or that black people are marked by God because they are descendants of Cain (and not Abel, like white people),
This is the part of their beliefs that most confuses me. I mean, do they have a version of the Bible that doesn't have the Flood in it? Because the universal flood killing off everyone except Noah and his family is kind of a thing in Christianity. So none of Cain's descendents made it out of Genesis. I really want to know how Mormons reconcile that with there being black people around today.
FYI, Abel was killed by Cain before having any children, too. Noah, and thus all of humanity if you take the Flood literally, was descended from Seth, Adam and Eve's third child.
The Mormons have their own version of the NT, OT, as well as supplemental books, of which the best known is The Book of Mormon.
About the only thing I'll say on their behalf is that the holy texts they use are freely available, so it's not as if it's a mystery cult. Anyone who wants to compare and contrast their religious literature with that of mainstream Christianity's is free to do so (and it has been done).
But yeah, they have a whole timeline of events that is wonky compared to what's in normal bibles.
"Sweetie, do you mind if I bring my <one of her roommates> to the ballet instead of you?"
"Well honey, I had started putting on my suit and getting ready, but if it's important to you I can stay home tonight."
"Awww, I'll make it up to you."
Now if you'll excuse me, I have pizza and football to watch.
Desc maybe its time to admit, you aren't very good at racing games.
It's god damned Deb Steppe who's driving, not me. I'm just watching it happen and wondering what all my pretend money is going to if we're not going to win fuckin' races.
On the other hand the car itself just leveled up, so ... I dunno what that means. I guess we'll be faster next.
Yeah if lie about your beliefs to make them more palatable to others, perhaps that should give you pause about having them as beliefs.
well I guess they could have good, genuine policy ideas to try to accomplish, but I guess you're right, they should completely kneecap their political careers and accomplish literally nothing
Or try and change the system by being a good well known atheist politician instead of a fucking coward who will just hope things change, but fuck if they will risk their career.
Because if you aren't willing to stand behind your own belief system for better or worse, than what the fuck can I trust you to stand behind as a poltician.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
"Sweetie, do you mind if I bring my <one of her roommates> to the ballet instead of you?"
"Well honey, I had started putting on my suit and getting ready, but if it's important to you I can stay home tonight."
"Awww, I'll make it up to you."
Now if you'll excuse me, I have pizza and football to watch.
*high five*
I sense and will accept nothing less than a hilarious sitcom resolution
or that black people are marked by God because they are descendants of Cain (and not Abel, like white people),
This is the part of their beliefs that most confuses me. I mean, do they have a version of the Bible that doesn't have the Flood in it? Because the universal flood killing off everyone except Noah and his family is kind of a thing in Christianity. So none of Cain's descendents made it out of Genesis. I really want to know how Mormons reconcile that with there being black people around today.
FYI, Abel was killed by Cain before having any children, too. Noah, and thus all of humanity if you take the Flood literally, was descended from Seth, Adam and Eve's third child.
How is the Flood a major part of Christianity? Can you show me any Christians apart from crazy fundamentalists who believe it actually happened?
Not a major part, but if you look at the different geneologies of Jesus between Matthew and Luke it kind of comes in to play.
or that black people are marked by God because they are descendants of Cain (and not Abel, like white people),
This is the part of their beliefs that most confuses me. I mean, do they have a version of the Bible that doesn't have the Flood in it? Because the universal flood killing off everyone except Noah and his family is kind of a thing in Christianity. So none of Cain's descendents made it out of Genesis. I really want to know how Mormons reconcile that with there being black people around today.
FYI, Abel was killed by Cain before having any children, too. Noah, and thus all of humanity if you take the Flood literally, was descended from Seth, Adam and Eve's third child.
Desc maybe its time to admit, you aren't very good at racing games.
It's god damned Deb Steppe who's driving, not me. I'm just watching it happen and wondering what all my pretend money is going to if we're not going to win fuckin' races.
On the other hand the car itself just leveled up, so ... I dunno what that means. I guess we'll be faster next.
Sure blame poor deb, who's trying her hardest while you are completely unaware of whats going on. God damn it desc she's giving years of her life out there for you! Haven't you seen days of thunder?
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
EG: anything at all about Egypt (eg: the exodus) in the OT is so far off from the archeologicial record (or the written records of the egyptians and others from the time it is talking about) its just absurd.
