Jump to content

a case for christ


Recommended Posts

Yeah, you are wrong on all counts. Enjoy your ignorance mister studly.
I'm more than willing to be educated. If you find any aspect in which I posted something incorrect, feel free to provide a reference - you know, the same way I've done when I've corrected a few of your many howlers.
How about we start with every aspect? That seems like a good place.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 866
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I'm more than willing to be educated. If you find any aspect in which I posted something incorrect, feel free to provide a reference - you know, the same way I've done when I've corrected a few of your many howlers.
How about we start with every aspect? That seems like a good place.
I guess you don't understand what a reference is. What that means is, you take a specific point on which you think I'm wrong, and you show me what I need to look up to correct that error. For example, when you made the claim that the bible doesn't discuss slavery, and I gave you half a dozen verses to look up and educate yourself if you're so inclined, that's what giving a reference means. If it turns out that you completely ignore that reference and switch to blanket insults, then that's OK - at least I know that none of your points are actually fact-based.So go ahead, pick one single point on which you think I'm wrong, and post your stuff. If it's all as clear as you seem to believe, then it'll convince me of the error of my ways, or at least let everybody reading know that your case is built on something stronger than personal attacks and wishful thinking.Of course, this isn't the first time I've gone over this material, so I'm not really expecting you to show anything new. But hey, I enjoy a good surprise as much as the next guy, so go ahead - surprise me.
Link to post
Share on other sites

The bible does discuss slavery!!! But if you actually knew the bible you would know that in the new testament it actually talks about treating a servant as you would yourself!!! Jesus washed the apostles feet for a reason- he was leading by example, showing that even the son of god could abase himself and serve another. Remember, the old law was nailed to the cross, so there are things in the old testament that no longer apply. I realize you do not know that by what you say, and your biblical ideas are so convoluted that to be honest to actually reply to some of this random bologna is pointless- seriously, slavery? Slavery? All the things you could come up with and you want to talk about treatment of slaves? Think about that one- when it comes to that God was actually pretty fair. When his own people rejected him he let the egyptians enslave them for how many years? Equal opportunity, baby. Hey, by the way, that is also backed up by egyptian historical reference, which they were very good at- that era ended with the parting of the red sea, which coincides with a break of time in egyptian historical reference, which is weird, because they kept track of EVERYTHING. Seems like, I don't know, what the bible said happened actually did? ( The egyptian army being wiped out, firstborn being killed, blah blah blah blah- the egyptians were basically ravaged by god, took years for them to recover. ) For the record, I never pick and choose- you do. You have too, it is the only way to even possibly hold on to the idea that the bible is not of god.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The possibility of God's role in evolution is pointless to discuss. All the "scientific" evidence for it is bullsh*t. There is no actual evidence. The discussion of evolution and the discussion of creation are mutually exclusive. There is no common ground, they are separate discussions.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The possibility of God's role in evolution is pointless to discuss.  All the "scientific" evidence for it is bullsh*t.  There is no actual evidence.  The discussion of evolution and the discussion of creation are mutually exclusive.  There is no common ground, they are separate discussions.
I know that God is the creator of all things- Did he create the car? No, but he created the mechanism which created the car so he is the author of all things- if evolution happens, then I know that God being the creator is behind it, and that it is part of the overall plan that he has- so, it would not be evolution at all, nothing random about it- just part of Gods plan. Sorry, Tim, you cannot win in this arena- only one of me and you are waaaayyyyy outgunned.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Faith is superstitions greatest weapon against reason.It can make otherwise brilliant men defend absurditiy and spout idiocy.
It can make poorly armed men defeat an overly powerful army also. It is called FAITH.
Link to post
Share on other sites
The possibility of God's role in evolution is pointless to discuss. All the "scientific" evidence for it is bullsh*t. There is no actual evidence. The discussion of evolution and the discussion of creation are mutually exclusive. There is no common ground, they are separate discussions.
I know that God is the creator of all things- Did he create the car? No, but he created the mechanism which created the car so he is the author of all things- if evolution happens, then I know that God being the creator is behind it, and that it is part of the overall plan that he has- so, it would not be evolution at all, nothing random about it- just part of Gods plan. Sorry, Tim, you cannot win in this arena- only one of me and you are waaaayyyyy outgunned.
