Morality of the Old Testament

[shunyadragon]

Spanish?

I will not respond to any Youtube posts.

 

[Banach-Tarski Paradox]

I will not respond to any Youtube posts.

Of course not. It’s against your religion.

We Don't Talk About Bruno (From "Encanto")​

 

[jimb]

I rely on academic Christian and Jewish scholars not my own knowledge.

You are the on that thinks you know all the answers and believe that only those that believe as you do understand the Bible. Your denial of the view of scholars and actual citations of the Bible concerning slavery is problematic.

You have stated it perfectly! Instead of relying on God's wisdom and faith in Him, you rely on academics! That is your problem!!!

I am not "the on" [sic] "that" [sic] thinks I know all the answers. I am the one who relies on God for wisdom, not fallible people who constantly disagree, a.k.a., academics. God alone is truth.

 

[shunyadragon]

You have stated it perfectly! Instead of relying on God's wisdom and faith in Him, you rely on academics! That is your problem!!!

I am not "the on" [sic] "that" [sic] thinks I know all the answers. I am the one who relies on God for wisdom, not fallible people who constantly disagree, a.k.a., academics. God alone is truth.

Based on your posts you are the one who has all the answers, because you have clearly and specifically stated that only those that believe as you do know the truth understands the scriptures, and rejecting Jewish and Christian academia, which directly translates to "you know all the answers."

 

[jimb]

I do not consider your problematic view of "academia vs God." remotely valid. Grammar errors is not a valid argument for anything. You are simply denying the archaeological, historical and scientific objective evidence to justify the belief in one and only one belief where you throw up a stoic stonewall of denial with the intentional ignorance of the factual history behind the Bible. Your stoic denial is sad, but not a joke.

My references include Jewish scholars over the past 200 years who know their scriptures far better than you or me in their own language. My references also include factual citation of scripture, which you also deny. They do not believe in academia vs the God that they do sincerely believe.

I don't really care what you think about my "problematic view". Since you lack faith in God and worship academics I simply don't respect your opinions.

BTW, nice run-on sentence! LOL! As shown previously, you constantly make grammatical errors. Not too good for one who worships academics instead of God.

Also, watch your verb tenses. You wrote, "Grammar errors is not a valid argument for anything". "... errors is"?

"Stoic"? Do you even understand the words that you use? A "Stoic" is defined as "one who is seemingly indifferent to or unaffected by joy, grief, pleasure, or pain", which is irrelevant nonsense. How is "my denial" indifferent to or unaffected by joy, grief, pleasure, or pain?

I give your post a C- grade (and that is generous).

 

[jimb]

Based on your posts you are the one who has all the answers, because you have clearly and specifically stated that only those that believe as you do know the truth understands the scriptures, and rejecting Jewish and Christian academia, which directly translates to "you know all the answers."

Another run-on sentence! And meaningless. How does "the truth understands the scriptures"???

Rejecting Jewish and Christian academia does not directly translate to "you know all the answers." I have been around academia long enough -- many years in fact -- to clearly understand that academics disagree with each other constantly. If you disagree, then you're not acquainted with academia!

You are clearly confused! You may think that you're positively impressing anyone with your pseudo-academic approach, but just the opposite is true. In serious academia, you would be considered a joke!

 

[Banach-Tarski Paradox]

Based on your posts you are the one who has all the answers, because you have clearly and specifically stated that only those that believe as you do know the truth understands the scriptures, and rejecting Jewish and Christian academia, which directly translates to "you know all the answers."

Well, to be fair, you jumped into this whole conversation simply to deny the Holy Wars that my wife’s ancestors fought against slavery.

 

[shunyadragon]

I don't really care what you think about my "problematic view". Since you lack faith in God and worship academics I simply don't respect your opinions.

BTW, nice run-on sentence! LOL! As shown previously, you constantly make grammatical errors. Not too good for one who worships academics instead of God.

Also, watch your verb tenses. You wrote, "Grammar errors is not a valid argument for anything". "... errors is"?

"Stoic"? Do you even understand the words that you use? A "Stoic" is defined as "one who is seemingly indifferent to or unaffected by joy, grief, pleasure, or pain", which is irrelevant nonsense. How is "my denial" indifferent to or unaffected by joy, grief, pleasure, or pain?

I give your post a C- grade (and that is generous).

For one who uses stoic stonewalling to reject the academic this is a problematic response,

Would the rejection of an argument because of a grammatical error be a type of logical fallacy?

Many people may have experienced situations (often online) where someone dismisses another's argument not on the merits of the argument, but because of a grammatical (or, more generally, mechanical)

english.stackexchange.com

Many people may have experienced situations (often online) where someone dismisses another's argument not on the merits of the argument, but because of a grammatical (or, more generally, mechanical) error. Instead of errors that could actually confuse the meaning of a statement, I'm thinking of errors like using "that" to refer to a person rather than "who," where the ability to process meaning is not disrupted.
Generically, I guess it might be considered an ad hominem ("What do you know? You can't even use a comma correctly!"), but I'm just curious if there's a more specific term for such a thing.

Please do not play the fallacy role of the grammarian and respond to the substance of the posts.

 

[shunyadragon]

Another run-on sentence! And meaningless. How does "the truth understands the scriptures"???

Rejecting Jewish and Christian academia does not directly translate to "you know all the answers." I have been around academia long enough -- many years in fact -- to clearly understand that academics disagree with each other constantly. If you disagree, then you're not acquainted with academia!

