• 0 Posts
  • 71 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 21st, 2023

help-circle












  • letsgo@lemm.eetoAtheist Memes@lemmy.worldOxygen
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    29 days ago

    Sure. But there’s a process.

    1. Patience.
    2. Send prophets to try to correct behaviour.
    3. More patience.
    4. More prophets.
    5. Patience and prophets, over and over.
    6. OK fine, you won’t have it any other way. Judgment.

    We see prophets actually work. Jonah didn’t want to go to Nineveh, he wanted to jump straight to 6, but God had other plans. When God finally got him to go to Nineveh, the people listened, repented, and judgment was avoided. The reason Jonah didn’t want to go is that he thought there was a strong possibility of that outcome and he wanted the Ninevites to suffer judgment.

    Hmm… just noticed the sidebar. This defence of the OT probably violates Rule 1. Forget the above, yay God, what a dick, punishing people for being evil!


  • letsgo@lemm.eetoLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.worldCar
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    29 days ago

    Next time you’re driving somewhere, just pick a pedal and push it to see if it has the desired effect. If you go faster that’s the gas. If you go slower that’s the brake. If neither of them do anything try switching the engine on. You might need to fiddle with the gearstick as well, one of them makes you go backwards, the others are forwards. Just experiment and you’ll figure it out.

    Preferably well away from any othe traffic.




  • letsgo@lemm.eetoAtheist Memes@lemmy.worldOxygen
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    29 days ago

    I’d probably DuckDuckGo it. I based that comment on the use of the words “what” and “about”.

    /me visits DDG…

    Eh, maybe it’s the wrong word. This sort of reminds me of a discussion I saw on YT a few months ago between a Christian taking the eye argument, and Prof Dawkins giving his best response: lots of mights, maybes, could’ves, topped off with billions of years, which doesn’t appear to satisfy the former who then follows up with “what about…” I can’t remember what, but I do remember the gist of Dawkins’ response which was something along the lines of: you led with your best; I answered that; I’m not going round in circles at this point. So I’m with Dawkins now (and in fact as a Christian I actually agree with a lot of what he says. We do need to think things through and not take them on blind faith.)

    So in other words I’ve given a sound explanation for the dashing babies on a rock question and I’m going to leave it there.


  • letsgo@lemm.eetoAtheist Memes@lemmy.worldOxygen
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    29 days ago

    Sure, but we’re not in a gentleness and respect situation here. There’s me, and there’s a bunch of rabid fundamentalist atheists present. And no doubt some calm and rational ones too, but they’re not making themselves known at the moment. For example just look at the strawman (the bit between quotes) and judgmentalism (the prefix to your bible quote) in your own post. I think a good debater could and would avoid both those potholes.

    Not my quote but I like it nonetheless: when asking WWJD, remember that turning over tables and chasing everyone round with a whip is an option.