Actually, most of what the OT describes about Egypt is exactly in line with the archaeological record. We have Egyptian records for seven-year-long droughts, the story of Joseph in the Egyptian nobleman's house getting seduced by the wife is copied on the Egyptian "tale of two brothers", the cup-bearer was an important person in the Pharaoh's court, the reading of dreams was done much as the OT describes, the seal that the Pharaoh gave to Joseph was a real thing, the Pharaoh during the drought taking land "except that of the temple" is exactly in line with Egyptian civilization (where the temples accumulated so much land over the centuries and millenia they ended up rivalling the Pharaoh in power), there are expressions and names in Ancient Egyptian, and they even got the number of days between death and mummification right. "Moses" is an Ancient Egyptian name, and the Egyptians really did use straw in their clay bricks. Oh, and let's not forget Joseph living to be 110 years old, an age that Ancient Egyptians (not Jews) considered significant and wise.
Whoever wrote the Egyptian part of the OT wasn't being "absurd", he was in fact quite accurate and versed in Egyptian life and culture.
notsureifserious.jpg
I am. I'm not saying that Joseph and Moses are historical figures or that the specific events surrounding them happened - we have no records for that outside of the OT. But the details of Egyptian everyday life in the OT are quite accurate.
Actually no, no they aren't.
The details (and there are less than you'd think) of Egypt that are glimpsed here and there in the OT are of (specificially) northeastern egypt during the Saite period at the earliest (685-525 BCE). These are falsely thrust back in time to the bronze age despite them making no sense in that context.
Care to back that up with some examples of anachronistic details? Because otherwise I'm calling bullshit. The easiest thing to date is "A Tale of Two Brothers", which is from 1200BC. The royal cup bearer, dream interpretations, giving land to temples, and putting straw into mud bricks are all extremely old traditions as well, easily 1500-2000BC if not earlier.
Yeah if lie about your beliefs to make them more palatable to others, perhaps that should give you pause about having them as beliefs.
well I guess they could have good, genuine policy ideas to try to accomplish, but I guess you're right, they should completely kneecap their political careers and accomplish literally nothing
Elendil, you don't understand: being honest is more important than actually being able to accomplish anything.
This is why Democrats should never, ever say anything mean about Republicans.
Yeah if lie about your beliefs to make them more palatable to others, perhaps that should give you pause about having them as beliefs.
This is my point. How does that not apply to Mormons and atheists equally?
I have never advocated that anyone lie about their religious beliefs to get elected. Perhaps you confused me with one of the other forumers who have said atheists should lie to get elected. I don't condone that at all, as I have said.
or that black people are marked by God because they are descendants of Cain (and not Abel, like white people),
This is the part of their beliefs that most confuses me. I mean, do they have a version of the Bible that doesn't have the Flood in it? Because the universal flood killing off everyone except Noah and his family is kind of a thing in Christianity. So none of Cain's descendents made it out of Genesis. I really want to know how Mormons reconcile that with there being black people around today.
FYI, Abel was killed by Cain before having any children, too. Noah, and thus all of humanity if you take the Flood literally, was descended from Seth, Adam and Eve's third child.
Yeah if lie about your beliefs to make them more palatable to others, perhaps that should give you pause about having them as beliefs.
well I guess they could have good, genuine policy ideas to try to accomplish, but I guess you're right, they should completely kneecap their political careers and accomplish literally nothing
Or try and change the system by being a good well known atheist politician instead of a fucking coward who will just hope things change, but fuck if they will risk their career.
Because if you aren't willing to stand behind your own belief system for better or worse, than what the fuck can I trust you to stand behind as a poltician.
you can't be a good, well-known atheist politician if you're not getting fucking elected in the first place
or that black people are marked by God because they are descendants of Cain (and not Abel, like white people),
This is the part of their beliefs that most confuses me. I mean, do they have a version of the Bible that doesn't have the Flood in it? Because the universal flood killing off everyone except Noah and his family is kind of a thing in Christianity. So none of Cain's descendents made it out of Genesis. I really want to know how Mormons reconcile that with there being black people around today.
FYI, Abel was killed by Cain before having any children, too. Noah, and thus all of humanity if you take the Flood literally, was descended from Seth, Adam and Eve's third child.
How is the Flood a major part of Christianity? Can you show me any Christians apart from crazy fundamentalists who believe it actually happened?
I didn't say "major" part or that people believed it, I just said it was there. It's in every single version of the Bible that I know about.