You are clearly confused! You may think that you're positively impressing anyone with your pseudo-academic approach, but just the opposite is true. In serious academia, you would be considered a joke!

Yes. two claims you make amount to the claim that "You know all the answers": (1) Rejection of sound academic sources as "academia vs God" argument. (2) Claiming only those who believe as you do understand the truth of scriptures.

 

[Banach-Tarski Paradox]

Many people may have experienced situations (often online) where someone dismisses another's argument not on the merits of the argument, but…

I’ve had that experience right here in this thread.

 

[shunyadragon]

I’ve had that experience right here in this thread.

Idiotic off topic Youtube videos do not remotely reflect any argument that may be considered one's belief nor the merits of any argument. You have not presented anything concerning what you believe that merits a response.

Actually the proliferation of Youtube videos is cluttering a thread with OFF TOPIC meaningless nonsense.

None of these Youtube videos are remotely relevant to the topic of the thread,

I have no idea what your beliefs and views concerning the thread subject are,

 

[Elihoenai]

The Catholic Church has provided the Catholic Catechism to prevent precisely that. The whole point of the Catechism is that the Pope and the Church's myriad scholars have studied and researched and interpreted every passage in the Bible-- both Old and New Testaments-- and they have laid before the Church's followers its proper and true interpretation. So all you have to do is read the Catechism to know what is true. You don't have to learn ancient Hebrew and Greek, you don't have to spend decades learning about the cultural and historical milieu in which the Bible's many documents were written. All that work has already been done for you.

Martin Luther rebelled against that hierarchical structure and insisted that all Christians have both the right and the responsibility to read and interpret the Bible in their own way. That's why he provided the first German translation of the Bible-- to enable people of his homeland to read and study the Bible in their native language.

Those are two different extremes along a spectrum of how the Bible should be understood. My objection to @Elihoenai's remark is not that he cited passages from the Bible, but that he refused to even consider the passages that I cited from the Bible that, in my opinion, counter his interpretation. I think we should feel free to openly discuss any and all passages in the Bible, not just those that are the favorites of any one individual or group.

@DavidSMoore, In the Esoteric Gnostic Tradition Spiritual Teaching are kept Secret/Esoteric as only Elohim/God can Reveal these teachings to you. Since you don't believe in Elohim/God you won't understand this.

I only post on a public forum what Elohim/God tells me to write. I discussed Freely with you some of the Moral aspects of the Bible. I post Exoteric content on a Public forum.

 

[shunyadragon]

Well, to be fair, you jumped into this whole conversation simply to deny the Holy Wars that my wife’s ancestors fought against slavery.

I posted no such thing. Need's clarification concerning the Holy wars and the issues of your ancestors, Relevance????

It iis a fact that your proliferation of Youtube posts are OFF TOPIC of the thread.

 

[Banach-Tarski Paradox]

I posted no such thing. Need's clarification concerning the Holy wars and the issues of your ancestors, Relevance????

It iis a fact that your proliferation of Youtube posts are OFF TOPIC of the thread.

I’m not interested in critiquing your abilities to read for comprehension, so let’s just go back to this. Here’s the artist himself explaining the elements of his composition.

Memoriandar con Adolfo Albán Achinte sobre un Canto a la Escuetería o "Los macheteros del Patía"​

 

[shunyadragon]

Another run-on sentence! And meaningless. How does "the truth understands the scriptures"???

Rejecting Jewish and Christian academia does not directly translate to "you know all the answers." I have been around academia long enough -- many years in fact -- to clearly understand that academics disagree with each other constantly. If you disagree, then you're not acquainted with academia!

You are clearly confused! You may think that you're positively impressing anyone with your pseudo-academic approach, but just the opposite is true. In serious academia, you would be considered a joke!

Grammarian fallacy continues unabated. I am not trying to impress anyone, and not confused at all.

Academic sources with archaeological, historical evidence, and Bible citations is not confusing.

 

[metis]

Although Albert Einstein was a Natural Genius he didn't have a clue where the Bible is concerned:

Categorically false, as he said he believed in "Spinoza's God", which is more of a pantheistic/panentheistic approach. However, where he was wrong was with his belief if the Steady-State Theory, which he believed God caused as such.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Grammarian fallacy continues unabated.

OMG!

I am not trying to impress anyone, and not confused at all.

Kudos on mastering the first goal.

Academic sources with archaeological, historical evidence, and Bible citations is not confusing.

I think you meant "are not confusing."

 

[Kathryn]

Idiotic off topic Youtube videos do not remotely reflect any argument that may be considered one's belief nor the merits of any argument. You have not presented anything concerning what you believe that merits a response.

Actually the proliferation of Youtube videos is cluttering a thread with OFF TOPIC meaningless nonsense.

None of these Youtube videos are remotely relevant to the topic of the thread,

I have no idea what your beliefs and views concerning the thread subject are,

I always feel manipulated and held hostage by YouTube videos myself. But maybe that's just me. Same with podcasts and narrated books, Just let me read something. I can and will decide for myself as far as the validity of the source goes.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I always feel manipulated and held hostage by YouTube videos myself.

I love YouTube for the music it makes accessible but detest it for most other things. Give me something I can scan and/or highlight if I choose.

 

[Kathryn]

I love YouTube for the music it makes accessible but detest it for most other things. Give me something I can scan and/or highlight if I choose.

Amen to all of this.