Total posts: 5,875
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Whether either of us believes in God is immaterial. We want to discuss whether such killings would be moral or not in the context of Christianity.
No one needs to be a believer for us to be able to do so. We don't care that you don't believe in God. Please stop degrading every discussion with the same obsessive stupidity about God not existing.
At the very least, make your own thread. But we can discuss ANY subject, theoretical or actual. We don't need you always knee-jerking to a "does god exist?" argument every time someone wants to discuss religion on the religion board.
You've told us what you believe several times. Thanks, but no one cares. We want to discuss other things than just your obsession. God need not be actual for a theoretical discussion to take place. But your mind should be able to deal with intellectual discussions other than just the tired, "god doesn't exist" clunker.
So, start your own God doesn't exist thread, but if you don't, and enter the thread of another, contribute to the discussion instead of simply insisting in every thread of every topic, that God doesn't exist.
On topic or gtfo.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@T_Rocks
T_Rocks? T_Rocks? Where are you?
In the last instance, the member quit in disgust.
Stop lying. The post was directed to T_Recks, a banned alt of yours. He didn't quit. He was banned.
...offensive behavior has gone way beyond the pale.
You will tell a girl her behavior is skanky as you rape her? Buy a clue loser. You're continuously violating CoC to tell me I'm violating?
Lol. Your obsession has really screwed up your brain.
T_Rocks, where are you? Not banned again certainly. You're the ethical one with integrety, where are you?
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
And then your next sentence says "they" would be citizens. Who was rejected?My implication is that with a functioning system, there would be a legal method they could use.
If you remove any chance of a legal method all you are doing is guaranteeing that they will use an illegal one. You are creating criminals.
The stupidity of this kind of liberal thinking cannot be overemphasized. So if a woman removes any chance of a legal method of sex with her, all she is doing is guaranteeing that men will use an illegal one?
No foreigner has any right to immigrate here. Nothing excuses illigality. And it is not the home owners fault for not providing a "legal" way for the burglar to satisfy his desire. You cannot possibly be this stupid.
I said give them a legal path they could follow,...
There is. The US has a functioning immigration service. Many thousands use it every year. The illegals don't want to use it, because they know that with no skills or education, they are likely to be rejected.
you choose to believe I said "let all of them move here" which is not what i said at all.
I go by what you say HB. You seem to believe that the only thing that should qualify an immigrant for entry is that he WANTS to come in.
Hardly any of the economic immigrants now sneaking into the country should be allowed in. Even legally. They are not an asset but a burden on the country.
...well at least you are finally showing your true racist colors.
And what "race" am I against HB? Beat a liberal in a logical debate, and you magically transform into a bigot, a racist, a homophone, or a misogynist.
...those are countries, not groups of people.
Then how is saying "Afghani primitives" racist? My accent was on "primitives", but the racist among us, you, focused on the "racial" part.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@T_Wreck
@T_Recks
@T_Rocks
T_Rocks? T_Rocks?
I do have sound ethics and morals...
Then why do you keep getting banned? And why do you keep violating the rules if you have sound ethics and morals? You're just a troll T_Rocks.
[ I ] do not like seeing new members (who want to have their fair say) quiting in disgust from you directly bullying them with intimidating lies and accusations.
Did you like them being banned as alts of Willows? Let's compare, how many new members have quit compared to how many of your sock puppets have been banned.
....hurl it at me and keep innocent people (new members) out of it.
OK. T_Rocks? T_Rocks? Every time I respond to one of your "new members", he's been banned as a alt of the ethical and moral Willows. Imagine if that loser troll was not ethical and moral?
You are very fond of using the word "compulsive"...
Hey loser, you are posting this from like your 20th sock puppet! Buy a clue why don't cha! Lol. Oh, goodness, this is rich.
I witnessed the whole thing happen with you and Harikari gratuitously exchanging some of the most revolting, offensive, bigoted, racist prose that could ever be written;
You didn't just witness. You chimed in with your own racism, supporting the racist every step of the way.