And you're right, no one believes it happened except fundamentalists who take the Bible literally... and that would fit the description of someone who believes the Mark of Cain is a real thing, IMO.
or that black people are marked by God because they are descendants of Cain (and not Abel, like white people),
This is the part of their beliefs that most confuses me. I mean, do they have a version of the Bible that doesn't have the Flood in it? Because the universal flood killing off everyone except Noah and his family is kind of a thing in Christianity. So none of Cain's descendents made it out of Genesis. I really want to know how Mormons reconcile that with there being black people around today.
FYI, Abel was killed by Cain before having any children, too. Noah, and thus all of humanity if you take the Flood literally, was descended from Seth, Adam and Eve's third child.
The lineage is passed through Ham, Noah's son.
How? If Ham is Noah's son, and Noah is descended from Seth, how is Ham descended from Cain?
or that black people are marked by God because they are descendants of Cain (and not Abel, like white people),
This is the part of their beliefs that most confuses me. I mean, do they have a version of the Bible that doesn't have the Flood in it? Because the universal flood killing off everyone except Noah and his family is kind of a thing in Christianity. So none of Cain's descendents made it out of Genesis. I really want to know how Mormons reconcile that with there being black people around today.
FYI, Abel was killed by Cain before having any children, too. Noah, and thus all of humanity if you take the Flood literally, was descended from Seth, Adam and Eve's third child.
How is the Flood a major part of Christianity? Can you show me any Christians apart from crazy fundamentalists who believe it actually happened?
Let's just pretend I have handy a video of the Republican debate from 2008 where someone asked who believed in the literal truth of the Bible and most of the candidates raised their hands.
Thanatos on
0
Options
ThomamelasOnly one man can kill this many Russians. Bring his guitar to me! Registered Userregular
Yeah if lie about your beliefs to make them more palatable to others, perhaps that should give you pause about having them as beliefs.
This is my point. How does that not apply to Mormons and atheists equally?
I have never advocated that anyone lie about their religious beliefs to get elected. Perhaps you confused me with one of the other forumers who have said atheists should lie to get elected. I don't condone that at all, as I have said.
No, you said that people with unpopular beliefs should reconsider them since they're unpopular for a reason, and I pointed out that that applies to atheists just as well.
atheists should absolutely be deceptive about their beliefs if running for political office
This really doesn't help much when people accuse atheists of being amoral.
I guess atheists are really bothered by the fact that people generally want to elect people who they feel share their beliefs.
Most atheists are amoral. Many I know are good, ethical people, and definitely not immoral. But they are amoral.
That's nice. But the voting public probably isn't OK with that.
So I guess that makes lying to them OK?
Because atheists have so many great ideas that are bound to fix everything that them getting political power is that important?
What's the difference between atheists who want other atheists to lie their way into office and Randian Robert Jordan fans who wank to the idea of some prick with a magic nuclear sword executing everyone who doesn't toe the line, seizing power, and establishing a wonderful dictatorship filled with moral clarity?
Oh no a link to tvtropes now I have an excuse for being a useless piece of shit who just browses the web all day! I better make a big deal out of iiiiiiiiit
0
Options
Podlyyou unzipped me! it's all coming back! i don't like it!Registered Userregular
atheists should absolutely be deceptive about their beliefs if running for political office
This really doesn't help much when people accuse atheists of being amoral.
I guess atheists are really bothered by the fact that people generally want to elect people who they feel share their beliefs.
Most atheists are amoral. Many I know are good, ethical people, and definitely not immoral. But they are amoral.
wha?
Morals are often discussed in the terms of law and are somehow constitutive of human experience. They are speculative, and it's assumed that we somehow "grasp" them, as if they have some abstract and universal property for them. They are extra-sensual. For an atheist to doubt the existence of god and yet uphold these universal absolutes that are unknowable isn't exactly a strong belief foundation.
Yeah if lie about your beliefs to make them more palatable to others, perhaps that should give you pause about having them as beliefs.
This is my point. How does that not apply to Mormons and atheists equally?
I have never advocated that anyone lie about their religious beliefs to get elected. Perhaps you confused me with one of the other forumers who have said atheists should lie to get elected. I don't condone that at all, as I have said.
No, you said that people with unpopular beliefs should reconsider them since they're unpopular for a reason, and I pointed out that that applies to atheists just as well.
I remember when you couldn't post a link to TVTropes because people would be furious that you made them spend the next few hours on that site clicking and clicking. Now people hate it. I don't remember ever liking it but this transition is so sudden! Seems like it happened in the past year or two.
