Total posts: 3,520
Posted in:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Logic, reason, and facts are smiling in your behalf!
That is quite ironic - Brother, given you are the most arbitrary and irrational person on this site and have no understanding of basic logic or reason.
Created:
Miracles by their very nature are not cause and effect - hence it would be absurd to think they ought to be repeated.
Miracles are also by their nature intended to be rare and unusual.
The only way for an atheist to say miracles don't exist would be to say that "In my experience, I know there can be no miracles because I have done the empirical research on every place on planet earth and in every moment of history that has ever taken place". Or the atheist could could say he has talked to someone who does know everything. ( I think the only person who knows everything is God)
So the statement of knowing miracles are not true is not knowledge - it is prejudicial opinion. Something which does not have any educational value.
What say you?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
You have no Idea what JTB thought.....That would require a time machine and a very classy mind reading act.
The NT is pretty clear. John knew he came as a forerunner to the Christ. This is not arbitrary. It is not relative. That is the story in the narrative.
Just because you are not sure of your opinion does not mean that facts in the narratives become irrelevant. Of course if you wish to present some evidence to the contrary, I am happy to look at it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
Yeah, this kinda means you're not a good person: you're only doing what you think god wants you to do because you think he or she is there, watching, and waiting with a reward or a punishment. By all means, then, please keep believing this way. Me, I don't do good only when it serves my own purposes. I do it because it makes the world a better place, in ways large or small. Like when I hold the door open for someone...that makes the world a little bit better and serves no purpose for me. You're saying fxck that person, unless, of course, Jesus is watching. You wouldn't respect human life without Jesus? What's the matter with you, seriously? You think people who don't believe as you do (because there are far more non Christians than Christians) are only pursuing their own happiness all the time? Your entire personal integrity ("doing whatever I can do without getting caught") is based ENTIRELY on the reality of Jesus? Are you serious? I always find it strange how unChrsitian Christians turn out to be, not surprising, but strange. But here it's laid fairly bare, no?
sorry ludof;3x, it means no such thing because there is no such thing as good. Good is whatever I subjectively want to make it. I do good now for all sorts of reasons - but primarily because God is the creator of the world and is good. Presently, I see good as defined by him. If God did not exist, then good would not exist in any means at all - except as I subjectively want it to be. and how would I be expected to define good if god does not exist? there are no absolutes. In any way that makes my life easier.
You on the other hand - do good - because you subjectively think it will make the world a better place. Puhlease - what absolute bollox. Whatever would you want to do that for? to ease your guilty mind. Typical socialist rubbish. The betterment of the world - which has no specific meaning is meaningless diatribe. Seriously, and I for one am not going to feel guilty for others if there is no god. Whatever would be the point of that? The world is going down the gutter anyway the more leftwing it becomes. leftwing politics has been slowly destroying the West for the past 80 years anyway.
If there is no god, then consistently - if that even mattered anymore - I would only do what made me happy. I don't honestly know why that is a problem for you. I would not care about the future of world. I would have no reason to care about the future for other people. I don't owe them anything - they don't owe me anything.
You are not thinking properly are you? My life is now based on the fact that God exists completely shapes my life. I am not ashamed of that. Everything I am is dependent on God. If God does not exist - I make my own morality. That is the point. If there is no god, then whatever I do and whatever I end up is neither Christian nor non--christian. The reason I do good is because of God. That part you don't get. And it rankles you. You calling be bad - what a joke!
This is where you mix up religion and morality. You don't like me saying that my life is based on God now. And you find it horrendus that if I ditched God then I would do whatever I want. What is wrong with you? Life owes me nothing and has no meaning without God. I really couldn't be bothered with trying to save the world if I didn't believe in God. There would be no point. There really wouldn't. You can be inconsistent in your views - that is a matter for you. But your entire thesis went out the window and the best you can do is say you are evil. What a joke.
Imagine if you received irrefutable evidence there is no god. What did you think I was going to say? Oh well, I will just throw that idea out - and get on with my life. It just shows how naive and shallow you are. No offence meant - but you just don't get it. And then when you get thrown by what I say - then you throw all of this guilt manipulative garbage - that only might effect me if I was thinking as a Christian. But if I don't believe in god, these things just don't matter. Many of my atheistic friends - think the same thing anyway. I know you don't like to admit it - but the fact that you want to make the world a better place as an atheist is inconsistent - you want to believe that atheists are moral people - but they are not. They borrow from other worldviews because they are shallow.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Because he believed ( or was led to believe)that he was rightful heir to the throne of David. And that it was his time to rule over all of Israel ....... but then so did John the Baptist . They had a right royal row over who should rule and who shouldn't down by the river.
What utter rubbish you spout. John the Baptist NEVER thought he was the one who should rule. What a load of nonsense.
LOL@ the utter stupidity that you vomit out of your mouth.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Yes, Brother, And unlike you, I owned up to my words. I own them. They were my words. I regret saying them because no matter the truth of themSo then, it is just as I thought, you stand by these uncalled for slights and this uncalled for abuse.TYes, Brother, And unlike you, I owned up to my words. I own them. They were my words. I regret saying them because no matter the truth of themSo then, it is just as I thought, you stand by these uncalled for slights and this uncalled for abuse.Tradesecret wrote: the serpent, satan, whatever - he is the accuser and you follow after him. you are his disciple. From my point of view - he is slime. You know like the stuff we find after a snail has passed by. creepy. disgusting. Ugly. \ #24Tradesecret wrote: Stupid man. Dumb as fuck. Just continue to repeat your ignorance. #161Tradesecret wrote: After all, you are the swine and the dogs that trample over the pearls. your comments to me are like water of a ducks back
Yes. I did write these words. Let me repeat them for you. You see I do own my own words. Do I regret saying them? Yes. But only the form of them. Not the truth therein. Did you read that? Do you get that? I am not ashamed of the truth. Just the way I structured it. I should not attack the person. But don't get ahead of yourself Stephen. You are the swine that Jesus talks about. You are the pig. And not because you are Gentile. But because you don't have a clue. You are ignorant. That is the truth. Satan is evil. And his disciples are just like him. You don't purport to be his disciple - but you certainly talk the same as he does. And walk the same way. You don't have a clue about much at all. But don't stress. And as I said a moment ago - let me repeat my words.
