Prayer (dun dun DUN...)

[Acriku]

No no, I argue just to argue. That's my personality, if I see something that I don't agree with, I will be very stubborn until I am either overwhelmingly proven wrong or proven right. But what would be the point of arguing with people about Buddhism when no one that I know of on these forums is buddhist? I know a lot of people are christian, so that would be a good debate. And I have the occasional ramblings ;)

[TMA_1]

okay man I feel better... you scared me for a while. I thought you turned into one of those guys that is way over emotionally heated against religion.lol but arguing for its own sake is pretty damn fun... your off the hook I guess because I do the same thing.lol Sorry man :)

[DjCiD]

#6 He said without any other way! He can still hit the button with the other arm, and what if you only have one round and you are 10 feet away from him, what then?

Shoot him in the nuts... he'll cover them with both hands... ^-^

[Caid Ivik]

Nah if everybody was Buddhist I would find controversial topics for everyone to discuss about Buddhism ;)

I knew it, Acriku. All nihilism, atheism, materialism... All is just a rebelity of youth. All adolescents are rebelling against authorities: parents, then school, state, God and anything what will come in their mind. But you will grow up. As we all. One sooner, one later, someone never...

[quoudam72]

lol quondam, quondam, quondam... I am afraid you are wrong and besides the early church didnt use any symbols. They eventually used a Fish as a secret symbol for a church. It was secret in order to be able to show christians where the church was but without having unbelievers know and persicute them.

Yes TMA_1 but I was not refering to the early church where did I say that. It is true but you assumed that I ment the early church I ment in our age and time.

[Edric O]

He said without any other way!

No such situations exist. You can always choose to do nothing.

Give me another choice you can do instead of stealing the gun away that produces results?

Mess around with the gun to make it unusable. Warn the victim. Warn the police and have them lay a trap for him. And so on. You've got plenty of options.

And what about the other commandments he talked about?

He doesn't talk about any others.

And now let me put your precious moral relativism on trial.

Let's say I argue that all people whose names begin with A should be tortured and killed. With no moral absolutes, how can you tell me I'm wrong? If morals are relative, then Hitler was a moral person. After all, he followed his morals to the letter. They included genocide, but that doesn't matter, because it's all relative, right?

[Edric O]

That guy did get one thing right:

"Covet not..." Coveting is the basis for capitalism. That commandment promoted communism and socialism.

Yes it did. In fact, all Christian teachings condemn capitalism and other similar systems as immoral. Too bad not many people see that...

[Acriku]

Oh yes the one thing he did right wasn't against your beliefs ;)

Choose to do nothing eh? Yep, let the bastard shoot the whole school because you chose to do nothing. What if I don't know how to mess with the gun? What if the police department was 4 miles away and this was going to happen right when school starts? What if this happens when school starts, and you find it right before school giving you no time to warn the victims (and what if I didn't know the victims?) There is always a situation with one option left.

Edric I'm not going to directly reply to your "test" because that is nothing like the argument at hand. We are arguing that if there are moral absolutes, then people with no other option will thus break them, will break one if they do the other, and break that if they do the first, etc.

[Edric O]

I assume we are discussing the "salvation through faith and works" Christian belief, because if we were talking about the "salvation through faith alone" belief, this whole argument would be moot.

Let me make this clear: Killing, stealing, etc. are sins under ANY circumstances, even when you are saving lives by commiting them. However, the action of saving lives is (obviously) part of the "good works" required for salvation. Therefore, it can make up for sin, to a certain extent.

But it is still far more preferable to not sin in the first place. It is very unlikely that you won't have another choice.

[Acriku]

In whatever extreme, there lies a possibility. - Acriku ;)

And the commandments were the words of God, what he determined moral and immoral. If you sin, it's immoral. So if you let millions die because you didn't kill the person who pressed the big red button, it is moral.

[Edric O]

Moral? No. It's morally neutral. You didn't do anything, neither right or wrong.

[Acriku]

You neglected to do wrong, but at the same time neglected to do right (saving people). Could I save somebody from the fire only to let him kill millions of people, and knowing he would, and still not sin?

[Edric O]

Of course you could. You saved a life. What that person chooses to do with his life from then on is his/her business alone.

And NOT saving him/her is not a sin either. The choice is yours.

[Caid Ivik]

Fire on that button. Best way to neutralise in way of humanity is to destroy the weapon. That's why all ships must give a warning before they fire upon the target. Or catapulted pilots are not being shot. Geneva convention was all about it.

[Acriku]

10 feet away with a button the size of a quarter? Good luck at that. What if I only have the skill to shoot huge targets (human beings)? Anyway you put it, there is a situation where it won't work.

[sneezer3]

My reply to earlyer in this thread.

Sneezer seriously, which part is the attacking? I'd like to know so I can see what might offend you in the future.

I believe you should be pointing to empr if you are talking about always saying everybody else is wrong, because I've never said that. I accept I am wrong (and have been many times on fed2k) but when I believe I am right I will defend it, but not attack the other person! Which I don't do, most of the time, some of the time it's mild such as "what have you been smoking man?"

I overacted a little. and got to bored to post back :P ;D

But you shouldn't have tryed to point out the bible was wrong. Even if it is you asked about prayer and has soon has you got a reply you immdently begin attacking. even if you did word that a little less attacking like.

okay man I feel better... you scared me for a while. I thought you turned into one of those guys that is way over emotionally heated against religion.lol but arguing for its own sake is pretty damn fun... your off the hook I guess because I do the same thing.lol Sorry man :)

Nahh. i just din't much fill like posting. and i'm not emotionally heated. i just got kinda upset.

there is no way around it. Killing another human being under any circumstance (including self-defense) means braking the commandment and it is a sin.

Edric i know for a fact your wrong on this one. but i don't know of any bible verses to prove it at the present. Has always i'l IM if this thread is done dead. And what about people that fight in the war? What about people that either fight or die. We have to defend areself's. Freedom costs lifes of are own and the enemy alike. so yes we should defend are self's.

[Caid Ivik]

10 feet away with a button the size of a quarter? Good luck at that. What if I only have the skill to shoot huge targets (human beings)? Anyway you put it, there is a situation where it won't work.

When you aren't such good shooter, how you want to shot him to prevent any movement? Have you heard about rigor mortis? But best way is to PREVENT this situation of being made. That's one of the senses of christianity.

[Acriku]

Ok figure out a way to prevent it, and I'll just make a situation where you stumble into a room with a gun (hey it could happen). The bottom line is that I can make up any situation and leave it with one choice. Or atleast just this one lol.