But the way you are carrying on is the same as what finally precipitated the mass exodus of existing members and lack of new members from DDO.
It wasn't you and the moron hari attacking every poster to the religion forum with racist mono-topic nonsense? Really? You brought your stupidity here and was promptly banned. I'm still here.
Wait, I'm a disciple of the site, that explains it right? That explains why I'm here, but it doesn't explain why you keep making sock puppets after you get banned.
For God's sake, sit up and listen to others for once.
T_Rocks? T_Rocks? I think some one's trying to tell you something. Maybe you should follow your own advice and listen?
Compulsion is insidious.
Created:
Posted in:
Tyran_R
Profile is banned
Banned from: 04.05.2020 06:38AM
Banned until: 08.22.2047 06:38AM
Banned by: Ragnar
Ban reason: Alt of Willows.
... I do applaud the naming convention, full hand clap, which is something a T-Rex can't do.
Willows was banned but as you know he is compulsive, so has been making sock puppets and spamming his usual stupidity till he is caught and the fake account deleted. Then he does it again with another sock puppet, all the while claiming he's on a crusade against Christianity. - Ethan
I think that Ethongs days of ......[snip]...... making blithering mistakes and outright lying are very numbered. - Tyran_R, banned alt of Willows
Lol! First Hindu hari, then dee dee, then this. I must be doing something right.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
Athias, have mercy. Perhaps you should argue with half your brain tied behind your back. That wouldn't make it fair, but it might make it less of a mismatch.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Sooooo, is your problem that God kills, or that He didn't submit a reason to you explaining why He killed?
I mean, if He had given you a reason, would you be OK with His killing? If not, then why even mention at all that no reason was given?
The OP is like when you read a rant by a 15 year old against the "outrage" of his parents grounding him for having sex when his parents have sex too.
There is nothing to do except just wait for the lad to get older and become less immature.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
It's almost like the bible was written without the year 3751 in mind.
Would that be the year 3751 by the Hebrew calendar, the Arabic calendar, or the Chinese calendar?
.......Oops! ...D'oh!
What amazes me, is not that a person can be this dumb, but that they feel OK to parade that dumbness like a crown.
It's. It's crazy.
Lol. OK Deb-8-a-beavis. There is another word that fits better than crazy.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
Because they are according to the system of measurement used back then.Well why state that they were 900 plus?
Why not state that God built the universe in 872, 492, 462 man made days then he rested for 78,305 days.
1. Because the bible is not stupid. 2. Because the length of time set by man changes over time. 3. Because since even children could figure it out, the bible didn't need to waste the time explaining to the obtuse. 4. Because the ages of the men was immaterial to the message of the story.
I know this is hard for you to believe, but reality doesn't reside between your ears. Really.
Created:
Posted in:
Sorry to see you go Speed. But I know you'll do good and be back even more educated. I'll leave you with this verse.
1Ti 4:12 - Don’t let anyone look down on you because you are young, but set an example for the believers in speech, in conduct, in love, in faith and in purity.
Good luck.
Created:
Posted in:
Things like making noah and adam 900 years old is beautiful for the making yourself believe a under 10,000 year old universe really means 14 bill.
Watching people struggle over this simple idea is like watching someone struggle to break out of a wet paper bag.
If I ask you, how many years old was someone before the number of days in a year was determined and fixed?
This is something even children can figure out, but the atheist becomes a blazing idiot the moment the bible is mentioned.
The ages of Adam and Noah cannot correspond one to one with our years because the 12 month, 365 day year had not been established in their time. The ages of Noah and Adam do not represent our years.
But even telling these geniuses this is futile. They are invested in the "error" and will not give it up.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
Out of that construct, adding that a logical argument cannot be made to prove a negative, what proof do you expect? It does not help to propose a logical cat's cradle.
