No such thing as a "true" Christian

[fr0d0]

A flippant, dismissive quip about "justice" does nothing to address the absurd possibilities allowed by your belief system (such as the murderer who joins his victims in heaven). Why don't you try responding to the conundrum in the post, instead of a diversionary tactic?

It was neither flippant nor dismissive Strongbad. You made a bad point. Who are you to say who is innocent and who is guilty? Unless you possess divine powers... how do you know what is really inside people's hearts? Given that justice is actually served... in what fantasy do you imagine an unjust God? <---this isn't the concept put forward in Christianity. Your conundrum is a straw man.

---

The fact a person can insist something to be true and yet deem it to be, even theoretically, beyond testing, while at the same time consume oxygen and sequester nutrients that can be immediately be used to fertilize a needy plant, irritates me.

You are simply someone with the intellect to comprehend but are unwilling to try.

[Violet]

I gave you the benefit of the doubt in deference to your demigod status, and was willing to give you 30 seconds more than a solipsist.

^_^

Have a good day chuck, and good luck arguing with fr0d0 ^_^

[Strongbad]

A flippant, dismissive quip about "justice" does nothing to address the absurd possibilities allowed by your belief system (such as the murderer who joins his victims in heaven). Why don't you try responding to the conundrum in the post, instead of a diversionary tactic?

It was neither flippant nor dismissive Strongbad. You made a bad point. Who are you to say who is innocent and who is guilty? Unless you possess divine powers... how do you know what is really inside people's hearts? Given that justice is actually served... in what fantasy do you imagine an unjust God? <---this isn't the concept put forward in Christianity. Your conundrum is a straw man.

It was both flippant and dismissive, and also diversionary, just like your last response to me. I was not talking about who is guilty or innocent, and I never claimed to be the arbiter of that. There are no such things as "divine powers". And I do know what is really inside people's hearts: blood. The childish religious euphemisms where the "heart" is substituted for the brain carry no weight with me. I have no fantasies where I imagine an unjust God - that would require fantasizing about an actual God and assigning certain properties to it.

A straw man argument is where person A puts forth a position (usually distorted) and claims that it is person B's position. Where in my previous post did I do that? Let's look at what I posted:

"Do you think that if a man shot and killed your wife, he should be allowed to go free if he is sorry enough? Or how about this: the guy who shoots your wife "accepts Jesus into his heart" while he is on death row. Then he is executed. Thirty years later, when you die and "go to heaven", you find the guy sitting on a cloud having lunch with your wife. Make sense to you?"

A murderer meeting his victims in heaven is a possibility allowed in the Christian religion. I find this to be absurd and ludicrous, and no amount of wordsmithery or twisted euphemisms can explain it away.

P.s. Here is another good example of a straw man: "In what fantasy do you imagine an unjust God?" Here, you are implying that I have a fantasy about God, and that I imagine God to be unjust. The next time you try accuse someone of making a straw man argument, try not to make one yourself.

[fr0d0]

There are no such things as "divine powers"

A strong claim, which I'm sure you welcome shouldering the burden of proof for, and will now present to us all.



The straw man you constructed is one of an injustice:

the guy who shoots your wife "accepts Jesus into his heart" while he is on death row. Then he is executed. Thirty years later, when you die and "go to heaven", you find the guy sitting on a cloud having lunch with your wife. Make sense to you?

God is just: THEREFORE your scenario doesn't address Christianity.

So you get to heaven and meet with your wife's murderer. Ultimate justice, which you are now aware of, has shown this guy to be deserving of forgiveness. Where's the problem??

[Gawdzilla]

There are no such things as "divine powers"

A strong claim, which I'm sure you welcome shouldering the burden of proof for, and will now present to us all.

How about "can anyone provide credible evidence for divine powers"?

[fr0d0]

I never claimed that there is such a thing outside of religious faith Gawd, as Strongbad has done of the opposite. I therefore do not attract the burden, where he does.

[Strongbad]

There are no such things as "divine powers"

A strong claim, which I'm sure you welcome shouldering the burden of proof for, and will now present to us all.

