only
Message 16 of 19 (675533)
10-12-2012 9:11 AM 		Reply to: Message 15 by Coragyps
10-12-2012 8:36 AM

Our sheriff then was named Buck Fuqua,
​
Is that pronounced Buck Fuckwa?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Coragyps, posted 10-12-2012 8:36 AM Coragyps has not replied
  
Larni
Member
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005

Larni Posts Only
Message 17 of 19 (675534)
10-12-2012 9:18 AM 		Reply to: Message 12 by caffeine
10-12-2012 4:58 AM

Re: Context?
I got the impression he was simply following the Bible because that is what he thinks Christians should do.
​
But my eyes sort of glazed over when my Faith Filters kicked in.
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53
​
The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286
​
Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by caffeine, posted 10-12-2012 4:58 AM caffeine has seen this message but not replied
  
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1053 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008

caffeine Posts Only
Message 18 of 19 (675709)
10-15-2012 5:17 AM 		Reply to: Message 14 by saab93f
10-12-2012 6:40 AM

Re: Context?
He seems to be serious - he even describes the judicial process that would lead to eventual executions and goes on to tell that it would guarantee that things would not be done in haste.
​
How effing sick does one have to be even to entertain such thoughts?
​
I don't know - it doesn't read to me like he's decribing a judicial procedure to be put in place. It reads like he's saying that they had such procedures in place in the Bible, so that kids weren't actually killed, so this outdated bit of morality is okay to find in a book I have to believe is relevant today.
​
It's worrying enough that he feels it necessary to defend, but I don't think he's advocating its introduction today.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by saab93f, posted 10-12-2012 6:40 AM saab93f has not replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by Larni, posted 10-15-2012 6:44 AM caffeine has not replied
  
Larni
Member
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005

Larni Posts Only

(1)
Message 19 of 19 (675712)
10-15-2012 6:44 AM 		Reply to: Message 18 by caffeine
10-15-2012 5:17 AM

Re: Context?
I think he is. He seems to imply that by the existence of apparatus to legally kill your kids the 'kids' of today would be far more respectful of their parents.
​
The actuality of the death penalty would act as a deterant to potentially rebellious kids: just like the death penalty for adults deters people from being criminals (i.e. not at all).
​
An example of a Christian who is as thick as pig shit.
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53
​
The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286
​
Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by caffeine, posted 10-15-2012 5:17 AM caffeine has not replied
  
Date format: mm-dd-yyyy
Timezone: ET (US)
  
Prev12
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024