Fun, Fun! finally someone who's in it for the long run!
:Thumbsup:
(August 19, 2014 at 11:46 pm)FlowingFlame Wrote: No, it doesn't.
ya huh!
Quote: You're just trying to strawman everyone into your own narrow view of Atheism as someone who willingly turned away from God after accepting all of this bullshit.
In order for this statement to be true you must provide a viable example. (something better than what you have provided.)
Quote: A lot of people never have any faith or belief to begin with so stop trying to narrowly define us as a group so you have something (your apparently perfect understanding of the bible) to lord over us.
Again people do not believe because that have no proof, as per the definations I provided, and the Atheist Amthem. I am working well with in the confines of the established parameters of your system of belief, and the dictionary definations.
Quote:Being told as a child that God is real and you should believe in him =/= constitute belief in God. Much the same way a child being told that Santa Clause is real doesn't make it so. There was no belief to be supported.
Which is exactly what i said in option 2. Did you even read my last post?
Again option 1 God showed himself to you. You know their to be a God but choose to turn your back anyway.
Option 2 You never find proof of your version of God and your faith dies...
Which is in accordance to the parable of the wise and foolish builders. That is why knocking (The continuation for the search of truth.) is so important. One more time, this continuation/search is not of the God you thought to be real, but of whatever is out there that is God.
Quote:As a child I had NO understanding of this supposed God and viewed it much the same as I would presently view the claim that someone saw a ghost. I don't assume the ghost is real and then go from there.
It goes like this:
No belief + claim of God (ghosts)-> Analysis of facts (bible/cold spot in basement hallway viewed through thermal camera) -> Disbelief of God (ghosts)
Hence option 2
Quote:Lazy arguing based on presumptions that you don't have to think about must be nice.
Again your offering absolutly nothing new to the core arguement you are using. only the details change.
Quote:1. As I stated above, belief DOES NOT come first.
Yes, yes proof comes first.. ok now that we are both on that page, what comes before proof? The search right? Don't look now but thats what asking and seeking are in the bible. The knocking is simply asking and seeking proof till you find it!!!
Quote:2. Yes, you did assume that with your "Only other option" BS because of your poorly rigged questioning. You made is so that option A) lack of evidence) and option B) received evidence but it wasn't enough (also known as a lack of evidence), were basically the same thing and required a willing betrayal of God.
You haven't read my posts or you do not understand them still. Lets start fresh let go of your ideas as to what i have said thus far, and read the following as if it were your first time...
Option one you know God to be real, but as satan and his followers choose not to worship.
Option two What EVER THE REASON. You Have NO PROOF of GOD, And Your Faith Dies!!!
Those are the only two options that one has and still classify themselves as an atheist.
The details as to why you have no proof, or why you do not worship the God you know to be real is completely irrelevant.
Quote:No shit. For good reason given the "I know you better than you know you" shit Christians constantly tout. Similar rebuttal will follow similar bullshit. What's your point other than wanting to look like a smug asshole?
The smug ass part was the primary goat getter i was going after. the second was for you to drop the pretense that your specifics made you any different than anyone else who uses that form of atheistic arguement. That way we can cut the personal stuff out and go straight to the theology and or philosphy of the matter.
Quote:Can't hate what I don't believe in, only the assholes that presume to tell me how to live my life in It's name. Oh, and condescending assholes that presume to know me and spout bullshit like this.
Those 'great atheist' have made a name for themselves doing that very thing. (Hating what does not exist according to their stated beliefs.) So either God does indeed exist, or they (per your observation) are just abunch of idiots for doing something you say can't happen.. Either way if your right, the greatest atheistic minds man has to offer have just been proven to be fools.
Quote:Ah yes, assume that someone mentioning their own thoughts and experiences (including hypothetical ones) in response to someone elses questions means they think said views are groundbreaking revelations just so you can mock and talk down to them. No fucking shit other people have had similar thoughts in the last few millennia! Where are you pulling this bullshit from?
So, if it is possiable that you are just following the foot steps of those who have come before, then is it not also possiable for one to observe where you are in your beliefs and make generalizations as to the nature of your beliefs and where you are going?
After all if one who has come before has taken the path you are currently on to it's logical conclusion, then can't someone else make the observation that you will end up in the same general area they did?
Quote:Don't really think I can give you the benifet of the doubt anymore, it really just seems like you went out of your way just to be a condecending asshole and talk down to me. I'm curious, do you do take inspiration from the Bible to do shit like this or does it stem from your own nature?