You made my point. Your only grounds for belief is that you 'know it.' Clearly there is no room for a discussion And I'm not sure I understand what you mean that I am outgunned. You are the one afraid of science.
Link to post
Share on other sites
The possibility of God's role in evolution is pointless to discuss. All the "scientific" evidence for it is bullsh*t. There is no actual evidence. The discussion of evolution and the discussion of creation are mutually exclusive. There is no common ground, they are separate discussions.
I know that God is the creator of all things- Did he create the car? No, but he created the mechanism which created the car so he is the author of all things- if evolution happens, then I know that God being the creator is behind it, and that it is part of the overall plan that he has- so, it would not be evolution at all, nothing random about it- just part of Gods plan. Sorry, Tim, you cannot win in this arena- only one of me and you are waaaayyyyy outgunned.
You made my point. Your only grounds for belief is that you 'know it.' Clearly there is no room for a discussion And I'm not sure I understand what you mean that I am outgunned. You are the one afraid of science.
You don't get do you??? It is called FAITH.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Faith is superstitions greatest weapon against reason.It can make otherwise brilliant men defend absurditiy and spout idiocy.
It can make poorly armed men defeat an overly powerful army also. It is called FAITH.
Yes. Like when the poorly armed men struck right on US soil killing thousands of citizens on 9/11. Very, very good point.Good ol' FAITH.Fucking moron.
Link to post
Share on other sites
The possibility of God's role in evolution is pointless to discuss. All the "scientific" evidence for it is bullsh*t. There is no actual evidence. The discussion of evolution and the discussion of creation are mutually exclusive. There is no common ground, they are separate discussions.
I know that God is the creator of all things- Did he create the car? No, but he created the mechanism which created the car so he is the author of all things- if evolution happens, then I know that God being the creator is behind it, and that it is part of the overall plan that he has- so, it would not be evolution at all, nothing random about it- just part of Gods plan. Sorry, Tim, you cannot win in this arena- only one of me and you are waaaayyyyy outgunned.
You made my point. Your only grounds for belief is that you 'know it.' Clearly there is no room for a discussion And I'm not sure I understand what you mean that I am outgunned. You are the one afraid of science.
Yeah- those stupid people who's grounds for belief is knowing something- what morons!! They go around and study there bible, reason through the scriptures, look at the facts and the flaws in religions, compare belief systems, rationalize why there is a God and why there isn't, realize why the idea that God did not create man and the earth and all the elements in it, is just profoundly absurd- no intellect, just happenstance, which cannot be proven- but look into the brain, look at the way the body works together as a whole, look at the intricacys and then realize that when you die it goes back to being dirt, which is essentially what we are, we are made up of the same things that are in dirt!!! The best part?? That was written by a man thousands of years ago who in no way at that time could have possibly know that we came from dirt, and here we are 1000's of years later, turns out dude was right- we are just dirt. Hmmmmm...... looks like that's one more point for the divinity of the bible. See, Mr. Wakefield you are outgunned because your knowledge is limited- you do not know the bible anymore than something you pulled off of a website condemning it, not even close to a worthy opponent and I don't mean that to belittle you but at least when Smash and I squared off on this a few weeks back he had actual issues with the bible that I could look into for him and try and explain- what are your issues? Throw me some questions and I will answer everyone, have I not done that? I am not afraid of science, just acutely aware of how fallible it is- it constantly changes whereas God does not. I am quite comfortable being skeptical of science, even scientists are skeptical of there own work, there very job at times is to prove that something that they once believed was the truth is in fact not- why do you think science books for all ages of curriculum change so often? God is not the author of that kind of confusion, only man could be. Which is why you are how you are- I do not fault you for it, I understand it.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Faith is superstitions greatest weapon against reason.It can make otherwise brilliant men defend absurditiy and spout idiocy.
Misplaced faith I would have to agree with you- I would be in a tough spot if I had to defend Cathlocism right now that is for sure. Spademan, I respect you- give me your reasons why God should not be a player in your life, if you would, so I can get a feel for where you are coming from. Alot of what you say has to do with acts of extremists- most people of any kind of faith do not condone these things, you realize that, right?
Link to post
Share on other sites
Faith is superstitions greatest weapon against reason.It can make otherwise brilliant men defend absurditiy and spout idiocy.
