- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Amazon Prime new cartoon retells the creation story
Posted on 2/6/24 at 12:01 pm to FooManChoo
Posted on 2/6/24 at 12:01 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
FooManChoo
Foo,
You mad, bro?
You are complaining about me calling you out on your circular arguments, and then in the same breath you state circular arguments aren’t all that bad and that the Bible is the Truth, because the Truth is in the Bible. It would be funny if it wasn’t sad.
Secondly, you promised to quit responding to my posts. Why’d you go back on your word?
You will probably have a much more calm, relaxing day with lower blood pressure and better well-being if you don’t respond to my religious posts. I don’t want to contribute to you stroking out or anything.
3
Posted on 2/6/24 at 12:07 pm to anc
quote:
Amazon Prime new cartoon retells the creation story
Satan was the misunderstood hero.
The left doing what the left does. History not convenient for your narrative? no worries, just write your own history and keep repeating it until brain dead embicles believe it.
Posted on 2/6/24 at 1:17 pm to Squirrelmeister
quote:
Squirrelmeister
Cites and distorts single Scripture verses but unwilling, unable, and disinterested in including full proper context.
Unable to discern and understand true scriptural interpretation to begin with; distorts the Truth.
Cites obscure Gnostic-Babylonian texts and fully expects Luciferian sources be taken seriously. (Unable and unwilling to provide legitimate "Scriptural" sources.)
Expects Christians to read miles of TLDR obvious lies, distortions, and warped "Bible" interpretation -- then won't respect the response or concede correction.
Makes miles of Gnostic - Heretical - Luciferian assertions; then ignores rebukes & corrections on the record.
Keeps on citing subsequent thousands of more miles of extended TLDR Gnostic-Mystic nonsense...zzzzz.
Sorry, for me you are NOT worthy of serious exchanges; You're simply not sincere. Nor honest. Nor interested in the Truth. You parachute in on these thread simply to rattle Christian cages (in your delusional state) and to evangelize Luciferian-Babylonian-Gnostic doctrines. Truth is you rattle no cages. But you've actually been a great help.
Yes, Squirrelmeister, you are doing the forum faithful and perhaps faith-less a service nonetheless as others are graciously willing to engage you despite your lack of respect for them and for our Lord.
An important reason some Christians here may be humoring you? The Father of Abraham -- "I AM -- is using you for HIS Purpose, NOT your own. Ironic, eh?
In a sense you're become an "art class" model. Of what you ask?
It has become your unwitting privilege to the subject of THE "teachable moment" and example of Christian patience and scholarship (some do still pray that you eventually see the Light as well before it's too late. )
Posted on 2/6/24 at 1:20 pm to Squirrelmeister
quote:
Squirrelmeister
quote:
I don’t want to contribute to you (FooManChoo) stroking out or anything.
Does that thought humor you?
Why the LOL gif?
Posted on 2/6/24 at 6:18 pm to Liberator
quote:
Liberator
Posted on 2/6/24 at 6:21 pm to Liberator
quote:
Does that thought humor you? Why the LOL gif?
Yes, it was a joke and I thought it was funny.
I don’t actually think Foo is literally going to stroke out. It was figurative.
Unlike you guys that hope to see me tormented in hell for eternity for what you deem to be a thought-crime, I don’t wish pain and suffering on anyone.
Posted on 2/6/24 at 9:36 pm to Squirrelmeister
quote:
Firstly, Roman emperor Theodosius issued the Edict of Thessalonica in 380CE which made Nicene Christianity the official religion of the empire. They tolerated the pagan religions for some time, but most people quickly switched to Christianity because there were many economic advantages such as being able to serve in the military and to secure favorable contracts and such.
So forced, false converts? If anything, I would think this would only create resentment towards Christianity (surely it did)- especially if it were completely false and made up.
quote:
Secondly, the Christians conquered and colonized most of Africa and the Americas and forcibly converted natives to Christianity, and those who refused were murdered.
