Brunei's new laws

@divegeester said
On what basis do you find the executing of homosexuals to be wrong?

Jesus said let the one that has no sin cast the first stone. How about you?

I notice you have been dodging the questions I asked you earlier on.

@kellyjay said
That lowers my opinion of you. The guy could recite each book he ever read. I don’t think you spent any meaningful time looking at his work if you could write him off like that. You would not have to agree with him but unimpressed is not a call I think he deserves.

I've had a good look at C.S. Lewis' forays into the realm of superstition and religion, and I find it to be glib and cloying and infested with informal fallacies: ersatz philosophy and pure preaching-to-the-choir "theology". I've read Mere Christianity, and Miracles. Not to my taste but, horses for courses I suppose. A lot of his ideas strike me as being kind of on the fridge magnet level. Maybe he could recite each book he ever read because he had a photographic memory. I don't see how that's a selling point, though. Having said all that, I will say his fiction for children was impressive and handled Christian messages quite well.

@kellyjay said
That lowers my opinion of you.

Because we disagree about something?

@dj2becker said
Jesus said let the one that has no sin cast the first stone. How about you?

No what I asked you was, On what basis do you find the executing of homosexuals to be wrong?

@fmf said
Because we disagree about something?

No, I actually respect how you defend your beliefs. I just don’t agree with you. Your being so dismissive of someone like him just reminds how attacking a person is the cheap lazy way of avoiding the discussion. Attack the source avoid any point made.

@kellyjay said
No, I actually respect how you defend your beliefs. I just don’t agree with you. Your being so dismissive of someone like him just reminds how attacking a person is the cheap lazy way of avoiding the discussion. Attack the source avoid any point made.

I wasn't "attacking a person". I am underwhelmed by his writing ~ I gave you a few pointers as to why. I have no reason to think he was anything other than a lovely person. I've been involved in discussions about his drab beg-the-question rhetoric and platitudinous writing many times here over the years. I am "cheap"? And "lazy"? Are you by any chance "attacking a person" here because you don’t agree with something he said?

@kellyjay said
No, I actually respect how you defend your beliefs.

You have my default-setting respect as a fellow poster. But I do not have much respect for how you defend your beliefs: you are so prideful that when you are called out for your inarticulacy and your often not-joined-up or contradictory notions, it too often results in you becoming pouty and passive-aggressive.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Yes. In a godless universe morality forms in different societies (though with significant commonality) and is by nature subjective and changeable.

In a Christian universe God is unchanging and the theist has to struggle with the questionable morality of the Old testament that is rooted in time.

I know which I prefer.

Not me I prefer a universe where meaning does not change on a whim, that we can go to a source changeless due to my likes or circumstances for answers. A foundation of shifting sand is a dangerous thing.

@kellyjay said
Not me I prefer a universe where meaning does not change on a whim, that we can go to a source changeless due to my likes or circumstances for answers. A foundation of shifting sand is a dangerous thing.

Why do you think it is morally wrong to execute gays and adulterers?

@kellyjay said
we can go to a source changeless due to my likes or circumstances for answers

Changeless? There was a time when, according to your ideology, your God thought it was morally sound to execute gays and adulterers, right?

@fmf said
I wasn't "attacking a person". I am underwhelmed by his writing ~ I gave you a few pointers as to why. I have no reason to think he was anything other than a lovely person. I've been involved in discussions about his drab beg-the-question rhetoric and platitudinous writing many times here over the years. I am "cheap"? And "lazy"? Are you by any chance "attacking a person" here because you don’t agree with something he said?

You did go after him, but I will apologize to you because you are correct, the majority was about his work, and not only that, you quoted some. So I will say sorry my bad.

@kellyjay said
You did go after him, but I will apologize to you because you are correct, the majority was about his work, and not only that, you quoted some. So I will say sorry my bad.

I am sure he was a lovely man.

@fmf said
Changeless? There was a time when, according to your ideology, your God thought it was morally sound to execute gays and adulterers, right?

If you are going to quote, I suggest you take the full quote, not slivers out of context that change the meaning.

@fmf said
Changeless? There was a time when, according to your ideology, your God thought it was morally sound to execute gays and adulterers, right?

Matthew 26:27-29 English Standard Version (ESV)
And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, “Drink of it, all of you, for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. I tell you I will not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.”

The covenant of God has changed with man, before there was no reason for the forgiveness of sins, there was only a temporary covering. Yes, due to the law these two things were punishable by death as a lot of other things were. They are still against God's laws, and not something approved of by God, but Christ's grace is possible for all sins at the moment, until that time is up and every sin will be paid for either through God Justice or His grace.

@kellyjay said
If you are going to quote, I suggest you take the full quote, not slivers out of context that change the meaning.

There was a time when, according to your ideology, your God thought it was morally sound to execute gays and adulterers. To suggest that the morality connected with that has been "changeless" is ridiculous. I have not changed the meaning of word "changeless" by calling you out on your use of it.