Monday, May 14, 2012

Quote of the Day

[Professor Assaf]

"One of the most common factors leading religious youth away from the fold is the contradiction between sexual life and religious life. When you’re Orthodox and also a maturing young adult, you’re unable to express your sexuality, and that leads to significant inner conflict. Especially for men; where it starts with masturbation."

From an interview with David Assaf professor, Department of Jewish History, Tel Aviv University, Israel; himself formerly Orthdodox

pointed this out myself some time ago, and was greeted with vehement denials from Orthodox drop outs.

64 comments:

Anonymous said...

It is true, that rabbinic Judaism is inconsistent with normal pubescent male development. You cannot tell a boy who masturbates or has a wet dream that he is a sinner or murderer, since they all do it (despite YOUR denial), and you are introducing neurosis.

Unless you ignore that particular rabbinic law, which everybody does.

When faced with the conflict, some people will react by thinking "what is wrong with me?". Others will react by asking, "what is wrong with those fucking rabbis?"

jewish philosopher said...

The Torah also commands us to be honest, as it's written

Keep thee far from a false matter Exodus 23:7

http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0223.htm#7

Studies indicate that most people lie on a daily basis.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/homo-consumericus/201111/how-often-do-people-lie-in-their-daily-lives

According to your logic, this would indicate, not that people have a problem, but rather there is something wrong with those fucking rabbis.

If people are promiscuous, then promiscuity must be good. If people are dishonest, then dishonesty must be good. Whatever feels good, do it.

The truth is, usually the hard thing to do is the right thing also.

This validates my belief that Atheist = immature, irresponsible lowlife.

Anonymous said...

I’d bet that when teens leave orthodoxy to experiment sexually – they come back. The guys I know who left orthodoxy (permanently) were not low lives at all. My step father (an attorney in law enforcement) was the most ethical person I’ve ever met, may he rest in peace. My friend’s father became a tenured professor at an Ivy League school (and raised two boys with his secular Jewish wife – one a tenured professor at Stanford, the other a high official in government.) My pal is becoming a principle of a public high school and has two masters degrees. All left orthodoxy.
tuvia

jewish philosopher said...

People who left prior to 1960, many times left in order to find a good job or in order to be safe (for example, during the Russian pogroms).

Post 1960, it's all about sex.

natschuster said...

Anonymous at 7:20

Are you sure that all adolescents masturbate? Have you dome any studies? And if you look inthe Halacha literature, a wet dream is considered a sort of oneis, and the methisd fro doing teshuva is prescribed there. So no-one has to feel too guilty.

Anonymous said...

"At one point during my university days, I had a personal realization: I don’t have any religious emotions. Nothing... I became exposed to the critical approach to history and the study of Jewish civilization, where I learned new ways of thinking and exploring. The whole critical approach of studying the history of halacha and the history of tradition made me feel that… ehhh… it’s not like I used to think."

I think this quote is more pertinent to why he decided to become irreligious. And not as an adolescent but while in university, which for Israelis begins after their army service; in their 20's.

Anonymous said...

"It was hardest to take off the kippah. You can do anything, you can be a horrible person, but if you wear the kippah you belong." (Assaf)


"The truth is, usually the hard thing to do is the right thing also." (Stein)

jewish philosopher said...

Well, of course, every atheist is in denial. Who is going to admit he's an immature, irresponsible lowlife?

Anonymous said...

Well, at least you have the courage to admit to your racism, homophobia and misogyny.

jewish philosopher said...

Where's the racism?

Dave said...

Racist? By saying that slavery was good for the blacks.

Like rapists who say that the girl 'needed' raping.

jewish philosopher said...

The Jewish laws of slavery have nothing to do with color. In ancient Roman, the most popular slaves were probably very fair skinned Germans.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_ancient_Rome#Origins

ah-pee-chorus said...

natschuster reads the nonsense posted by JP in which he not only makes generalizations, but he does so in cases where his assertions arent even based on reality. and natschuster says nothing.....
JP did so more than once in this very post.

Atheist = immature, irresponsible lowlife.

Post 1960, it's all about sex.


