moralist Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 Michael writes: Peter and Greg, Support answered me quickly. (Yay! ) Are you using Internet Explorer 11? Apparently there is a glitch for copy/paste when using this browser on IPB. However, there is a patch (called a hook) and, following instructions from support, I have installed it. Now it should work (I hope). Simply do "hard refresh (CTRL+F5 on a Windows machine) [on] the posting screen" to quote the message I received. I don't know if you have to do this each time you post or only one time right now if you don't want to close OL and open it again. Please fiddle with this and let me know how it works out. Thanks, Michael Thanks for the diligence, Michael. Yes, I have Internet Explorer 11, and refreshing the posting screen doesn't make any difference. Everything is still the same. It's ok because I'm already used to it. As long as there's a way to get around it and to quote and post manually with the html post option, it's fine. Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 Greg,Please do me a favor. Clear your cookies and try again. (Or better, close the browser and start it again.) I want to make sure it doesn't work before I report the feedback to support.Thanks.Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 Wow!! Thanks Michael!I did all that keyboard stuff and a stunning redhead showed up and said that she needed a place to rest...thank you Michael...you da man ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moralist Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 Frank writes: Even before I came to the conclusion that a supernatural being was an illogical concept (see, for example, George H. Smith, Atheism: The Case Against God, p. 28), I had decided that if God of the Old Testament existed, with his destruction of millions by the flood and the fire and brimstone in Genesis and by the Angel of Death in Exodus, he must be a homicidal maniac. There are a couple of assumptions you made so as to arrive at your conclusion that God is a homicidal maniac. And just for clarity, I don't believe in your irrational morally depraved description of God any more than you do. The first assumption you made is that the evil people who were destroyed were actually good and did nothing to deserve what they got. That assumption naturally begets another in that you believe that there is no such thing as moral justice. For if God isn't just, certainly no one else could be either. However, you do have the consolation that Satan, also known as The Deceiver and The Accuser, is in total agreement with you. For he also accuses God of being unjust because he represents his own kind. So he also feels that evil people are only innocent helpless victims who did not deserve what they got. Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GALTGULCH8 Posted April 15, 2014 Author Share Posted April 15, 2014 Wow!! Thanks Michael!I did all that keyboard stuff and a stunning redhead showed up and said that she needed a place to rest...thank you Michael...you da man ...Link please!gg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francisco Ferrer Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 Frank writes:Even before I came to the conclusion that a supernatural being was an illogical concept (see, for example, George H. Smith, Atheism: The Case Against God, p. 28), I had decided that if God of the Old Testament existed, with his destruction of millions by the flood and the fire and brimstone in Genesis and by the Angel of Death in Exodus, he must be a homicidal maniac.There are a couple of assumptions you made so as to arrive at your conclusion that God is a homicidal maniac. And just for clarity, I don't believe in your irrational morally depraved description of God any more than you do.The first assumption you made is that the evil people who were destroyed were actually good and did nothing to deserve what they got. That assumption naturally begets another in that you believe that there is no such thing as moral justice. For if God isn't just, certainly no one else could be either.However, you do have the consolation that Satan, also known as The Deceiver and The Accuser, is in total agreement with you. For he also accuses God of being unjust because he represents his own kind. So he also feels that evil people are only innocent helpless victims who did not deserve what they got.GregOkay, what evil little tricks did the first born babies of the Egyptians play to "deserve" the "moral justice" of the death penalty?4 And Moses said, Thus saith the Lord, About midnight will I go out into the midst of Egypt:5 And all the firstborn in the land of Egypt shall die, from the first born of Pharaoh that sitteth upon his throne, even unto the firstborn of the maidservant that is behind the mill; and all the firstborn of beasts.6 And there shall be a great cry throughout all the land of Egypt, such as there was none like it, nor shall be like it any more.--Exodus 11:4–6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 God's not about morality; that's Jesus. God is about power, the power of reality through allegory reflecting patriarchy in cultures built on agriculture.