Misplaced faith I would have to agree with you- I would be in a tough spot if I had to defend Cathlocism right now that is for sure. Spademan, I respect you- give me your reasons why God should not be a player in your life, if you would, so I can get a feel for where you are coming from. Alot of what you say has to do with acts of extremists- most people of any kind of faith do not condone these things, you realize that, right?
Dangit. You asked in a civil tone forcing me to respond in a civil tone.No fun.Now to it, your question, “give me your reasons why God should not be a player in your life", is what is called a complex (or loaded) question.That is to say, a logical fallacy, specifically "a question that assumes more than the listener is prepared to assent to."For example, would it be in any way constructive for me to ask you, "Hey Loismustdie, when are you going to stop beating the hell out of your grandma?"I'm going to assume you don't beat your grandmother, so it wouldn't really be a fair or valid question for me to pose in such a way, would it?The same thing that allows me to easily point that out is why I don't believe in your religions god. Namely, my education, most important, my education, self-learned and academically, of things related to logic and reason.I excel at the two, frankly, and neither, when used with a measure of accuracy and consistency, will allow for any particular cults (sorry to use a word that is equivocally correct, but usually taken as a negative connotation) folly and absurdity.I probably should go on, but I've got beer to drink...but that's where I'm coming from.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Understood- and yes, civility does kind of defeat the purpose of this forum doesn't it? LOL- Oh well, ask a loaded question..... The real question is this- what sort of God do you think I believe in?
Heh about the first part.About the second,I really couldn't even put forth a guess.I've heard so many variations of God's form, or non-form, name or none name, trinity or whole, pickings and choosings from various biblical or non biblical sources, and interpretations of those sources, or personal experiences, or feelings, or idea's or rationalizations or traditions, from people of different ages or races or cultures or times....that I can't come close to making an assumption about what sort of God you believe in.Not trying to be a smartass, that's an honest anser.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Throw me some questions and I will answer everyone, have I not done that?
uh.. no. all you've done is spout doctrine.please cite one single piece of evidence that "any scientist will tell you" supports the earth being submerged 5000 years ago (don't just tell people to google creationists websites).please cite any hard evidence currently accepted by non-creationist (that is objective) scientists that the human body absolutely couldn't have evolved on its own (BTW the genetic mechanism and code map for our "marvelous complex" bodies is actually extremely messy, wasteful, and inefficent, exactly as you would expect it to be if evolved rather than created, and also we are just starting to understand that quantum mechanics has a huge roll as a driving force in genetic mutation, which potentially solves any statistical issues with the complexity of the human body, if there ever actually were any valid ones). you cannot support the human body being created by saying "just look at it". i was raised a christian till i was 17 and know the bible pretty well. i wanted to believe it when i was young, but quickly came to realize it's an extremely simplistic, illogical self-contradictory obviously man-made load of crap.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Throw me some questions and I will answer everyone, have I not done that?
uh.. no. all you've done is spout doctrine.please cite one single piece of evidence that "any scientist will tell you" supports the earth being submerged 5000 years ago (don't just tell people to google creationists websites).please cite any hard evidence currently accepted by non-creationist (that is objective) scientists that the human body absolutely couldn't have evolved on its own (BTW the genetic mechanism and code map for our "marvelous complex" bodies is actually extremely messy, wasteful, and inefficent, exactly as you would expect it to be if evolved rather than created, and also we are just starting to understand that quantum mechanics has a huge roll as a driving force in genetic mutation, which potentially solves any statistical issues with the complexity of the human body, if there ever actually were any valid ones). you cannot support the human body being created by saying "just look at it". i was raised a christian till i was 17 and know the bible pretty well. i wanted to believe it when i was young, but quickly came to realize it's an extremely simplistic, illogical self-contradictory obviously man-made load of crap.