Well, of course, every atheist is in denial. Who is going to admit he's an immature, irresponsible lowlife?


yet when someone writes that all boys masturbate, which is true for an overwhelming majority by any study , natschuster pipes up with,

Are you sure that all adolescents masturbate? Have you dome any studies

nat is quite selective in when he looks for evidence. and whatever his hero JP writes, he believes divine and accepts.

and furthermore, while one who had a wet dream is an 'oness', which is obvious in that he didnt intend to do anything, by your own words theres a recipe for his teshuva. people who do nothing wrong dont need to do teshuva. so theres a clear message that the boy has been involved in something wrong which he must make amends for. your lack of honesty is startling.

jewish philosopher said...

Aren't wet dreams the result of erotic fantasies when awake?

You know, ah-pee, according to founder of your religion, Darwin, it's natural for the strong to kill the weak so the urge to murder should not be stifled by some rabbis, should it?

ah-pee-chorus said...

Aren't wet dreams the result of erotic fantasies when awake?,

is that what you are claiming?

founder of your religion, Darwin,

atheism is a 'religion' in the same way that NOT collecting stamps is a hobby.

i have no idea what youre saying in the last paragraph nor how it might connect with this thread.

Anonymous said...

Everytime I ask you, you have no answer. What about us women? What about us who are otd and could care less about sexual promiscuity or jerking off? Those of us who are faithful to our husbands and still don't believe in the Torah? What? We don't exist?

Dave said...

JP, as usual you lack the ability to make moral distinctions between actions that are actually harmful to another human being, and actions that offend the rabbis or your vision of god.

This moral blindness pervades this blog. It leads you to think that morally repugnant things, such as slavery or genocide is OK, and that harmless adolescent behavior, such as sexual fantasy or masturbation, are immorality of the worst kind.

This makes me wonder if you have a moral compass. The ability to make these distinctions is inherent in most of us.

jewish philosopher said...

"atheism is a 'religion' in the same way that NOT collecting stamps is a hobby"

Wrong. Atheism is a belief system concerning spirituality, the afterlife, man’s origin and morality and therefore it is a religion. There is an Atheist Alliance International complete with all sorts of activities, awards, conventions, publications, etc. There is no "People Who Don't Believe in Leprechauns Alliance International".

"What about us who are otd and could care less about sexual promiscuity or jerking off?"

I don't think you exist. I've met online one guy who I think dropped out of Orthodoxy to find a better job, not because of sex (he joined the army), but that's a rare case today.

"This makes me wonder if you have a moral compass."

What ever you consider to be moral would not be accepted as such in other cultures today, or in any culture in the past. Your belief that whatever is politically correct in the United States in 2012 is eternally, universally valid is absurd chauvinism.

My morality is based on the laws given by God at Mount Sinai. Yours is based on today's New York Times editorial page.

natschuster said...

Apeekorus:

The statements JP made are his opinion. I don't necessarily agree with everything he says. But I can't say his opinion is wrong. Its his opinion. the statement about masturbation was an assertion of fact. I asked for the evidence.

And I said that nocturnal emissions are a sort of oneis.
Since they can be brougt about by erotic thoughts one bears some cupability, but not to the extent of a conscious act.

natschuster said...

Dave:

What exactly is your basis in logic or science for saying JP's morality is flawed? Waht is your basis for saying any morality is better or worse than yours. What is your basis for saying morality even exists?

Dave said...

"My morality is based on the laws given by God at Mount Sinai"

No its not. Its based on what rabbis from 2000 years thought about what was given at Sinai, but only when they thought it was appropriate. When they blatantly disagreed with the Torah, they "reinterpreted" it.

jewish philosopher said...

"Its based on what rabbis from 2000 years thought about what was given at Sinai, but only when they thought it was appropriate."

The historical structure of rabbinical validates Talmudic interpretation.

http://www.torahphilosophy.com/2010/03/jewish-literature-seeing-effects-of.html

Dave said...

Something can't prove itself true. That's circular.

jewish philosopher said...

That's like me showing you a $100 bill.

You tell me "Maybe it's counterfeit."

I'll say "No. Look at the security thread (a plastic strip) running from top to bottom. Look at the watermark bearing the image of the person whose portrait is on the bill. Look at the color-shifting ink (ink that appears to change color when the bill is tilted). With a magnifying glass, look at the words USA 100 micro-printed on the security thread and around the portrait. These features prove it's authentic."

Would you tell me "Something can't prove itself true. That's circular."?

Did you read the post? The structure of Jewish literature authenticates it.

ah-pee-chorus said...