--Brantmonotheistic religion mostly trumps any others with contesting gods and it didJesus is the God buffer (I think); that's why they burned Joan: she went straight to the source, so she said, threatening the temporal power of the Church (I imagine) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 Okay, what evil little tricks did the first born babies of the Egyptians play to "deserve" the "moral justice" of the death penalty?4 And Moses said, Thus saith the Lord, About midnight will I go out into the midst of Egypt:5 And all the firstborn in the land of Egypt shall die, from the first born of Pharaoh that sitteth upon his throne, even unto the firstborn of the maidservant that is behind the mill; and all the firstborn of beasts.6 And there shall be a great cry throughout all the land of Egypt, such as there was none like it, nor shall be like it any more.--Exodus 11:4–6There were ten plagues which Egypt suffered and which the Israelites did not. It was collective punishment. Yaweh is not a -nice- God. When He gets pissed He even kills Israelites.Ba'al Chatzaf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellen Stuttle Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 [...] why they burned Joan: she went straight to the source, so she said, threatening the temporal power of the Church (I imagine)She threatened more than that. There was a political context and a war, and her "magic" reputation was a "bad press" problem from the standpoint of the English. Besides which, she was inconvenient to the leaders on her own side.The trial lasted nine months because Cauchon, the head inquisitor, was an honest man who wanted to know if Joan was a witch - and to save her soul if he could.Ellen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 Just tie her to a chair and throw her in the river. If she floats she needs a witch's power. Haul her out and burn her. If she sinks she is innocent and God will take her from there. We don't need no stinkin' trial!--Brantstill works today! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellen Stuttle Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 Just tie her to a chair and throw her in the river. If she floats she needs a witche's power. If she sinks she wis innocent and God would take her from there.--Brantstill works today!That was Salem.Ellen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 I suppose so, but it still works today. All one needs is the courage to do it!--Brantare politicians witches?--let's find out!(the people who keep screwing up OL software sure are) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellen Stuttle Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 --Brantare politicians witches?--let's find out!(the people who keep screwing up OL software sure are)Those are gremlins.Ellen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmj Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 6 And there shall be a great cry throughout all the land of Egypt, such as there was none like it, nor shall be like it any more.So just a one off? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellen Stuttle Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 [...] why they burned Joan: she went straight to the source, so she said, threatening the temporal power of the Church (I imagine)She threatened more than that. There was a political context and a war, and her "magic" reputation was a "bad press" problem from the standpoint of the English. Besides which, she was inconvenient to the leaders on her own side.The trial lasted nine months because Cauchon, the head inquisitor, was an honest man who wanted to know if Joan was a witch - and to save her soul if he could.EllenA couple other points: She is called "Saint Joan," you know. The guilty verdict of the trial was reversed some years after her death and she was declared a martyr. Many years later (1920) she was declared a saint.Also, unlike some others who were canonized, Joan didn't claim to be talking directly to God, but instead to three emissaries, Archangel Michael, Saint Catherine, and Saint Margaret.It's true that the Church was (I suppose still is) leery of persons claiming to be getting input straight from the source, but the major issue with Joan's trial and sentencing was the threat she posed to English not to Churchly authority.At one point, about twenty-five years ago, a friend of mine, who was program director of the Connecticut Association for Jungian Psychology, did extensive research on Joan's life and gave a couple lectures about her. At that time I read the Vita Sackville-West biography. The biography includes sections from the trial transcript, plus my friend who was researching the story handed out copies of additional sections at the lectures he gave.Joan's performance in the trial was remarkable. Over the course of the nine months she was arrayed against, all told (not all at the same time), about 100 Church representatives trying to trap her into saying something definitively heretical. She kept managing to avoid the traps - an illiterate peasant girl, not yet 20 when she was burned at the stake (according to such information as can be gotten as to her birth date).One of my favorite replies was when a questioner was asking if Archangel Michael appeared clothed. "Do you think that God can not afford to clothe his saints?" she replied.One exchange has become oft-quoted. I'll copy it as told by Wikipedia:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joan_of_Arc]link"Asked if she knew she was in God's grace, she answered: 'If I am not, may God put me there; and if I am, may God so keep me.'"