Oh no a link to tvtropes now I have an excuse for being a useless piece of shit who just browses the web all day! I better make a big deal out of iiiiiiiiit
I know you're mocking this response
which is appropriate because whenever I see it
I'm like "Well, I guess you're very easily entertained, and that's probably a pretty awesome thing considering how much money it can save you over a lifetime."
Posts
The Mormons have their own version of the NT, OT, as well as supplemental books, of which the best known is The Book of Mormon.
About the only thing I'll say on their behalf is that the holy texts they use are freely available, so it's not as if it's a mystery cult. Anyone who wants to compare and contrast their religious literature with that of mainstream Christianity's is free to do so (and it has been done).
But yeah, they have a whole timeline of events that is wonky compared to what's in normal bibles.
yes, well played
It's god damned Deb Steppe who's driving, not me. I'm just watching it happen and wondering what all my pretend money is going to if we're not going to win fuckin' races.
On the other hand the car itself just leveled up, so ... I dunno what that means. I guess we'll be faster next.
Or try and change the system by being a good well known atheist politician instead of a fucking coward who will just hope things change, but fuck if they will risk their career.
Because if you aren't willing to stand behind your own belief system for better or worse, than what the fuck can I trust you to stand behind as a poltician.
pleasepaypreacher.net
This really doesn't help much when people accuse atheists of being amoral.
I guess atheists are really bothered by the fact that people generally want to elect people who they feel share their beliefs.
I'm not a rookie.
Not a major part, but if you look at the different geneologies of Jesus between Matthew and Luke it kind of comes in to play.
The lineage is passed through Ham, Noah's son.
Sure blame poor deb, who's trying her hardest while you are completely unaware of whats going on. God damn it desc she's giving years of her life out there for you! Haven't you seen days of thunder?
pleasepaypreacher.net
Care to back that up with some examples of anachronistic details? Because otherwise I'm calling bullshit. The easiest thing to date is "A Tale of Two Brothers", which is from 1200BC. The royal cup bearer, dream interpretations, giving land to temples, and putting straw into mud bricks are all extremely old traditions as well, easily 1500-2000BC if not earlier.
This is why Democrats should never, ever say anything mean about Republicans.
I have never advocated that anyone lie about their religious beliefs to get elected. Perhaps you confused me with one of the other forumers who have said atheists should lie to get elected. I don't condone that at all, as I have said.
Most atheists are amoral. Many I know are good, ethical people, and definitely not immoral. But they are amoral.
Is that why jews don't eat pork?
and he feels weird and alone and different in a way he can't quite name
and he wrote that weird book about the song singing kid everyone wanted to fuck
wha?
SOMEONE BEING RUDE OR POLITE IS NOT 'SUBVERTING A TROPE'
WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU
GO TO JAIL
Welcome to motorsport.
And you're right, no one believes it happened except fundamentalists who take the Bible literally... and that would fit the description of someone who believes the Mark of Cain is a real thing, IMO.
Some of those looks they share is down right :winky:
Also, if a dead croc wrangler endorses a product, I ask no questions and purchase twenty copies.
Free? no, no, I am paying.
Wait what
How? If Ham is Noah's son, and Noah is descended from Seth, how is Ham descended from Cain?
My life is just one big AP English essay.
The whole "All homephobes are closeted gays" isn't that true, but in his case I'm kinda thinking it is.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DoNotPassGo
That's nice. But the voting public probably isn't OK with that.
So I guess that makes lying to them OK?
Because atheists have so many great ideas that are bound to fix everything that them getting political power is that important?
What's the difference between atheists who want other atheists to lie their way into office and Randian Robert Jordan fans who wank to the idea of some prick with a magic nuclear sword executing everyone who doesn't toe the line, seizing power, and establishing a wonderful dictatorship filled with moral clarity?
I can tell you what's the same about them.
Oh no a link to tvtropes now I have an excuse for being a useless piece of shit who just browses the web all day! I better make a big deal out of iiiiiiiiit
Morals are often discussed in the terms of law and are somehow constitutive of human experience. They are speculative, and it's assumed that we somehow "grasp" them, as if they have some abstract and universal property for them. They are extra-sensual. For an atheist to doubt the existence of god and yet uphold these universal absolutes that are unknowable isn't exactly a strong belief foundation.
No, that's not what I said.
Ahaha, I watched it again while muting it and I see what you mean.
I know you're mocking this response
which is appropriate because whenever I see it
I'm like "Well, I guess you're very easily entertained, and that's probably a pretty awesome thing considering how much money it can save you over a lifetime."
my dad said the polite way to say it is 'barnyard'
beautiful, beautiful wine though