Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 10
61
General Religious Discussion / Re: Challenging Timeless Bible Principles
« Last post by Jstwebbrowsing on May 17, 2018, 01:04:35 PM »
I think it would be more logical if JST showed something in the Bible that could not have been invented by philosophers of the time.

I keep offering the golden rule.  You guys just keep pointing to things about reciprocity.  Jesus may have had some of these things in mind.  But he did not just merely reproduce their work.  He improved it.  He did do this at certain points for sure.  That's why some of his statements are preceded by "You have heard it said, but I tell you......."

You just don't want to give credit where credit is due.
It has already been proven to you that. Jesus' comments are a tarnished rule. (Of which you agreed by your replies) So why you still think it is his only. And that his is better. Is beyond us.  You cant expect credit for something that isn't credit worthy.

No, you just keep repeating the same refuted claims.  Repeating the same thing over and over doesn't make it true.
62
General Religious Discussion / Re: Challenging Timeless Bible Principles
« Last post by Steve on May 17, 2018, 12:29:18 PM »
I think it would be more logical if JST showed something in the Bible that could not have been invented by philosophers of the time.

I keep offering the golden rule.  You guys just keep pointing to things about reciprocity.  Jesus may have had some of these things in mind.  But he did not just merely reproduce their work.  He improved it.  He did do this at certain points for sure.  That's why some of his statements are preceded by "You have heard it said, but I tell you......."

You just don't want to give credit where credit is due.
It has already been proven to you that. Jesus' comments are a tarnished rule. (Of which you agreed by your replies) So why you still think it is his only. And that his is better. Is beyond us.  You cant expect credit for something that isn't credit worthy.
63
General Religious Discussion / Re: Challenging Timeless Bible Principles
« Last post by Jstwebbrowsing on May 17, 2018, 12:15:05 PM »
I think it would be more logical if JST showed something in the Bible that could not have been invented by philosophers of the time.

I keep offering the golden rule.  You guys just keep pointing to things about reciprocity.  Jesus may have had some of these things in mind.  But he did not just merely reproduce their work.  He improved it.  He did do this at certain points for sure.  That's why some of his statements are preceded by "You have heard it said, but I tell you......."

You just don't want to give credit where credit is due. 
64
General Religious Discussion / Re: Challenging Timeless Bible Principles
« Last post by Jstwebbrowsing on May 17, 2018, 12:06:40 PM »
Took me a while to figure out that you'd given Biblical answers, that you claim are correct, but don't bother to prove are correct.

Well maybe after a few hundred more years of research and some trial and error.  The point is that the Bible contains answers that can be used by modern people.

Quote
You avoided answering that, by using an inappropriate fallacy that "would I" desire that. A half made baby, with only suffering ahead, is seen by most as a waste of time. I just saw a doco where a Christian woman aborted 2 fetuses to avoid spina bifida. I think she eventually gave up and had the third, because advanced surgery was offered. So the solution you seem to be angling at is most inhumane, and people would not put their dog through 1/10 of it.

“All things, therefore, that you want men to do to you, you also must do to them." (Mt 7:12)

I don't think this applies to the situation. You are using it backwards. If you could use it backwards, it would stop the death penalty and tying an unruly son to the gates.

I am not angling toward a position.  Not everything comes with a black and white answer.  But generally speaking humans do not choose death for themselves.  Applying the golden rule does not allow you to make a detached decision.  Did anyone every think of asking the fetus what it would want?  Have you ever asked  10yo cancer patient if they are glad to be alive?

But the golden rule doesn't rule it out as you are suggesting but it does make it real when you start talking about how you want your own life treated.  I imagine there may be some circumstances where you might choose death over life but exactly how bad would your quality of life have to be before you chose death?

Quote
The verse you use to support your bias is tangential at best. I'm surprised you didn't use Gen 6:4

That is entirely your short-termed view of the world, probably based on the idea that the second coming is around the corner. It avoids thinking forward, and is terribly trite.

I don't have a bias.  I don't have a preference myself.

Quote
I think you messed up this one, but no matter.

I think the principle and the example of it's use was almost a direct answer.  If your child is hungry or cold then you feed and clothe it.

Quote
I would argue that this is why Christianity was a failed experiment.

If followed, this would forbid anyone moving to a more capitalized state. It's ok if 1% of the population does it, but we have no data on what would happen if everyone did it.

Why would it stop someone for moving to a more capitalized state?

And with the world economy the more capiatalized states are a big part of the problem because less developed countries can't compete and we saturate their markets which chokes out local businesses.