[59] The question is a scholarly trap. Church doctrine held that no one could be certain of being in God's grace. If she had answered yes, then she would have convicted herself of heresy. If she had answered no, then she would have confessed her own guilt. Notary Boisguillaume later testified that at the moment the court heard this reply, "Those who were interrogating her were stupefied."[60]Ellen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 Some years ago I found myself TV watching the silent 1930s movie The Passion of Joan of Arc. I immediately emailed Barbara Branden so she could watch it. It had a modern operatic sound track. The making of the movie was so wearing on the principal actress she never made another movie. The director pushed her to her limits if not over them in a way almost akin to actual torture. The result was cinematic brilliance and the most powerful movie I have ever seen including Francis Ford Capolla's presentation of the restored Napoleon, scored by Carmine Capolla, which I saw at its Radio City Music Hall premier.--Brant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 It has become almost too hard to even edit my posts.--Brantyou can always tell when the software on OL has been upgraded by the usual incompetents Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moralist Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 Frank writes: Okay, what evil little tricks did the first born babies of the Egyptians play to "deserve" the "moral justice" of the death penalty? People who do evil inflict the consequences of their immoral actions upon their own offspring. Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moralist Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 Michael writes: Greg, Please do me a favor. Clear your cookies and try again. (Or better, close the browser and start it again.) I want to make sure it doesn't work before I report the feedback to support. Thanks. Michael I cleared, cleaned, scanned, updated, and restarted... and the results remain the same. But it's all good, as long as there's a way to get around the obstacle. Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francisco Ferrer Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 Frank writes:Okay, what evil little tricks did the first born babies of the Egyptians play to "deserve" the "moral justice" of the death penalty?People who do evil inflict the consequences of their immoral actions upon their own offspring.GregIn Post #29, you wrote, "The first assumption you made is that the evil people who were destroyed were actually good and did nothing to deserve what they got."So what the first born babies "did" to "deserve what they got" was to choose evil parents to be born to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 Greg is the only one here I know of who is completely beyond any logic that contradicts anything he says. I don't think the rest of us need a refresher, but he does need to be bookmarked from time to time--so thanks.--Brant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 Greg is the only one here I know of who is completely beyond any logic that contradicts anything he says. I don't think the rest of us need a refresher, but he does need to be bookmarked from time to time--so thanks.--BrantThe fallacy that represents the Stalker's primary method of "thinking" is that of Affirming the Consequent.Evil actions have the consequence of misery.Fiona is experiencing misery.Therefore Fiona committed an evil act which caused the misery.J Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moralist Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 Frank writes: In Post #29, you wrote, "The first assumption you made is that the evil people who were destroyed were actually good and did nothing to deserve what they got." So what the first born babies "did" to "deserve what they got" was to choose evil parents to be born to? Let's start at the beginning: Do you have any children? Please answer the question. Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moralist Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 Brant writes: Greg is the only one here I know of who is completely beyond any logic that contradicts anything he says. I don't think the rest of us need a refresher, but he does need to be bookmarked from time to time--so thanks. --Brant Ok. Same question for you, too: Do you have any children? A simple yes or no will suffice, and then I'll continue... Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 But I don't want you to continue. Everything of value to me you've said I've fished, cooked and eaten and the rest is down the river now and I've not wanted you to continue for a long time. That doesn't mean, however, that I want you to stop.--BrantI'll not ever respond to this please answer the question first approach and you're the first to try it on me, as I recall, in the over seven years I've posted here, by answering the question; I don't like it's structural discourtesy although I've on occasion been otherwise discourteous here myself, sometimes apologizing, sometimes half-assed apologizing (not sure about this) and sometimes simply apologizing apart from not apologizing at all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now