What are the Characteristics of a NT Christian?

[Brian37]

That is the SECOND TIME you posted that meme,...

That's rich...YOU criticising ME for being repetitive. Clown.

You are repeating NONSENSE, not me.

I repeat scientific FACT, not old fairy tales. 

You not liking that is your baggage. I am not here to placate your insecurities. Maybe you simply need to GROW UP!

I promise your privates wont fall off, nobody will strike you down with a lightening bolt, nobody is going to rape your women or barbecue your kittens. You wont become a serial killer either. If you figure out there is no god, it will simply mean YOU GREW UP!

I am sorry you fell for an old book of myth. That is your problem not mine.

[Harry Nevis]

You're saying omnipresence but you're describing omniscience.

No, I define omniscience as God knows and believes all true proposition and he does not believe any false propositions.

You guys are talented at desperately making up your own definitions.  If you can call that a talent...

[Brian37]

No, I define omniscience as God knows and believes all true proposition and he does not believe any false propositions.

You guys are talented at desperately making up your own definitions.  If you can call that a talent...

If there is anything that keeps me online everyday, it is seeing all the attempts to sound original but it is just the same old word salad.

[Harry Nevis]

We can prove the age of the universe and you still have no evidence for your invisible friend.

It's a no-brainer.  If you use no brain, you won't see the ignorance of this meme.

[SteveII]

SteveII, regarding the op, and based on my experience at Abilene Christian University, I'm aware that NT Christians feel a special oneness and connection with their god, which feels absolutely true and objective to them; it is a part of who they are (IMO, like a nerve), as knowing that they are a part of a broader reality of love keeps them connected with their god for eternity.

 Now, with all due respect, are NT Christians willing to share the world with people who think differently (different sense-making processes), and are they open/willing to see their particular beliefs as a viewpoint among many viewpoints that does not have the same meaning/validity for out-groups as it does for them? Hence, when putting your deity's love into practice, is there room for accepting peoples' differences and acknowledging the validity of other starting points?  Thanks for your patience and understanding throughout this thread, SteveII.

NT Christians should be willing to share the world with other:

Romans 12:9 Love must be sincere. Hate what is evil; cling to what is good. 10 Be devoted to one another in love. Honor one another above yourselves. 11 Never be lacking in zeal, but keep your spiritual fervor, serving the Lord. 12 Be joyful in hope, patient in affliction, faithful in prayer. 13 Share with the Lord’s people who are in need. Practice hospitality.

14 Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse. 15 Rejoice with those who rejoice; mourn with those who mourn. 16 Live in harmony with one another. Do not be proud, but be willing to associate with people of low position.[c] Do not be conceited.

17 Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everyone. 18 If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. 19 Do not take revenge, my dear friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,”[d] says the Lord. 20 On the contrary:

“If your enemy is hungry, feed him;
    if he is thirsty, give him something to drink.
In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head.”[e]
21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

I respect everyone's beliefs and how they may have arrived at them, but there is a huge difference between respect and agreeing their beliefs are true. Christianity clearly makes a claim of exclusivity and there is no room for pluralistic thinking.

[Harry Nevis]

Math you moron! Speed of light, red shift, cosmic microwave background radiation. ...well let me dumb it down for you, the big bang is no fucking different than coming across a car someone just parked walked away, you don't see them but you feel the heat of the hood. CLUES you fucking idiot. No different than coming across a murder scene way after the murder has left. MATH tells us everything about the age of our planet, the age of our sun, the age of our galaxy and the age of our universe. Just like taking a tape measure and working backwards with it. 

Out of apologetics, so resorting to stupid memes?

---

It can be, if you only believe...

---

Like your sig, Lady.  I'm going to a Tom Waits tribute concert tonight.  Hopefully, someone will cover, "Christmas card From A Hooker in Minneapolis".

Oh, Thank you, Harry!   That sounds like a lot of fun; I hope they can do his voice justice!

Fucking FANTASTIC song, btw.  [emoji41].   Sometimes I think 70's Tom Waits is my favorite Tom Waits, until I listen to Raindogs, that is.  [emoji16]

It was great!  Covered Chocolate Jesus, also.  I'm more of a fan of his Asylum era, but so much good stuff in all his stuff. Disappointingly, no "hooker".  (Boy, if I had a dollar for every time I said THAT...)

---

So then tell us, Steve:  How should one navigate through a discussion (with any intellectual honesty, that is) regarding the most accurate definition, and truest description of the nature of such a hypothetical attribute, when the only hypothetical being it has ever been ascribed to can't be demonstrated to exist in the first place?

Maybe afterwords we can have a hearty debate over the exact mechanisms behind Earth's yellow sun making Superman more powerful than a locomotive, eh?  

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Ah, the favorite fallback position when an atheist can't field a rebuttal: "but...but...you can't prove that what we have been talking about for 518 posts really exists...so...so...I win...so there!

---

Can't blame us for not making a guess on the number of angels dancing on the head of a pin.  You're just twisting words to make yourself feel better about the internal consistancy of your fairy tale.  You can't actually believe you're chipping away at our ignorance of the existance of your god, do you?