Tradesecret wrote: the serpent, satan, whatever - he is the accuser and you follow after him. you are his disciple. From my point of view - he is slime. You know like the stuff we find after a snail has passed by. creepy. disgusting. Ugly. \ #24
Tradesecret wrote: Stupid man. Dumb as fuck. Just continue to repeat your ignorance. #161
Tradesecret wrote: After all, you are the swine and the dogs that trample over the pearls. your comments to me are like water of a ducks back
Tradesecret wrote: the serpent, satan, whatever - he is the accuser and you follow after him. you are his disciple. From my point of view - he is slime. You know like the stuff we find after a snail has passed by. creepy. disgusting. Ugly. \ #24
Tradesecret wrote: Stupid man. Dumb as fuck. Just continue to repeat your ignorance. #161
Tradesecret wrote: After all, you are the swine and the dogs that trample over the pearls. your comments to me are like water of a ducks back
Tradesecret wrote: the serpent, satan, whatever - he is the accuser and you follow after him. you are his disciple. From my point of view - he is slime. You know like the stuff we find after a snail has passed by. creepy. disgusting. Ugly. \ #24
Tradesecret wrote: Stupid man. Dumb as fuck. Just continue to repeat your ignorance. #161
Tradesecret wrote: After all, you are the swine and the dogs that trample over the pearls. your comments to me are like water of a ducks back
Tradesecret wrote: the serpent, satan, whatever - he is the accuser and you follow after him. you are his disciple. From my point of view - he is slime. You know like the stuff we find after a snail has passed by. creepy. disgusting. Ugly. \ #24
Tradesecret wrote: Stupid man. Dumb as fuck. Just continue to repeat your ignorance. #161
Tradesecret wrote: After all, you are the swine and the dogs that trample over the pearls. your comments to me are like water of a ducks back
Tradesecret wrote: the serpent, satan, whatever - he is the accuser and you follow after him. you are his disciple. From my point of view - he is slime. You know like the stuff we find after a snail has passed by. creepy. disgusting. Ugly. \ #24
Tradesecret wrote: Stupid man. Dumb as fuck. Just continue to repeat your ignorance. #161
Tradesecret wrote: After all, you are the swine and the dogs that trample over the pearls. your comments to me are like water of a ducks back
Tradesecret wrote: the serpent, satan, whatever - he is the accuser and you follow after him. you are his disciple. From my point of view - he is slime. You know like the stuff we find after a snail has passed by. creepy. disgusting. Ugly. \ #24
Tradesecret wrote: Stupid man. Dumb as fuck. Just continue to repeat your ignorance. #161
Tradesecret wrote: After all, you are the swine and the dogs that trample over the pearls. your comments to me are like water of a ducks back
Tradesecret wrote: the serpent, satan, whatever - he is the accuser and you follow after him. you are his disciple. From my point of view - he is slime. You know like the stuff we find after a snail has passed by. creepy. disgusting. Ugly. \ #24
Tradesecret wrote: Stupid man. Dumb as fuck. Just continue to repeat your ignorance. #161
Tradesecret wrote: After all, you are the swine and the dogs that trample over the pearls. your comments to me are like water of a ducks back
Tradesecret wrote: the serpent, satan, whatever - he is the accuser and you follow after him. you are his disciple. From my point of view - he is slime. You know like the stuff we find after a snail has passed by. creepy. disgusting. Ugly. \ #24
Tradesecret wrote: Stupid man. Dumb as fuck. Just continue to repeat your ignorance. #161
Tradesecret wrote: After all, you are the swine and the dogs that trample over the pearls. your comments to me are like water of a ducks back
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
It comes from myself. The need to be worshipped is demonstrative of ego and narcissism. Why would anyone find that worthy of worshipping?
But the God of the Bible is neither narcissistic nor up himself. He is holy and good.
So given the factor that worship is inescapable - it is always going to be a matter of woshiping someone.
I suspect that you are full of yourself - after all, anyone who thinks that they can decide who God is - from themselves is arrogant and full of it.
And yet I reckon you worship yourself. In fact this goes without saying - you are the master of your own fate. The captain of your soul. You do what you want to do. You think your views are supreme.
So really you are also a bit inconsistent and don't actually practice what you preach. I suspect arbitrary is a good word to describe you,
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
I have no intention of leaving. Your continued bullying tactics are yours. I have called you before and I will do so in the future.
But as for leaving, only if the moderators ban me. If I leave before then, then the bullies win. I don't think I am permitted to let bullies with no substance win.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Yes, Brother,
And unlike you, I owned up to my words. I own them. They were my words. I regret saying them because no matter the truth of them - it was not the proper way in which to conduct myself on this debate. I apologize for my words, not for the truth therein, but because it demonstrated a lack of self control on my part and an appropriate way to conduct myself.
This page has died and I will be asking the moderator to close it for further comments.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Stephen,
You prove my point.
I have conceded before today that I should never have acted like you and attacked the person. I did. I was wrong.
You on the other hand would never concede the point. Why not? Because you don't see it as being wrong. And that too is the point.
Bullies never ADMIT they do wrong or bully people.
You are a bully.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Are you really so ignorant? Every time you raise anything about me personally is being done to personally attack me. To go on about something in a profile page, to go on about alleged bragging, to go on about any of my personal life - is nothing short of a personal attack on me. Don't you get that?
You use ad hominin attack very often - you attack the man and not the argument. Don't be so naïve as to think you can just continue to get away with it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
I have always been male. Never been female. Never been unknown. Only a male. I am not a runaway. I love Jesus. He is my king and my God.Well it is on record that this simply is not true. And your wild claims of being "hacked" don't fly.
Personal attacks are one of your strengths, aren't they? That must make you feel so proud. And your mum. I bet your kids just love the fact that daddy is a bully and your grandkids go and brag about their granddad to their mates at school. O they must be so proud of you for your bully skills.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
Didn't you once brag to us that you "study the original languages, translate them to English", #25 ?
Stating a fact is not bragging. Stevie Blunder.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Which part of not answering personal questions don't you understand?
Brother, why are you dressed as a man when clearly you are a chicken on a runaway trip?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
Why do you think you ought to do good? How do you determine if it improves it or not?My answer is pretty clear: I try to do good because it improves the world around me. That's according to my perception of my actions vis a vis the world around me. It's not difficult.
So, would it be fair to say that your perceptions are infallible? After all, surely that would be the only way to know you are doing good and improving the world? But I am pretty sure you would not think your perceptions were infallible. If what you do is good from your perception but from someone's point of view it is not, is it really good? And if everyone around you thinks it is actually bad, but your perception is that it is good, and will improve the world, will you still do it?
But why do you want to improve the world? What is the purpose of that? Are you talking big things or little things? And how are you determining what is improving it or not? According to what schema? Personally, I want to improve the world as well. And perhaps that is part of the reason I do good - but for what purpose? Isn't the world going down the toilet? Haven't we already gone past the point of no turning back? What is the point of polishing the brass on a sinking ship? Or are you more positive - and think the world is actually not in such a bad place? You reject the science.
Well obviously it is derived from atheism. But it doesn't just arrive from nowhere?If it's obvious that my desire to do good derives from atheism, please provide your demonstratioin. I've never once done anything good or bad and thought "I'm doing this because atheism." It arrives through the social contract we all live by: if I do good, and you do good, then the world gets better. It's just humanism, it has nothing to do with atheism.
I missed a word in that sentence - I missed "not". It should read "Well obviously it is not derived from Atheism". Sorry this confused you. My fault. The second sentence continues my thought - which is "if not atheism, there where? You have answered humanism. Ok.
What is humanism and why does it have nothing to do with atheism.
