unholymight's forum posts

Avatar image for unholymight
unholymight

3378

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

5

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 unholymight
Member since 2007 • 3378 Posts
[QUOTE="Sajedene"][QUOTE="unholymight"][QUOTE="Sajedene"] Hmmm.... what kind of cookies are we talking about?

I knew it. I was right all along! Not that I should be surprised, for I am not.

Actually, if you read through the whole thread you will see that I do take this whole thing seriously and my post was made with all seriousness. I personally chose to ignore your replies because clearly they have already been addressed. Feel free to go through all the pages again to see all my responses in this thread and I will stand by my original statement. I will be more than glad to explain it to you further if you can not comprehend it. Sometimes, the simplest explanations are the hardest to fathom.

Alright, let me take a look at the last statement. It seems like a very general statement, meant to be applicable to all cases as a general rule. But does it work? "Hardest to fathom" seems too much loose. "Hard" is subjective. What is hard for me may not be hard for you. So, another way to look at this is to read it as, as simplicity increases, difficulty to understand increases. But, what this is also saying is that as simplicity decrease, difficulty to understand decreases. So, literally, it means as something gets more complex, it becomes harder to understand. Now, the human brain is pretty complex. More complex than the concept of 1 + 1 = 2, you might agree. But, there are more people who are capable of grasping the concept of 1 + 1 = 2 than the number of people who understand how the brain works. So, that would show there are some problems with your statement.
Avatar image for unholymight
unholymight

3378

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

5

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 unholymight
Member since 2007 • 3378 Posts

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="unholymight"]

I have no education on this subject. But, I don't see how it would matter as long as my logic is sound. Actually, it wouldn't matter in a debate behind a podium.

Welkabonz

Education on the subject doesn't matter? And it wouldn't matter in a debate? I'm curious...how does one successfully debate with no knowledge of a subject?

Pick fights with people who also don't know anything about the subject.

Like I said, you don't need to be an expert in religion to find a contradiction in someone's argument. Besides, no education means no FORMAL education, so it's not like I have NO knowledge. If you would notice the importance of this, I would thank you by encouraging you to see a debate, such as your local model united nations assembly.

Avatar image for unholymight
unholymight

3378

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

5

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 unholymight
Member since 2007 • 3378 Posts

[QUOTE="unholymight"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Education on the subject doesn't matter? And it wouldn't matter in a debate? I'm curious...how does one successfully debate with no knowledge of a subject?

LJS9502_basic

No formal education doesn't mean I don't know enough to see some flaws otherwise other unsound kinks in your logic.

If someone is stating facts....how do you purpose to find unsound logic?

First, on gamespot, always check if the fact actually relates to what you're debating. Then check if the other poster got your meaning in your previous post. Estimate the validity of the fact, use Internet if necessary. Check the probability of existing counter-facts. There you go. Just some things you can do in your spare time, LOL.

Avatar image for unholymight
unholymight

3378

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

5

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 unholymight
Member since 2007 • 3378 Posts

[QUOTE="unholymight"][QUOTE="Xx_Hopeless_xX"]

But not your view that it was under Christian watch...also..slavery of the indigenous people of America was abolished by a Christian priest in the 1500's..

Xx_Hopeless_xX

Well you showed that it can occur in areas that don't have Christianity. But showing that does not yet prove that it cannot exist in areas where there is also Christianity. Wikipedia says slavery lasted longer than that here; into the 1700s. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_slavery Also, you have not established that it was indeed specifically Christianity that ended slavery, not the common sense of the people.

"New Laws of the Indies in 1542, in which Emperor Charles V declared free allNative American slaves," Wikipedia...

But, this does not show that it was specifically his fear of being damned to Hell that caused Charles V to make the decision, instead of other likely reasons such as wanting to demonstrate nobility for his followers, a philosophical viewpoint that all should have freedom, or even a general sympathy for the natives.
Avatar image for unholymight
unholymight

3378

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

5

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 unholymight
Member since 2007 • 3378 Posts

[QUOTE="unholymight"]

I have no education on this subject. But, I don't see how it would matter as long as my logic is sound. Actually, it wouldn't matter in a debate behind a podium.

