(October 11, 2015 at 6:33 am)I_am_not_mafia Wrote:

(October 11, 2015 at 6:29 am)Randys brother Wrote: Why does atheism exist?

• Atheism exist's because of people's pride.
  
• So that have obey God's rules.
  
• So that they don't have obey there Father and Mother.
  
• So that they can watch Porn.
  
• So that can show that there cool.
  

Aside from the actual bollocks that you are spewing:

exists not exist's
"have to obey" not "have obey"
their not there
"that they can" not "that can"
they're not there


0/10 Must try harder

See how you try to change the subject and your wording indicates your pride,You just won't give in to God will ya.

(October 11, 2015 at 6:47 am)Randys brother Wrote: See how you try to change the subject and your wording indicates your pride,You just won't give in to God will ya.

How can I give in to an imaginary being?

Incidentally there is a typo in your user name too. Should be "Randy's brother"

And why is pride a bad thing? It means that you care about something.

Are you proud of being an American?

(October 11, 2015 at 6:29 am)Randys brother Wrote: Why does atheism exist?

---

• Atheism exist's because of people's pride.
  
• So that have obey God's rules.
  
• So that they don't have obey there Father and Mother.
  
• So that they can watch Porn.
  
• So that can show that there cool.
  

---

Why does religion exist?

• Religious people are little b*tches with no dignity, honor, or anything to be proud of.
  
• Religious people need to be told not to steal, rape, or kill, because they're thieves, rapists and killers, I guess.
  
• Religious people have been abused by their parents, in order to become obedient farming tools.
  
• Religious people like someone to watch them beat their meat/stroke their clam.
  
• Religious people are dorks and they know it...
  
• Yo Momma so dumb she bought tickets to Xbox Live
  

Schooled...

(October 11, 2015 at 6:29 am)Randys brother Wrote: Why does atheism exist?

• Atheism exist's because of people's pride.
  
• So that don't have to obey God's rules.
  
• So that they don't have to obey there Father and Mother.
  
• So that they can watch Porn.
  
• So that can show that there cool.
  

[NB:  I bolded your errors for you, except for line #2, where I inserted the words you left out. No need to thank me.  You made 9 errors in a post of only 39 words.  This makes your fuck up percentage a smidge over 23%.  Impressive.]

#1.  Well, people, including atheists, certainly have pride, but ours isn't a patch on the blindingly idiotic arrogance of believers who have the hubris to think they intimately understand the heart and mind of the creatrix of the universe.

#2.  Fair point, but limited.  As an atheist, I don't have to obey God's rules.  Which is just as well, as I have no desire to set fire to oxen or to murder disobedient children.  But I'm not an atheist so I don't have to obey God's rules.  I'm an atheist in part because God's rules are mind-numbingly stupid.

#3.  Bzzt.  I love, honour, respect and obey my parents.  Not because your mythic God orders me to do so.  I do it because my parents are worthy of love, honour, respect and obedience.

#4.  Seriously?  With all the Christian perversion in the world, you think that atheism is a requirement for watching porn?

#5.  Yup, people see me walk down the street and say, 'See that guy?  He's an atheist.  He is soooo cool!' In fact, my atheism makes me so cool that people used to throw rocks through my windows to express their admiration of my incredible coolness.

Boru

Randy's poor clone, until you can demonstrate why the magic fairytale you purport to worship should be regarded as a valid source, I have infinitely less interest in 'listening' to you rationalise plot holes than I would in performing reconstructive bowel surgery on myself with a rusty penknife coated in hot chilli sauce to a soundtrack of a perpetual loop of Star Trek fans explaining away in pathological detail every single inconsistency between TNG and TOS. That at least would be somewhat entertaining and something I have never had before;

(October 11, 2015 at 3:11 am)Redbeard The Pink Wrote: I pretty much just skimmed the OP because from what I could tell it's basically Sunday Morning Drivel, but something he said in there reminded me of something that recently occurred to me.


Ok, so Jehovah is said to be the ultimate source of all goodness and morality (especially morality) in the Universe, right? He's, like, the most moral it's possible to be, right?


The test of salvation, however, is apparently not one of morality, but one of belief. Many Christians and sects of Christianity hold to the idea that even very good people who don't believe in Gaud and accept Jesus will wind up in Hell, and that even truly evil people who convert on their death beds and do no good works will wind up in Heaven. If that's true, it essentially means that Gaud completely ignores how moral one's behavior is and instead only really looks at what you believe in your heart and confess with your mouth.


Now, that does beg the question...why in the FUCK would the penultimate moral force of the Universe base salvation on a position of belief rather than the morality of one's behavior?


"Oh, because human morality is so flawed that it will never measure up, so he has to base our salvation on something else for us to even have a chance."