I do good because it pleases God. Not because he might punish me - but because I love God and like to please him. And also it makes sense rationally. For instance I don't kill people. I do this because I value life. I value life because God is the author of life. And I want to be like him.Let's imagine that you woke up tomorrow and there was some rock solid confirmation that there is absolutely no god or gods. Would you immediately stop doing good? As to the bold, this is EXACTLY what I do, I just don't do it related to anything about any god. If you want to be like god, do you also think about punishing the sinful, taking your vengeance on your enemies, holding people accountable whose great grandparents committed some crime, and drowning humanity? I have a real hard time arriving at the conclusion that the god of the bible values life as much as I do. TUrned a woman into a pillar of salt, for pete's sake. Do you want to be like that one too?
If I woke up tomorrow and discovered by some amazing epiphany that there was no god, what would I do? I would no longer worry about anything but my life. I would do my own thing. I would be selfish. I would be looking after no. 1. Yes, I would good at times, but only if it served my purposes. I would not go around killing people in case I got killed back, or went to prison. I would not respect other human life. Why should I? If I am going to be a life that is just a dot in the history of everything - then I will try and get as much zest out of it as possible. That would be the only meaning for me. The pursuit of my happiness. Now of course that does not mean I suddenly become as evil as possible - but it does mean that I will do whatever I can do - without getting caught. And that would be perfectly ok - because good is subjective isn't? That is why the second part of your paragraph is INCONSISTENT.
If good is subjective, then so is evil. How we improve the world is determined by our worldview and the standards we hold to. This is why I find atheists who think they are attacking god with the things he has done - but some sort of absolute morality when they don't hold to it themselves is irrational. Of course I want to be like God. God is holy and perfect and good. This means understanding that sin is evil and will be judged accordingly. God alone is worthy to take vengence on his enemies. Our modern nations have judicial systems which do the same thing. They punish and judge evil. I think this is a good thing. Do you think judicial systems are not a good thing? If you are asking me to take a 21st century pragmatic and subjective understanding and opinion on morality and apply it against the Standards of God, hmmm not likely. I am not that presumptious or arrogant.
God loves people. God created a pretty good world. Humanity stuffed it up. God wants to see the world improved again. But humanity stuffed it up - and so - humanity should try and fix it up. Humanity does a pretty bad job and continues to do a pretty bad job. The world God made continued to have a God that warned people when they were sinning and God continued to put humanity on notice when they sinned and stuffed things up. God continues to help humanity despite their ignoring him. Yet, he warns and then judges. He warns and then judges. I sometimes think that people like you would prefer that judges just stop judging and let people do what they want to do -without consequences. That is the effect of what you say about God. Stop judging us - let us do our own thing. Let us try and fix up the world - we have no idea how to do - but we are sure that we will figure it out - if we don't kill ourselves first.
Yes. I absolutely want to be like God. God is good and perfect. Holy and just. I will always warn and put people on notice before I call them to account. Yes - that is someone I know has my interests at heart - and someone I can trust.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sum1hugme
Reason - the power of the mind to think, understand, and form judgments by a process of logic.The universality of Reason delivers the Universal Moral law. The proper moral motivation is one of duty to the moral law one gives oneself, out of a sense of reverence for that moral law. Reason delivers the moral law, and we must apply it to ourselves in order to be morally autonomous. And if we are reasoning correctly, we should all arrive at the same universal moral law.
Do you think the laws of logic are material or immaterial? It sounds like you are suggesting that there are some things in existence which are immaterial.
Talking about Universals is, I would have thought, a dangerous topic for an Atheist. After all if we are just matter - then how can we trust our own powers of logic or experience or well anything including the power to doubt? Still thanks for your response.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
It is the Atheist who says they do not have a worldviewAtheists do not say they have no world view, atheists are saying that their worldview is not tied to atheism. Once again, atheism is a position on a single issue - that of whether a god exists. That’s all.
That is precisely what I have been saying. I commenced this thread because of that view by Atheists. I don't have to agree with it of course. An Atheist has no Atheistic worldview.
Morality does not fall out of the sky. Our morality typically comes from our environmentsOur morality tends to reflect our culture, because much of our sense of morality is learned through the behaviors we observe. But at some point in our lives we develop the ability to question our own morality and in so doing we improve. Our history with slavery is a perfect example of this.The problem with religion is that the only thing it teaches with regards to morality is obedience. It completely discourages any type of rational application or critical thinking. ‘Do as god says’ it’s literally all religion offers. This is why theists cannot fathom the idea of morality without god, because they’ve never had to figure it out for themselves.
Well, you obviously have a distorted view or narrow view of religion. Christianity does not merely teach obedience. What a silly thing to say. When Jesus teaches - do good to others. Or treat other people how you want to be treated - it is clearly encouraging rational application and critical thinking. When God talks about forgiveness, it requires critical thinking and judgment. When God requests his people to study and show themselves approved - this requires significant rational applications and critical thinking. Theists develop morality all of the time. Why do you think that there are different denominations? It is partly because people's morals have been challenged by traditional thinking or conservative thinking or progressive thinking and after doing some homework have decided to expand. When I make such generalizations about Atheism I get blasted. It takes two to tango and to sort things out.
Can you name a non-theistic worldview?A worldview is a term we use to describe the totality of ones beliefs. Theism/atheism is just one small part of it, so it doesn’t make sense to say “name one”. I have a non-theistic worldview because my worldview doesn’t include a belief in a god, but there is no one name that describes the totality of how I see the world. I’m just not that important.
Whether it is small or not, it is still part of it. We can no more raise it to the top level than to dismiss it altogether. Why wouldn't it make sense? There seems to a large motivation by atheists who want their cake and to eat it as well - to try and dismiss the notion. That is part of the reason why they in my mind so irrational and arbitrary. I call this rationalization. They see the world - yet they don't really see the world. They say they use their senses - but they don't. That of course is their prerogative to walk around blind to the obvious. I just find it offensive that they choose to do this and then try and call religion irrational. Especially given that they admit in the beginning that Atheism is a sole doctrine - yet they want to eat the cake as well. You have to love inconsistency.
But even secular thinking is a religious doctrineSecular thinking is literally the opposite of a religious doctrine. This is like arguing that abstinence is a sex position.
Well no, you are now talking apples and oranges. Go and do a bit of history. Where did secular thinking come from? It is a term that separates how people Worship God on a Sunday in church from how people worship God throughout the rest of the week. It is the difference between formal worship and informal worship. It is a term that separates sacred things from non-sacred things. It may have evolved in recent times to be more "without god" but initially in the universe and time when it was framed - it was considered impossible to divorce God from anything. Hence all nations prior to America's constitution were expressly a religious nation. America changed that to become in effect the first secular nation. A nation still under God. Yet now God was not attached to a particular religion or denomination.
Of course that has evolved, hasn't? And I certainly don't disagree that its modern understanding is more non-religious than religious. Yet it historically is a religious doctrine. In fact it is historically accurate that the term in particular derived from Protestant's thinking on worship. There is a very interesting book titled, The Secular City, by Harvey Cox which explores this. I would encourage to read it.
Define goodGood is that which corresponds to a moral standard. The moral standard is subjective, even if you’re using God’s.