Lots of people have done terrible things in the name of Christianity. But that doesn’t mean Christianity is false. When it comes to, say, gun violence- do you blame the gun or the criminal?
quote:
You wrote about endurance of the Christian faith, but in the countries that are scientifically educated with high intelligence with moderate birth rates, Christianity is actually in rapid decline. Pew Pew Research
Well, there is a lot to unpack in this study. It probably deserves its own thread. Actually, most of the content of your post probably deserves its own thread, but let’s see how much we can cover here. Before we delve into the numbers of the “nones”, let’s see who they are and what they believe.
Pew Pew: Religious “nones”
•Most “nones” believe in God or another higher power. But very few go to religious services regularly.
•Most say religion does some harm, but many also think it does some good. They are not uniformly anti-religious.
•Most “nones” reject the idea that science can explain everything. But they express more positive views of science than religiously affiliated Americans do.(This is a vague statement about a broad category)
“Nones” tend to vote less often, do less volunteer work in their communities and follow public affairs at lower rates than religiously affiliated people do.
28% of U.S. adults are now religiously
unaffiliated (2023). In our latest data, 17% of “nones” identify as atheist, 20% say they are agnostic and 63% choose “nothing in particular.” 17% of 28% is less than 5% of the population- not exactly the 5 alarm fire it appears to be on the surface.
Now, let’s breakdown the numbers from your Pew Pew study.
Today, Christianity still is the stickier affiliation for older Americans. But among younger adults, the unaffiliated identity has become the stickier one. Among people who are 40 and older, 80% of those raised as Christians are still Christian today, compared with just 56% of those who were raised unaffiliated (in childhood) and still do not identify with a religion today (in adulthood). However, among people in their 30s, only 66% of those raised Christian are still Christian today, compared with 73% of those raised unaffiliated who still are today.
Young and dumb, and full of… terrible misconceptions about Christianity.
U.S. adults who have moved away from Christianity are younger, on average, than those who have remained Christian after a Christian upbringing
Americans who have moved away from Christianity are more likely to be men (commitment issues?)
People who have become unaffiliated after a Christian upbringing are a little more likely to have graduated college than those who remain Christian, with 35% and 31%, respectively, holding college degrees. This reflects a broader pattern: In the U.S., people with higher levels of educational attainment tend to be less religious by some traditional measures, such as how often they pray or attend religious services.
A lot to be said about this. First thoughts are indoctrination and peer pressure, followed by the rich young ruler syndrome. I honestly thought the numbers would be higher in favor of educated “nones.”
Seven-in-ten adults who were raised Christian but are now unaffiliated are Democrats or Democratic-leaning independents, compared with 43% of those who remained Christian and 51% of U.S. adults overall. Some scholars argue that disaffiliation from Christianity is driven by an association between Christianity and political conservatism that has intensified in recent decades.
Oof. Does TDS know no bounds?
People who have left Christianity are underrepresented in the South
Surveys often find that U.S. adults tend to be more religious, on a number of measures, in the South
Taking all of this into consideration, it doesn’t really seem like Christianity has suffered any significant loss. Rather, it appears that many of the fake Christians, who were only pretending to be Christians because it was socially acceptable, and required no real commitment or sacrifice, have been emboldened to show their true colors.
quote:
I’m not sure if you meant to word this the way you did. I’m sure you lack belief that Santa is real, but you are aware of the tales of Santa. You are also I’m sure aware of the claims of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) but you lack a belief in those claims.
I did. I don’t lack belief in Santa or Muhammad. I positively believe that Santa doesn’t exist- the people who told me he was real- later told me they made it up. We can go into the reasons why I believe Muhammad was a fraud- but not tonight (I have to pack for a trip)
I will try to respond to the rest of your post during my trip- but it may have to wait. I don’t want to overlook anything.
Posted on 2/6/24 at 10:19 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
of defending the Faith against your irrational hatred of your maker
Never change Foo, never change.
Posted on 2/7/24 at 8:04 am to Squirrelmeister
quote:Not at all. I pity you and pray that the Lord will save you. Contrary to what you've been complaining about, Christians don't want you to suffer eternal hellfire (at least we shouldn't--I know I don't). We want all of God's enemies to repent and be saved. And yet if you remain obstinate and refuse to bend the knee to Jesus Christ in this life, you will suffer for eternity for rejecting your maker and the many attempts by myself and others to steer you down the narrow path to salvation through Jesus Christ, and in Heaven I will glorify God for your everlasting destruction, not because of any hatred of you, but for love of God and jealousy for His good name and His justice against those who refused to honor Him after so many pleas for repentance.