JP-

Atheism is a belief system concerning spirituality, the afterlife, man’s origin and morality and therefore it is a religion.

try again. atheism is a rational position that there is no evidence for any god, and certainly not for bible-god. one can be an atheist and have no position on mans origin, morality, or anything else.
people who think theres no evidence for astrology and consider it irrational dont have or nee any moral position as a result of their non-belief or a-astrology. nor does their position necessitate any particular thoughts on anything else. its quite simple. A-astrologists say theres no evidence to support it and A-theists say theres no evidence for god. end of story.
however due to the huge affect religion and its believers have on life , war and laws, and the discrimination faced by atheists in most societies some atheists decided to form various groups to promote their interests and share information. that isnt a religion.
if it were, then so is a group to promote the insurance industry.

definition of religion acc. to merriam-webster:

"the service and worship of God or the supernatural "


epic fail on your part but that wont deter you from repeating your silly assertion since it never has before. facts are just things you ignore.

ah-pee-chorus said...

natschuster said....


The statements JP made are his opinion.....the statement about masturbation was an assertion of fact. I asked for the evidence.

here are the 2 statements.

1.. You cannot tell a boy who masturbates or has a wet dream that he is a sinner or murderer, since they all do it

2.of course, every atheist is in denial

please explain why the first is a statement of fact and the second just an opinion.

jewish philosopher said...

"atheism is a rational position that there is no evidence for any god"

That definition is worthless since the word "god" is undefinable.

"the service and worship of God or the supernatural "

Some Buddhists and Scientologists don't.

http://www.urbandharma.org/udharma3/budgod.html

http://www.scientologymyths.info/cult-or-religion/do-scientologists-believe-in-god.php

Atheism teaches that there is no Biblical God and evolution created us. Evolution is different from God in that it has no intelligence, therefore it demands nothing.

"atheists decided to form various groups to promote their interests and share information. that isnt a religion."

Actually, Atheist Alliance International (AAI) is a global federation of atheist and freethought groups and individuals, committed to educating its members and the public about atheism, secularism and related issues.

http://www.atheistalliance.org/about-aai

So the purpose of AAI is what we would call in Hebrew "kiruv" or what Christians would call evangelizing.

ah-pee-chorus said...

as we've established prior, neither JP nor nat schuster can comment on 'morality' since the word has no independent meaning or value to them. it is just a synonym for whatever the torah and its self-assigned exegetes have said. having that position is akin to admitting that one has no ability to discern right from wrong or good from bad on their own. its not only sad but untrue even according to the torah. god punished people before he spoke to them for being 'bad'. he expected a certain level of morality exclusive of his laws. furthermore, there is no basis or justification to be found anywhere in the torah for any rabbi, tanna, amora, gaon, rishon or acharon to add, delete or change anything in the torah. the entire torah she'b'al peh is a fraud of a myth of a lie.

jewish philosopher said...

The Noahide commandments were given to Adam.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noahide_laws

The Torah doesn't change however Judaism does.

http://www.torahphilosophy.com/2009/05/eternal-torah.html

ah-pee-chorus said...

That definition is worthless since the word "god" is undefinable.

theists have described a god they believe in. that god is claimed to have done certain things and has certain characteristics. atheists rightly say theres no evidence for it.
you dont believe the invisible black unicorn created the world and runs it . ergo youre an atheist in regards to the IBU. or do you claim to be a theist as to IBU since its undefinable?
besides that, just substitute anything supernatural and the points the same. no evidence-no belief-atheism.

Some Buddhists and Scientologists don't.

whats your point? if you want to restrict your definition to bible god, then they arent religions. if you include anything supernatural, then they are religions. but it doesnt change the fact that atheism isnt a religion no matter how much youd like it to be.

Actually, Atheist Alliance International (AAI) is a global federation of atheist and freethought groups and individuals, committed to educating its members and the public about atheism, secularism and related issues.

and again, that has nothing to do with the definition of religion. the dept. of health educates people as to what constitutes a healthy diet. they arent a religion either.

Atheism teaches that there is no Biblical God and evolution created us

repeating things that have been shown to be untrue is a sign of a disturbed person uninterested in truth.
ATHEISM TEACHES NOTHING. A-astrology doesnt teach anything either. its just the rational position that its all BS.
further evidence of how wrong you are is that there can be people who say that not only is there no evidence for any god or supernatural being, but theres also no evidence for evolution.
they are known as ATHEISTS.

jewish philosopher said...