Says who? And why is that the case? And if it a subjective standard, then good basically means anything. Hitler was good to kill the Jews. Biden was good to leave Afghanistan to the Taliban. Humanity was good to kill Jesus. For the record, I don't think any of those things are good. All were evil decisions.
The question of good unless it has an objective standard from our point of view - loses its intrinsic value as a word.
I do accept that God's standards from his point of view are subjective. This of course does not mean that they are arbitrary, vindictive, irrational, or sinful or even prone to error. From our point of view - this is objective. Again apples and oranges. Because anything short of a perfect and holy God is going to have standards that fall short of perfect and will at times be arbitrary and vindictive and selfish and short sighted and irrational. Hence why I would suggest that an atheist having a worldview yet, divorces that somehow from his belief or disbelief is irrational. And short sighted.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
As a memeber of 5 religious groups , that spans across the three "main" holy books.I highly doubt you will ever meet anyone as moral as I.I'm so fukin moral.If you need to know if a act is moral or not just PM me.Nice.Picture being a theist for like twenty - twenty five years , And something happens one day that makes you denounce your religion.You'd go to bed that night feeling fine.But then picture waking up that very first day your not religious anymore.And not having one single moral in ya .It would feel freaky right?Good game.Good game.
I take the view that everyone is moral. It is never a matter of morals or no morals - but whose morals will we follow. I never said Atheists did not have morals or could not do good. I said that Atheists tell me that their Atheism is unrelated to whether they have morals or not. I think the term "unrelated" is a misnoma in the discussion. What does that mean? Atheists suggest that atheism is only about a belief or disbelief in god. I personally reject that position. Nevertheless, Atheists like everyone else has morals. The question I posed is where is that morality derived if not from their Atheism.
The fact that you have been in 5 groups over 3 religious books does not make you any more or any less moral than anyone else. It just means that you cannot determine exactly which morals are your and which ones come from elsewhere. Thanks for the post.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
You can be a atheist and not even know you are.
I totally agree with that point. There are many people who wander about thinking they are religious or Christian or whatever, but actually, they serve and worship themselves. And act and react like there is no ALMIGHTY GOD of the universe.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
Being benevolent and doing good does not have to be faith based or does it require a belief in god as you are trying to impress on us that it is/does. You will keep getting the same reply until you can prove otherwise.So you concede the point then!!!!There is no point to concede, you idiot. And if you cannot prove that it is a requirement for one to have to believe in god or does it have be faith based to be benevolent and do good, then simply address the original op, or leave the thread.
Aha! And that is exactly what you have done. You have conceded. You lost. Go back to school. I am not the one with the assertion here - it is you. And if I was I could still overwhelm you. I can't actually believe that you think you have anything to add.
God is the default position. Atheism is the newcomer. The first people believed in God - and so did all of their families for years and decades and centuries and millenia. Then along comes a an atheist and has a problem with God. Despite the evidence that is compelling everywhere around them. And has never disapeared. So despite this nonsense - people such as yourself think that this somehow reverses the burden of proof. You are incorrect.
We theists were here first. Go and prove your atheistic position. Oh - you can't - that's not fair. LOL! STUPID!!!!!
Stevie STUPID Blunder. Up to you -
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
TRADESECRET, whose gender went from a woman to a man, and then to unknown, and now back to a man, the Debate Runaway on Jesus' true MO,
I have always been male. Never been female. Never been unknown. Only a male. I am not a runaway. I love Jesus. He is my king and my God.
Bible denier of Jesus being the Trinity God in the OT, the runaway to what division of Christianity he/she/unknown follows,
I totally am convinced of the infallibility, inerrancy, and sufficiency of the Scriptures. Jesus is not the Trinity. He is however the Second Person of the Trinity. The Father is the First Person and the Spirit is the Third. Jesus is also fully Man and Fully God. I belong to the Reformed Tradition of the Protestant Faith in accordance with and in line with the Orthodox practices of the Historic Church.
the pseudo-christian that has committed the Unpardonable Sin,
Brother is the only pseudo Christian on this site. I have not committed the unforgiveable sin. Only people who have rejected Christ once and for all have committed this sin.
the number 1 Bible ignorant fool regarding Noah's ark,
I understand that the Biblical picture of Noah's Ark is quite different to how people who are unbelievers would understand the language. Nevertheless, the evidence in support of Noah's Ark is still much weightier than the alternative. If I am the no.1 fan, then I am doing well. Thanks for the Kudos.
the pseudo-christian that says kids that curse their parents should be killed,
Again, not pseudo. I say adult children are liable to covenant death, which may well include the death penalty for cursing parents. This demonstrates that the Bible has a very high view and value on family. I deny it refers to minors.
states there is FICTION within the scriptures,
Absolutely. The Bible contains many different kinds of genres including history, parables, poems, prophecy, Gospel as well as apocalyptical literature. There is both fiction and non-fiction.
and is guilty of Revelation 22:18-19 and 2 Timothy 4:3,
LOL! dum dum speaks again. I deny any guilt.
AN ADMITTED SEXUAL DEVIANT,
Nope. More lies from the fake Brother. The Atheist pretending to be a theist - and one who quotes none other than the permanently banned Harikrish as his source. Say no more. LOL!
and obviously had ungodly Gender Reassignment Surgery,
Answered above.
Satanic Bible Rewriter,
LOL! I do not rewrite the Bible.
an embarrassed LIAR of their true gender, and goes against Jesus in not helping the poor,
I do not tell lies. I have ever had one gender. I agree with Jesus in helping the poor.
has turned into a HYPOCRITE,
Probably! I certainly don't pretend to be perfect. I make mistakes. I get things wrong. But I am continuing to learn. So trying not to be a hypocrite.
and a LIAR,
Every person in the world lies approximately 10 times a day. So probably I do lie - from time to time. I am not one who intends to lie. Yet, there are times when I exaggerate, when I give white lies, and do so. However, I am not characterized by lies.
teaches Christianity at Universities in a “blind leading the blind” scenario,
Pardon. And your proof for this. LOL!
and is a False Prophet,
I don't make prophecies.
says that Jesus is rational when He commits abortions and makes His creation eat their children, and that Jesus is rational when He allows innocent babies to be smashed upon the rocks,
I have explained that it is rational to warn people that their sins will result in judgment. If Jesus does this, it is Rational. On the other hand - the person who ignores the warning and continues in their sin despite the warning of pending judgment is IRRATIONAL. This describes Brother. Brother Irrational.
YOUR LAUGHABLE QUOTE WHERE YOU WANT YOUR CAKE AND EAT IT TOO IN YOUR POST #24! LOL!!!: "Sorry Brother, I was afraid you would misunderstand me (I know your logic is terrible and comprehension skills are sadly lacking) but I wanted to act in good faith that perhaps my view of you was incorrect. ) But here we go - I said - and I repeat God is rational. You produced some verses and asked me whether they were rational. I said yes. I then asked you how you could argue that it was irrational. Do you remember that question or have you just forgotten to answer it. AGAIN!"