He's fully aware of the illogic in his argument fauxlaw.
His payday is when he claims, "there has been no evidence to the contrary" forthcoming."
No evidence of what? That atheist cannot prove God doesn't exist, and that theists can't prove God exists.
But, as Athias demonstrated, this is nonsense, as non-existence cannot be "proven", and his claim that "no evidence to the contrary" is forthcoming, is a lie.
What he means is that he accepts no evidence, which is a very different thing from no evidence actually existing.
He claims there is absolutely no evidence, but cannot explain why so many millions over so many centuries have believed otherwise.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tyran_R
And yet your sock puppets keep getting deleted. What am I getting wrong loser?Getting things horribly wrong.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Interesting how you ignored all the relevant statistical data in my previous post.
It was not relevant. You wanted to divert us from the point.
And the attempts at refutation that you did give were, it has to be said, complete nonsense.
There was nothing to refute. What you said had nothing to do with my point.
Statistics as presented are not based on conversion, that's just a foolish claim.
Your stats meant nothing to my argument. The bible is convincing, and bunching people up who have never considered the bible as those who have not been convinced is deceptive.
Children born to Christians will be counted as Christians as those born to Muslims will be regarded as Muslim etc.
Nonsense. Counted by whom? We are talking about how people self identify.
Your argument seems to have reduced to wild self affirming claims.
Because you are unable to follow an argument that has several steps.
And a multitude remains a multitude.
No one said it wasn't Einstein. What you tried to imply multitude represented was a lie. Your multitude did not represent people not convinced by Christianity.
And your bias cannot change reality.
My bias doesn't have to. Christianity IS the most persuasive religion on earth, and millions have found enough evidence for it. My bias wouldn't want to change that even if it could.
And your argument is not a lie....it is just the same old unprovable assumption.
If it was unprovable, I wouldn't be able to point out reality that verifies it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
No worries, you will find that for someone who has not known him for more than six years, I'm very knowledgeable about what that troubled man will do.
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
Please stop being dishonest. Look at this. You said to pie,....
You simply want to reject all of them out of fear.
Did he ever say he wanted to reject every immigrant? No. But yet you were able to accuse him of it.
Now, let's look at what you said.
Post #53
if there was a functioning immigration system then they
(They who? Illegal immigrants)
could simply do it legally without any need for a coyote.(do what?) Then they would be paying taxes like any other citizen.(Become citizens silly!)
Your implication here is that with a "functioning immigration system", THEY would become citizens. Does that sound like you think any of "them" would/should be rejected?
Or again here in post #55
It seems like the logical solution to what you are complaining about is to make them citizens so they can pay the same taxes as everyone else. Problem solved.
Which immigrants are you rejecting HB? Looks like none of them.
Then this post #77
i want to change the laws of the land so that those "foreigners" can become citizens who will then pay into the system too.
Which "foreigners"? The illegal immigrants who sneak into the country. Tell us, who are you restricting HB? It is clear you want ALL of them brought in.
But you will lie when pressed because, just like Bernie and the DNC, you want to hide your true intent.
You think America has an economic problem of not enough tax payers, and that importing busloads of Afghani primitives will solve the problem. You said so and I can quote where you said so.
Stop lying.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ATroubledMan
Think loser. What exactly are you reporting?
Do you really think that for the first time in your online history, things are going to end differently for you?
Lol. And if the mods banned me, what would happen to your obsession and stalking of me? Who would you fixiate on?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ATroubledMan
Sure I am Willows.
I may have the record for most posts reported from a sock puppet account.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
...so we did the math Supa. He's the 1%.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ATroubledMan
Wouldn't it be better if you used all of your sock puppets?
Created:
Posted in:
We all observe it every time you make another sock puppet and post to yourself.I observe a lack of intelligence being posted on these forums.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
What dodge?
This one...
