Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
General Religious Discussion / Re: No True Scotsman
« Last post by stuffin on Today at 07:41:53 AM »
nice arguments to show your god is certainly not the omnipotent, omniscient being that you claim.  funny how this god can't find, or make, humans that show these supposed fruits.  This entity repeatedly picks those who don't even remotely show these fruits.  Those things pointed out in the bible about these petty little men are the exact opposite of the fruits you say that are required to know ssomeone favored by this god.  Why is that, jst?  Why is your god so limited to need to use humans that don't do as you say they are supposed to do? 

we know that Christians repeatedly harm others, so again, this god is rather pathetic or just malicious since it does nothing to stop this.  Thse Christians haven't any of these supposed "fruits".  Your supposed savior said that one should abandon one's family.  so much for your excuses again.

Because you don't like what God has done, does not make it wrong.  Because you evidently think God should have allowed those wicked people to continue without him executing judgement doesn't make God wrong.  To me, it just makes you unreasonable and not at all convincing.

And the scriptures are full of examples of humans doing God's will, one of them doing so perfectly even under the harshest circumstances.  It's all a matter of what one chooses to do.  Some choose to do good and some do not.  Those like Christ demonstrate that God's purpose is proceeding just fine.

Christ did not teach one should abandon your family.  That's just dogma common among atheists that shows a complete lack of critical thinking or research.  Maybe you will convince each other, but that's about it.

God created those evil people to do his will, for what purpose?
What about improvement?

What has God done for, or given to humans which has or would improve humankind?

It seems to me everything God has given us has been a detriment to humans.

I guess my negative view of the world  blocks my vision of God's faultlessness.
Well, arguably, any theist who does good because he thinks that is what his god requires for entry into the better places in the supposed next life is not doing those good things for the right reasons. The person does it to earn rewards - for themselves.

Don't let's mince words, though. Any theist can only know what the supposed god wants is to listen to what his denomination / cult / sect etc tells him god wants. Holy books are only that same way of working but another step back to unknown teachers. besides, holy books allow one to more or less decide what is a good course of action based more on what one would like it to be than what the books says. That's how Matthew et al managed to created 'prophecies' of Jesus in the OT despite ignoring the Messianic texts identified by the Jews.
One of the skeptic54768 posts I'm alluding to above:
It does not bother me, but it bothers God. That is where you guys misunderstand us Christians. It doesn't bother us, it bothers God. Since God is the head honcho, it would be wise to obey what He says. Just like how rules at work are given to you by your boss and you have to obey them.

If God had said that homosexuality is OK, then you wouldn't be hearing an argument from a Christian.

so we have blindly obedient nitwits as Christians.   If God said that skinnydipping in a ladleful of molten steel, was okay, then we'd certainly have fewer Christians, and many creative excuses about this little problem. 

very much "we are just following orders...."

Yeah I know - that's so scary.  Jim Jones's followers were just following orders when they killed Congressman Leo Ryan too.  German soldiers were just following Hitler's orders to exterminate Jews. 

Which is exactly what Yahweh wanted, of course.  Skeptic and other Christians are doing exactly what their god originally wanted - absolving themselves of any moral judgement over what they are being asked to do, and just doing it "because god said so......because I am chust followink orders". 

It gives the complete lie to any suggestion by Christians that they are in any way moral, if they follow a particular path just because someone says so, without questioning it.  It does always come down to "might makes right" - they can't even legitimately use a defence of "but god is good!" while they simultaneously refuse to consider any moral questioning of the actions they are being required to undertake. 

God might be good - but they can't say for sure without investigation, which they will not do.
General Religious Discussion / Re: No evil shit in new testament??
« Last post by dloubet on Today at 05:38:12 AM »
The NT: Love Me Or Be Tortured Forever.  8)

If that's not the point to drop the mic, I don't know what is.
General Religious Discussion / Re: No True Scotsman
« Last post by wheels5894 on Today at 04:38:43 AM »
You are most likely correct, AH. Even reading Jesus' supposed speeches in the gospels, it seem pretty clear that the agenda was not a new religion but a reformation of the Jewish faith. His 'love god, love neighbour' for example is also recorded to have been used by a very prominent rabbi in the 1st century, Rabbi Gamaliel. Then we have his insistence of praying directly to the father goes with the overturning of the tables of the dealers implying that the whole Temple organisation was outdated given the nearness of god to ask forgiveness and the like.

However, I have my doubts about the existence of Jesus and, especially, of the words he might have used. The speeches recorded in the gospels start small, in Mark, and grow longer and more complex as we get to the last gospel, John. This is not the way memory works but it is the way myths are generated - a small story that grows with the retelling.
Chatter / Re: Mr. President Donald Trump
« Last post by Add Homonym on Today at 04:23:54 AM »
I hate to say this, but you need to do the math, OAA. 2/3 of both houses of Congress, of which more than half are Republicans. 3/4 of the states, of which Trump carried 60%. There are enough people who supported Trump that trying to evoke him as a reason for changing the system is likely to turn it into a dead letter.

And again the same defeatist attitude. If you convince yourself it's a lost cause, you don't have to feel bad about not trying, right?

Australia has tried to become a republic, ie divorce from Queen of England. This rather trivial and unfrightening thing, in a country full of relaxed individuals, who see no political agenda in it, are still unable to pass the legislation, due to fear campaigns.

The US electoral system currently benefits a bunch of people will hold onto power, for dear life.

The only way I can see to do it, would be to reverse the Democrat push for fair elections, and Gerrymander the place into lunacy, until even Republicans get the message.

However, Democrats like weakness, and will do everything they can to appear weak, like letting a supreme court appointment fly by, because they want to prove how weak they are.
I suppose the answer here is the nutjobs in churches where they handle snakes.... and get bitten and killed.. just to show their faith!

Really, though, we ought to not that none of them are obeying a god, for in is highly doubtful that their god exists. No, rather, they obey the holy book or, mare accurately, they obey the leaders of the denomination or cult which tells them what the holy book means. I hardly need mention that there are some way out understandings of the Book of Revelation and, I suppose, there are many, many more ways to see it too. It's a case of believe pastors / church / bishops / governing body...  and to treat them as though they were a god.
General Religious Discussion / Re: No True Scotsman
« Last post by Add Homonym on Today at 03:08:06 AM »
When Christ said ""If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters--yes, even their own life--such a person cannot be my disciple", he didn't actually mean you should hate them.  Seriously, no joking, I accept that.  His point was that to be a proper disciple, you had to make sacrifices - in the same way someone training to be an olympic champion will be at the gym every waking hour at the expense of family and social life.

Jesus was talking to an enthusiastic revolutionary proselytizing audience, somewhat like Trump supporters, circa 30AD. He did not intend for his words to flow into the 3rd millennium, where affluent Christians had dominated the western world, with affluent 50th generation Christian parents, and no longer knew what the point of Christianity even was.

I don't think JST knows, either. Spread like a virus, and then mouth Christian platitudes.

It's a dull, failed experiment, with very few real believers.
General Religious Discussion / Re: No True Scotsman
« Last post by Add Homonym on Today at 02:56:42 AM »
Because you don't like what God has done, does not make it wrong.  Because you evidently think God should have allowed those wicked people to continue without him executing judgement doesn't make God wrong.  To me, it just makes you unreasonable and not at all convincing.

We can either see the fruits, or we can't. God can be reprehensible and illogical, but you can't have an enigmatic God and consistently know the things by their fruits. If the fruits law is true, then Catholicism damns it.

Your cult is just an offshoot of a dead fruit.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10