Yes, do you remember? Oh yes you do - but like always - you just run away by avoiding the question AGAIN.
Tradesecret, in adding more embarrassment towards your presence within this forum, it is sad that your memory is lacking again, I wonder why *cough,* where you seem to have forgotten the FACT that before I address your continued Bible stupidity, you don't get something for nothing, don’t you remember? Therefore, because of your memory loss, I will repeat this notion AGAIN, whereas you are to address YOUR ONE HUNDRED RUNAWAY POSTS that I directed to you that were inspired by Jesus, BEFORE I address your Satanic posts in the name of Satan! GET IT?! 2+2=4, oil and water don't mix, and you don't get something for nothing until you follow through to the simple LOGICAL proposition above. UNDERSTOOD BIBLE FOOL?
What I get is this. I will answer all questions that are not personal. That cuts out well, almost everything you ask. I will answer any question in proper form - proper form is NON personal.
Now, do you need said 100 reticent posts that I directed to you, and have RUN AWAY from ad infinitum to start your quest in answering them, or will you come up with yet further lame excuses to RUN FROM them again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again? YOUR CHOICE!
Well if any of the 100 posts do not contain personal attacks - then I am happy to answer. Just start your own thread. Oh that is right - you don't have the courage to do so.
Well the ball is in your court. What will you do? My guess is run away by avoiding the answers and by attacking me personally. LOL! I win every time.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Pope Francis assures atheists: You don’t have to believe in God to go to heaven.so the pope is just another person. He is the head of his church. This is true. But are you saying he is infallible and we must believe everything he says?Nope, I am saying that no one should listen you and your own shite, and to take your smug ramblings with a pinch of salt, to put it bluntly. You do not know the scriptures that you admit to simply "passing on what you have been told " to pass on for who knows how long? And that have been teaching to all those universities ; this is you isn't it?
But they should listen to you ? Why? You bluster here more than anyone else- except perhaps your two other personalities - Brother and Dimtim. Although I have noticed dimtim is not around. Have you forgotten about him? It is you who don't know your Scriptures. Remember Is 9:6 - you know that place where god is given more than one title and it does not devoid the other?
The pope is a person - who is trained in his doctrine. But he is still a man who makes mistakes. Did you notice how you did not answer the question. But quickly - attacked the man. ad hominin. You move so quickly to that position - it is becoming a habit. Your default position.
Tradesecrete wrote: I in most parts are merely passing on the teaching of what i have received , I don't have an agenda. I don't charge students, I charge universities when they request me to lecture to them. #20So going by that standard, I think it is safe to say the Pope knows a little more about scripture than you will ever live to know. You even tell us that you don't have "an agenda", so you tell me, why would anyone listen to the likes of you, a smug fly-by night- holy roller that doesn't remember the Great Commission given by Jesus to all of his disciples.?
Oh and again. bringing up things from the past. Yes, I don't reinvent the wheel. I do pass on those things I have been taught - rightly so. And things I have explored. I don't have an agenda. The Great Commission is not an agenda. Some people talk about it being a mission. But it is not an agenda. You might like to distill it to that - but that is your over reach not mine. And trying to be a smart alec about it - is your issue again not mine.
The pope may well know the scriptures than me. I don't pretend to know everything. unlike you. who has studied for 40 years but still can't find Is 9:6. The pope is still not my god.
“You ask me if the God of the Christians forgives those who don’t believe and who don’t seek the faith. I start by saying – and this is the fundamental thing – that God’s mercy has no limits if you go to him with a sincere and contrite heart. The issue for those who do not believe in God is to obey their conscience.Ok. Again I am not sure your point.That is because you are stupid.
Delightful - again - just go straight for the man. ad hominin. And why? because that is your default position BECAUSE you cannot present a solution. Or an argument. The pope is irrelevant in this context. You quoting him is neither here not there. The only point we could surmise is that you have no points. And need to quote from someone you don't even agree with.
He[the pope] is the head of his church.Well not just any church is it, Reverend?The Pope has inherited the very church of the person that Jesus in the bible tells us he would build his church on: Peter. Or have you forgotten this ALSO??"Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (Matt. 16:18).
Wow ! you almost sucked me into a full on apologetic. Well done. But why waste my time. You don't believe this - and I don't believe it. The Catholics might - but so what?
It was all just nonsense- by Stevie Blunder - the one who has NO arguments for anything - but whose favourite time is attacking the man. Go well Stevie - I will continue to pray that God does not take you too soon.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
So no real difference? Both are rational - or irrational. Both live by faith and both have worldviews. Ok. I can live with that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Bones
Like you said, Atheism is not a world view, so obviously it is not a structure for morality. If you want a world view, adopt some world view, such as Sam Harris' moral landscape. Also, like Edge said, everyone gets their morality from an unknown source, and internal compass. You chose the bible because it aligns with this compass.
Can Edge prove this statement? Who said I chose the bible? But you are correct Atheists do not have the capacity to be good simply because they are an atheist.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
Theism and atheism are positions on a single proposition - ‘a god exists’. If you believe that proposition you’re a theist. If you do not believe that proposition you’re an atheist.You’re confusing a person’s position on a single proposition… with a person. The fact that one does not believe in a god tells us nothing about what they do believe in regarding morality or where it comes from. That’s where we look at other positions regarding morality. Humanism for example.The idea that an atheist must borrow from a theistic world view to do or be good is nonsense. Both atheists and theists get their morality from the same place - within themselves. You can’t say god is good if you haven’t yet figured out what you think the word good means.
Thanks for your thoughts.
I don't think I am confusing the two. It is the Atheist who says they do not have a worldview. The Theist totally accepts he has a worldview. In fact - it is pretty much only the Atheist who denies he has one.
Morality does not fall out of the sky. Our morality typically comes from our environments. America and the UK and Canada and Australia have similar types of morality. Not the same exactly, but their morality is much more similar than Eastern Cultures such as China, and Cambodia, and Vietnam. One morality in that sense is not necessarily better than another. But they are similar. Interestingly their law codes and religious codes are also reasonably similar,.
Can you name a non-theistic worldview? Communism? Humanism has become a secular one. But even secular thinking is a religious doctrine. And developed by religious people originally. Communism is probably the closest thing we have to a non-theistic worldview - that and fascism. The two worldviews which have caused more damage to the world than everything else together in history.
Define good. Again you reveal a worldview. Is good good because God calls it good or is God good because good exists?
Thanks for playing.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@janesix
concience.
Cool answer. But what is a conscience? Is it material or immaterial? Is it part of the soul or part of the brain? Is the brain the mind?
Do Atheist's have a conscience? How did it evolve?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
TRADESECRET, whose gender went from a woman to a man, and then to unknown, and now back to a man, the Debate Runaway on Jesus' true MO, Bible denier of Jesus being the Trinity God in the OT, the runaway to what division of Christianity he/she/unknown follows, the pseudo-christian that has committed the Unpardonable Sin, the number 1 Bible ignorant fool regarding Noah's ark, the pseudo-christian that says kids that curse their parents should be killed, states there is FICTION within the scriptures, and is guilty of Revelation 22:18-19 and 2 Timothy 4:3, AN ADMITTED SEXUAL DEVIANT, and obviously had ungodly Gender Reassignment Surgery, Satanic Bible Rewriter, an embarrassed LIAR of their true gender, and goes against Jesus in not helping the poor, has turned into a HYPOCRITE, and a LIAR, teaches Christianity at Universities in a “blind leading the blind” scenario, and is a False Prophet, says that Jesus is rational when He commits abortions and makes His creation eat their children, and that Jesus is rational when He allows innocent babies to be smashed upon the rocks,
Not relevant to the topic of Atheism doing good.
Why are you wasting your time with yet another ignorant rambling post relative to the Atheists where it is meaningless, and that continues to show your outright Biblical stupidity!!! Your thread is senseless, as usual, because Atheists will be going to our glorious 1400 square mile Heaven as well, with its 60 foot walls, that will hopefully keep out the Satanic Mormons and Jehovah Witnesses, AND YOU! Do I have to easily "School you once again upon this biblical axiom?!" YES?
Not relevant to the topic. I never said in this thread that atheists are not going to heaven. I only indicated that atheists cannot do good simply because they are atheists. I feel this has gone way over your head.
Tradesecret, now pay close attention, okay? The JUDEO-Christian Bible explicitly states that EVERYONE is going to heaven, matter not their works or believing in our serial killer Jesus as Yahweh God incarnate, understood Bible fool?“For it is for this we labor and strive, because we have fixed our hope on the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of believers.” (1 Timothy 4:10)
See above.
Tradesecret, now take off your pointed aluminum hat for a moment, and at least "try" to understand simple biblical syntactical deductions, where it states in the verse above; "all men" and "especially of believers." GET IT? Huh, you Bible simpleton fool! AGAIN, “All men,” especially of believers, as in addition to all men that are not believers, as in Atheists and other faiths that contradict the Christian one, will in fact be saved regardless of whether anyone believes or not!
This topic is not about heaven or getting to heaven. It is about whether Atheists can do good or not.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Nobody has morality from their belief (or none) belief in god, rather, they grant if from other sources - in cases of theist its the religion around their god, not their god himself. Atheists actually show some of this some, typically the community around which they are atheists, whether that be humanists or conservatives. You see: people tend to get their morality from their communities - that's true of all humans.
Which worldview are you taking this piece of philosophy from? Or are you making it up on the spot?
Good to see you acknowledge that it does not arise from being an atheist.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
Imagine asking someone if they are a atheist, and they reply with. ' Ummmmmm yeah i think so. They are the ones who don't believe in god right 'Like not really caring about it. ( Because some people don't )Its kinda like EATING CHILDREN. Picture the day or the verse that made you not want to eat kids.No thats not right.Picture a atheist doing something in spite of the bible.Or.Or.Not having, Fight or Flight buttttttttt atheism or god.And or.If atheists can't do good as atheists.AndddddddCatholics can't do good as catholics.Being Agnostic must be spot on.Butttttttttt.The sentence then arrivesA agnostic can't do good as a agnostic.Hang on, being agnostic may be different then being theistic orrrrr atheistic. It definitely should not be but it feels like it is.And the time you've been a atheist needs to be taken into account.To sum it up.Atheists can't do good as atheists.Correct.Well it sounds right. Nice post.
Hi Deb,
I never know how to respond to your posts. You baffle me entirely. Thanks though for posting.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
Then Jesus said to his disciples, “Truly I tell you, it is hard for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.” -Matthew 19:21-24Evangelist Kenneth Copeland: Net Worth $760 MillionI'm guessing that secretly he is an atheist.
IDK. Perhaps he is. I never thought he was a christian. He is far to hindu and new agey for me. But tell me - what has this to do with Atheist's doing good.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
Humanists recognize that it is only when people feel free to think for themselves, using reason as their guide, that they are best capable of developing values that succeed in satisfying human needs and serving human interests.-Isaac Asimov, 1984 Humanist of the Year and Past AHA PresidentIssac Asimov was an atheist.
Thanks FLRW
Are you saying that atheists have a worldview. That certainly is what it looks like. How many other positive doctrines does the worldview of Atheism have? I am sure all of your fellow atheists would love to know.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Pope Francis assures atheists: You don’t have to believe in God to go to heaven.
Ok. I am a protestant of course - so the pope is just another person. He is the head of his church. This is true. But are you saying he is infallible and we must believe everything he says? Or can he make mistakes? And is this his infallible word - or his mistake? Why is it relevant to the topic?
“You ask me if the God of the Christians forgives those who don’t believe and who don’t seek the faith. I start by saying – and this is the fundamental thing – that God’s mercy has no limits if you go to him with a sincere and contrite heart. The issue for those who do not believe in God is to obey their conscience.
Ok. Again I am not sure your point. But he is not an atheist. Is he? Or maybe he is?
“Sin, even for those who have no faith, exists when people disobey their conscience.”
Ok.
But what would he know? He's only the Pope
Are you saying the pope knows what he is talking about? You are full of surprises aren't you Stephen? Which statements are correct and which ones are not?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SkepticalOne
So how then can an atheist do good things if it does not flow from their atheistic view?...because they have a worldview which isn't atheism or religion - Humanism for example.
Thanks for that SkepticalOne. And thank you for acknowledging that atheists can't do good simply as an atheist. Humanism of course is a worldview - and there are a few different types. Would you consider it to be an Atheistic worldview? Or is it a religious one? Hmmm, why did the early humanists desire to do good?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
I try to do good things because it improves the world I live in in some way, which is different than "It makes my life better."
Why do you think you ought to do good? How do you determine if it improves it or not?
I'm not sure how that borrows anything, but I agree, it has nothing to do with atheism. Please provide your path to arrival at this conclusion:
Well obviously it is derived from atheism. But it doesn't just arrive from nowhere?
Thank you for asking. I intend to start a new thread about this sometime in the next month. I will get to it then. After all, this thread is not about me but primarily about atheists.
It is because they have to borrow from other worldviews - things like morality and goodness and well, everything for that matter. They are really a lot like leaches aren't they?Do you do good because if you don't, God will get mad? Potentially punish you?
I do good because it pleases God. Not because he might punish me - but because I love God and like to please him. And also it makes sense rationally. For instance I don't kill people. I do this because I value life. I value life because God is the author of life. And I want to be like him.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sum1hugme
I ground morality in reason, and not arbitrarily either. So I can do good things and be properly motivated without believing in a god.
Whatever does that mean? What type of "reason" do you ground it in? How do you know it is properly motivated?
Created:
Posted in:
Don't misunderstand me. But an Atheist can only do one thing. And I have been told this over and over on this forum. There is no Atheistic worldview. There are no atheistic doctrines. There are just atheists who ALL "don't believe in God". In fact this is their only - non-belief. LOL!
So if someone who calls themselves an Atheist - does good or is benevolent to someone - it is not the result of their atheism. In fact that would be impossible. Because if it was - then this would be implying that there are positive beliefs that flow from atheism. But we know that it is not true.