Foo,
You mad, bro?
Again I say, I hope you do repent and put your trust in Jesus Christ to pay the debt you owe to God for your sins. I want to call you "brother" in the kingdom of Heaven.
quote:I called you out for mischaracterizing me and my arguments, which you did. You incorrectly lumped all circular argumentation together and then associated my arguments with fallacious circular reasoning.
You are complaining about me calling you out on your circular arguments, and then in the same breath you state circular arguments aren’t all that bad and that the Bible is the Truth, because the Truth is in the Bible. It would be funny if it wasn’t sad.
quote:Where did I make such a promise? I made prior statements about not responding to you but, to my knowledge, made no blanket vow or promise to never respond to you ever again.
Secondly, you promised to quit responding to my posts. Why’d you go back on your word?
As a general rule, I have stopped responding to you, because you do nothing but reject the truth and it is casting pearls before swine to continue to try to convince you that your religious conspiracy theories are false after so many attempts, but I'm happy to break that rule on occasion to correct a particular falsehood that you are promoting, like in this case.
quote:I'd thank you for your concern for my wellbeing if I believed it were sincere rather than another backhanded attack against me. Think what you want, but I'm quite at peace, calm, and am not suffering from any blood pressure issues whether I'm responding to you or not.
You will probably have a much more calm, relaxing day with lower blood pressure and better well-being if you don’t respond to my religious posts. I don’t want to contribute to you stroking out or anything.
Repent of your sins and trust in Jesus Christ for salvation before it is too late for you.
Posted on 2/7/24 at 8:34 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
I called you out for mischaracterizing me and my arguments, which you did. You incorrectly lumped all circular argumentation together and then associated my arguments with fallacious circular reasoning.
You mischaracterized yourself by refuting the part I bolded, immediately after posting this gem:
quote:
when I argue the existence of God, I use biblical concepts but I typically use the transcendental argument for God, which is a philosophical argument based on biblical truth
You have two fallacies that your god described in the Bible exists and that the Bible is “the Truth”. You use those two fallacies as dependent on each other in a circular loop. You argue proof of God’s existence is the Bible, and the Bible is the truth because God wrote it. So I think I characterized you correctly.
The other circular fallacious argument you like to use is that God is the reason everything makes sense, and that everything makes sense because of God.
quote:
you do nothing but reject the truth
I reject psychotic delusions such as yours. I sure as hell hope you never have a dream where your imaginary friend tells you to hurt someone. You are liable to go through with it.
quote:
your religious conspiracy theories
I promote scholarly evidence-based data. Facts. Facts like how biblical Israelites are just Canaanites, with the Canaanite high god “El” in the name of their kingdom, who worshipped Canaanite gods, with a Canaanite language and Canaanite scripture, with Canaanite pottery, clothing, and architecture revealed through archaeology, the study of extra biblical texts from the region, and DNA evidence. Facts like Adam, Noah, Abraham, and Moses being made up characters (probably Jesus too). Facts like there are irreconcilable contradictions in the Bible… like was Jesus born under Herod or under Quirinius, or did Jesus die on the day after the Passover was eaten or was it on the day of preparation of the Passover meal.
quote:
your concern for my wellbeing if I believed it were sincere rather than another backhanded attack against me
I do wish you well, but don’t be surprised if I continue to point out your delusions as I think maybe it will help you. I think the world would be a better place if everyone acknowledged our reality and tried to make this place better now rather than waiting for nonexistent rewards in a nonexistent afterlife while tithing to corrupt and evil organizations.
Posted on 2/8/24 at 12:46 pm to Squirrelmeister
quote:I didn't mischaracterize myself. You did, when you brought my name into the discussion when I wasn't part of it.