“theists have described a god they believe in . atheists rightly say theres no evidence for it.”

Hindus worship the Ganges River and consider it to be a god.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ganges_in_Hinduism

Do you deny the existence of the Ganges River?

“no evidence-no belief-atheism.”

So atheists only accept things based on evidence. I think members of all religions claim the same.

“there no evidence for any god”

So there is no Ganges River.

“but theres also no evidence for evolution.”

Name an atheist who doesn’t believe in evolution.

ah-pee-chorus said...

Hindus worship the Ganges River and consider it to be a god.

good for them. do they ascribe to it supernatural powers? do they say the ganges created the universe and runs it? if so, then the ganges river they describe does not exist in terms of evidence. if they dont make supernatural claims about it then your point is non-existent, like your god.

So atheists only accept things based on evidence. I think members of all religions claim the same.

many theists dont make such a claim. they say they rely on "faith"- which is belief absent evidence. and for those who claim they DO rely on evidence, i say theyre all either hopelessly ignorant, pathetically weak-minded, or willfully delusional.

Name an atheist who doesn’t believe in evolution.

it happens that most atheists are highly intelligent and are clearly rational thinkers. thats why theyre atheists. and since the evidence for evolution is as abundant as that for gravity or germ theory, it would follow that almost all atheists know it to be true. however do you think before darwin there were no atheists? once again youre wrong but wont admit it.

jewish philosopher said...

“do they ascribe to it supernatural powers”

I think what you’re trying to say is that atheism is synonymous with determinism, which depicts the physical matter of the universe as operating according to a set of fixed, knowable laws. The "billiard ball" hypothesis, a product of Newtonian physics, argues that once the initial conditions of the universe have been established, the rest of the history of the universe follows inevitably. If it were actually possible to have complete knowledge of physical matter and all of the laws governing that matter at any one time, then it would be theoretically possible to compute the time and place of every event that will ever occur. In this sense, the basic particles of the universe operate in the same fashion as the rolling balls on a billiard table, moving and striking each other in predictable ways to produce predictable results.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causal_determinism#Western_tradition

This view of the universe has been discredited by quantum mechanics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle

“and for those who claim they DO rely on evidence, i say theyre all either hopelessly ignorant, pathetically weak-minded, or willfully delusional.”

Sure you do. Like all fundies, you’re right and everyone else is wrong.

“it happens that most atheists are highly intelligent’

As a member of American Mensa, I can tell you that our membership includes members of all religions about in proportion to the general population.

“and are clearly rational thinkers”

I would actually describe them as hopelessly ignorant, pathetically weak-minded, or willfully delusional.

“do you think before darwin there were no atheists?”

The word was used almost only as an insult towards someone else prior to 1859 and the Origin of Species.

ah-pee-chorus said...

think what you’re trying to say is that atheism is synonymous with determinism

another strawman. i said what i meant. since you know i'm right you have no choice but to shoot down something irrelevant.

Like all fundies, you’re right and everyone else is wrong.

thats you. i rely on evidence. a good fundie like you starts with the answer to the equation that makes him happy and then fudges the inputs to make it look like it fits. unfortunately facts arent on your side. and as i showed atheism isnt a religion. why dont you just acknowlege your error? oh thats right, you never do.

As a member of American Mensa, I can tell you that our membership includes members of all religions about in proportion to the general population

i was also a member of mensa for a number of years till i dropped it. studies show that the higher up you go on the scientific ladder the greater the likelihood of being an atheist. increased IQ= increased atheism. sucks for you.
93% of those in the royal academy of science are atheists and not a single nobel prize winner in the hard sciences has believed in the creation myth. and oh yeah....atheism is still not a religion.

jewish philosopher said...

"i said what i meant."

You said you don't believe in the supernatural, which I guess means you do believe in determinism, which has been refuted by quantum uncertainty.

Or maybe it means that all phenomena can be explained by the known laws of nature. Well, wrong again. The Big Bang cannot be explained according to the know laws of nature.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_Big_Bang#Very_early_universe

Neither can the accelerating universe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerating_universe

“i rely on evidence. a good fundie like you starts with the answer to the equation that makes him happy and then fudges the inputs to make it look like it fits.”

