What do moderates think Jesus died for?

[Alan V]

God is the answer, Not I.

You may think you speak for God. You don't.

[T0 Th3 M4X]

God is the answer, Not I.

You may think you speak for God.  You don't.

It's not about me.

[Nihilist Virus]

Unfortunately you don't get around your own fallibility so easily.  You still choose who to listen to and how to interpret it.  You really are in the same boat as everyone else, except you don't want to do the hard work it takes to actually sort these things out.

This is what you are saying, and I agree.  We are both fallible.  As far as the hard work, you are saying it.  If you are fallible, then by what authority can you tell me that?  Maybe I am lazy, but why should I assume based on your claim?  If you are right, then no problem.  My inefficiency isn't an excuse for another fallible human.

God is the answer, Not I.

2 Peter 1:8-11 For if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. But he that lacketh these things is blind, and cannot see afar off, and hath forgotten that he was purged from his old sins. Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall: For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

Could I ask... what your deal is? You come onto atheist forums acting like the Bible doesn't promote slavery, like wtf dude.

If you can show Jesus rose from the dead, there's no goddamn need to dance around this other stuff. God endorses slavery, but so what atheists, I proved Jesus rose from the dead so checkmate! All you do by denying the obvious is make yourself look like a fucking asshole.

[T0 Th3 M4X]

This is what you are saying, and I agree.  We are both fallible.  As far as the hard work, you are saying it.  If you are fallible, then by what authority can you tell me that?  Maybe I am lazy, but why should I assume based on your claim?  If you are right, then no problem.  My inefficiency isn't an excuse for another fallible human.

God is the answer, Not I.

2 Peter 1:8-11 For if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. But he that lacketh these things is blind, and cannot see afar off, and hath forgotten that he was purged from his old sins. Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall: For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

Could I ask... what your deal is?  You come onto atheist forums acting like the Bible doesn't promote slavery, like wtf dude.

If you can show Jesus rose from the dead, there's no goddamn need to dance around this other stuff.  God endorses slavery, but so what atheists, I proved Jesus rose from the dead so checkmate!  All you do by denying the obvious is make yourself look like a fucking asshole.

To you, a fallible man.  I'm not against you, but I get the impression that you assume I am.  Fair enough.   I am also fallible and can't be considered sufficient on my own.  However, I am not the answer and as such I should not be someone else's excuse.

If I spoke of myself, then my hope would be the best all of us, bit I believe that to be consistent with what God has said.

2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

[Nihilist Virus]

[Alan V]

I am also fallible and can't be considered sufficient on my own. 

Then you can't make good decisions about who or what to trust and how to interpret them or it. You can't have it both ways.

If you approach the problem of human fallibility rationally, you will understand there are degrees involved. Rationality is better than irrationality. Evidence is better than unverified stories. Science is better than superstition. We are not completely hopeless on our own, unaided by any deity. In fact, we've made real progress.

[T0 Th3 M4X]

I am also fallible and can't be considered sufficient on my own. 

Then you can't make good decisions about who or what to trust and how to interpret them or it.  You can't have it both ways.

If you approach the problem of human fallibility rationally, you will understand there are degrees involved.  Rationality is better than irrationality.  Evidence is better than unverified stories.  Science is better than superstition.  We are not completely hopeless on our own, unaided by any deity.  In fact, we've made real progress.

Right. We are insufficient on our own.  That doesn't mean we are always wrong, but we aren't always right either.  So why put everything on unreliable beings?

The rest are open to interpretation.  Rational ideas can lead to a wrong conclusion, just as irrational choices can lead to the right result.  Evidence can be helpful, but it can also be detrimental if interpreted wrong.  Science is sometimes superstition, and sometimes what we assume to be superstition ends up being the science of tomorrow.

What progress are you suggesting we've made?  I see a volatile world, but maybe we view the world differently.

[Nihilist Virus]

Then you can't make good decisions about who or what to trust and how to interpret them or it.  You can't have it both ways.

If you approach the problem of human fallibility rationally, you will understand there are degrees involved.  Rationality is better than irrationality.  Evidence is better than unverified stories.  Science is better than superstition.  We are not completely hopeless on our own, unaided by any deity.  In fact, we've made real progress.

Right. We are insufficient on our own.  That doesn't mean we are always wrong, but we aren't always right either.  So why put everything on unreliable beings?

The rest are open to interpretation.  Rational ideas can lead to a wrong conclusion, just as irrational choices can lead to the right result.  Evidence can be helpful, but it can also be detrimental if interpreted wrong.  Science is sometimes superstition, and sometimes what we assume to be superstition ends up being the science of tomorrow.

What progress are you suggesting we've made?  I see a volatile world, but maybe we view the world differently.

Insufficient for what?

[T0 Th3 M4X]

Right. We are insufficient on our own.  That doesn't mean we are always wrong, but we aren't always right either.  So why put everything on unreliable beings?

The rest are open to interpretation.  Rational ideas can lead to a wrong conclusion, just as irrational choices can lead to the right result.  Evidence can be helpful, but it can also be detrimental if interpreted wrong.  Science is sometimes superstition, and sometimes what we assume to be superstition ends up being the science of tomorrow.

What progress are you suggesting we've made?  I see a volatile world, but maybe we view the world differently.

Insufficient for what?

Understanding the whole of things.

[Nihilist Virus]

Insufficient for what?

Understanding the whole of things.

Why do you talk like it's 1811?