If God's "wrath" was because of Adam & Eve's lack of knowledge of good and evil, was it not expressed when they actually did lack that knowledge?
He'll dodge answering your great question.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DebateArt.com
The mobile version has far less info per page and requires me to employ several more clicks to get to the same info.
Now it takes me longer and sometimes I go into the forum only to find there has been no activity, and that time spent going in has been wasted.
The end result for me will be that I will only go into the religion and DART boards and ignore the other boards unless I get a notification from one of them.
I figure the change to less information was to force members to stay longer on the site, and require them to check other boards than their usual to see if there are new posts?
The new design looks fresher and cleaner, but it's less functional, at least on the mobile version. I got my phone browser set to display only the desktop version.
I'm going to bump those tiny buttons by accident more often, but the greater information at a glance is a worthwhile trade off.
Created:
Posted in:
Lol. OK Clyde.I have not been banned....
You create sock puppets as a hobby.
Lol!
I will report you to the moderators...
Which account will you use to do so?
Created:
Posted in:
The same ones who banned you?I have no problem contacting the moderators...
I have no problem contacting the moderators...
Nor do you have a problem making sock puppets apparently.
(I couldn't decide on one response so I posted both)
They have assured me you will abide by the rules here, so it would be best for you to heed their warning.
Perhaps I should create a fake account and spam the board. Would they like that?
Created:
Posted in:
Christians are not born, they are converted.
While it's technically true that all children are born atheist in that they lack a belief in God, children who are born and raised to be Christians...
Christians are not born, they are converted....
From the darkness of atheism to the glorious light of Christianity.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
If God's "wrath" was because of Adam & Eve's lack of knowledge of good and evil, why was it not expressed when they actually did lack that knowledge?
Can you feel that dodge coming on?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RoderickSpode
Stephen just came off a 15 day ban and seems not to have learned anything. He will probably leave soon.Does Stephen = Disgusted/Bulproof? Or possibly GoldTop?
Disgusted/Bulproof was just permanently banned. Goldtop is around but has seen the writing on the wall, so is tiptoes through the tulips.
It seems this Caligula character is a reoccurring role here.
Yes. But we now have a mod team that is simply not taking that nonsense anymore.
Willows was banned but as you know he is compulsive, so has been making sock puppets and spamming his usual stupidity till he is caught and the fake account deleted. Then he does it again with another sock puppet, all the while claiming he's on a crusade against Christianity.
Currently he's "Atroubledman", but he sometimes makes other sock puppets to spam encouragements to himself.
You should have been here for a character calling himself BrotherDThomas, he was hilarious till he got banned. If you ever have time to waste, look up his old posts.
Both Willows and the moron hari are still on DDO spamming and trolling themselves on the empty dead board.
I think there's a law that every site must have at least one Caligula character moron in residence. They take that stuff quite seriously.
Created:
Posted in:
No, I'll wait till I get banned and then create sock puppets over and over to ask members in good standing how come they don't contribute.
Lol!
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Liberals believe multiculturalism is a high standard of living, so if your neighborhood is flooded with Rwandan bushmen and Yemeni goat herders, your standard of living went up.
All cultures are not equal dude. Some cultures are absolute shit.
My God! That is racist!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
You forgot to mention singing groups. Deb has a fixation on singing groups.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Untrue. Unfortunately for you, Christians are not born, they are converted, so a simple increase in world population should not necessarily translate into an increase in the number of Christians.If the world population continues to expand then the numbers of those regarded as "Christian" will inevitably expand also.
Atheists can be born, so an increase in world population will result in an increase in the number of atheists. But unlike Christians, a decrease in the worlds population would necessarily mean a decrease in the worlds atheists. Whereas the number of Christians could actually increase in a world with a decreasing population.
All of which can rightly be regarded as multitudes.
Untrue. You claimed they were multitudes who had considered the bible and had failed to be convinced. That is a lie my friend. Very few of them have considered the bible. Many of them have no experience with the bible. Still my point is true, Christianity is the most convincing religion on Earth. That's why you're running away from it.