I rely on evidence. An atheist like you starts with the answer to the equation that makes him happy and then fudges the inputs to make it look like it fits. For example, evolution is just nonsense, as I’ve demonstrated.

http://www.torahphilosophy.com/2008/03/evolution-science-hijacked-by-atheism.html

“why dont you just acknowlege your error? oh thats right, you never do.”

Why don’t you just acknowledge your error? Oh that’s right, you never do.

increased IQ= increased atheism.

Is that why Bobby Fischer, with an IQ of about 180, joined the World Wide Church of God?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bobby_Fischer#Religious_affiliation

“93% of those in the royal academy of science are atheists”

Scientists desperately want to bash Christianity so that they can be society’s most important intellectuals. Prior to Darwin, the clergy were supreme. All universities were primarily theological seminaries. Darwin himself considered a career in the church. The clergy studied God, while scientists (then called natural philosophers) were mere mechanics who studied God’s handiwork. Scientists have an obvious self-interest in promoting atheism and experience shows that scientists are no more inherently honest than businessmen or politicians, for example.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_misconduct

ah-pee-chorus said...

you keep trying to change and broaden the topic but it isnt working. i guess you realize that atheism isnt a religion and cant bring yourself to admit it. thanks for waving the white flag.

jewish philosopher said...

You can't provide any meaningful definition of atheism, therefore I'm sticking with mine:

A religion which teaches that there is no Biblical God and evolution created us.

ah-pee-chorus said...

how predictable. you dont LIKE my definition of atheism since it proves your statement a lie, so you say its "not meaningful".

You can't provide any meaningful definition of atheism, therefore I'm sticking with mine:

proudly stated by a guy who can only defeat strawmen of his own creation. bravo.

jewish philosopher said...

"atheism is a rational position that there is no evidence for any god"

That definition is worthless since the word "god" is undefinable.

You can't provide any meaningful definition of atheism, therefore I'm sticking with mine:

A religion which teaches that there is no Biblical God and evolution created us.

ah-pee-chorus said...

plug in "god of the bible" -or -any supernatural being possessing the qualities of omnipotence, omnibenevolence, intercessory etc..

jewish philosopher said...

An incorpreal, almighty, all knowing creator of the universe is the definition of the Biblical God.

Atheists believe that the Biblical God did not create us and instead evolution did - a mindless, natural process which cannot demand anything.

ah-pee-chorus said...

An incorpreal, almighty, all knowing creator of the universe is definition of the Biblical God.

yes it is. and that is precisely what atheists say has no evidence in its support.

Atheists believe that the Biblical God did not create us

correct.


and instead evolution did

incorrect. being an atheist is separate from evolution though most atheists do of course know evolution is a true. many evolutionists however remain theists.


and atheism is still not a religion.

jewish philosopher said...

"being an atheist is separate from evolution though most atheists do of course know evolution is a true"

Nope. A Buddhist doesn't believe in the Biblical God and also doesn't believe in evolution so he's not an atheist.

All atheists believe in evolution and they are linked.

"although atheism might have been logically tenable before Darwin, Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist"
-- Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker (1986), page 6

http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/quotes/dawkins.htm

"many evolutionists however remain theists"

And when Christianity first appeared, many Christians continued to worship Thor for example.


http://www.vikinganswerlady.com/hvitkrst.shtml

This is called syncretism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syncretism#Religious_syncretism

"atheism is still not a religion"

Here are atheist missionaries.

http://youtu.be/7dW-bt_1LzY

While Richard Dawkins urges the faithful to evangelize for your religion and against all others. Like a real fundie.

http://youtu.be/VxGMqKCcN6A

Dave said...

JP, your argument makes the assumption that all people who believe in god do not believe in evolution. This is false.

For example;
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/10/1018_041018_science_religion.html


Therefore evolution is not "synonymous" with atheism.

You set up a false dichotomy as the basis of your argument.

Dave said...

Regardless of your opinion of people like Dr Francis Collins, head of NIH, who are religious people and accept evolution, we have established the fact that evolution and belief in god are not incompatible.

Therefore, since acceptance or non-acceptance of evolution is not a necesary feature of religion, you cannot claim that belief in evolution is "religion".

You claim that "Atheism is a belief system concerning spirituality, the afterlife, man’s origin and morality and therefore it is a religion."