Correction: when you stated "...unless you have divine powers..." YOU are the one making the assertion by implication that divine powers exist. Therefore, you shoulder the burden to prove their existence. Enjoy your popcorn.

The straw man you constructed is one of an injustice:

the guy who shoots your wife "accepts Jesus into his heart" while he is on death row. Then he is executed. Thirty years later, when you die and "go to heaven", you find the guy sitting on a cloud having lunch with your wife. Make sense to you?

God is just: THEREFORE your scenario doesn't address Christianity.

So you get to heaven and meet with your wife's murderer. Ultimate justice, which you are now aware of, has shown this guy to be deserving of forgiveness. Where's the problem??

Where's the problem? By your line of reasoning, anyone who commits any crime is "deserving of forgiveness" by the Christian god. You cannot seriously think that getting to heaven to meet with the man who murdered your wife's is "ultimate justice", unless of course you have some serious mental problems, which is what I am beginning to suspect.

[fr0d0]

Correction: when you stated "...unless you have divine powers..." YOU are the one making the assertion by implication that divine powers exist. Therefore, you shoulder the burden to prove their existence.

Don't be stupid Strongbad. To liken the powers of divinity - a literary reference you obviously understood, is NOT the same as stating the fact about a divinity as you have done. Be a dear now and shoulder your burden like a man.. or squirm away if you must.

By your line of reasoning, anyone who commits any crime is "deserving of forgiveness" by the Christian god. You cannot seriously think that getting to heaven to meet with the man who murdered your wife's is "ultimate justice".

Another gross stupidity. I can't think of anyone that would be excluded from potential forgiveness. Do many actually earn it? Do they even truthfully ask for it? Do you think justice can somehow come to mean injustice? That seems to be what you're suggesting.

Try to abstract your emotional bias and think about this rationally.

[Strongbad]

Correction: when you stated "...unless you have divine powers..." YOU are the one making the assertion by implication that divine powers exist. Therefore, you shoulder the burden to prove their existence.

Don't be stupid Strongbad. To liken the powers of divinity - a literary reference you obviously understood, is NOT the same as stating the fact about a divinity as you have done. Be a dear now and shoulder your burden like a man.. or squirm away if you must.

You want me to prove the non-existence of divine powers? While I'm at, why don't I prove the non-existence of unicorns and fairies, which I also assert do not exist. When you can prove the existence of anything "divine", manly man, I'll take your challenge.

By your line of reasoning, anyone who commits any crime is "deserving of forgiveness" by the Christian god. You cannot seriously think that getting to heaven to meet with the man who murdered your wife's is "ultimate justice".

Another gross stupidity. I can't think of anyone that would be excluded from potential forgiveness. Do many actually earn it? Do they even truthfully ask for it? Do you think justice can somehow come to mean injustice? That seems to be what you're suggesting.

Try to abstract your emotional bias and think about this rationally.

You know what, fuckwit? You've just called me stupid twice in one post. I am on this forum to engage in intelligent conversation with adults, not trade barbs with clowns. Any shred of respect I had for you has just gone out the window. Take your non-emotional bias and rationally abstract it straight up your ass.

[Zen Badger]

The straw man you constructed is one of an injustice:
[quote=Strongbad]
the guy who shoots your wife "accepts Jesus into his heart" while he is on death row. Then he is executed. Thirty years later, when you die and "go to heaven", you find the guy sitting on a cloud having lunch with your wife. Make sense to you?

God is just: THEREFORE your scenario doesn't address Christianity.

It does frods, and that is the lamest rebuttal I've ever seen.

So you get to heaven and meet with your wife's murderer. Ultimate justice, which you are now aware of, has shown this guy to be deserving of forgiveness. Where's the problem??

The problems is that christianity allows you to be a complete arsehole your entire life and lets you off as long as long as you ask for forgiveness at the end.
On the other hand you can be a saint all your life, yet because you haven't asked for forgiveness from the big bully in the sky you're gonna burn for all eternity.
So THE important thing is not what you do, but that you kiss gods arse.