ZAROVE wrote:EVEN the definitions of Sophistry you presented do not say they are always intentionally deceptive arguments, and the word generally means that the argument is designed to sound reasonable but really isn’t. It can conotate intentional deceit, but most often simply conotate the use of an argument to support a position even though said argument is not supported by proper evidence.
I’m not attacking you, your simply reading into my posts a hostility that’s not present.
can you say "passive aggressive?" It's obvious you are attacking her. you are doing it a way designed to crush her ego for daring to disagree with some little misguided by gone standard of imperialism that you romantically attach yourself to.
Really I’m treating you no differently than I did Messiah Rain, who spells god in lower case each time he uses it even though this is bad grammar, and also claims Adam And Eve could not have really been responsible for their actions for they had not yet taken of the Tree of Knowledge.
O that's brilliant. you really know how to charm people there. So you saying you talk to her no differently than you do some nut case whom you obviously regard as a fool and that's supposed to make her feel un attacked? What? you think she's a total idiot?you think you can just say "i'm no attacking you" even though you made her feel like shit, that's supposed to shut her up is that it?
His argument fails because Adam and Eve need to be ignorant, possessed of little to no knowledge, before they eat the Fruit off of a tree known as “The Tree Of Knowledge”. But the Tree if the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, not simply the Tree of Knowledge, and thus his argument was invalid.
ahaahah yet to fit your preconceived notion of doctrine they do but what does that have to do with what's really going on in the text? "they need to be..." man that cracks me up.
You need them to be, that doesn't mean they are!
I did not call his argument sophistry, but it was the same sort of thing.
ahahahahahahah
ROTFLOL "I didn't say you are an idiot just very much like an idiot."
He begins with a position, then seeks to argue for it and uses any argument that can be used to defend his position. People do this all the time, and the sort of thinking is Dangerous as it prevents true evaluation of the arguments.
O brother, who the hell do you think you are? you don't have right to assign that kind of value to people's argument. "Its' dangerous. if we let people way pretty soon they wont vote Republican anymore."
You simply accept something because you prefer It if you think along these lines. You personally did the same thing with El Shaddai, you preferred that it meant “The Breasted One”, and you Interpret this to be Feminine because women have breasts and men don’t.
you had no support for your view and your logic was atrocious. I totally outpointed you on scholarly support before someone wiped the board by hacking it.
your analysis about breasts is not sterling. I disproved it. you are dishonest in insisting that I never said what I did. You have never once addressed the fact of what I said. the strength giving image of mother's milk.
then you claim to be a Hebrew scholar.. I have Rabbinical evidence and you don't.
Your failure to comprehend the the strength giving metaphor of a woman's best speaks volumes.
The fact that men do, In fact, have Breasts and the actual word may have simply came form the word for upper chest (Assuming that’s even right) never occurred to you.
That has nothing at all to do with the issue. the Rabbis did not see it that way that's not how they took. Men don't usually refer to their breast as breasts they call them paps. The reason there is a breast metaphor is the strength giving aspect of mother suckling her baby.
you never once addressed that argument. I made it time after time and you ignored every time. you are wrong. you are disproved. I have scholarly you don't'.
stop trying to assign motives to Kristen because you are extremely transparent.
You took a modern English idiomatic use of the word “Breast” and applied it Universally. You do this without thinking through the ramifications of the argument. It never occurred to you that “Breast” is not a feminine exclusive. You wanted this to be Feminine, so it was, and the argument made sense to you, and you likely still use it.
No you took a modern idiomatic use of the term breast and insisted that it be applied to an ancient world concept from a culture of which you do not read the language and did not do the research and you have been extremely dishonest about the whole issue.
The same thing is true here. You want to support Birth Control so you buy into any argument that allows you to, and treat it as if its somehow valid and that your “Taking a deeper look” at the Bible. In this case though the deeper look makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
stop assigning motives.
The Hebrew, and subsequent English translations, don’t obviously mean that Eve will become pregnant more often as the result of the Curse, and if you study anatomy at all and contrast Human reproduction with that of other Animals you will see Humans actually reproduce at a significantly lower rate than most other Species.
That's not the issue. The fundies in the quivering movement understand the curse on Even in that way and they use that to justify making their wives have 10 kids. That's the issue she's dealing with. Weather or not supports birth control is neither here nor there. you are not disproving the morality of birth control by just tagging her as having that opinion.
If you reduce the number of Pregnancies women have naturally you will end up with a Species which doesn’t produce enough offspring to ensure the survival of the species.
Now he's a demographer. that's not true man. From Hebrew scholar to demographer what a guy. what are you trying to do here? that's just ignorant.
In fact, even in today’s world you see that the pattern where if most people use Birth Control they tend not to have a Population that is growing but contracting, and this is even with intentional discontinuation in order to have a specified number of Children, or people who forget in the heat of passion to take nay precautions.
you never read Malthus hu? that's silly. The only thing it would do is to destroy family names. So what? That's part of that old world charm you are into, value the name, primo generator. you just be the oldest sib. It would not destroy any population that's not true.