A little bit from column A... a little bit from column B....
Quote:Think it's pretty obvious that I meant whatever God chose to inspire me with is the 'message' but whatever.
What if God sent a messenger? Someone you could physically talk to?
Quote:Somehow I really doubt you have some big zinger on hold.
Quote:The fact that we only share a (lack of) belief in ONE thing is the important part here. Any two people who believe or don't believe in ONE thing can have vastly different views or experiences.
Again irrelevant. If one considers himself Atheist the core reason is due to a lack of evidence. I prooved this fact by literly defining the terms, and pointing out that shared belief are indeed all tied to the terms I defined.
The reason why you came to your lack of evidence is meaningless because it was the lack of evidence that has you in a state of disbelief, not your path. For if you had absolute evidence the same path would strenthen your convictions. rendering your life experiences (The storm in the parable of the two builders) as just the proofing process having nothing to do with your actual faith.
Quote:For example:
Man A believes baseball is the funnest sport because he grew up playing it and has fond memories. He thinks football it's too violent to be enjoyable.
Man B believes baseball is the funnest sport because he enjoys the more technical aspects of the game in comparison to other sports, football in particular.
Same conclusion, different reasons, completely different people. Should we then apply the sweeping generalization that they both received proof that football was the funnest sport but turned their back on it? Obviously not because preferences and beliefs don't work like that.
The conclusion is what is being discussed not your reason. Addressing your personal reason as to why you do not believe in God is pointless because God himself said He would bring the challenges that would sweep away your beliefs if they were not founded correctly. This is exactly what happened, So why would I challenge that? Rather because God said He would take away your 'houses built on sand' the remedy here is not to try and address what God Himself has done, rather follow the path He perscribes to repair this mess.
The first step is to acknoweledge the house you built on the sand did not have the proper foundation. Meaning it was not built on an accurate picture of God/Jesus.
the second is to simply keep seeking the truth no matter where it may lead.
Quote:Proof is a flimsy and relative term and absolutely does NOT foster belief unless you're a person that's willing to jump to conclusions without bothering to check said Proof against anything. One persons absolute proof can be completely laughable to another person. In the example I used above Man B's "proof" that Football is technically inferior to baseball doesn't mean anything to Man A because he has his own "proof" for his belief.
Your reasoning falls apart when you apply it to two people, how well do you think it's going to hold up when you apply it to billions? Atheists, like any grouping of people are infinitely diverse because everyones PERSONAL story and reasons for having belief or no belief in Gods are exactly that; personal.
Proof is whatever you need it to be. God knows what you need, and what you need is waiting for you just out of your current sight. All you need to is A/S/K for it.
Quote:You also said this earlier. If someone seeks God and finds only stories told by genuinely awful human beings then their "proof" is just as valid as yours no matter how hard you disagree with it and it NEVER requires them to believe in God in the first place.
Cut and paste please or provide a link and a post number.
Quote:Again, I reiterate that the bible you have today could be the result of either lies used to benefit the writers/conscriptors by applying their own nature and will onto a made up and supposedly divine being to cement their power. Or there are mistranslations/missing books that could prove that God is otherwise.
Given the corruptive nature of power, in particular of people that already has some power, I'm going with the former. Fits with everything I've observed both in and outside of the bible.
YOU need the bible to be true and accurate, I don't.
You do if you are going to assert a quality of the God of the bible, and then build an arguement of said charactistic. (In this particular instance that God is Omni benevolent) If you can not support your fan fiction version of God that says God is omni benevolent then your whole arguement is no longer valid, because I am speaking of the God of the bible and you have your own religious version of Him.
The two are not compatiable.
Which again is the reason you have no proof of God. Is because you hold a fan fiction version of God in your mind one He Himself said He will not support. rather God said He will call down the trials of life and have this fan fiction/house washed away leaving you with the conclusion that your god can not be real.
Quote:A is your answer.. Now all you have to do is find BCV that say God is supposed to be 'All Loving.' Or conceed that this is your own version of god that failed to get supported.
Quote:John seems to think so.
I missed the omnibenevolent part. It simple says God is love or God is Agape. Agape is a koine word that describes God's love and not our own. Without a doubt what we consider love in this day and age has little resemblence to What God identifies as love. In short the corrections and reproof we endure under the label of Agape will quickly be considered as not being good. For Agape can also include contraction of a deadly disease or cancer. Or it can be the loss of a child, or spouce. Agape also may include loosing everything... All of these things and many more can all considered Apart of God's Agape, but in this world, these actions can only be the actions of hate if visited from one person to the next.
