(June 3, 2015 at 1:23 pm)Rhondazvous Wrote:

(June 2, 2015 at 4:19 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote: The sad part is yes, he is.  Don't bother talking to him about morality or god's nature.  He literally thinks slavery is okay and that someone getting cancer can be 'a blessing from God'.

Sounds like he does a better job betraying his own stupidity than we could do. Maybe he should be encouraged.  Imagine if he got together with Godschild and Professor. Do I hear you groaning?

Sometimes I wonder if Drich is secretly an anti theist trying to turn people against Christianity. 

(June 3, 2015 at 2:14 pm)Rhondazvous Wrote: I've never driven a car before, but I can't imagine anyone following the directions of a GPS they can neither see nor hear. Maybe you'd do well to try a different analogy.

:Facepalm:The 'Directions' come from the bible which can be seen and heard...
My analogy works quite well once you understand it.

Quote:Did god say that's the only way he can be found or did you say that.

Jesus actually said that in Luke 11.

Quote:The biblical god came to a lot of people who weren't looking for him. You are signing god's name onto your own agenda and that, my friend, is spiritual forgery.

Examples?
(Also you do understand we are speaking of Christianity, therefore Christian examples would be what you need to provide.)

Quote:How can god be the standard of morality if you excuse his bad behavior by pointing to what men do? I was warned not to argue morality with you, but I like drawing you out. Please continue.

Do you truly think it is you who is drawing me out? Aww.

So how can God be the standard of 'morality'? The short answer He's not. Morality is Man's standard of right and wrong. (generally it is always the lessor of two evils) True Righteousness is the Standard of God. The standard in which man can never acheave. With God's Righteousness, the acts themselves have no intrinsic value. Meaning the act of killing has no right or wrong value in of itself. It is what God says about the act in a given situation that assigns an act's relation to right or wrong. So for a man or men to rape and murder and plunder a people or land... Sin, evil wretchedness. For people to do the same under God's command? Blessed, heros, conquorers, liberators..

Again man assigns right/wrong value to certain acts. God's right wrong values are tied to obedience to those very same acts.

Still with me?

If so, then also know God understands we can not ever live Righteously/In perfect obedience to his 'right wrong values.' That is why He has made provisions for attonement.

Quote:I want you to look at the word atheist. The first syllable A means none, not, no, sin, without, etc. The second syllable theist means god. To say that science is our god is to redefine the word god in a way to which I am not privy.

which is why I am pushing the fact that science is indeed your god. Because it shows ignorance to the rights, rules and rituals you pay homage to by bowing down to your god of 'science' without even knowing it. I shouldn't really say science, I should say theortical/fringe science which has been adopted by anti God-ers as mainstream science.

Quote:Who said the theory is proof?  The theory points to things which do stand as proof.  Your claims have yet to point to anything outside themselves.

Read the chain of posts that lead to that quote.

---

(June 3, 2015 at 4:08 pm)PhilliptheTeenageAtheist Wrote: And if someone follows those steps, but doesn't find the proof you're talking about?

Then for them their is no God.
The hard truth is that God does not call everyone. However out of the 3 years I've been here and out of everyone who said or claimed to attempt to follow what was said to do in Luke 11, not one of them actually perform all three steps as outlined by the parable. So for them how can they know if God called them or not? Fore not all who are called will heed that call.

Quote:It's a big assumption that just because you can find what you think is proof, that everyone else can not only find this proof but interpret it the same way as you as well.

When God shows up... There is no interpreting going on.

---

(June 3, 2015 at 4:42 pm)Nope Wrote:

(June 3, 2015 at 1:23 pm)Rhondazvous Wrote: Sounds like he does a better job betraying his own stupidity than we could do. Maybe he should be encouraged.  Imagine if he got together with Godschild and Professor. Do I hear you groaning?

Sometimes I wonder if Drich is secretly an anti theist trying to turn people against Christianity. 

First you called me a troll, then a Mormon, then a Calvinist, now anti theist? What is it with you and lables? How about Drich is simply telling you in his own words what it is the bible and God is really all about, without the filter of a big religious box church to sponcer/tell him what to say?

(June 2, 2015 at 5:07 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote: Hell, add that one to the list if it's not already on there.

# - Intentionally or otherwise conflating the colloquial and scientific meanings of the words 'law' and 'theory' to serve their own ends.

Definitely adding that one.

along with # They point to ancient tales of martyrdom as proof. If we don't believe in their god it means all those people died for naught. Shame on us making fools of the dead.
(Sung to the tune of Oh My darling, clementine)
I'm a rain drop
I'm a rain drop
I'm a rain frop
Sleek and rich
But I'd rather
Be a rain drop
than a drip
By name of Drich

If you believe in a literal hell (not sure if you do or not), and that god does not call everyone, you are admitting that god sends some people to hell even when it is not their fault.

(June 3, 2015 at 4:05 pm)Drich Wrote: My argument was about whether or not GPS exists... It was about how to 'proove' whether or not what the GPS said was accurate. The only way to 'proove' whether or not your getting accurate turn by turn instruction is to follow the instructions turn by turn.

Like wise God's system of proof that is offered is like a set of turn by turn instructions, in that the only way to get to God is to follow the turn by turn instructions.

Precisely.  And both whether the GPS exists and whether it works are easily tested.  It does, and it mostly does.   The item exists, it offers clear instructions and they work for everyone almost all of the time.

God offers an incoherent book.  The directions that begin with turn off your rational mind and really really want.  And even so the directions don't work for everyone except those who really really want them to and are willing to ignore much failure.

GPS hypothesis pass,  god hypothesis fail.

These false equivocations are abundant.

"God is like an apple. An apple exists, therefor God exists."

"We can't see feelings. But feelings exist. So God exists."

It's not a lot more sophisticated than that. If you want to use an analogy, it has to actually be equivalent in the ways important to the discussion at hand.

There is only one simple logical statement that would cure everything, but they will not "get" it.

Indoctrination exists, therefore God
else Atheist

With religious theism, that is certainly true. Can you imagine someone coming to all these conclusions about "Jesus" and so on if no one ever mentioned his name? Me thinks not.

Even those not being directly indoctrinated still get a kind of second hand smoke effect where the mythology that surrounds them gets absorbed. This can be enough in some cases to draw people in.

People could believably come to a philosophical theism independent of any discussion I think. Weirdly, I came to the tentative conclusion of determinism when I was quite young, before I realized it had a name or that it was already a recognised philosophy. I thought I'd figured out something amazing and new!

(June 3, 2015 at 4:43 pm)Drich Wrote:

---

(June 3, 2015 at 4:42 pm)Nope Wrote: Sometimes I wonder if Drich is secretly an anti theist trying to turn people against Christianity. 

First you called me a troll, then a Mormon, then a Calvinist, now anti theist? What is it with you and lables? How about Drich is simply telling you in his own words what it is the bible and God is really all about, without the filter of a big religious box church to sponcer/tell him what to say?

I don't remember calling you a Mormon but I didn't think that being a Calvinist was a bad thing. Many of your beliefs seem to line up with Calvinism. Can you link to the post where I called you a Mormon? It is pretty obvious you aren't Mormon as you have made it clear in other threads that you don't like it when we label them Christian. As far as calling you a troll, I have been suggesting that you might not be what you claim for a long time.  Overall, I think that I am usually pretty polite to you so I am confused why being called a Calvinist or my doubting your online persona would bother you.

I liked the original intent of this thread. 

Did anyone list changing goal posts? 

Changing the goalposts into a tiny target on a tree the other side of the world.