You mischaracterized yourself by refuting the part I bolded, immediately after posting this gem:
You are mischaracterizing me again based on a clear misunderstanding of the argument I've made. I'll explain further down.
quote:I don't think you understand what a "fallacy" is in this context. What you've described are two propositions or premises, not two fallacies. When using the word "fallacy" in this context, it should be in reference to a logical fallacy (an explanation as to why an argument is illogical, not simply incorrect), not simply a claim you disagree with.
You have two fallacies that your god described in the Bible exists and that the Bible is “the Truth”. You use those two fallacies as dependent on each other in a circular loop. You argue proof of God’s existence is the Bible, and the Bible is the truth because God wrote it. So I think I characterized you correctly.
Neither of those two premises (that the Christian God exists, and that the Bible is His revelational truth) are arguments in themselves. I've stated them as truth claims and have supported them through rational argumentation previously.
But to the concern about my statement that the transcendental argument for God "is a philosophical argument based on biblical truth", I wasn't saying that the argument, itself, is contingent on the Bible, but is supported by the Bible as well as supporting the claims of the Bible. The point of me saying that was to affirm that the Scriptures are the highest authority due to them being God's words, and there is no authority higher than God; it was a defense of my own presuppositions being based on God's authority not my own or not the "authority" or human reasoning or anything else. However, the transcendental argument is a logical argument that necessitates a conclusion that supports the testimony of God in the Bible.
The transcendental argument doesn't even have to reference the Bible, but the God of the Bible is the sort of god that must necessarily exist for the argument to be impactful, since the particular god that must exist must have the same qualities of the biblical God (omniscience, omnipotence, impassability, etc.)
So at the end of the day, I'm not making a circular argument in regards to the transcendental argument, and the circular arguments that I do use are not viscous, and therefore are not fallacious. As I said, you've mischaracterized me.
quote:Can you show me where I've made that argument, or are you just mischaracterizing me again? It seems the latter, not the former.
The other circular fallacious argument you like to use is that God is the reason everything makes sense, and that everything makes sense because of God.
What I'm actually saying is that the God of the Bible (the God that has the characteristics of the God of the Bible) must exist in order to make sense of the reality we live in. If you would like a syllogistic version, here it is:
P1: The existence of God (as described in the Bible) is a necessary precondition for an intelligible reality
P2: Reality is intelligible
C: God exists
Where you seem to get hung up is on the first premise, which is why when I do make this argument, I attempt to support it. I most commonly use moral intelligibly as an example since most people can relate to and use moral reasoning, but it applies equally to all aspects of intelligibility, such as math, science, and language.
All this to say that I'm not arguing circularly when using the transcendental argument for the existence of God.
quote:1. Because you reject God, you have no rational basis to reject the "psychotic delusions" you claim I have. The best you can do is say you don't personally like my thoughts and opinions, which is fine with me, even if it is eternally determinantal to you.
I reject psychotic delusions such as yours. I sure as hell hope you never have a dream where your imaginary friend tells you to hurt someone. You are liable to go through with it.
2. You clearly haven't been paying attention in the past when I've discussed my beliefs on the subject of closed revelation (I don't believe God gives personal messages to individuals any longer because the Bible is complete), but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you're simply making this statement out of ignorance.
3. Similar to 1, even if I were to have some dream that resulted in me doing harm to others, you would have no rational basis to condemn such an action due to your rejection of God as the source for objective moral reasoning.
quote:I've engaged with your false assertions (not just facts, but your interpretations of facts) plenty in the past and you continue to assert them none the less, and move on to others. You simply try to win the argument by overwhelming your opponents with claims to refute, and very few have the time to spend doing it just for you to ignore the rebuttals and claim the same things over again the next day.
I promote scholarly evidence-based data. Facts. Facts like how biblical Israelites are just Canaanites, with the Canaanite high god “El” in the name of their kingdom, who worshipped Canaanite gods, with a Canaanite language and Canaanite scripture, with Canaanite pottery, clothing, and architecture revealed through archaeology, the study of extra biblical texts from the region, and DNA evidence. ...