So you're telling me that the ultimate source of all morality, the Universe's most moral being, is able to ignore and forgive gross immorality because of an utterly arbitrary standard that has literally nothing to do with morality, and that he is completely unwilling to forgive even the smallest infraction unless that utterly arbitrary standard is met, and that this is somehow still a moral being? A moral being who sends otherwise bad people to Heaven and otherwise good people to Hell, all over a matter of whether they can believe something on bad evidence and not whether they can be moral people? How does that even begin to make sense?

Let's break up the argument.

Quote:I pretty much just skimmed the OP because from what I could tell it's basically Sunday Morning Drivel, but something he said in there reminded me of something that recently occurred to me.
Ok, so Jehovah is said to be the ultimate source of all goodness and morality (especially morality) in the Universe, right? He's, like, the most moral it's possible to be, right?

Yes

Quote:The test of salvation, however, is apparently not one of morality, but one of belief. Many Christians and sects of Christianity hold to the idea that even very good people who don't believe in Gaud and accept Jesus will wind up in Hell, and that even truly evil people who convert on their death beds and do no good works will wind up in Heaven. If that's true, it essentially means that Gaud completely ignores how moral one's behavior is and instead only really looks at what you believe in your heart and confess with your mouth.

Now this is where you go wrong, God wants you to have a high morality and follow him. Simple wording.

Quote:Now, that does beg the question...why in the FUCK would the penultimate moral force of the Universe base salvation on a position of belief rather than the morality of one's behavior?

Your suggesting, why can’t one just be Good and go to heaven, As Paul explains in Philippians 2:13, "God is the one, who, for his good purpose, works in you both to desire and to work. “Notice that Paul's words presuppose that the faithful Christian is not just desiring to be righteous, but is actively working toward it. James 2:17 reminds us that "faith of itself, if it does not have work, is dead." In verse 24 James says, "See how a person is justified by works and not by faith alone." And later: "For just as a body without a spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead" (2:26).
But why does it have to this way, because God said so.

Quote:"Oh, because human morality is so flawed that it will never measure up, so he has to base our salvation on something else for us to even have a chance."

No, human morality is corrupted by sin, but we are not to give up if we did then that’s sin, but if we did then we can trust on God’s mercy and by putting the effort of a confession.

Quote:So you're telling me that the ultimate source of all morality, the Universe's most moral being, is able to ignore and forgive gross immorality because of an utterly arbitrary standard that has literally nothing to do with morality.

God is not limited to anything, he can do whatever he wants and you have no right to say what he should be doing.

Quote:and that he is completely unwilling to forgive even the smallest infraction unless that utterly arbitrary standard is met,

You have to put in the effort to confess, you can’t just go on sinning and expect God to forgive you.

Quote:and that this is somehow still a moral being? A moral being who sends otherwise bad people to Heaven and otherwise good people to Hell,

You, miss the point here that nobody’s good, we are saved by grace we have all sinned, like I said before we are without excuse since we sin too (Romans 3:23; 5:12), and we all deserve death before a perfect Holy God. To assume Adam’s descendants are innocent is a false assumption. Due to the sin nature received from Adam, death is coming for all since all have sinned (Romans 3:23).

Quote:all over a matter of whether they can believe something on bad evidence and not whether they can be moral people? How does that even begin to make sense?

Even if there good evidence one can simply ignore it or simply not look for it, it does make sense to you because you do not have faith.

Needs more green and red font. But I like the pink font as well.

(October 11, 2015 at 7:17 am)Stimbo Wrote: Randy's poor clone, until you can demonstrate why the magic fairytale you purport to worship should be regarded as a valid source, I have infinitely less interest in 'listening' to you rationalise plot holes than I would in performing reconstructive bowel surgery on myself with a rusty penknife coated in hot chilli sauce to a soundtrack of a perpetual loop of Star Trek fans explaining away in pathological detail every single inconsistency between TNG and TOS. That at least would be somewhat entertaining and something I have never had before;

I demonstrate but you pretend/ignore it,This part clearly shows your not interested in any Godly talk.

(October 11, 2015 at 7:25 am)Randys brother Wrote: I demonstrate but pretend/ignore it,This part clearly shows your not interested in any Godly talk.

Why should we be interested in 'godly talk' ?

Are you interested in hearing about the flying spaghetti monster?

First thing you need to do is demonstrate why we should give any credence to what the Bible says.

Sinnerdaniel failed to do that when he was challenged to do so on this very thread. You will fail too.

P.S needs more green font.

(October 11, 2015 at 7:29 am)I_am_not_mafia Wrote:

(October 11, 2015 at 7:25 am)Randys brother Wrote: I demonstrate but pretend/ignore it,This part clearly shows your not interested in any Godly talk.

Why should we be interested in 'godly talk' ?

Are you interested in hearing about the flying spaghetti monster?

First thing you need to do is demonstrate why we should give any credence to what the Bible says.

Sinnerdaniel failed to do that when he was challenged to do so on this very thread. You will fail too.

P.S needs more green font.

Because it's the word of God and if you won't obey you'll burn in hell.