The term omni benevolent means all good, or all Love, all the time. This does not apply to God as simply put there are those in whom God hates. So again, God loves whom He loves and God hates whom He hates. This is the benfit of being the alpha and omega and not an omni max God. The Omni max god is one who is tied to the definations of what those various omni terms mean. an Alpha and Omega God is who He wants to be. Rather Alpha and Omega is the true boundless Omni-version of what God is supposed to be. No paradoxes, does not answer to man's definations of God.
Quote:Join the club We were ALL BORN UNTO SIN. You are nothing special. That is why Christ came and died for us.[/url]
Quote:Presupposes God, and no, we weren't if you believe in Adam and Eve.
Was adam and eve born?
No, Adam was created from the earth. Eve was Produced from Adam. The rest of us are born or rather Reproductions of the fallen nature of Adam and Eve thus 'Born unto (not into) Sin' Into Sin is a term that describes what happens when sin has offspring. Their is nothing redeemable there. Unto sin is being born with a predisposition/slave to sin, but it leaves us open for redemption.
Quote:The "sacrifice" rings so hollow since god intentionally created the problem the sacrifice needed to fix.
Indeed He did now ask yourself why did he create this problem.
Quote: If I stab you and then put a bandaid on it should I only be credited for treating your wounds and saving you? This is not a positive.
Actually this is more like your father giving you the freedom to go out do what you will, you getting seriously hurt, (You need a lung or heart), and him cutting the part you need of himself and giving it to you.
Quote:Seems both dickish and contradictory.
That is because you do not understand the basics of biblical Christianity.
The vast majority of the people seek to be apart of or replicate a catholic based picture of what a christian is supposed to be. Granted one can still be considered to be christian playing out this type of personality, but it is not a mandate.
Quote:Gotcha, need to have the magic decoder ring in order to not need the magic decoder ring.
Actually you need the Holy Spirit, and luke 11 is how we get it. (The proofs of purchase you need to mail off so you can get your "ring")
Quote:Yes because not one single sect of Christianity has differing views on what is to be taken literal and what isn't.
Keep trumpeting your No True Scotsman fallacy all you want, it doesn't make it so. Even funnier is that your "unique snowflake" insult applies oh so perfectly to you!
again you are trying to trivialize the interpertation of the book of judges 1&2, which can not be done. Why? Because again the books themselves tell us how to interpret them.
And FYI a no truescots man can only be identified as a fallacy on trivial unwritten qualifications of a Universal claim. The term 'bible believeing Christian, is not a universal claim. It speaks to one specific genre of Christianity. Therefore Bible believing Christians must yield to the authority of the bible otherwise by the very defination of "Bible believing Christian" they are disqualified from that genre of Christianity.
Therefore your idenitification of a no true scotsman is invalid.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman
Quote:Look. In. A. Mirror. Context is subjective. You only THINK yours is right because you continue to fervently brush off everything that doesn't fit your own fanfiction. Guess you're just a truly unique snowflake!
I repersent Biblical Christianity for one reason. For the past 20 plus years God has feed me with a constant stream of evidence everyday. I am here repersenting biblical Christianity because I have found that the God behind the bible is faithful to what He says. No other reason.
Quote:Now imagine that same person took that further, using only examples from their own fanfiction, that you didn't deserve the same rights than them because of it. That you were worth less, deserve less than them because their fanfiction is so obviously better and they have a big dopey grin on their face when they do it.
Boy, I bet you'd sure like to subscribe to their fanfiction over your own, it seems to have turned them into a wonderful person...
How can you possibly know what kind of person I am? Because i will not yield to your sterotypes? (
.. I like you am a snow flake ) Never mind my past present or furture endevours, you have closed your mind to all of it because you can not beat me up in an arguement about God. Or rather i will not let it go uncontested.
Quote:Burden of proof is on you. Their 'failure' is merely your interpretation. And stand alone? Really? Nobody else posting in this thread refuting your methods?
You are not being supported in your specific angle or approach. (the snow flake/enigma arguement) they all approach from various other points of philosphy.
Quote:Herein lies the point I was making. Many, hell I'd say most, of god's displays of power weren't person specific back in the day. He was thundering judgements and wrath on people who, by virtue of isolated job specific lifestyles and inability to read, likely had never even heard of him. Did everyone who died in the supposed flood have a personal and spiteful relationship with god?
Didn't you see the movie Noah? I think they got that part pretty dead on.
Quote:And, like everything above this, miracles are subjective (and leading if you already believe in miracles). I've provided emergency medical care to thousands of people in my life. Some have thanked me personally, others have thanked god for sending me. Which ones were the miracles and which ones were just chance? Couldn't you just view everything good that happens to you in your life as a miracle and claim god did it? What about whatever bad stuff caused the situation that needed the miracle to begin with?
The 'Badstuff' is every bit as much miracle as the good. After all how can the blind receive sight if not for the fact that blindness was there in the first place.
Quote:Seems pretty shady, almost like someone made it up to fit their personal view of god...
For some, without a doubt. For others God directly makes a change.
Quote:I have, you just ignore or hand wave them because you're a dishonest person.
Proverbs 6:16-19English Standard Version (ESV)
Quote:16 There are six things that the Lord hates,
seven that are an abomination to him:
17 haughty eyes,
Is to look at yourself as being better than someone else. I am not better than anyone else, that is why I am here.
Quote:a lying tongue,
Nothing here is a lie.
Quote: and hands that shed innocent blood,
nope
Quote:18 a heart that devises wicked plans,
what plans???
Quote: feet that make haste to run to evil,
someone who seeks out and snaps up every oppertunity to be evil.
nope.
Quote:19 a false witness who breathes out lies (repetitive?),
who have i testified against?
What was false about what i have said?
Quote: and one who sows discord among brothers.
You nor any other non believer is a brother... Neighbor yes. Brother no.
And what discord?
It is so funny that you posted this. this was the very verse set i was thinking of when i refuted your post on 1john 4.
Again to recap, God is the Alpha and Omega not omnibenovlent. therefore no paradox. what else you got?
Quote:-or- I just whiped you with some good ole fashion logic and reasoning.
(See I have already been here with one/many of you snow flakes. I gave you your answer before you even knew to ask the question) 
(All good things come to those who wait.)
A great many have tried here on this website, and have failed (that is why you stand a lone with me)
Are you saying these things somehow make me better than any of you? For me they make me like you. These things are a point of connection or rather the first step in the deconstruction of what you believe a Christian should/has to be.
The example being if I am what a biblical Christian looks like and I seem out of sorts compared to what you are expecting, then it should have you ask who's off point. If I can show biblical precedent, then maybe this will start a cascade that has you question everything as per 1thess 5:21 says.
I have found if i 'act' and behave like I am not like you, that also makes me better in many people's eyes. The key difference being After a while if i go unchecked I will being to believe it myself. This is what 'haughty eyes' truly are.
Quote:Uh oh, you're gonna have some 'splaining to do if god brings up your time here...
Maybe you can do some splaining yourself. i do not see what I'm guessing you see here.
I said Wrote:[spoiler]In which case separating the two, venue (heaven) and reward (relationship with God), is just an arbitrary action in order to put you on a pedestal above other religions and one of the worst cases of Special Pleading I've ever seen. You're damn well doing it for a reward, you just think yours is special. This desperation to elevate yourself above other faiths is so petty and lacking in humility that it's honestly disappointing./[spoiler]
If I tell you I have a billion dollars to give out as a reward for one who can do XYZ. Verses I am giving out my love and respect to the person who can give their life in my service, which is considered a trifle and which is considered a proper reward?
Quote:Subjective to the person.
Indeed. So when I say I'm not in it for a reward and give an example of what a reward is for me, then what? You have to take my word right.
Quote:Dodge. Your views are not shared by every Bible based Christian which is the point I was making and you know it.
Despite what people want, if it exceeds what the bible offers they will be disappointed.
"Well done my good and faithful servant, you may enter into the fathers rest.' is the only thing we are assured of as a Christian. Some will move on to great reward, while others will enter into heaven "as a man who escapes a great fire" (with nothing more than the cloths on his back.)
Quote:Or maybe it hammers home the point I've been making that you so desperately try to avoid is that not every Bible based Christian agrees with you and thus your special pleading and sweeping assumptions mean nothing.
That's the wonderful thing about Christianity in general. Not everyone has to believe what i say nor what the bible says. Only those who profess to be centered on the teachings of Scripture.