But to your overall point:
1. You are not promoting "facts". You are promoting your own conclusions based on your interpretations of facts.
2. You are essentially promoting an empiricist epistemology, which is self-refuting since not all knowledge is gained strictly through sense perception
I could go on, but you certainly are not arguing on facts alone. You also reject the facts that are presented to you regarding the texts of Scripture which you want to debate so often on this forum. You reject basic grammatical and historical context of the Scriptures, themselves, and push only contrary assertions from outside sources, though you don't accept those sources as truthful in and of themselves (you don't accept the beliefs of the Moabites but are happy to take their accounts over that of the Biblical narrative, for instance).
You are not neutral so you really should stop presenting yourself that way. You are not motivated by truth and in your worldview, you have no rational reason to pursue truth in the first place.
quote:I'll accept you at your word in this instance and thank you for wishing me well.
I do wish you well, but don’t be surprised if I continue to point out your delusions as I think maybe it will help you. I think the world would be a better place if everyone acknowledged our reality and tried to make this place better now rather than waiting for nonexistent rewards in a nonexistent afterlife while tithing to corrupt and evil organizations.
However, the rest of your statement only goes to highlight the irrationality of your worldview. You reject God, and therefore you have no rational basis for meaning at all, and yet you seek meaning in your life. You reject the only rational basis for an objective moral standard and yet make moral judgements using words like "better", as if there is a real standard to judge actions and behaviors against to determine what constitutes "better" or "worse". You act like there is objective and real meaning and value to things in this life while rejecting any rational underpinning for value and meaning.
Posted on 2/8/24 at 4:14 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
I didn't mischaracterize myself
Your own quotes convey the opposite is true.
quote:
When using the word "fallacy" in this context, it should be in reference to a logical fallacy (an explanation as to why an argument is illogical, not simply incorrect), not simply a claim you disagree with.
Fallacy
quote:
But to the concern about my statement that the transcendental argument for God "is a philosophical argument based on biblical truth", I wasn't saying that the argument, itself, is contingent on the Bible, but is supported by the Bible as well as supporting the claims of the Bible.
Wordplay and mental gymnastics. You said “based on” and then you follow up that it isn’t “based on” but “supported by”. Weak.
quote:
but the God of the Bible is the sort of god that must necessarily exist for the argument to be impactful,
Completely baseless assertion
quote:
qualities of the biblical God (omniscience, omnipotence, impassability, etc
Also baseless assertions that aren’t supported by many parts of the Bible. Omniscience - his plans backfire on him all the time. Adam and Eve? Backfired. Sons of God come down and create giant Nephilim that eat people and teach them weaponry and warfare? Kill then all in a flood. Backfired. Omnipotence- he can’t defeat the Canaanites who have iron chariots, and he can’t defeat the Moabites with Chemosh on their side. Impassability??? God doesn’t experience pain or pleasure? He sure delights when he smells the aroma of burning meat, and he experiences regret, and he is a jealous a-hole who kills his own people (who he inherited in Deut 32:8-9
) for the slightest screw up. All your baseless assertions can be disproven simply by reading the Bible. quote:
P1: The existence of God (as described in the Bible) is a necessary precondition for an intelligible reality P2: Reality is intelligible C: God exists
More baseless assertions
quote:
1. Because you reject God, you have no rational basis to reject the "psychotic delusions" you claim I have.
Nope, I don’t reject “God”. I deny the existence of your “God” though. Maybe there is a god, but definitely not your “God”. And I have a rational basis for rejecting your delusions… because they are delusions. If you told me the moon was made of cheese, I’d reject your baseless assertion in the same way.
quote:
even if I were to have some dream that resulted in me doing harm to others, you would have no rational basis to condemn such an action due to your rejection of God as the source for objective moral reasoning.
Tell that to the police, jury, and the judge!
quote:
I've engaged with your false assertions (not just facts, but your interpretations of facts)
Projection.
quote:
You are not promoting "facts". You are promoting your own conclusions based on your interpretations of facts.
No, I’m presenting facts. It is your delusions that won’t let you accept the facts and to accept reality. You are keen to live in a fantasy.
quote:
You also reject the facts that are presented to you regarding the texts of Scripture which you want to debate so often on this forum
Well they’re not facts. So they’re easy to reject.
quote:
You reject basic grammatical and historical context of the Scriptures, themselves, and push only contrary assertions from outside sources
Projection. Can you do nothing but project your own fallacies??? I interpret based on the basic grammar and context of the scriptures. The simplest and least complex way to interpret a passage is most likely the correct interpretation. You on the other hand do the opposite, using mental gymnastics to assert a verse doesn’t mean what it literally states.
quote:
you don't accept the beliefs of the Moabites but are happy to take their accounts over that of the Biblical narrative
Their account really doesn’t conflict with the Bible much. I’d say they complement. The biblical text says that the Moabite King (let’s call him “Mesha”) sacrifices his son as a burnt offering and then divine fury sweeps away the Israelite coalition and they withdraw and go home. The Mesha stele tells basically the same story but doesn’t mention the child sacrifice. The Israelite account could be correct though. All the Canaanites including Moabites and Israelites sacrificed their children.
quote:
You are not motivated by truth and in your worldview, you have no rational reason to pursue truth in the first place.
Your baseless assertions are getting old.
quote:
You reject the only rational basis for an objective moral standard
I sincerely hope your eyes are opened one day and you get to confront those who brainwashed you. One day you might see the light when you realize you already reject half the Bible subject matter because it doesn’t match your preconceived suppositions. I hope you can one day just simply admit that the Jesus in mark tells the disciples to take only a staff (mark 6:8) while in Matthew and Luke he says not to take a staff. You continuously reject the literal and plain meaning of the texts you claim are sacred.
You sir are the master of mental gymnastics and a denier of your scriptures if you can’t admit that in one gospel Jesus says take a staff, and in the others he says not to take a staff.
This post was edited on 2/8/24 at 6:22 pm
Posted on 2/9/24 at 12:08 pm to Squirrelmeister
quote:
You couldn’t be more wrong. It is not offensive to me, and the evidence is that I have studied it and like to discuss it and continue to study it. I don’t believe it, but it’s not because it confronts sin and speaks of judgement. Use your head. I don’t believe in it not because “I just want to sin” (heard that idiotic argument many times) but because there’s no truth to it. If I don’t believe in the subject matter, why would I be concerned about sin and judgement if it won’t affect me? Your argument makes no logical sense.
I know you may “think” it won’t concern you…unfortunately, regardless of your thoughts, you will face the judgement of God all the same. Choice is yours. You’ll have to lay in the bed you make. Praying one day you will choose differently. Know that until you breathe your last, there is hope in Christ but the moment you die, and you will die, there will be no more opportunity.
Posted on 2/9/24 at 12:37 pm to First Sergeant1
quote:
I know you may “think” it won’t concern you…unfortunately, regardless of your thoughts, you will face the judgement of God all the same. Choice is yours. You’ll have to lay in the bed you make. Praying one day you will choose differently. Know that until you breathe your last, there is hope in Christ but the moment you die, and you will die, there will be no more opportunity.
What if god is Allah, and when you die he’s not happy that you rejected his prophet, Muhammad?
Posted on 2/10/24 at 7:44 am to Prodigal Son
quote:
So forced, false converts? If anything, I would think this would only create resentment towards Christianity (surely it did)- especially if it were completely false and made up.
Yes, yes, and Yes. Especially in Europe there were “Conversos” - Jewish converts to Catholicism. They were given choices to leave Europe, convert to Catholicism, or be burned at the stake. They had to raise their children as Catholics so as to not give away their parents’ Judaism as little innocent kids. Later in life they’d spring the Judaism on them, but by then many of the children were fully indoctrinated by the church and were anti semitic.
quote:
Lots of people have done terrible things in the name of Christianity. But that doesn’t mean Christianity is false.
That particular subtopic was about how Christianity spread. whether the religion is true or false does not matter to how it spread by terrible acts by Christians. You’re right - just because it was spread and propagated by evil terrible actions of Christians doesn’t mean Christianity is false. Rather it’s the historical and scientific falsehoods and irreconcilable contradictions that demonstrate the religion’s falseness.
quote:
Taking all of this into consideration, it doesn’t really seem like Christianity has suffered any significant loss.