Nonetheless, no amount of statistical manipulation will validate a religious text.
Your bias cannot change reality. If more people are convinced of one text over another, that text is validated for convinsibility.
And statistical manipulation is you trying to say that every non-christian is a person who has not been convinced by the Bible.
If your argument is valid, why do you need to lie?
Created:
Posted in:
Now the loon is breaking into the site, spamming, stalking and sock puppeting because as a victim, he will not simply pack-up and go away. Lol!
I can't break CoC with you loser. You aren't a member, you're a squatter.
Created:
Posted in:
Notice Gentle Reader, that some atheists have left the topic and are now arguing about how many people go to church!
I'm embarrassed to say that makes my thread title look like a lie. I guess I should have titled it, "Some Atheists Are Not Stupid".
Others go into a sock puppet feeding frenzy, posting what they view as antichristian data, but is just off topic silliness.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SkepticalOne
..an argument against the virtue of innocence if ever I heard one! 😝
This exact point is asked in the bible! And Paul deals with the contention.
This board would be much more quiet if atheists only read what they so oppose.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
If he had any sense, he would be ashamed.
Lol. What a flogging.
Created:
-->
@ILikePie5
How many foreigners?
HB wants every single one that wants in, to be let in.
Enough so that my standard of living decreases, or do you deny that that’s not going to happen?
Liberals believe multiculturalism is a high standard of living, so if your neighborhood is flooded with Rwandan bushmen and Yemeni goat herders, your standard of living went up.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
The bible is an inanimate book that cannot convince anyone of anything.
Untrue. I know people convinced just by reading it. The world is not your little atheist bubble.
It's people who influence people.
It also people who influence people.
And one doesn't need statistical data to quantify a multitude.
All I asked was how did you know. It seems you have no metric for your claim. That is OK. I just wanted to on record you have no evidence.
And it's a fact, that most people who loosely regard themselves as Christian have never read the bible.
Most people who loosely regard themselves as christian..... Loosely act as christian? Can the class say tautology?
For most of them all that Christianity means, is dressing up and doing a bit of singing on a Sunday morning.
So you take out a minority and say they are not devout. So? Even they were convinced.
The atheist claim that Christianity is shrinking is just semantic nonsense. The total number of Christians on Earth grew in 2017.
Talk about an ad popullum fallacy.
Only an idiot or a liar would say every non-christian calls the bible unconvincing. Buddhists accept the bible, Islam accepts the bible. Even some atheists accept the bible.
So anyone using a figure of 5.6 Billion a the number unconvinced is lying or just ignorant. Many of them are restricted from considering the bible by laws in their country.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Laws themselves are situational and applied subjectively. But principlesnever are.
This is like asking me to validate how boys are never girls. Principles never areBut principles never are"....can you validate this?
situational because they cover every situation. So laws are applied to individual situations based on the principle.
A moral principle is an idea.... That's the way a data construct works.
Data constructs are your undefined nonsense.
So, who's idea is the moral principle?
No one, if it is to be truly objective.
Variable actors = variable intent + variable relationships = variable morality or a variable moral assumption.
This is why we need a moral standard based on principle.
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
We don't need to buy tacos for Pedro.Taxes are a necessary part of every society to pay for the services we all need.
but this debate is about bring immigrants into america.
Untrue. This debate is about AOC and her liberal loonies wanting services for illegal aliens.
They then are Americans, not foreigners.
No one becomes American simply by breaking into the country.
They then pay into the system too and then we can do more good and help more people.
If they are legal and skilled, not when they are illegal and illiterate.
Most illegal immigrants would have absolutely done it legally if there was a functioning immigration system they could have used.
Nonsense. What stopped them? How do you know what they would have done? How difficult is it to present yourself at the border and say, "I wish to immigrate to America."?