So how then can an atheist do good things if it does not flow from their atheistic view?
It is because they have to borrow from other worldviews - things like morality and goodness and well, everything for that matter. They are really a lot like leaches aren't they?
Atheists therefore only ever do good works and benevolent things when they borrow them from someone else. And given that there is not an atheistic worldview - it must flow from a non-atheistic worldview and understanding of the world. Atheists do good not because they are atheists but because they borrow from religious worldviews. Don't you love this?
So every time an atheist does anything good - they actually reveal a belief in god - and religion even if they with their mouths and their minds are atheists. This is such an amusing thing.
How will the Atheist rationalize this? Well we will wait and find out.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
Being benevolent and doing good does not have to be faith based or does it require a belief in god as you are trying to impress on us that it is/does. You will keep getting the same reply until you can prove otherwise.
So you concede the point then!!!!
Stevie Blunder, you don't have the courage to answer the questions, do you? LOL!
And we all know why. Because to answer the questions - reveals the deception of your own mind. LOL!
And Atheists do have a religious position. They don't believe in God. It takes more faith to be an atheist than to believe in God.
I never said atheists can't do good things. Atheists say it. In fact an Atheist can't do anything as an atheist except not believe in God. It is interesting isn't?
Atheists can only do one thing as an atheist. Once they do anything else - it can't be as an atheist. Hence, it must be as a non-atheist. Oh this is good.
So I might start saying that Atheists can't do good. In fact - it is impossible for them to do good as an atheist. That would be putting doctrines onto them.
You don't have an answer do you Stevie Blinder. I mean Blunder. ???????
Repeating the same answer is obviously your prerogative - but it is also revealing. -
Created:
-->
@Stephen
Being benevolent and doing good does not have to be faith based or does it require a belief in god as you are trying to impress on us that it is/does. You will keep getting the same reply until you can prove otherwise.
Ok Mr Smart Alec,
Is atheism a worldview? Yes or No.
If you say yes, what are the doctrines associated with it? Do those doctrines enable them to also do good? And as you answer - presenting such positive doctrines - then you by implication assert it is a worldview based on faith. LOL!
If no, then please shut up and stop being such a dunce. Because obviously if you are not one, then you are borrowing morals from somewhere. You can't have atheistic morals if you are not a worldview.
If Atheism is not a worldview - as almost every atheist will tell you, then every atheist in this world has no choice - no option - but to borrow from a worldview which is not atheistic - (because Atheism is not a worldview) - and therefore it borrows from one which has faith. Atheists deny faith - but over and over again - they consistently have to come back to it.
So please Stephen, where do you borrow yours from? Which religious position? LOL!
Created:
-->
@Stephen
Pointing out that you are a bully and have personal vendettas is not being a victim. It is calling you out as a bully and personal.
The fact is - you have been well and truly beaten up over a long period - and the only way you feel you can score a point is by attacking people. I can't recall the last time you actually persuasively refuted an argument. Against anyone.
Is that personal? Probably, I suppose I have been watching you too long.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
Odd that you also call your learned teacher "A Hebrew"
I agree it was odd. And as I reading it later - I thought why did I use that term? Still, Rosends knew what I intended to say. So I am not sure what else we can read into it.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
Firstly, everyone has faith -Prove it.Secondly, I am not denying that atheists can do good.NO. , what you are doing is implying that goodness and benevolence are linked explicitly to god and faith. Can you prove that?Atheists MUST borrow from other worldviews - worldviews logically which are religious.Opinion. And we are talking YOUR OWN religious views concerning benevolence and doing good and not my world views.You can't say atheism has no doctrines but is able to encourage people to do good."doctrines" are different all over the world as are religious doctrines. The difference being that you believe that your doctrines on benevolence and doing good stem from god and his laws, and I don't. As I have said, religion does not have the monopoly on whether or not a person can be benevolent and do good. This is simply a haughty claim made by the religious.Get well soon Reverend....all three of you.
Well that is a sorry lot of an excuse, isn't? I can't answer any of these questions Stephen until you answer mine. Can I?
How can I respond to you about good - until you tell us what good is -and why your definition is better than anyone else's?
Let us know what good is - why people ought to do it for the sake of doing good? Help us help you. Until you prove your own assertions, then is little point in me discussing faith and why it links to good. After all, you will simply produce a different understanding of good and why it can't possibly be linked to faith. So - you asserted first - it is your topic.
Please start.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Before I address your irrational claims in your Saturday Night Live skit in your comical post #175, you forgot to address the following in my post #174 like you usually do in your runaway status:
There is nothing in 174 to respond too. I await therefore for your response. I won't hold my breath though.
YOUR QUOTE THAT YOU WILL AGAIN RUN AWAY FROM, JUST WATCH!: "Hence, I am not running away from any question properly put in this forum. You on the other hand, find excuses and make all sorts of absurd reasons to run away."
Did you notice "any question properly put"? Questions which attack me personally are not questions properly put. Ask me questions about the religious matters on this forum. 99.99% of your questions are specifically personal. Hence I don't respond to them. I know you have a hard trouble keeping up - but even you should be able to comprehend the difference between any questions and proper questions. This of course is genuine reason not to respond.
TRADESECRET, or he/she/unknown, address your claim above that I have run away from your complete Bible stupidity with at least 10 examples. Whereas YOU as a "he/she/unknown," has run away from me ONE HUNDRED TIMES AND COUNTING, which has to be a record upon this Religion Forum!!!! LOL!
Please disclose how many of these so called hundreds of questions are non-personal attacks? I think it will be a big fat zero.
And here is just another example of your questions: tell us - is this non-personal or personal? When you figure that out - perhaps we can have a genuine discussion.
Tradesecret, how come you didn't address the FACT that you had your Satanic Ass handed to you by the moderators when you broke COC rules? LOL!!!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
So - for all the forum to see and witness - Brother Thomas HAS AVOIDED my questions. He is a chicken. and a coward.
Please answer my questions. Or else leave the thread and bully someone else.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
HEADLINE NEWS REGARDING TRADESECRET
Cool! Now I am famous. Keep it up Brother. Thanks for the references.
Tradesecrets mental state has now entered into a Satanic Realm by them actually stating as FACT, that the ever loving and forgiving JESUS IS RATIONAL when He committed abortions to innocent life, and would KILL babies that if born, and Jesus is rational in having His creation eat their children, and it is rational for Jesus to have had innocent babies smashed upon the rocks!!!
Sorry Brother, I was afraid you would misunderstand me (I know your logic is terrible and comprehension skills are sadly lacking) but I wanted to act in good faith that perhaps my view of you was incorrect. ) But here we go - I said - and I repeat God is rational. You produced some verses and asked me whether they were rational. I said yes. I then asked you how you could argue that it was irrational. Do you remember that question or have you just forgotten to answer it. AGAIN!