That is a non-sequitor because having an opinion about these things does not constitute religion. For mans origin, I just proved it. As an atheist I still might or might not believe in a soul, or have no opinion at all, having nothing to do with a biblical creator. I may or may not believe in "spirituality" in terms of connectedness of all things. I don't need to believe in Yahweh for that.

How about this definition for atheism: The opinion that all organized religions are man-made pyramid schemes. How can you call THAT a religion?

I am not a plumber. Does that make my "profession" a "non-plumber"? Thats the argument you make about making non-belief a religion.

jewish philosopher said...

“JP, your argument makes the assumption that all people who believe in god do not believe in evolution.”

Nope. As I just wrote, when Christianity first appeared, many Christians continued to worship Thor for example.

http://www.vikinganswerlady.com/hvitkrst.shtml

This is called syncretism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syncretism#Religious_syncretism

“That is a non-sequitor because having an opinion about these things does not constitute religion.”

I think it does.

“How about this definition for atheism: The opinion that all organized religions are man-made pyramid schemes.”

Try again. Members of the New Age movement apparently reject organized religion but are not atheists.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Age

"Thats the argument you make about making non-belief a religion."

Atheists have beliefs which they are actively trying to convert other people to.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Atheism

natschuster said...

Appekorus:

"as we've established prior, neither JP nor nat schuster can comment on 'morality' since the word has no independent meaning or value to them."

Why do you have a greater ability to comment on morality, seeing that for you morality os just a feeling. If you feel like being nice, your nice. If you feel like committing genocide, you'll commit genocide. Why is morality more significant for you than eating donuts is for me? If I feel like eating donuts, I eat donuts, If not, not.

And I don't know about atheism being a religion, but it certainly is faith based. Atheist have simple, pure blind faith that science will solve all the many problems with origins and the many problems with evolution someday. And lots of the evidence for evolution is actually based on theology. OR metaphysics. Either G-d wouldn't do it that way, or saying G-d did it is cheating.

Dave said...

"Atheists have beliefs which they are actively trying to convert other people to."

So do Amway salesman. That doesn't make it a religion.

" Members of the New Age movement apparently reject organized religion but are not atheists."

Their beliefs are so amorphous you cant pin them down to anything. By your standards they are atheists, since they reject a biblical creator. Is a demon worshipper an atheist?

So if you make up your own wacky definition of "atheist" and "religion" you can say whatever you want, except that it doesnt make sense to us normal people out here.

jewish philosopher said...

"So do Amway salesman. That doesn't make it a religion."

Soap's not a religion.

"By your standards they are atheists, since they reject a biblical creator."

If they don't believe in an omniscient, ominpotent creator and they do believe that we developed spontaneously from simple chemicals without the involvement of an intelligent designer, then I would classify them as atheists.

"So if you make up your own wacky definition of "atheist" and "religion" you can say whatever you want, except that it doesnt make sense to us normal people out here."

The American government considers atheism to be a religion.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/6034949/Atheism-Is-Protected-As-a-Religion-says-Court-

ah-pee-chorus said...

natschuster said-
Why do you have a greater ability to comment on morality,

because i am open to analyze and define what meaning the word can have. you have said that your definition is whatever the torah says. ergo, its pointless for you to discuss morality as a stand alone issue by which the torah can be judged. for you the word is a synonym for torah.
if someone asks if the torah is moral your response should be, "thats like asking if the blue sky is blue."....but instead you respond illogically that you think it is moral and when asked for a definition of moral you say "the torah". its almost funny.
why dont you acknowledge that by you "morality" has a far different meaning than for everyone who isnt a deluded fundie?

Why do you have a greater ability to comment on morality, seeing that for you morality os just a feeling

like every fundie, dishonesty is required for your discussions. and like JP, when faced with another argument you cant refute you set up a strawman and attack it. i never suggested morality is a feeling and you know it. you may not agree with my method of measuring relative morality but it definitely isnt a 'feeling'

.And I don't know about atheism being a religion, but it certainly is faith based

faith=belief without evidence. show me where someone who says theres no evidence for bible god is relying on faith.

Atheist have simple, pure blind faith that science will solve all the many problems with origins and the many problems with evolution someday. And lots of the evidence for evolution is actually based on theology
your ignorance as to what atheism is and your cluelessness about evolution is comical.

and dont think i didnt notice how you failed to respond to my query above as to why JP's statement was opinion and the other commenter's was a fact requiring proof.
your ignorance about atheism and cluelessness about evolution is hilarious. keep the jokes coming.

ah-pee-chorus said...