[Mister Agenda]

So then tell us, Steve:  How should one navigate through a discussion (with any intellectual honesty, that is) regarding the most accurate definition, and truest description of the nature of such a hypothetical attribute, when the only hypothetical being it has ever been ascribed to can't be demonstrated to exist in the first place?

Maybe afterwords we can have a hearty debate over the exact mechanisms behind Earth's yellow sun making Superman more powerful than a locomotive, eh?  

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Ah, the favorite fallback position when an atheist can't field a rebuttal: "but...but...you can't prove that what we have been talking about for 518 posts really exists...so...so...I win...so there!

---

I would agree here.  Omni present, and omniscience have different meanings. And the meaning Steve gave is not typical nor orthodox for the meaning of Omni present.

I know it is not typical. However if someone had not stripped my whole reply down to that sentence, it makes more sense in context I wrote it. However, I will expound on the concept lest people not see the point of being more precise and nuanced than cutting and pasting the first thing that pops on Google. 
I believe that the omnipresence of God means he is cognizant of and causally active at every point in space (or cosmos if you prefer)--but not actually present as we typically use the term. 
Reasons: 
1. The universe is expanding. If God was everywhere, is God expanding? Or perhaps becoming diluted? 
2. The universe if finite. Does that mean that God is finite?
3. More silly conclusion can be drawn from a too-simplistic view: for example, is a portion of God in my coffee cup and the rest of him outside of it? 
4. The Bible talks regularly about times when God is present and times when he is not. How is that possible if he is always present in the way we normally define it? 
5. Is God present in Hell?

Those are good questions. Humpty Dumpty-ism is not a good answer. Why keep the word 'omnipresent' except to just be able to keep saying it?

[Brian37]

SteveII, regarding the op, and based on my experience at Abilene Christian University, I'm aware that NT Christians feel a special oneness and connection with their god, which feels absolutely true and objective to them; it is a part of who they are (IMO, like a nerve), as knowing that they are a part of a broader reality of love keeps them connected with their god for eternity.

 Now, with all due respect, are NT Christians willing to share the world with people who think differently (different sense-making processes), and are they open/willing to see their particular beliefs as a viewpoint among many viewpoints that does not have the same meaning/validity for out-groups as it does for them? Hence, when putting your deity's love into practice, is there room for accepting peoples' differences and acknowledging the validity of other starting points?  Thanks for your patience and understanding throughout this thread, SteveII.

NT Christians should be willing to share the world with other:

Romans 12:9 Love must be sincere. Hate what is evil; cling to what is good. 10 Be devoted to one another in love. Honor one another above yourselves. 11 Never be lacking in zeal, but keep your spiritual fervor, serving the Lord. 12 Be joyful in hope, patient in affliction, faithful in prayer. 13 Share with the Lord’s people who are in need. Practice hospitality.

14 Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse. 15 Rejoice with those who rejoice; mourn with those who mourn. 16 Live in harmony with one another. Do not be proud, but be willing to associate with people of low position.[c] Do not be conceited.

17 Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everyone. 18 If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. 19 Do not take revenge, my dear friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,”[d] says the Lord. 20 On the contrary:

“If your enemy is hungry, feed him;
    if he is thirsty, give him something to drink.
In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head.”[e]
21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

I respect everyone's beliefs and how they may have arrived at them, but there is a huge difference between respect and agreeing their beliefs are true. Christianity clearly makes a claim of exclusivity and there is no room for pluralistic thinking.

That is utter nonsense. 

I hope you dont blindly protect all claims, NOBODY should do that. 

1. Nazis, "Jews are the problem"........ 
2. KKK, "Blacks are the problem"
3. Isis, "Kill anyone who doesn't submit to Islam".

I really hate the word "respect", because far too much of the time the sickos listed use it to mean "Know your place" or "don't bruise my ego".

I never use that word. I do VALUE human rights, but even the right to make claims I find to be bullshit. But claims by themselves should never get a blind taboo never to be criticized or blasphemed. 

There is a huge difference between the RIGHTFUL western concept of protecting all citizens regardless of label, and the separate issue of the claim itself, no, not all claims deserve value, much less "respect".

Just because you have the right to make a claim does not mean the claim itself is true. There is a huge difference between rights under the law, and the separate issue of having the ability to demonstrate what you claim as being credible.

You certainly would have the right to claim, "The New England Patriots beat the Chicago Cubs in the Stanley Cup" and that would be your legal right, but it would still be a bullshit claim not deserving of consideration.

[Neo-Scholastic]

He has me on ignore simply because I kept pointing out that he couldn't refute my arguments, the big wuss.

Occasionally, I read a point just to remind myself. I have you on ignore because you never contribute anything positive to the conversation, like you just did again.

[Brian37]

He has me on ignore simply because I kept pointing out that he couldn't refute my arguments, the big wuss.

Occasionally, I read a point just to remind myself. I have you on ignore because you never contribute anything positive to the conversation, like you just did again.

Yea because a book claiming men magically pop out of dirt, talking donkeys, talking snakes, talking bushes, magic babies born without a second set of DNA, is such a contribution.

How the hell do you tie your shoes in the morning?