Posted on 10/03/2013 6:40:34 AM PDT by Paladins Prayer
Take a look at the following list and tell me if anything strikes you:
Prudence Justice Temperance Courage Faith Hope Charity
Viewing these, the Seven Cardinal Virtues, anything make an impression? Okay, now try the Seven Heavenly Virtues of:
Chastity Temperance Charity Diligence Patience Kindness Humility
Anything? What strikes me is that equality is not among them.
Scour great works, such as the Bible, and you won't find talk of equality. Not one bit -- that is, unless you consider The Communist Manifesto a great work.
One thing about virtues -- which are defined as "good moral habits" -- is that their exercise doesn't require the cooperation, or compulsion, of another person. I can cultivate prudence, temperance, courage and the other virtues in myself, and I can do it all by myself. So while a virtuous society is desirable, virtue can also be a purely personal goal. And this is one time when focusing on the self needn't be selfish, for we should take the log out of our own eyes before worrying about the speck in our brother's.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
That's precisely what I just said -- the author is starting from a confused definition of his basic term, and so naturally gets lost in the weeds. It's as if he wrote an essay on managing a government budget using "the common modern understanding" of Keynesianism.
Dude, are you pedagogically impotent or is it just an act?
A woman taken captive, forcibly “married” and carnally penetrated is not enduring sexual slavery? LOL.
Don’t let semantics trip you to a fall so easily.
You're applying 21st century morality to the brutal barbarism of 3000 BC. Compared to the common practice of the day, the Torah restrictions were a quantum leap in ethics!
LOL, when did you lose your ability to think logically?
Those are the supposed commandments of a god, not of humans. Unless this god evolves over time, it shouldn’t have “values” more flexible than elastic, wouldn’t you reckon?
I didn't say that God's values changed; merely the era's. God is timeless, but human ideas do evolve over time. You're assuming He commanded women to be forced into marriages. That's your idea, not His.
LOL.
Whose words are those, in Deut. 21:10-14?
I’ll enjoy making you course through your own pretzel “logic”, as you answer me.
God’s. Have fun.
This funny little deity of yours establishes that mixing milk and meat is an abomination (Exodus 23:19) , but wage war on your neighbours and if you find good-looking eye-candy in their midst, capture those women and have sex with them under the cover of a forced “marriage”, that’s fine and dandy (Deut. 21:10-14).
And don’t work on Saturdays (Exodus 35:2) or you get to die. You’re too uncivilised for THAT!!!
Tell this to yourself in the mirror (really) and let me know if you missed catching a glimpse of the most gullible person you ever knew.
But getting back to the original issue from which you strayed, please point out to me in that passage where force is even implied. By all means attempt to prove to me this was not voluntary.
All I see is compassion and gentleness to the point that she's even allowed to mourn her parents before the marriage, or, as you would have it, "marriage" is consummated.
Compare that to Assyria which marched their prisoners along pulled by hooks attached to their faces.
Ta ta!
Bump
Destroyed my arguments? LOL, that’s mighty proud of you for presuming, for someone feigning humility in the lack of evidence.
So, a foreign army invades your village, your daughters are captured by them, and taken away, and you want to believe they did this voluntarily, in the face of the death of their parents. They must have amazing personalities for giving themselves sexually to those who slaughtered their parents and took their children as captives. Stockholm syndrome, exemplified, I guess.
Pathetic.
Since this is a diktat of your god to do as commanded, it’s okay because hey, look at what the Assyrians are doing! LOL
The “giver” of morality justified by comparison to the lowest common denominator!
The point you’re missing is that if that is the common understanding today, it’s a problem. Also, it was inevitable that what has happened in our country would happen with all the focus on ‘equality.’ The founders didn’t really talk about equality nearly as much as they talked about virtue.
The one thing I would never presume to is justifying God's actions and commands. Not that I don't understand them but He does give this warning about casting pearls before SWINE!
LOL.
You were posting reply after reply last evening and only now conveniently remembered to quit when your non-arguments got ahead of you. That alone shows who the real fool is.
:^)
Thanks for the exchanges, however. It was fun making you attempt to defend the indefensible, and watch you fail pathetically.
When I returned home and saw your silly post, I answered immediately.
The only thing you have going for yourself is that you are so easily amused. When you don't have wisdom you should at least have a sense of humor.
There you go, again.
You imply not to indulge in the exchanges but keep coming back for more, like a living version of the definition of insanity.
I showed how your “ever permanent”, “universal, unchanging morality” god permitted sexual slavery at one point which you pathetically defended by saying they were “morals of the times” and with false moral equivalence by comparing them to the Assyrians. Cornered, you started calling me names.
Then, unable to stay the course regarding the actual argument, you make an excuse for yourself to not indulge further but still keep returning. Insanity is what one would term this behaviour.
What you're incapable of understanding is that the question of the sovereignty of God is not something you can resolve in a messaging board; you won't believe it, but it's bigger than you or, of course, me.
It's sad to think that you actually believe you've shown me anything! The moment you condemned God, you already lost the argument. So, in the spirit of the present discussion:
GET LOST, LOSER!
LOL.
You first decide to argue your case FOR sexual slavery per Deut. 21:10-14, whilst claiming that a message board is an “insufficient” arena to do so (what more do you need, a miming platform?) , fail at convincing the validity of both claims, say you will cease arguing, yet persist stubbornly in continuing, and now ask me to get lost.
When trying to prove a point, you want (expect) the opposition to believe in it as a precondition so that makes you certifiably insane.
:^)
To prove my earlier assertion that understanding the English language is not your strong suit, you have stated the exact opposite of my position; I argued AGAINST sexual slavery, but that discussion no longer interests me. I've already put you in your place on that and I'm not going to cover that ground again.
The subject that I want to explore is your atheist faith; of course, if you wish to deny it's a religion all you need do is prove God does not exist. Have fun with that one.
Atheism was popularized by Enlightenment philosophers for the purpose of mainstreaming homosexuality. A case in point is Friedrich "God is dead" Nietzsche who died insane from tertiary stage of a case of syphilis he acquired in an Italian bath house.
So, whenever I encounter someone culturally related to the Continent or the Empire obsessed about opposing God, my reaction is to think they're either gay or...uh...well...gay.
To avoid getting into a secondary argument, my gentle buddy, I'll immediately clarify that "bi" is "gay." You see, engaging in a second perversion does not cancel out a first perversion.
Have a nice life.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.