I don't follow the creationist websites- I have no idea what you are talking about. As far as evidence of a worldwide flood- LOL. Lets start with pretty much every culture having historical, written reference to it- lets start with skeletons of whales, etc. found in various mountains worldwide- and then they will go from there. As far as doctrine? Have not even touched on it- as far as the human body? You are a fool if you think that the human body, which man cannot replicate, the human brain, which man cannot replicate, the breath of life, which man cannot create, is happenstance, a eventual transformation of nature- that would be like saying my bicycle, if it just rolls around for a few thousand years, quite possibly could be a working car. As far as the bible being simple- you got that right. God made it VERY easy on you, even a fool could figure it out- on that much we agree. As far as the bible being contradictory, well, I still have yet to have anyone give me examples of where. 100 dollars transfered to your neteller account per contradiction is the current running offer, by the way- no one has stepped up. Good luck.
Link to post
Share on other sites
 I don't follow the creationist websites- I have no idea what you are talking about. As far as evidence of a worldwide flood- LOL. Lets start with pretty much every culture having historical, written reference to it- lets start with skeletons of whales, etc. found in various mountains worldwide- and then they will go from there.    As far as doctrine? Have not even touched on it- as far as the human body? You are a fool if you think that the human body, which man cannot replicate, the human brain, which man cannot replicate, the breath of life, which man cannot create, is happenstance, a eventual transformation of nature- that would be like saying my bicycle, if it just rolls around for a few thousand years, quite possibly could be a working car.     As far as the bible being simple- you got that right. God made it VERY easy on you, even a fool could figure it out- on that much we agree. As far as the bible being contradictory, well, I still have yet to have anyone give me examples of where. 100 dollars transfered to your neteller account per contradiction is the current running offer, by the way- no one has stepped up.
no ancient oriental or northern european cultures have historical reference to a world-wide flood, just Mediterranean/middle east and those happen to coincide with a local recently discovered volcanic caldera event. other cultures also reference catastrophic tidal waves from other known volcanic events, and might refer to them as floods.there is no evidence for the land being flooded in the topography anywhere in north america, except for the scablands in eastern washington. that area flooded due to a huge ice-age glacier-dammed lake in montana breaking its dam and flooding hundreds of square miles.. and creating a good example of what the land WOULD look like if it were flooded, and this appearance is found nowhere else in north america.there have NOT been "skeletons of whales etc." found on mountaintops. that's old-school creationist truth-twisting propagada that modern creationists can't even use anymore because it has been thoroughly discredited. of course there are numerous mountain ranges world-wide that were once seafloor, created by continental drift scraping the seafloor followed by collision and folding/subduction of continental land-masses raising their peripheries over millions of years, and these mountain ranges DO have sealife on top embedded in the ancient raised seafloor- in the form of *FOSSILS THAT ARE MILLIONS OF YEARS OLD*. of course you will blow all this off even though it's now accepted by every non-christian scientist in the world *and* most christian scientists, hopelessly stuck in your simplistic outdated view of nature because it supports what you want to believe rather than the truth.the idea that if the human body can evolve spontaniously mankind should be able to recreate it is ludicrous. that argument is egotistical and self-centered. again, how are you coming to the conclusion that your (or any other human's) intillect is complex enough to reach any conclusions about the matter? are you born with perfect knowledge about the subject? you're up on your typical christian pedestal as a "child of god" with your sense of self-important making you think you are more capable of reason than you actually are - starting with the ASSUMPTION that god created you and working backwords. if you were able to see the subject objectively you would immediately notice how much you are assuming.the biggest contradition in the bible is the nature of god changing from vindictive, sadistic, and quite interactive in the old testament to the more silent loving forgiving god of the new testament. this of course directly reflects the nature of the different times and cultures that spawned the myths of the bible.i already went into the internal total logical contradition of the plan of salvation, hell etc. no point rehashing.also there are historical inconsistencies among the 4 gospels, although i would have to re-research the fine specifics to get back into that.
Link to post
Share on other sites
 I don't follow the creationist websites- I have no idea what you are talking about. As far as evidence of a worldwide flood- LOL. Lets start with pretty much every culture having historical, written reference to it- lets start with skeletons of whales, etc. found in various mountains worldwide- and then they will go from there.    As far as doctrine? Have not even touched on it- as far as the human body? You are a fool if you think that the human body, which man cannot replicate, the human brain, which man cannot replicate, the breath of life, which man cannot create, is happenstance, a eventual transformation of nature- that would be like saying my bicycle, if it just rolls around for a few thousand years, quite possibly could be a working car.     As far as the bible being simple- you got that right. God made it VERY easy on you, even a fool could figure it out- on that much we agree. As far as the bible being contradictory, well, I still have yet to have anyone give me examples of where. 100 dollars transfered to your neteller account per contradiction is the current running offer, by the way- no one has stepped up.