If you want to reform the immigration system so that these people can actually do it legally, then I would be onboard for stricter rules around doing it illegally
Listen to what you're saying! You will only be in favor of enforcing current immigration law if we change immigration to let in everyone who wants in to come in! How is that functionally different from open borders?
no, i want to change the laws of the land so that those "foreigners" can become citizens who will then pay into the system too.
You want to open the borders. You can play around with words, but that is exactly what you want.
First, you put "foreigners" in quotes. Why? They ARE foreigners! You don't think they are.
Second, why do you want more backwards foreigners from backwards cultures to become citizens?
Third, why can't the money spent be spent on people who are already citizens? America owes nothing to every economic migrant who sneaks into the country.
Focus on Americans first. Enforce the laws made by bipartisan legislation. Stop hobbling your country for political gain.
Created:
Posted in:
How do we know that vanilla is the most popular ice cream flavor? Because the most people prefer it.
Our genius calls this a fallacy.
No wonder he needs sock puppets.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
And the bible being unconvincing is evidenced by the multitude of people unconvinced by it.
How do you know the amount of people unconvinced by it? I know the number of people convinced by it by the number of converts it makes each year. What's your metric?
For every argument there is a counter argument.
Sure, but not every counter argument is good. Just being counter is not enough. It must be logical, not just counter.
The bible convinces more people than any other religion on Earth. It has been doing so for centuries. Only a fool or a fake would call the bible unconvincing.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SkepticalOne
The Bible being the infallible word of a god is like preference for a particular ice cream flavor?
No. The bible being convincing is evidenced by the multitude of people convinced by it. Just like the evidence of vanilla being the favorite flavor is evidenced by the majority of people who prefer it.
This argument is simple common sense, but to a semi-leterate, it's the ad popullum fallacy.
If one was to say, "vanilla is the best flavor because most people prefer it." That would be the fallacy. But I'm saying what is plainly obviously true, vanilla is the clear favorite, and that is validated by the fact that most people prefer it. That has nothing to do with truth or what is the best.
Interesting. I agree.
Lol. That you agree with youself is hardly surprising.
It's not a matter of objectivity, but personal preference - at least for those who consider it to be perfect.
OK. That is a whole different argument, and I suspect you want to go there because you've lost the one relating to the OP.
I needn't counter it as I see nothing wrong with it. People are free and right to choose anything on whatever criteria they find acceptable.
But the astounding accomplishments of the bible and Christianity remain, and I think that has influenced why it has become the dominant religion.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SkepticalOne
So, spiritual corruption equates to bad deeds, and good deeds are individual based?
No. Spiritual corruption is a bad state. Our "Good" deeds are often selfish and deceitful. None of us do good deeds, even our "good deeds" are not righteous. And good deeds do not make anyone righteous.
In other words, bad actions are due to a spiritual chasm, but anyone can do good deeds regardless of the spiritual distance from god?
Sure. Jesus once said that even sinners know how to gave their children a fish and not a serpent when they are hungry.
That might be plausible if "there is no one that does good" wasn't written regarding non-believers.
Sorry, you've been so reasonable up to now, I forgot you are one of those atheists who thinks words cannot have more than one meaning in the bible.
The bible includes Christians when it says no one does good. And the bible accentuates that by repeating, "No, not one."
But the bible uses the word "do"in different senses. For example, just because I do occassionally drive, doesn't make me a driver.
The occasional good deed I do does not make me dooer of righteousness. The bible calls our good deed, filthy rags. None of us are righteous, not the atheist, or the theist.
After all, you've agreed atheists do good things.
That has never been in dispute. But those "good things" the bible calls "filthy rags" when judged by God's standard of righteousness.
And worse, even if they were really "good deeds", they still would not make us righteous.
Our righteousness comes from faith in Jesus Christ, not from our deeds, so that no one can boast of earning his righteousness.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SkepticalOne
The original verse you cited from the Bible explicitly contradicts your understanding.