If they are then know that the bible does not say we are to spend eternity in Hell. Rather we will be consumed/burned up in the fires of Hell. Hell is our 'Second death' not eternal prison for man. Hell his an eternal prison for lucifer and his demons.
Quote:Good newws everyone! We can not be friends for a whole lot of reasons, except for the ones you listed.
Quote:That's a shame,
So, you don't want to be my friend or your don't want me to be my friend for the specific reasons you listed?
Quote:I have lots of friends that are Christians and we have a lot of fun debating things and learning from each other. Then again, they're decent people that seem to have taken to heart to heart one of the positive aspects that the Bible inspires in SOME Christians.
Honestly, when you say stuff like this it makes when you say...
Paul tells us we are all like different members of the same body. Just because 'we'/Christians Are not all the same does not mean we are anyless apart of the body. Rather each part has it's own unique and essential function.
Let's say your 'gentle friend' is a nose/nostril, and lets say if you were a member of the body you too would be a nose or nostril. For you seem to have and hold alot in common thus making you friends. Let's say I am a finger nail or finger. Now you being a nose/nostril don't like being picked/picked at, because you find picking process invasive and intrusive, and the finger nail clears away all of the crap and clutter you two have been hording. now just because the nostril does not liked being picked does it mean that the process is not needed from time to time? If the finger nail any less apart of the body? If the finger nail were ripped off would not the whole body react in pain?
We are not all nostrils, meaning not all christians have the same function in the body of Christ. If the whole body all had the same function as your friend does where would the other functions be? How would we eat? how would we hear? how would we see? How could we maintain ourselves?
Again that is the wonderful thing about Christianity. Their is room for those who want to act and behaive a certain way, and still yet there is much biblical example of those who act and carry themselves as i do as well. Do if you do not want to be friends then know I will not lose one second of sleep over it, eitherway know you will be 'picked' if you start to hold on to, too many boogers :Razz:
Quote:...seem an awful lot like bullshit. Damn near everything I've seen of you smacks of mockery, ridicule, and belittlement from atop a self issued pedestal.
give it some time. You will find my work will reflect your own. we are still in the honey moon phase of the theist/anti-theist relationship. Soon the name calling will become old hat and we get to move on when your ready.
Quote: It's quite possibly the worst way to go about your supposed goal here.
It greatly depends on who my target audience is. what they believe and what they are willing to let go.
Again take a look at how Christ taught the hard hearted and the proud.
Quote:Try being a respectful person first, I guarantee the people you're trying to reach will be a lot more likely to listen. Keep heaping scorn and people will only respond in kind because nobody, Atheist/Christian/gay/straight/bigot/humanist/whatever will ever really be happy turning the other cheek.
I have been doing this for some time now. I have tried many many many many many many different ways of approaching 'you people.' Then one day it hit me. that painting with a broad brush (trying to approach one singular way) will fail every time. Rather i approached the crowd here and in other places with the same effort the person i was speaking was putting in. Now granted I may push and prod a little to get reactions (so i can build a profile) but in the end what you see from me is my approximation of what you are bring into this discussion. Just so i can say when confronted about my bad behaivor, that if you do not like what you see, then change your approach.
If you take the time to read some of my other post you will note I can be a serious and sincere as your nostril/nose buddy, or i can be an out right buttock. I am what I need to be when i need to be it.
Quote:Well, I think I've seen enough to know there's nothing worthwhile, or interesting to glean from you. Moving on!
Man i wish I read your post all the way through first before answering line by line.
oh:
(August 20, 2014 at 3:33 am)oukoida Wrote: SPOILERS: Col. Sanders was a person, the documentation regarding him is reliable and objective and can be verified by a third party.
The absolute same can be said about Jesus.
Quote:The documentation about god is oftentimes vague, imprecise and open to a variety of interpretations. God is your claim, and if you don't show us any objective evidence of him no one's going to change their minds.
There are more documents about Jesus than anyone else of that time period.
If Christ's existance is in question then so too is everyone else who lived then.
Quote:The problem is that you're looking for god but it does not stand up to any scrutiny from a third party.
Again see above.
Quote:Luke 11 Wrote:11 If a son shall ask bread of any of you that is a father, will he give him a stone? or if he ask a fish, will he for a fish give him a serpent?
12 Or if he shall ask an egg, will he offer him a scorpion?
13 If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?
Still looks like vague metaphors to me.
almost there... just a few more verses.