Quote
k, so Proverbs 15 is a bunch of household tips, but not including the importance of vinegar and bicarb to fix everything. I notice that we are giving you balanced counsel, here, but you are ignoring it all.

You haven't offered any counsel.  Please go ahead and post the answers provided by secularists.

Quote
So, love them in secret, once you have made them all pray in secret, like the NT demands.

Christians are not to make showy displays.  Christ did pray with his disciples and occasionally in public.  But he condemended the showy displays of the religious leaders.

Quote
How do we take this seriously, if Christians like the death penalty, due to Leviticus? It has two disclaimers: If possible, as far as it depends on you,

Because they would rather judge people by the Law than practice the mercy Christ taught.  At best they are ignorant.  At worst they are like the reliigous leaders of Jesus' time whom he condemned.

These same ones do not judge themselves by the Law.  If they did, then they'd be dead too because they are also Law breakers.


 
65
General Religious Discussion / Re: Why Would God Have Emotions?
« Last post by Jag on May 17, 2018, 11:13:31 AM »
1. Emotions are a survival mechanism: reproduction and protection.

Are they only good for survival?
WTF? Irrelevant.

Quote
Quote
2. An all-powerful single entity (outside space and time) that does not reproduce or need protection has no need for emotions.

Humans don't need them either.
Wrong. As junebug just said, they are a survival mechanism, that means we DO need them.

For someone who think he understands human behavior well enough to argue about it, you are shockingly ignorant of human behavior.

Quote
Quote
3. A brain is a material object.

4. God is described as immaterial.

5. Immaterial being cannot have a material brain.

Why would a God require a material brain?
That's where emotions come from jst. Have you been following what junebug (or anyone else for that matter) has actually been saying to you? Do you realize that posts on the same topic, written by the same person, in an ongoing engagement with you, should be understood together?

Do you have any real understanding of how conversation flows IRL?

You can go back to discussing this with junebug now. The eye rolling your post induced is giving me a headache.
66
General Religious Discussion / Re: Why Worship?
« Last post by velkyn on May 17, 2018, 11:11:08 AM »
Explanations don't change reality.  Understanding the laws of physics is not evidence things were not intelligently created.  I mean do you expect God should be out turning a crank somewhere or something?  Should we expect magical fairy dust everywhere?  Exactly what are the tell-tale signs of creation by God?

Science doesn't talk about God because it's not equipped to even address the question.  How can you tell by looking at something whether or not it's designed by God?

Saying no gods were involved because their is no evidence for their existence is an argument from ignorance.

hmmm, yep, jst, what is evidence e.g. "tell-tale signs of creation by god"?      And yep, science is equipped to address the question, especially since the bible itself gives us claims(roughly hypotheses) to analyze and look for evidence to support those claims. 

you and your bible have made claims that one can just look around and see these "tell-tale signs of creation by god" (one example, Romans 1).    I'm soooo glad you now say that the bible is quite wrong again. 

67
Chatter / Re: velkyn doubts that kevinagain really exists
« Last post by Emma286 on May 17, 2018, 11:08:17 AM »
^^^The last post was on May 2nd. kevinagain has popped in a few times, but he quit talking around the same time.

Silly me. Didn’t think of that. Thanks for pointing that out Jag.
68
General Religious Discussion / Re: Does the Bible change lives?
« Last post by Jag on May 17, 2018, 11:07:37 AM »
As living proof, I would say yes.

Why would you say yes without context?

At a guess, trying to get enough posts to make an introduction. Let's hope this isn't an indication of their posting style in general.
69
Chatter / Re: velkyn doubts that kevinagain really exists
« Last post by Jag on May 17, 2018, 11:05:56 AM »
^^^The last post was on May 2nd. kevinagain has popped in a few times, but he quit talking around the same time.
70
Chatter / Re: Sexism in media
« Last post by Jag on May 17, 2018, 11:03:11 AM »
Quote
I also agree that it's harmful - to both genders. It used to be harder (but not impossible) for me to recognize the ways in which men are manipulated

What kinds of ways do you mean Jag? Think I can hazard a couple of guesses, but curious/interested to know your answer anyways.

Well, the things we've been talking about in this thread so far.

Men are human beings, and despite how things may often appear, they DO have emotions and insecurities. The media plays on men's emotions and insecurities the same way it does on women - but for reasons I don't entirely understand, it seems that talking about how it affect women is common while the same can't be said of talking about the impacts it has on men.

In my opinion: the nature of the stereotypes are such that it's conceivably harder for men to refuse to conform in some respects. I'm not talking about physical danger necessarily, but from a social sanction standpoint, I can see quite clearly that the struggle is real.
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 10