Sorry, I don't see how.
Switching to a different (and weaker) translation to avoid this is disingenuous:
Huh?
They are corrupt; (therefore) their deeds are vile; / there is no one who does good.”
Or, if you prefer,
They are corrupt; (and) their deeds are vile; / there is no one who does good.”
We already know that the bible says it is our spiritual corruption that is the source of our vile deeds.
Deeds = actions
Agreed, but corruption is state, not action.
Eph 2:1 - As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins,
Eph 2:2 - in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient.
Eph 2:3 - All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our flesh and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature deserving of wrath.
Eph 2:4 - But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy,
Eph 2:5 - made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved.
Eph 2:7 - in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus.
Eph 2:8 - For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—
Eph 2:9 - not by works, so that no one can boast.
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
I can only go by what you say HB. You said,
I have no idea why people on the right argue we can't spend money doing something good because there is some other good thing we could do. The answer is really simple, put taxes at a reasonable level and then do both.
Surely you know we can't do every good? Surely you know that America doesn't have enough money to do all the good there is? Your comments here implies you don't.
Here is what you liberals never address. First, it isn't your money. It isn't "free" money. Someone worked for that money and it belongs to them.
Second, since it is true that the resource is limited, the priority should be on American citizens, not foreigners.
Third, when you are pressed, you start talking about "legal immigrants", but throughout your prior argument, it is obvious you see no immigrants as illegal.
You disrespect the laws of the land, and want to force citizens to pay for illegal foreigners who break the law.
Sometimes I wish Sanders would win just so liberals could see the complete disaster his liberal policies would cause America. Then I realize, as history has shown, liberals would simply weave up some illogical rationalization to explain the failure and remain in their delusion.
Thank god he can't possibly win.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SkepticalOne
Unless it is your contention that those who accept Jesus are perfect or that they cannot be forgiven for sins done in this acceptance (which I dont think you believe), rejecting Jesus so that one might 'live in sin' is unnecessary.
I doubt anyone rejects Jesus so that they might live in sin. The bible says they do not have a love of the truth.
Believers are no more righteous (or no less depraved - however you want to look at it) than non-believers.
No, it actually depends on how you look at it. Believers have the righteousness of Jesus imputed to them. We are all unrighteous though.
Accepting Jesus does little to prevent awful people from being awful.
Sure it does. There are hundreds of stories(some I know personally) of awful people who were changed by the power of the word of God.
Also, the verse you cited in the OP was in reference to non-believers, not all humanity. However, I accept the Bible holds humanity to be depraved, so I'll not quibble over this.
Good move. You'd lose that point.
As pointed out above (and conceded by you) believers and non-believers are capable of good and bad actions.
Yes, the bible clearly says so.
This conflicts with the Biblical characterization of atheists: "They are corrupt; their deeds are vile;” So which is it?
When the bible says, "they are corrupt, and do not receive the love of the truth", it isn't talking about actions, it's talking about a state.
Atheist can be righteous or is there "no one who does good"?
An atheist can do good deeds, but the bible is clear that good deeds make no one righteous. Not even theists.
You can't sit on the fence on this one. Either the Bible is wrong or atheists do no good.
Or you simply don't understand the doctrine. The bible is more concerned with our state than our actions.
The atheist refuses to have the righteousness of Jesus, the only truly righteous one, imputed to them. They declare that they will lean on their own righteousness.
You seem not to be aware that you are describing the exact problem with humanity that the bible points out.
Though we can sometimes do good things, we are not righteous. God must address our unrighteous state, not just our sins.
The bible mentions Christians who will truthfully recount to Jesus all the good things they did, but will still not be accepted as righteous.
The righteous will be the ones who put on the righteousness of Jesus, to cover them like a shield. So the bible is not saying that the atheist behaves less righteously, it's saying the atheist has no shield.
Created: