[Credendovidis]

1) You are assuming that the source is not Biblical. So far you offered no evidence for that. You assume that some other documents are older than the first instance of this in the Bible, but you have not validated that statement.

Just as you have never provided OSE for god's existence, but still claim that whatever you believe is factual...
Why should to me apply what seems not to apply to yourself ?

Second, you have not validated why you believe the source to be not Biblical.

This is essential the same as your point 1, so once more :
Why should to me apply what seems not to apply to yourself ?

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

.

.

[Tj3]

Just as you have never provided OSE for god's existence, but still claim that whatever you believe is factual ...
Why should to me apply what seems not to apply to yourself ?

Still in denial even after a thread that went over 500 posts!

[inthebox]

Just as you have never provided OSE for god's existence, but still claim that whatever you believe is factual ...
Why should to me apply what seems not to apply to yourself ?

This is essential the same as your point 1, so once more :
Why should to me apply what seems not to apply to yourself ?

Come on Cred. Just a diversion from not answering or proving your points made in your OP. :confused:











g&p

[Alty]

Tom, I've also tried to reach a truce with you to no avail. You claim to want to discuss respectfully, yet you keep dredging up past conversations and claiming that your way is the only way.

I've extended the olive branch with you and had it thrown back in my face. Now I know what you'll say, you'll claim it's me, that I wouldn't discuss respectfully, and you'd be partly right. After many attempts to have a respectful discussion with you, I gave up and decided to stoop to your level instead.

You have your own agenda, and nothing will get in the way of that. I don't think you really want to hear what others have to say, you're only here to preach you beliefs, to show that you are right and everyone else is wrong.

There is not respectful discussion with someone who doesn't want to listen. Feel free to say the same of me, because again, you'd be partially right. I have no desire to listen to any more of your rantings.

You are the only one of this board that I have a problem with Tom, doesn't that tell you something?

[Tj3]

Tom, I've also tried to reach a truce with you to no avail.

Alty,

If you want to have respectful discussion, it is entirely in your hands. Just stop the abuse. And if you do not plan to do so, then why not just stop talking about it, and move on somewhere else.

I've extended the olive branch with you and had it thrown back in my face.

You do not like me disagreeing with you. And that "olive branch" is the only one that I have seen with poison tipped thorns - It comes with conditions that I must do as you say, accept your beliefs, stop disagreeing with you, etc. conditions that you know are not reasonable. I impose no conditions on you. I will treat you respectfully no matter what, but a respectful discussion is a 2-way street. So, once again, if you want to discuss respectfully, all you need to do is to stop the attacks, and lets get into the discussion.

You have your own agenda, and nothing will get in the way of that.

Yes, my agenda is the truth.

I don't think you really want to hear what others have to say, you're only here to preach you beliefs, to show that you are right and everyone else is wrong.

The question is not whether we believe that our religious views are right and your religion is wrong. Every person believes that or they would not hold to their religious views. The problem comes when one person says that the other must accept their views, as you have said to the Christians on here. All of us present our views on here, yourself included, but most including myself accept the right of others to respectfully disagree. Why won't you agree to that also? Why must others accept YOUR religious views?

There is not respectful discussion with someone who doesn't want to listen. Feel free to say the same of me, because again, you'd be partially right. I have no desire to listen to any more of your rantings.

And following your logic, that means that you have no intent to discuss respectfully - BINGO! Alty, I have absolutely no interest in constantly listening to your attacks and abuse. If you don't want to talk to me, put me on ignore. That won't hurt my feelings one iota. IF you want respectful discussions, then drop the axe and let's discuss. I hold nothing against you, and am more than willing to start over with you anytime that you are ready to do so. That door will never close. But either way, your constant attacks against me serve no purpose.

Indeed, it leads one to wonder why you chose to interrupt this discussion to launch a person attack against me. Are you planning to do this on every thread? Kindly get over it and move on. This is beginning to look like an obsession.

[Alty]

Tom, when I say that I would like people to accept my beliefs, I'm not saying that you have to agree with them, simply accept that there are other beliefs than your own.

I don't expect anyone to jump on board and follow my beliefs, I would simply like the same respect that you expect.

You really don't see it do you? You expect everyone to say that your way is the only way, that your "proof" is absolute, that you beliefs are the one true way to God. But, when I ask that you listen to what I have to say you won't. You just quote scripture and say that only you are right.

That's why there can be no discussion with you. A one sided discussion isn't a discussion, it's preaching, that's what you are doing Tom.

So, no matter how hard I try, it's not possible. I know you don't agree, so be it, I think we've already established that you and I don't see eye to eye. Until you drop your guard we cannot have respect for one another, because you do not respect me, so how can you hope to respectfully discuss religion with me? It's not possible.

I wish it were different Tom, but it is what it is and I can't change it, I'm tired of trying.

Maybe I'll see you around the boards, maybe one day we can both be respectful, until then I think it's better for everyone if we just ignore each other.

Cred, I do apologize for getting off topic. Good luck with your thread.

Peace.

Alty out.

[NeedKarma]

Alt,
There is an Ignore feature on this site. Now seems like a good time to use it.

[Tj3]

Tom, when I say that I would like people to accept my beliefs, I'm not saying that you have to agree with them, simply accept that there are other beliefs than your own.

That is not what you have done in practice. In practice, you have demanded that we accept that your views are equally right, and of course many Christians have disagreed with your perspective on that and tried to explain to you that your request is not reasonable. Further, you have never practiced that view of accepting Christian views as equal to yours or we would not be having this discussion.

I don't expect anyone to jump on board and follow my beliefs, I would simply like the same respect that you expect.

You have it and always have had. If you want a respectful discussion, then stop the attacks and let's have that discussion. If you don't, then why not just move on or put me on ignore.

You really don't see it do you? You expect everyone to say that your way is the only way, that your "proof" is absolute, that you beliefs are the one true way to God. But, when I ask that you listen to what I have to say you won't. You just quote scripture and say that only you are right.

Alty, this is not true, but there is no value in arguing it with you. If you really believe it, then move on or put me on ignore. These constant rants against me across the board serve no purpose.

That's why there can be no discussion with you. A one sided discussion isn't a discussion, it's preaching, that's what you are doing Tom.

Then why do you carry on these abusive rants?

I wish it were different Tom, but it is what it is and I can't change it,

Sure you can - just stop the rants and start respectful discussion. Or move on or put me on ignore. Simple. It is entirely in your hands. I hold nothing against you and am more than willing to accept either approach. If you chose to drop the axe and start discussing respectfully, I will continue to treat you respectfully. If you choose to put me on ignore, you can do so with my best wishes for your future. Keep in mind that at any time you could always choose to change that decision, and I will keep the door open for you. No matter what you have done to me, or said to me, it will not change that.

Why can't you accept that, make your decision and move on in the path that you choose?

[NeedKarma]

Then why do you carry on these abusive rants?

I believe that you are the only one that sees "abusive rants" here. Please stop attempting to paint yourself as a victim, it's not working.

[Tj3]

I believe that you are the only one that sees "abusive rants" here. Please stop attempting to paint yourself as a victim, it's not working.

NK,

You are, if course, welcome to your opinion, however you have not been known for taking the neutral middle ground either, so I would not expect any endorsement or agreement from you (and I hardly think that you are in a position to speak on behalf of all members of AMHD). But that does not matter, because while you and Alty try to focus on the person, you appear to have forgotten the topic, and I find that rather ironic. :D I wonder, what would this thread and this discussion have been like if ALL posts in the thread had been written with the Golden Rule as the primary focus?

In any case, I do hope that Alty is able to bring closure to her decision and then move on.

Tom

[Alty]

Alt,
There is an Ignore feature on this site. Now seems like a good time to use it.

I agree. As for the open door that Tom speaks of, it was never open to begin with, and I'm tired of knocking. Ignore it is, I'm done.

[Tj3]

I agree. As for the open door that Tom speaks of, it was never open to begin with, and I'm tired of knocking. Ignore it is, I'm done.

Alty, it was and is and always will be open. It is not wide enough for you to carry that axe through it I(nor can you get through it by knocking on it with the axe ;) ) , though it is easy for you to walk through. Drop the axe, and come on in anytime, now or in the future.

[Tj3]

Come on Cred. Just a diversion from not answering or proving your points made in your OP. :confused:

Now, in hopes that we can get back on topic, I just wanted to bring the last input on the topic of the thread to the top.

[NeedKarma]

... however you have not been known for taking the neutral middle ground either, so I would not expect any endorsement or agreement from you.

The same can be said of you so it's no argument for your side as it were.

(and I hardly think that you are in a position to speak on behalf of all members of AMHD).

I've been here a long time and know the mods and admin a little. I know how this place works. I stand by my comments. We've seen people like you come and go. People who think they are smarter than everyone else. You seem to have thin skin for that type of person.

[Tj3]

The same can be said of you so it's no argument for your side as it were.

Sigh! I see that you have still not read the thread topic. Why do people so much want to attack others rather than deal with the issue?

I've been here a long time and know the mods and admin a little. I know how this place works. I stand by my comments. We've seen people like you come and go. People who think they are smarter than everyone else. You seem to have thin skin for that type of person.

No, NK, despite your false judgments, it is not true at all. Indeed, quite the contrary. I have learned a great deal from those on boards such as this, but the learning is much greater for all concerned when the participants choose to respectfully discuss the topic.

I have tried to discuss some points with you, but you prefer to be cryptic in your responses. Maybe because you think that you are smarter than me - I don't know, and I don't care. It seems to matter to you, and if so, that is your business and your issue to deal with.

Now, are you done? Can we get back to the discussion, or do you want to carry on in a very ironic sidelight to the thread topic? If you are not done, maybe you should consider the ignore feature also.

[Tj3]

Come on Cred. Just a diversion from not answering or proving your points made in your OP. :confused:

Let's try this again (unless someone wants to post another example of what the Golden Rule is not).

Now, in hopes that we can get back on topic, I just wanted to bring the last input on the topic of the thread to the top.

[NeedKarma]

The "golden rule" is also known as the "Ethic of reciprocity" and is certainly not a concept originally thought of in the bible:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethic_of_reciprocity

Here are versions of the golden rule in various religions: Versions of the Golden Rule in 21 world religions

I live by this rule as well, plus it's a tenet of my parenting. No bible is required for good morals.

[Tj3]

The "golden rule" is also known as the "Ethic of reciprocity" and is certainly not a concept originally thought of in the bible:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethic_of_reciprocity

Here are versions of the golden rule in various religions: Versions of the Golden Rule in 21 world religions

And as I responded before, let's look at the two assumptions that come from this:

1) You are assuming that the source is not Biblical. So far you offered no evidence for that. You assume that some other documents are older than the first instance of this in the Bible, but you have not validated that statement.

2) Second, you have not validated why you believe the source to be not Biblical. This appears to be point that you have missed. Usually where similar things appear in difference document (and for the time being, let's assume that to be the case), it typically refers to a common source. All you have done is identify some documents that you claim to have existed and claim to have been older than the Bible (a point which remains unvalidated in any case), but you have not addressed the point that the source itself of the Bible is God, and in such a case, God would be the likely primary source.

No bible is required for good morals.

No one said that the Bible is required for good morals, but unless morals have a standard upon which they are based, they will vary from persons to person, culture to culture and over time. The morals may still be called "good" because relativism is the standard.

[inthebox]

Nk your link does not specify dates in most cases.

As to the OP - NK prove where "good" morals come from in the first place.

What is "good" - does that change with time, geography or culture or religion? As Tj points out - that is relative.

A history of human sacrifice and cannibalism





g&p

[Credendovidis]

.... As to the OP - NK prove where "good" morals come from in the first place.

The Golden Rules is as old as humanity : by serving the interests of the tribe or group you belong to, you serve your own interests just as well. Even under simians and other animals you see this same behavior.
That is why you find the Golden Rule in almost every philosophic and/or religious view also.
Every religion in the Middle East from long before the era described in the Old Testament had the Golden Rule already as one of it's corner stones.

The Golden Rule started as a survival measure, but over time evolved also as basis for moral and ethical thinking.

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

.

.