no ancient oriental or northern european cultures have historical reference to a world-wide flood, just Mediterranean/middle east and those happen to coincide with a local recently discovered volcanic caldera event. other cultures also reference catastrophic tidal waves from other known volcanic events, and might refer to them as floods.there is no evidence for the land being flooded in the topography anywhere in north america, except for the scablands in eastern washington. that area flooded due to a huge ice-age glacier-dammed lake in montana breaking its dam and flooding hundreds of square miles.. and creating a good example of what the land WOULD look like if it were flooded, and this appearance is found nowhere else in north america.there have NOT been "skeletons of whales etc." found on mountaintops. that's old-school creationist truth-twisting propagada that modern creationists can't even use anymore because it has been thoroughly discredited. of course there are numerous mountain ranges world-wide that were once seafloor, created by continental drift scraping the seafloor followed by collision and folding/subduction of continental land-masses raising their peripheries over millions of years, and these mountain ranges DO have sealife on top embedded in the ancient raised seafloor- in the form of *FOSSILS THAT ARE MILLIONS OF YEARS OLD*. of course you will blow all this off even though it's now accepted by every non-christian scientist in the world *and* most christian scientists, hopelessly stuck in your simplistic outdated view of nature because it supports what you want to believe rather than the truth.the idea that if the human body can evolve spontaniously mankind should be able to recreate it is ludicrous. that argument is egotistical and self-centered. again, how are you coming to the conclusion that your (or any other human's) intillect is complex enough to reach any conclusions about the matter? are you born with perfect knowledge about the subject? you're up on your typical christian pedestal as a "child of god" with your sense of self-important making you think you are more capable of reason than you actually are - starting with the ASSUMPTION that god created you and working backwords. if you were able to see the subject objectively you would immediately notice how much you are assuming.the biggest contradition in the bible is the nature of god changing from vindictive, sadistic, and quite interactive in the old testament to the more silent loving forgiving god of the new testament. this of course directly reflects the nature of the different times and cultures that spawned the myths of the bible.i already went into the internal total logical contradition of the plan of salvation, hell etc. no point rehashing.also there are historical inconsistencies among the 4 gospels, although i would have to re-research the fine specifics to get back into that.
Not to nitpick, but the world is not even close to millions of years old- not even a million. MOST scientists actually agree with that statement these days. God loving and forgiving in the New Testament? Hardly- he can go bith ways. He still says few will be saved, that's just reality. As far as not seeing things objectively? We are to complex to just appear- simple as that. I do not need to be anything but not a complete idiot to see that- therefore, someone made us. Something bigger than us. THAT'S EGOTISTICAL??? YOU HAVE GOT TO BE JOKING, RIGHT? THE ADMITTANCE THAT I AM LESSER THAN SOMETHING ELSE IS EGOTISTICAL? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL. Seriously, you really make no sense.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Not to nitpick, but the world is not even close to millions of years old- not even a million. MOST scientists actually agree with that statement these days.
that seems so rediculous i'm starting to think this is all a put on, if so good one : ) but if you really believe that it's very sad. i feel bad for you, suggest you get out of your cave and read anything written in the last 35 years. seriously, 99.9% of scientists believe the earth is at least 3 billion years old. consensus is around 4 billion.
As far as not seeing things objectively? We are to complex to just appear- simple as that. I do not need to be anything but not a complete idiot to see that-
well at least 50% idiot ^^
therefore, someone made us. Something bigger than us. THAT'S EGOTISTICAL??? YOU HAVE GOT TO BE JOKING, RIGHT? THE ADMITTANCE THAT I AM LESSER THAN SOMETHING ELSE IS EGOTISTICAL? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.
it's egotistical to think you are important to a creator and the universe was made for you. sorta makes you special doesn't it? fills an emotional void and conveniently gives you a sense of purpose doesn't it? pre-modern day man created god (over and over again) in his various forms to appease his insecurity and need for self importance in a vast, incomprehensible, scary universe, and it has worked pretty well. this was and to this day continues to be the main driving force behind all religeons in the face of total illogic.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...