The Inconstant Gardener

-Removed-

Posted by divegester on page one:

So let's not get upset when he digs over a flowerbed, re-turfs the lawn or completely landscapes the entire project.

It quite clearly DOES say that.

Let me give another analogy. Suppose we were living in Biblical times and nobody cared if you beat your slave. Your statement is equivalent to saying: "Well if you are a slave, don't be upset when you get beaten".
You later tried to claim that the two are equivalent ie that noting the difference between:
a) Nobody cares if you beat your slave.
b) Slaves shouldn't be upset if they get beaten
is being a pedantic ass.

-Removed-

What do you believe the difference is between animal and vegetable. I strongly suspect that the whole misunderstanding in this thread is because you are making assumptions about plants that you think everyone else shares but they do not. The problem is you keep just repeating the claim rather than explaining it despite my repeatedly pointing out that it is not obvious as you assume.

If the analogy in the OP was that we were the cattle of some farmer would you similarly have said:
"Then we shouldn't get upset when the farmer decides to slaughter us for beef and leather".
or would there be a difference if the analogy was about animals?

-Removed-

We have been in several very lengthy threads where you refused to admit you were wrong even when it was patently obvious to everyone that you were, and you just got more and more ridiculous as it went on. (you are doing the same in this thread).
Both Freaky and sonship do the same sort of thing, the most laughable example was Freaky trying to defend being a flat earther.

-Removed-

I must note that you too have been making unfounded claims about my general behaviour:

I was expecting you to take this tact; you like to slip a little jab in, wait for a response in kind and then claim you have been insulted.

Your angry tub-thumping demands and cutting little jabs let down your facade of intellectual calmness twhitehead.

That second one is hilarious. You imagine I have a "facade of intellectual calmness" and then imagine it is being 'let down'. You have put me on a pedestal of your own making and are upset that I am not living up to it.

-Removed-

In the threads in question, not a single person spoke up in your support, and several other posters besides me said you were in the wrong.

-Removed-

I do hope so, as this is starting to look like you attempting to side track the thread.

-Removed-

In the thread I recall, there were more than just me and googlefudge. You are free to look it up and prove me wrong. You are also free to try and find an independent party for this thread that thinks you are making sense and not just question dodging. I would be more than happy to hear an explanation from someone else because it is becoming patently obvious that no explanation will be forthcoming from you.

Its obvious that you thought it was a clever comeback to the OP but realized your error when I questioned it, but you are incapable of admitting it.

Originally posted by twhitehead
In the thread I recall, there were more than just me and googlefudge. You are free to look it up and prove me wrong. You are also free to try and find an independent party for this thread that thinks you are making sense and not just question dodging. I would be more than happy to hear an explanation from someone else because it is becoming patently obvio ...[text shortened]... k to the OP but realized your error when I questioned it, but you are incapable of admitting it.

Dive posted:

"So let's not get upset when he digs over a flowerbed, re-turfs the lawn or completely landscapes the entire project."

I thought at the time, and still do, that this was a pretty good comeback on a number of levels. (One of the 2 thumbs up was from me). Firstly, if God was simply a gardener and we his plants, it would indeed be nonsensical for us to object to being treated as such. (Uprooted with indifference to love or justice). - I also took Dive's meaning to be a 'Christian poke' at my reasoning, demonstrating the loving God of the Bible had to be more than an indifferent gardener and that humans meant more to him than a disposable tulip.

I hope, as thread creator and atheist, i am a sufficiently independent party?

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
Firstly, if God was simply a gardener and we his plants, it would indeed be nonsensical for us to object to being treated as such. (Uprooted with indifference to love or justice).

Why should we not be upset?
To give another analogy, when a farmer kills one of his livestock for meat, do you believe:
a) it is not upset.
b) it shouldn't be upset.
c) it could be upset but shouldn't be.

Are you possibly saying that although we might not like dying, we should be understanding of the gardeners desires? Or are you saying we are simply helpless to do anything about it?

I hope, as thread creator and atheist, i am a sufficiently independent party?
You most definitely qualify. I still don't understand why we should not be upset so I hope you are better at explaining than div, who just kept repeating it or using various question dodging tactics.