You mentioned the “endurance and rapid growth” of christianity. I merely pointed out that if that used to be the case, then it is no longer the case, with a poll as evidence. Significant loss? You can argue it isn’t significant but I’m happy you can see that it is not enduring and rapidly growing at least. A massive downward trend in the double digits of percentage to me is significant.
quote:
Rather, it appears that many of the fake Christians, who were only pretending to be Christians because it was socially acceptable, and required no real commitment or sacrifice, have been emboldened to show their true colors.
The poll is anonymous. I think your assertion of fake Christians now showing their true colors on anonymous poll is a bit of mental gymnastics on your part to trick yourself into believing that Christianity’s ranks are decreasing.
quote:
I did. I don’t lack belief in Santa or Muhammad. I positively believe that Santa doesn’t exist- the people who told me he was real- later told me they made it up. We can go into the reasons why I believe Muhammad was a fraud
As a reminder, you wrote:
quote:
There is no neutrality in belief. In order to lack belief in something, you must lack any knowledge of it whatsoever.
So to hold true to your own logic, I’d like to hear about your thoughts on Muhammad (pbuh). You don’t simply lack belief in the Quran, but you positively believe it’s all made up I guess? I’m curious to hear what you think and if your reasons mirror by own reasons for disbelief in the claims of the Bible.
Posted on 2/10/24 at 8:55 am to First Sergeant1
quote:
I know you may “think” it won’t concern you…unfortunately, regardless of your thoughts, you will face the judgement of God all the same.
Would you say the judgement will more like Exodus 12:12?
quote:
For I will pass through the land of Egypt that night, and I will strike all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both man and beast; and on all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgments: I am the LORD.
Or more like psalm 82?
quote:
God has taken his place in the divine council; in the midst of the gods he holds judgment:
Hey bud, you can make false assertions based on your own delusions like the rest. But ask yourself when all this judgement and ushering into the kingdom of God is supposed to take place.
Matthew 16:28
quote:
Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.”
So according to your own Bible, the judgement is supposed to be in the lifetime of the people who Jesus was speaking to. I don’t see how you can believe in all that - not only because of the historical and scientific falsehoods in the Bible, and not only because of all the irreconcilable contradictions, but also because of all the failed prophecies.
Telling an atheist he needs to believe or else is just a waste of everyone’s time. If you want to have a discussion or argument, at least attempt to support your assertions with what you would consider to be evidence.
Posted on 2/10/24 at 2:45 pm to Squirrelmeister
quote:
So according to your own Bible, the judgement is supposed to be in the lifetime of the people who Jesus was speaking to. I don’t see how you can believe in all that - not only because of the historical and scientific falsehoods in the Bible, and not only because of all the irreconcilable contradictions, but also because of all the failed prophecies. Telling an atheist he needs to believe or else is just a waste of everyone’s time. If you want to have a discussion or argument, at least attempt to support your assertions with what you would consider to be evidence.
It’s so clear how blind you are. So it’s completely understandable how you cannot understand Scripture and/or properly interpret it. I know you hate God, I was there before I was saved. All I can say is “it’s a fearful thing to fall into the hands of a wrathful God.” One day, you’ll have to answer for your sins. I will stand completely confident that my Savior, Jesus Christ has fully paid my sin debt. His death, burial and bodily resurrection fully guarantees that. That where my faith resides. In the person and work of Jesus Christ.
Revelation 20:11–15 (ESV): 11 Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. From his presence earth and sky fled away, and no place was found for them. 12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Then another book was opened, which is the book of life. And the dead were judged by what was written in the books, according to what they had done. 13 And the sea gave up the dead who were in it, Death and Hades gave up the dead who were in them, and they were judged, each one of them, according to what they had done. 14 Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. 15 And if anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.
Posted on 2/10/24 at 3:56 pm to Squirrelmeister
quote:
What I am absolutely positive of is that the gods described in the Bible are fabricated by the delusions of men.
“Claims without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.” Did I do it right?
I know you think you and your liberal scholars have some “evidence” that leads you to believe that, but for you to claim absolute certainty in one breath, and deny the ability to prove your own claim in the next, is logically inconsistent at best. And, any evidence that you would rest your case on, at best, would be subject to interpretation and endless debate.
quote:
During Noah’s flood story, the windows of the firmament open to allow the rain to fall. I personally don’t believe it was written metaphorically.
Genesis 7:11 (NASB95): 11 In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on the same day all the fountains of the great deep burst open, and the floodgates of the sky were opened.
That’s a metaphor, Jack.
The Bible is full of them. quote:Similes and metaphors are easily recognizable- ancient near eastern idioms and hyperbole can be tricky.
If it was though, how then do you decide what is literal and what is metaphor?
quote:
If you state that it was written by goat herders who just didn’t have an idea because their science hadn’t progressed yet, then how can anyone claim it was inspired by God? Because it’s scientifically wrong
Well, it’s not a scientific textbook. Sorry. As far as God using the people He did, at the time He did; to communicate deeply profound theological truths to the rest of humanity, throughout the future of mankind- well, I think God’s inspiration is the only logical conclusion.
quote:
My faith is not based solely on biblical inerrancy. It is based primarily upon the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
quote:… fill in the blank with meaningless details. First of all, for someone who places such high regard for scholarly consensus- I would think that the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ would be a given. It most certainly is for the vast majority of scholars. Moving on. Go back and look at all of your supposed contradictions. Do any of them affect the necessary information needed for salvation? The answer is no. Although most (if not all) of them can be reconciled through careful (and charitable) exposition, IMHO I believe they exist for at least one reason: “so that while seeing, they may see and not perceive, and while hearing, they may hear and not understand, otherwise they might return and be forgiven.”
How can you even be sure that really happened? The gospels can’t agree on
God is not going to force you to believe in Him. That’s just my opinion, but I think it’s logically and biblically sound.
quote:
If they can’t agree on any of those details (and much more) and many of those details are contradictions that cannot be reconciled, then how can we believe any of it?
If anything, these “contradictions” only add legitimacy to the claim of being an authentic eyewitness report. Imagine if someone committed a crime against someone you know and love. Let’s say that there were multiple eyewitnesses- including you. Inevitably and invariably, there absolutely will be discrepancies regarding the unimportant details of the event. Conversely, there will be agreement on the important details of the event. So, by your own logic, you would let the criminal go free- because the witness statements were not in 100% agreement on every single detail? I don’t think so.
Now going back to the Gospels, if all the witnesses parroted the exact same narrative, with no discrepancies whatsoever- you would accuse them of conspiring to fabricate the entire story. Sooner or later you have to recognize your own bias. As I have said before, and will continue to maintain- when it comes to the Bible, you will find that which you are looking for. If you’re looking for reasons to believe, you will find them. If you are looking for reasons to doubt, you will find them as well.
quote:
I guess you can say - well they all say Jesus died for our sins and was resurrected on the third day and we must believe in him for salvation.
Amen brother!
quote:
True, but you could throw all those gospel accounts away and just read Paul’s epistles and you’d get that same message.
You’re on a roll!
You’re right about them being the same message. But, without them, I imagine the skeptics would then say that the whole thing hinges upon one man (Paul), who wasn’t even a disciple of the pre-crucified Jesus. The Gospels, plus the epistles, makes for a robust, cumulative case.
quote:
logical arguments for the existence of God
quote:
I haven’t heard such a thing. Can you share one with us, or post a link?
Don’t play coy with me, Newman! (Seinfeld reference) I would be more than surprised to find out that there was a single argument that you have not heard. Rather, I’m sure you find all of them lacking in one way or another. There is no “silver bullet” argument that kills atheism. What there is, is a cumulative effect when all the arguments are considered in a complementary manner- with the only prerequisite being an open mind (which I do believe you lack).
I will introduce and attempt to unpack this cumulative (though not exhaustive) list of arguments in my next post. Coming soon. As always, I wish you well my friend.
Posted on 2/10/24 at 5:53 pm to Prodigal Son
Well said!
Posted on 2/11/24 at 6:19 am to First Sergeant1
quote:
I know you hate God
And you hate Odin, Jupiter, Zeus, Ra, Ba’al, and Ahura Mazda.
Page 15 of 16
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News