LJS9502_basic

Education on the subject doesn't matter? And it wouldn't matter in a debate? I'm curious...how does one successfully debate with no knowledge of a subject?

No formal education doesn't mean I don't know enough to see some flaws otherwise other unsound kinks in your logic.
Avatar image for unholymight
unholymight

3378

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

5

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 unholymight
Member since 2007 • 3378 Posts
[QUOTE="unholymight"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]And that would be what specifically?LJS9502_basic
I have answers to all your posts, but I fear for what will happen to me if I reply to them.

You fear?

Of course. Fear is interesting. It puts spice on food.
Avatar image for unholymight
unholymight

3378

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

5

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 unholymight
Member since 2007 • 3378 Posts

[QUOTE="unholymight"][QUOTE="VigilanteArtist"]

The movement to abolish slavery was largely based on Christian ideals. For example, the Republican Party was founded by anti-slavery activists in the 1850s and used churches as networks to gain and influence voters. Slavery was considered a sin. Of course, there were hypocritical Christians in the 1800s too.

VigilanteArtist

The fact that slavery arose on Christianity's watch would show that Christianity provided little, if any, effective resistance against slavery.

Christianity (and Christians) had a huge impact on the abolishment of slavery in the USA. And I'm saying that as an athiest! It's not my opinion, it's fact. Many important figures in the movement (such as Harriet Beecher Stowe and John Brown) were Christians who used their beliefs as a means to influence and oppose slavery. Abraham Lincoln, although religiously ambiguous, was a member of the Republican party which, as I stated above, used religion to progress the anti-slavery movement.

And I have to ask-- What is the extent of your education as far as this subject is concerned?

Posting this again because I'd still like a response.

I have no education on this subject. But, I don't see how it would matter as long as my logic is sound. Actually, it wouldn't matter in a debate behind a podium.

Let me quote what the original poster said:

"It was only until Christianity's influence that slavery was abolished. You can talk about serfdom all you want, but it still isn't the same principal as slavery."

He said that Christianity was the only thing that contributed to the abolishment of slavery. I was challenging this view. Although you have named many Christians who opposed slavery, any other factor that is not specifically Christian in origin that contributed to the abolishment of slavery could be something I can use against your argument.

Avatar image for unholymight
unholymight

3378

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

5

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8 unholymight
Member since 2007 • 3378 Posts
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="unholymight"][QUOTE="caseypayne69"] wrong the bible never says this, but keep on talking about what you hear.

Yes, my bad. I meant to say Christianity said the Earth was the center of the universe, and defended this view strongly against someone with a different view like Galileo. Also, all I said was that Christianity advocated this view at some time, I don't need to say the Bible said it, since we were discussing Christianity as a whole, taking into account its history and previous actions of its supporters.

And that would be what specifically?

I have answers to all your posts, but I fear for what will happen to me if I reply to them.
Avatar image for unholymight
unholymight

3378

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

5

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9 unholymight
Member since 2007 • 3378 Posts
[QUOTE="Sajedene"][QUOTE="Penguinchow"][QUOTE="Sajedene"] It makes people feel better to belittle that that they do not agree with so as to assure themselves they made the right choice (hoping that they did). This goes for everyone.

... I find this to be an excellent explanation. Cookies for Sajadene for superior understanding of human nature!

Hmmm.... what kind of cookies are we talking about?

I knew it. I was right all along! Not that I should be surprised, for I am not.
Avatar image for unholymight
unholymight

3378

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

5

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10 unholymight
Member since 2007 • 3378 Posts
[QUOTE="unholymight"]

Christianity once said the Earth was flat, and kept anyone from proving this wrong (Galileo). This attitude towards science and observable evidence alone would say something about that.

caseypayne69
wrong the bible never says this, but keep on talking about what you hear.

Yes, my bad. I meant to say Christianity said the Earth was the center of the universe, and defended this view strongly against someone with a different view like Galileo. Also, all I said was that Christianity advocated this view at some time, I don't need to say the Bible said it, since we were discussing Christianity as a whole, taking into account its history and previous actions of its supporters.