God says “Love me or die”

[Rhizomorph13]

There is no god, there is no god.

[tackattack]

It's just more examples of Biblical contradictions...more evidence that the Bible shouldn't (or to be more accurate...can't) be taken literally. Also more evidence it wasn't written by a God...though maybe he was incompetent?

I agree the bible shouldn't be taken literally and it wasn't written by God, see concensus isn't that hard.

[Zen Badger]

I agree the bible shouldn't be taken literally and it wasn't written by God, see concensus isn't that hard.

So what do you base your Christianity on then?

[tackattack]

The nicene creed
the Bible
subjective personal experience
rational and logical observance
intuition
faith
practical application

not necessarily in that order

[Xyster]

So basically no solid evedence.... A bunch of good feelings and an adreniline rush.... So by those standards you can just as easly be a Muslim/worshiper of the greek gods/ Hindu / Shinto / Jain / Wiccan..what ever. To truly convince and Atheist: Step one would be prove god..Step 2 prove wich god.....But seems to me at least on this forum.. anytime there is a good debate, it seems to take this downward spiral to where words are meaningless (they must be for all the disscussion on what one word ment in a particular sentence.)

[tackattack]

A-I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything I'm simply here to answer questions. I got here asked some questions and got some answers. I'm just doing the polite thing and answering as best I can as many questions as I can from as many people as I can intellectually respect.
B-I've gone in to far greater detail and far greater depth in other yet unresponded to posts, I'm trying to keep the web of threads down to a minimum.
C-Why do you expect tangible evidence for the intangible. We're just now begining to map where certain thoughts come from in the brain, much less what they are.

Tell you what you continue working on finding ways to measure the intangible and I'll continue to teach people to free themselves from hate and we'll both end up making a better world.

[Violet]

We're just now begining to map where certain thoughts come from in the brain, much less what they are.

Although it should be noted that what, when, and where are separate "parts" of existence.

---

The nicene creed
the Bible
subjective personal experience
rational and logical observance
intuition
faith
practical application

not necessarily in that order

I'll believe every one of those except the strikeout. While you may think that there are rational/logical observations that can be made... you should note that "God" being able to create something from nothing defies logic, and observations is to suggest that "God" can be scientifically tested. But I can understand how the rest is what you base your christianity on (fr0d0 probably does as well, as probably does a lot of Christians). But not one of them I know has the strikeout as a part of their basis except as a mistake, or a lack of thought regarding the matter.

---

It's just more examples of Biblical contradictions...more evidence that the Bible shouldn't (or to be more accurate...can't) be taken literally. Also more evidence it wasn't written by a God...though maybe he was incompetent?

That assumes that writing the bible as he did (full of contradictions) was not a part of his plan when writing it. Perhaps our understanding of his motive in writing the bible is mistaken?

Just one more interpretation... this one to defend a "perfect God" against the attacks of logicians. As we have no way of knowing what a "perfect God" would be... it seems presumptuous of us to use the bible at all in regards to the being's perfection.

While it is demonstrably true that the thing created is "imperfect", this is to be considered by a subjective viewpoint and interpretation of what perfect is. If the being that created the "imperfect" thing is "perfect", it could be very well that the thing it created was too perfect... just not in our opinion. And perhaps a perfect being would create imperfect things... indeed, perhaps the "imperfection" was the intent of the "perfect" being.

We have no ground to make any opinion in the matter of that which cannot be known at our current level of existence... while a thing may not apply here... that is a far cry from suggesting that it would not apply elsewhere.

[tackattack]

no mistake I will add aqualification thoughrational and logical observance of subjective evidence

Besides, you asked what I based my belief of Christianity on, not my belief in God, that's in another thread.

And it wasn't directed at me, but God didn't write the Bible, whether he existed or not.

[Violet]

no mistake I will add aqualification thoughrational and logical observance of subjective evidence

Besides, you asked what I based my belief of Christianity on, not my belief in God, that's in another thread.

And it wasn't directed at me, but God didn't write the Bible, whether he existed or not.

I would never ask for non-subjective evidence... but i would ask for verifiable evidence. But you're going to have to pull a magic rabbit out of a thimble that is capable of breeding with an elephant and produces fertile offspring (rhetorical, i really don't mean that) if you're going to convince me with a logical statement that a god who having faith in requires that he be utterly without evidence or observation... has evidence or observable facts regarding his existence, and you have faith in him because of this.

I actually never asked you what your belief in Christianity was based on... that would be Zen Badger.

And as for the bold: can you prove this? I see no reason why a god would not be able to magick up a holy book of his lies, give it to some lowly nomadic tribe, and make them carry on his book/religion wether they believe or not. It's a GOD... it doesn't need Geikco.

[fr0d0]

While you may think that there are rational/logical observations that can be made...

There certainly are. Included in that logic is that it cannot be fully conclusive.

you should note that "God" being able to create something from nothing defies logic

Please state irrefutably how.

and observation is to suggest that "God" can be scientifically tested.

Do you mean that as it reads?

But I can understand how the rest is what you base your christianity on (fr0d0 probably does as well, as probably does a lot of Christians).

I don't base mine on subjective experience. To me that's an inconclusive bi-product.


...and Christians don't believe that God wrote the bible.. they believe he inspired it. Muslims believe it is the infallible word of Allah. It being possible or not is immaterial.