Your response might be interpreted as "No Tradesecret, I cannot explain why they are irrational - but I will try and bamboozle you with red herrings." Is there a reason why you cannot prove that they are irrational? Please explain to the forum why - cause and effect is not rational? That would be a good start. God said stop sinning or you will be destroyed. The people chose to keep sinning despite this reality. God destroyed them. Now, that is totally rational for God. The people who were destroyed acted irrationally didn't they? God said stop - they thumbed their nose at God. If I said to you as you were playing on the road - there is a truck coming and if you don't move - you will get run over? Is it rational or irrational for me to tell you to move? AND is it rational or irrational for you to thumb you nose at me?
Similarly, God telling people to stop sinning or your actions will result in people coming to attack you and kill your children and perhaps force you to eat your children, is that rational or irrational? Is it rational or irrational for people to keep sinning despite knowing that these things will happen? When God warns people and puts them on notice to stop sinning, it is very rational to do. In fact it would be cruel and vindictive and even arbitrary if God did not warn them. On the other hand, to ignore the warnings of God, because you don't believe in him, or because you think he is an idiot, or he won't do what he says he will do, is irrational. And Brother are clearly irrational because you choose to ignore the warnings from God.
As we are all aware, Tradesecret will RUN AWAY from this post of his above by saying that we are irrational if we do not accept his/her/unknown's horrific propositions as stated in said link shown above!
I am not running away. But I would like to know why you think that God was irrational. So far, you have just assumed that the things that happen in the above verses are irrational. You have not given a basis for this so called irrationality except for what you might consider to be a certain "yuck factor". Not a scrap. Of course I never thought you would. Not only are you irrational but you are dishonest.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
Any God that needs worship is a God that’s not worthy of worship.
Interesting comment, but what is the basis of that thought? It, respectfully, seems like you are defining what a god should be like or not like. Where does that come from? Just curious.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
Please explain why it is a ridiculous statement to say people should do good for the sake of doing good.Its not. I thought I made that clear.
Well, it looks like you said the opposite above. But pleased you clarify your position.
Doing good for goodness sake doesn't have to be linked to a faith . Doing good for the sake of it should be enough all on its own. Faith and Christianity does not have the monopoly on goodness or good deeds.
Everyone - including the atheist has faith. And everything they do flows from that faith or is borrowed from another. I am not talking about (a) faith in particular. But I still don't know why you think doing good for the sake of it is an answer to the question. Because it is not. That is simply a copout. Explain why it is "good enough all on its own". What is good for example? And why is your definition of "good" any better than someone else's definition of "good"? And why does it suddenly become something that should be done - "just for the sake of it"? There are any number of definition of what "good" is. The Taliban, taking control of Afghanistan is considered "good" by almost every member of the Taliban. I don't think it is good. And I have no doubt you have an opinion about whether it is good or not. This is your baby - your thread - at least do us the curtesy of explaining where you get your definition of good from and why people should do it "just for the sake of it".
Given I hold to the view that every person has Faith - it is ipso facto - true I don't think anyone has a monopoly on it. You have as much faith as I do. Faith is inescapable. And I certainly never said you did not do good or that you don't have morals. I indicated that the good you do - when you do good, is not something that flows from your faith because that would be irrational, but is in fact borrowed from another (without giving credit to that other faith). Atheism does not logically have the ability to produce good. Or to encourage good. How many times have we heard on this forum that atheism is neither a worldview nor anything more than isolated people around the world that share one thought - there is no god? Even according to it own thinkers - atheism is unable to encourage good. Therefore atheists - MUST borrow from another worldview.
And there it is, linking faith with doing good.ABSOLUTELY! And with both guns firing as well. Faith is at the bottom of everyone's thinking.Again, you are clearly speaking for others. Being and doing good is not necessarily always linked to faith or a good turn does not necessarily mean one is faithful to god as much as w you wish it to be. You are now clearly suggesting that a good turn comes about through one having a faith in god; this is utter bollocks. I know kind and generous atheists. One of my sisters was a prime example and to my annoyance at times.
Yes and your sister borrows from other worldviews in order to do "good" and to be "generous". It is not something that flows from being an atheist. I clearly did not say mean or intend or are even suggesting that a good turn comes about through having a faith in god. Again, you need to learn to read - rather than just bluster on.
People can and do, perform good benevolent things without faith and simply because they choose to do so.
Two things. Firstly, everyone has faith - not faith in god but in their own understanding of everything. Atheistic faith is real. It is irrational. But it is real.
Secondly, I am not denying that atheists can do good. I am just saying it is inconsistent with their own worldview - and that they have to borrow from other worldviews to that - and those other worldviews - must be religious by virtue of the fact that atheistic worldviews DENY implicitly any doctrine but the one that says "there is no god". You can't have it both ways. You can't say atheism has no doctrines but is able to encourage people to do good. To do so - is a contradiction. But once you start going down the line of logic which says atheists can do good - all by themselves and without faith - you have introduced a new doctrine. (Atheists don't believe in God AND Atheists can promote and encourage others to do good) But that would be to suggest that there are more than one doctrine. And that would then start to demonstrate that Atheism is not just about having "no faith" but is also having a positive position which implicitly is faith.
OF course it is a matter for you. Either you concede that atheism cannot encourage anyone to do good - or you concede the position that atheism is a worldview with positive faith. There are no other options. Atheists MUST borrow from other worldviews - worldviews logically which are religious.
Created:
-->
@FLRW
Notorious televangelist Jim Bakker and his church in southwestern Missouri was ordered to pay $156,000 in restitution to viewers of his religious talk show who were convinced into purchasing a fake Covid cure during the early stages of the pandemic.
And so they should be. Anyone - religious or not - should not be taking advantage of people's fears. I think their show - if it is still running - ought to be shut down for a while as well.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
Yes, I studied in an university which had a variety of different religious figures.It is none of your business.You make it the business of others from the moment that you declared freely your back story to the www that now all of a sudden includes being tutored in Hebrew by a Hebrew among your other claims to fame. No doubt you will complain about what it is that YOU have freely chosen to reveal about yourself at a later date. you just can't help yourself. I have told you, when one of your other personas makes these claims on your behalf they will always fall back on you, the Reverend "Tradey" Tradesecrete.At least I am consistent with my worldview - unlike you - who is in denial - and irrational.I don't believe there is anything irrational about my own beliefs where these ambiguous half stories that make up the scriptures are concerned. You believe that a three days old rotten stinking corpse rose from the dead, I don't. I have never witnessed this alleged phenomena and neither have you. Yet you question the minds of those those that don't believe it and their "irrationality"?At least I am consistent with my worldviewAnd so am I until something causes me to change my world view. And it is not your "world view" that I am bringing into question is it thicko? No. What I bring into question are these unreliable ambiguous half stories that go to make up the scriptures.
Please just keep to the topic. You know it is against the rules to derail people's threads with your personal vendettas.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
Yes, I studied in an university which had a variety of different religious figures. So what? In order for me to study Hebrew, I needed a teacher. That he was a Hebrew was a bonus.
Good for you. And So what? It is none of your business.
At least I am consistent with my worldview - unlike you - who is in denial - and irrational.
Created: