(July 14, 2015 at 7:55 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:

(July 14, 2015 at 3:05 pm)Redbeard The Pink Wrote: Semantic bullshit, semantic bullshit, and more semantic bullshit.

If god the son and god the father are the same person, then who is he the son of? I get whose father you think he is (everyone's...how lucky we all would be...), but whose son is he?

You're applying human limitations on God.

God created for himself a body in Jesus Christ and since the body was begotten or produced by God, God is the Father.

Here is an easy way to visualize it.

God = God above us

Son = God with us

Holy Spirit = God in us

It's the same God, just fulfilling different roles.

Uh huh.  The Bible shows Jesus was constantly praying to the Father - which was to himself.  Well, actually, I think I've seen guys looking in the mirror and praying to themselves. So, it's possible. And since God was invented when the first con man met the first fool . . .       Yep. He was praying to himself.

(July 14, 2015 at 1:48 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: No, Nemo. I'm pretty secure in every area of my life. I don't have a persecution complex - I just notice double-standards.

... except for your own, which you continue to peddle as if they're cheap baubles at a county fair.

also, I notice Sluggy hasn't replied to my point. I'm assuming that's because he has no answer, and doesn't want to look any more foolish than he already does.

(July 14, 2015 at 7:55 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: You're applying human limitations on God.

It must be nice, having a position so lacking in standards that you can just make up anything you want and handwave it away because we can't put limitations on god. Personally, I'm tired of so many theistic arguments boiling down to "it's possible- if you take anything to be possible, which is the claim we're hiding from view- therefore it's true."

(July 14, 2015 at 9:00 am)Rhondazvous Wrote: You and those other Christian nincompoops on this forum are proof that god does not exist. If he can't send better representation than you provide there's no way he could have created the universe.

He did. His name was Jesus.

The limitations of god

1. All knowing
A. If he is all knowing then then there is no free will.
B. Also god himself will have no free will.

2. All powerful
A. I literally keep going over this over and over there is no such thing at limitless or unlimited power.
B. If god created the universe he would be using up all his energy effectively kill himself creating the universe.

3. God is infallible
A. The bible is completely self contradicting
B. god's word (written by man)

(July 14, 2015 at 8:56 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: He did. His name was Jesus.

*Buzzer sound*

Wrong answer.

(July 14, 2015 at 8:56 pm)Randy Carson Wrote:

(July 14, 2015 at 9:00 am)Rhondazvous Wrote: You and those other Christian nincompoops on this forum are proof that god does not exist. If he can't send better representation than you provide there's no way he could have created the universe.

He did. His name was Jesus.

Groan. <facepalm> smh   Pathetic.  But ok, let's have some more fun.
Here's one for you, Randy . . . let's see your interpretation of this verse: Luke 9, verse 27 (Jesus, speaking to the 12 and others after the loaves and fishes shindig)
27 But I say to you truthfully, there are some of those standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God.”
This verse, as you well know, follows verse 26 which describes "the Son of Man returning in the glory of God", so we're not 
talking about Judean historical events 33 - 70 c.e.  People listening were going to be alive at the second coming.  So someone
walking this earth is over 2000 years old now.  And still waiting.

(July 14, 2015 at 8:56 pm)Randy Carson Wrote:

(July 14, 2015 at 9:00 am)Rhondazvous Wrote: You and those other Christian nincompoops on this forum are proof that god does not exist. If he can't send better representation than you provide there's no way he could have created the universe.

He did. His name was Jesus.

lol, even that asshole got laid up on a cross by some thoughtless cunts. Why can't your god send an unequivocal message?

Why is he afraid of leaving fingerprints?

And why do you worship such a shy god?

Oh, I almost forgot, you've got me on ignore, because you don't like hard questions. My bad.

(July 14, 2015 at 11:54 am)Parkers Tan Wrote: Jesus please us, Huggy and GC in one thread?  I've been sucked into a gravitational well of stupidity, heeeelllllllpppppppppppp

Too late to call for help. We've already passed the event horizon.

(July 14, 2015 at 2:50 pm)Esquilax Wrote:

(July 14, 2015 at 1:27 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: Are you saying a cure doesn't free from what distresses or harms?
Are you saying a cure doesn't extricate from or help to overcome something detrimental?
Are you saying a cure doesn't offset the bad effect of?

A cure is indeed redemption because it is meant to restore you back to health. Just as Jesus' sacrifice was to restore man back to what he originally was in the beginning.

Are you just not reading my posts before you disagree with them? Come back when you actually understand why we object to the Jesus narrative's vicarious redemption, because I don't have the time for someone who refuses to know what he's talking about, but still thinks he has some informed position from which to disagree. The objection to the Jesus redemption is not present in the medical one; if you're intent on just playing definition games to attempt to win points then I'll just use your terminology. It doesn't get you any closer to being right, anyway.

"Driving," is not the objectionable part of "drunk driving," and "redemption" is not at issue in this discussion, if we're to go along with your definitions.

He doesn't have to read your posts to know you're wrong, Esq. He decided that a long time ago.