Humans can offset this by other technical means to be sure but, if Humanity did not have the Technology that is wielded today, the fact that the Average European population is at below 2.0 and stands more at 1.5 would spell disaster, perhaps doom, for Europe.
that's ridiculous. It is true that the third needs to reduce the population not the first world. The people who have the education and understanding to reduce are not the one's who need to do it. The way to accomplish that is through increased technology and economic security. The reason third world countries have so many kids is it takes a huge family to run an old style far. When the got industrialized the reduce the population.
that argument is racist anyway because it only matters if you think you have preserve blood lines. Who cares? If the French stop producing we would all be better off anyway. I would think you would go along with that.
Given that a woman can only become Pregnant once a month, and considering that women do not generally become pregnant while Pregnant, and the vast Majority of Births are single Child, its hard to imagine Eve being made less fertile if the Curse were lifted, and the Human race surviving.
If the husbands through there was a curse that mandated that the women be pregame all the time and have a huge family then the woman would be pregnant all the item and that not good for her.
bad bad bad analysis Zor. you can think better than this.
We also have the stark reality that no one in the Ancient World understood the Curse of Eve as being that she will have more Children than before. None. Its not in any Hebrew commentaries.
wrong. some did, read Bushnell.
Sure, I’ve not read them all, maybe I’m wrong, but I doubt you have any text from the Ancient world that said that,
why do you doubt that? Because she's so stupid she can't have it right? She does have it. She's read Bushnell. It was a woman who studied it, Bushnell was a woman.
in addition to pain in Childbirth, Eve will also become Pregnant more frequently. If this was indeed part of the Curse, why did no one mention it at all in Antiquity?
Or is this another instance of “The Patriarchy” suppressing the Truth?
they did. that's more of those verses that you missed in the Talmud. I don't know how a major Hebrew scholar such as yourself can miss so much. I'm sure you read the read the Talmud a couple of dozen times right? That's in the stuff you missed.
You claim that this is what the Text said in the Original Hebrew. No, its not. No one else read those word s into the Original Hebrew who happened to live when the language was actually spoken as a Living Language, no one understood that as part of Eve’s Curse. If its so obvious in the Text, why did it take till now to discover it?
And you know this form the many years you spent living in the ancient world and speaking Hebrew right? You are such a major Hebrew scholar we should take your word for it hu?
Not only have I seen it in Bushnell but also in a couple of other books by scholarly authors. I don't think you have read the Talmud. I think you know Hebrew and I know you didn't live in the ancinet world.
Its simply a misreading of the text. The Curse was that she would have pain in Childbirth, but would still long for Children anyway so she’d be subjected to said Pain, not that she would become Pregnant more often.
The little arrogant one confidently asserts "it's just a misreading." It's your misreading. your opinion and you have no backing just like your groundless assertion on El Shaddi.
As to your personal experiences, I don’t mean to sound Cruel but,
there's the passive aggressive bull shit again. yes you do mean it. You need to be cruel. you want to vent you want to be cruel because it makes you feel like a big shot. That's just why you do it and makes you feel like a man to do it to a woman. It makes you feel controlled to allow women equality. I went through that. you have to get over, but you are not mature enough to understand yourself.
It's a guy thing to feel controlled when you first grant equality to women because then you lose a privilege. you feel demoted as a man so yur manhood is based upon aggression because you were raised in the south. I know that, I'm not stupid I was raised in the south. I know how it is.
this is normal that southern men go through this when they first confront their own sexist nature.
I have been abused a lot in my life, I don’t feel the need to endlessly rehash why that abuse was wrong or to simply attack that sort of abuse endlessly.[/quote]
Naw Barn you don't want to say That. see now this is the kind of thing we don't need. Look Mr. Sensitivity, however much you were abused. we all have our little pain in our lives, unless you have been a woman you have never been expected to accept your lot in life as second class, bottom rung, exist to serve others.
You don't know. You are not being sensitive you are trying to feel superior and get the value of manhood by lording it over a woman. You need to grow up. If you really have the grit to face your own personal demons then you need to accept the fact that these other people have a spicily draw back that we as men don't have, they were tried accept a place on the bottom, you did nto go through that you don't' know.
Its unhealthy and leads to exaggerated thinking which is equally as Dubious, perpetuating the cycle of abuse rather than eliminating it. A better way to handle the past is to simply let go of the abuse and to put things into proper perspective.
You don’t do this by simply countering everything the abusers said.
Now you are a shrink?
guess what other attitudes are unhealthy? It's unhealthy to act like a little tyrant and crush people's egos becuase you need to feel special. You are basing your self worth on putting down women. don't' play games. I did that too. I know what that's about.