JP-

can you provide the definition of "religion" youre using ?

jewish philosopher said...

A set of beliefs concerning the origin of the universe and the human race, spirituality, morality and the afterlife.

jewish philosopher said...

Atheism is not merely a religion, but it's an extremely dangerous false cult. No primarily atheistic community has been free of mass killings and been able to reproduce at replacement level. It's a cult of death. To name some of history's most infamous avowed atheists: Stalin, Mao, Jim Jones of Jonestown, Jeff Dahmer, should I continue?

ah-pee-chorus said...

A set of beliefs concerning the origin of the universe and the human race, spirituality, morality and the afterlife.

great, so atheism isnt a religion since all it is is an acknowledgement of the reality that theres no evidence for bible-god. you lose.

ah-pee-chorus said...

the western and democratic countries today with the highest percentage of atheists have the lowest levels of crime and teen pregnancy.

http://www.nairaland.com/121066/predominantly-atheist-countries-lowest-crime

if you want to live in a place where religion rules, move to iran or saudi arabia and tell me how you like it.

and atheism still isnt a religion.

do you believe the flying spaghetti monster created the world ? if not youre an atheist vis-a-vis the FSM. and according to you, your religion is disbelief in the FSM.

jewish philosopher said...

"so atheism isnt a religion since all it is is an acknowledgement of the reality that theres no evidence for bible-god. you lose."

So atheism is a religion since it is the ridiculous belief that there is no Biblical God and evolution created us. you lose.

"western and democratic countries"

What has being western or democratic got to do with anything? Because by cherry picking data based on that you can say something positive about your religion?

Estimates for atheism alone (as a primary religious preference) range from 200 to 240 million. But these come primarily from China and former Soviet Union nations (especially Russia).

China probably does have the largest number of actual atheists of any country in the world and many Russians clearly remain atheists.

http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html#Nonreligious

if you want to live in a place where your religion rules, move to china or russia and tell me how you like it.

As far as secularized Western Europe goes, besides it's present economic collapse, the indigenous population is birth controlling itself into extinction

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ageing_of_Europe

and will be replaced eventually by Muslims

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_Europe

natschuster said...

Apeekorus:

I recal asking you what your basis in logic is for your morality. I don't recal getting a logical answer. SO it must be that your morality os based on feelings. What else is there? And now you are tlaking aboujt measuring morality, I'm not sure what that means. I asked repeatedly about the basis for your morality. Are you changing the subject?

And lookee hear, I'm talking about morality, logic, feelings all that good stuff, just like you. So I guess a person who bases his morality on the Torah can discuss morality as well as a personwho bases his morality on his feelings.

And I guess I wasn't clear. When I mentioned origin questions, I menat all the origin questions, the universe, life, the human mind, etc. Science has no answers, only faith. You response was about evolution only. Isn't that a category error?

And are you saying that there are no problems with evolution? No missing fossil? No irreducble complexity? No highly specified complexity? No epi-static problems? No new proteins losing stability as they gain new abilities? No time constraints?

natschuster said...

And I didn't respond top your point about JP's opinion about atheists and denial because I think it is too trivial an issue to discuss at length, but if you insist... JP has stated in past posts that his opinion is based on his experiences and his assessment of the situation, that is, it is an opinion.

natschuster said...

I fond that "you are ignorant" is a very common phrase utterd by atheists in our discussions. I'm prepared to confess my ignorance before man and G-d. But when I ask atheists to educate me, I get n reponse. That pains me, as a educator.

natschuster said...

I forgot to mention in my list of probelms with evolution the fact that DNA often does not match morphology. Distantly related species sometimes have the same DNA, while clsely related species don't. So scientists musyt come up with apologetics like horizontal gene transfer and deep homology.

ksil said...

So atheism is a religion since it is the ridiculous belief that there is no santa claus. you lose

FTW!

lol

jewish philosopher said...

It's, among other things, the belief that worms can turn into people. Which is definitely true, if you take enough LSD. Lol.

ksil said...

"worms can turn into people"

www.jewishphilospher.strawman.com

jewish philosopher said...

On the contrary rock solid man.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-193252/Meet-long-lost-relative--worm.html

Like most fundies, you really know little about your own religion. You just join because it feels good, drink the evolution Kool Aid and never think about it.

lol.