Dealing with ignorant people

[theVOID]

You think I'm the only one who understands it?? Erm... wrong. Strawman.

No... I was being snide.

I don't dismiss anyone else's understanding at all.

Then why was the first thing you did not a defence of your position but an attack on my 'lack of understanding'?

I'm totally open to any opinion. It is fact that the bible's purpose is not to present literal facts about history. What _is_ it's intent is theology. Yeah, if you suggest something else I'm afraid I've gotta pull out the joker card. How can't I? If I started quoting Lassie the dog on particle physics I'd hope that you would call me a twat.

You haven't shown being open at all, every time i've seen you talking about, like in the chat box with Amorpha for example, you came up with the exact same dismissive excuses you always do by claiming that her conclusion required more background knowledge.

You don't have to cherry pick... absolutely everything in the bible is primarily allegorical. That there may be literal accuracy or not is completely irrelevant to the actual message.

Did Jesus rise from the dead or not?

If yes then BY WHICH STANDARD do you decide the validity of the supernatural claims? - I have asked you that question numerous times over the last few months and have not once received an answer.

---

Good point. But where in the bible does God say that he exists/ I am? He didn't write he book, he inspired it.

Your stupidity actually hurts my brain...

Existence is simply not nothing, therefore If he exists there is a God and if not then there is no god. If you claim that he doesn't exist then by definition you believe in nothing...

[Amphora]

I'm totally open to any opinion. It is fact that the bible's purpose is not to present literal facts about history. What _is_ it's intent is theology. Yeah, if you suggest something else I'm afraid I've gotta pull out the joker card. How can't I? If I started quoting Lassie the dog on particle physics I'd hope that you would call me a twat.

You haven't shown being open at all, every time i've seen you talking about, like in the chat box with Amorpha for example, you came up with the exact same dismissive excuses you always do by claiming that her conclusion required more background knowledge.

Which conversation is this you are talking about theVoid? I feel lost in a sea of nothingness

[theVOID]

I'm totally open to any opinion. It is fact that the bible's purpose is not to present literal facts about history. What _is_ it's intent is theology. Yeah, if you suggest something else I'm afraid I've gotta pull out the joker card. How can't I? If I started quoting Lassie the dog on particle physics I'd hope that you would call me a twat.

You haven't shown being open at all, every time i've seen you talking about, like in the chat box with Amorpha for example, you came up with the exact same dismissive excuses you always do by claiming that her conclusion required more background knowledge.

Which conversation is this you are talking about theVoid? I feel lost in a sea of nothingness

The shout box a few days ago when you mentioned you were up to deuteronomy - Before you could even give your opinion fr0d0 was seeding the excuses with his same-old condescending 'it's complex and takes background info' disclaimers so whatever your conclusion he can claim you didn't read it like he did.

[TruthWorthy]

fr0d0 Wrote:
Good point. But where in the bible does God say that he exists/ I am? He didn't write he book, he inspired it.
theVoid Wrote:
Your stupidity actually hurts my brain...

Primarily, there are two factors involved here.
1. Fear of failure. In order to protect his self esteem the subject will make little effort to win and thereby relieve any tension upon losing. Self defeatism at the heart of excuse.
2. The moral victory. The subject can avoid discussing the content in any proper manner and win through deliberate aggitation and non compliance of universally accepted rules on conversation.

Herein lies the real issue. Is it correct to destroy god in the mind's of believers, or not?
I'm very motivated against belief in god. I'm torn between being hell bent on atheism and caring about others.
Anyone care to help me out on this one?

[theVOID]

fr0d0 Wrote:
Good point. But where in the bible does God say that he exists/ I am? He didn't write he book, he inspired it.
theVoid Wrote:
Your stupidity actually hurts my brain...

Primarily, there are two factors involved here.
1. Fear of failure. In order to protect his self esteem the subject will make little effort to win and thereby relieve any tension upon losing. Self defeatism at the heart of excuse.
2. The moral victory. The subject can avoid discussing the content in any proper manner and win through deliberate aggitation and non compliance of universally accepted rules on conversation.

Herein lies the real issue. Is it correct to destroy god in the mind's of believers, or not?
I'm very motivated against belief in god. I'm torn between being hell bent on atheism and caring about others.
Anyone care to help me out on this one?

The truth is what it is - don't like it? Tough! Don't understand it? Neither do i! But it's not going anywhere or changing any time soon. Richard Feynman on the probabilistic nature of the universe.

[Amphora]

---

[quote='fr0d0' pid='46972' dateline='1261868782']
I'm totally open to any opinion. It is fact that the bible's purpose is not to present literal facts about history. What _is_ it's intent is theology. Yeah, if you suggest something else I'm afraid I've gotta pull out the joker card. How can't I? If I started quoting Lassie the dog on particle physics I'd hope that you would call me a twat.

You haven't shown being open at all, every time i've seen you talking about, like in the chat box with Amorpha for example, you came up with the exact same dismissive excuses you always do by claiming that her conclusion required more background knowledge.

Which conversation is this you are talking about theVoid? I feel lost in a sea of nothingness

---

The shout box a few days ago when you mentioned you were up to deuteronomy - Before you could even give your opinion fr0d0 was seeding the excuses with his same-old condescending 'it's complex and takes background info' disclaimers so whatever your conclusion he can claim you didn't read it like he did.

Ah duly noted, yes I remember he did write me that. Later on I had read what he had posted in the shout box and sent him a pm about it. He was being funny with that.

[TruthWorthy]

fr0d0 Wrote:
'it's complex and takes background info'

Occasionally we all make mistakes and sometimes they're bad ones. Occasionally they can be covered up with additional reasoning in order to excuse the mishap.
In light of this, I'd like to ask fr0d0:
Is this 'background info' the same additional reasoning used to make sense of how and why things happened?
Or is it privaleged info, available only to religious congregations?

Id like to know where this background info comes from, and what validity it holds (besides effectively bridging gaps across nonsense). If you hate this "jesus christ" fellow, don't reply!

[theVOID]

fr0d0 Wrote:
'it's complex and takes background info'

Occasionally we all make mistakes and sometimes they're bad ones. Occasionally they can be covered up with additional reasoning in order to excuse the mishap.
In light of this, I'd like to ask fr0d0:
Is this 'background info' the same additional reasoning used to make sense of how and why things happened?
Or is it privaleged info, available only to religious congregations?

Id like to know where this background info comes from, and what validity it holds (besides effectively bridging gaps across nonsense). If you hate this "jesus christ" fellow, don't reply!

Don't expect a real answer to that question - The dodge is fr0d0's speciality.

I've asked him time and time again for his methodology for determining what claims in the bible he chooses to believe literally, such as the resurrection, and which he considers allegory so i can take his methodology and see if it works not only on the bible but for any religious text or even supernatural claim yet he never delivers - and it's because he has no such methodology - He cherry picks what he wants to believe based on his own authority, and when you start to do that, to use your own instincts or conformational bias to judge 'the inspired word of god', then what use is any of it?

[TruthWorthy]

Yeah unfortunate they're impregnated with the FAQ response guide to difficult questions.
lol - That's why the feeble arguments never have any substance because not only do they not have any answers but any answer which could be mustered up would fall flat on its face under questioning. Hence the piles and piles of lies to support each one which preceeds it.

[theVOID]

Yeah unfortunate they're impregnated with the FAQ response guide to difficult questions.
lol - That's why the feeble arguments never have any substance because not only do they not have any answers but any answer which could be mustered up would fall flat on its face under questioning. Hence the piles and piles of lies to support each one which preceeds it.

That would be the case for the layman Christian, but i wouldn't say it about all apologists.