Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10
General Religious Discussion / Re: Individual perceptions
« Last post by Jag on Yesterday at 12:40:31 PM »
^^^Feel free to keep spinning bullshit jst.

This doesn't even merit the effort to reply. You make claim after claim, and provide none of the evidence necessary to support the claims you make. We're both reading the same thread, and I see none of what you claim is present.

If what I've written to you is too difficult for you to parse, I guess I HAVE been giving you too much credit. Reality exists. You can deny that all you want to, but the truth doesn't care about your feelings.

You are absolutely right that the bible does not say to give away "all" your money, but that little tiny detail is the one you want to pound on, while ignoring what it DOES SAY.Directly from the thread in question, here is what Add Hom posted:
[40] And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloke also.
[42] Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.
[30] Give to every man that asketh of thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not again.
[35] But love ye your enemies, and do good, and lend, hoping for nothing again; and your reward shall be great, and ye shall be the children of the Highest:

So, I'm not asking for
ALL of your money. I just want whatever is left over after you have accounted for the BARE MINIMUM of your family needs. I want the rest and according to the scriptures quoted above, you are obligated to give it to me, even after I allow for your weasle-y attempt to evade your responsibility as a Christian to give me what I ask for.

The bible does not say a lot of the things you claim it does, and you use the excuse of 'individual perception' to hand wave that away. You fill in the blanks and make up details that are not present. That's it, that's all, and that's the essential point you refuse to recognize.

Why do you think your made up stuff is more accurate that someone else's made up stuff? Why do you keep dodging that very simple question?

PS - please figure out how to use the quote function, and modify the formatting in your posts when they are fouled up like the second half of this one. It was difficult to figure out what belonged where. In fact, I quit reading it as soon as it got funky, so if you made a point worth pursuing in that part, you're going to need to restate it in a stand alone post.
General Religious Discussion / Re: Why Would God Have Emotions?
« Last post by Jstwebbrowsing on Yesterday at 12:32:16 PM »
JST, I apologize for my absence. As I explained, I have been busy with finals.

I want to talk a bit more about the New Kingdom. I find this worldview quite concerning. Not only is it bad for society, it's bad for you. It's an extremely pessimistic worldview, and is not good fruit. It's fruit that is so rotten it's almost decomposed. The destruction and bloodshed is NOT something I would expect from a being whose essence is love and goodness.

Seems to me if God has emotional intelligence He would not pitch such a hissy fit.

Emotional intelligence is the ability to understand your emotions and the emotions of others to resolve conflict. Bible God seems to be a perpetual man-child unable to understand the human condition.

Destroying those that are destroying the earth is not bad for anyone or anything other than those destroying the earth. 

I actually think it's quite evil to think that God should not interfere.  Is it better for humanity to go extinct?  That's the alternative according to the Bible.

If punishing those that destroy the earth is bad then what is destroying the earth?  Good?  To me, that is what you are wanting God to do, let humanity completely ruin the earth and life on it.

Please explain how not having people destroy the earth is bad for society?
General Religious Discussion / Re: Individual perceptions
« Last post by Jstwebbrowsing on Yesterday at 12:24:57 PM »
SUPPORT the position jst. That's precisely what I've been saying. SUPPORT the atheist position - it's offered as one reason among many to reject the THEIST claim that god exists. I'll repeat this as many times as it takes for you to understand. YOU ARE MISSING THE ACTUAL POINT.

Support what position.

The error here has already addressed by others.

Yes, it has been addressed by accepting it as an illogical claim.  Even though it's illogical, it's still supported.  I guess I am okay with that.

But allow me to add, this is yet another example of your inability to think broadly. You speak as though Christianity is the only religion that exists, and as if Hitchens was speaking specifically about Christian theists. Ethnocentric much? How small is your world jst? Do you even remember that other people exist in places outside the US, and that they have their own faith traditions that are not derived from Christianity? You've obviously not explored a religion outside of Christian theism. You know far less than you think.

I never thought he was only talking about Christianity.  No matter what you are talking about the statement is illogical. 

"Since it is obviously inconceivable that all religions can be right, the most reasonable conclusion is that they are all wrong".  You can substitute any word for "religions".  It's all equally illogcal and unreasonable.

Um, no.

I don't know how you reached that conclusion, unless you are suggesting that it's an appeal for people to take join the most popular position to dispense with all the contradictions?

Yes it is.  It's just carefully concealed.  The claim implies that religoions would be right if they all agreed, that is if everyone had one popular set of beliefs. 


Through this entire thread.  If we can't all agree about humans that can be seen, what reason is there to think everyone would agree about God that we can't see?


Through this thread.  If a policeman goes to interview witnesses does he expect identical stories or does he actually expect variations?  Dealing with God doesn't make people any different.

Individual perceptions are contrary to the actual words of the Bible.

Then why are you applying them in the following post?

For example, in another thread, it has just been brought to your attention that the Bible DOES have instructions saying you are to "give all your money away": Add Hom quotes the Bible so jst can individually interpret it to mean something other than what it says.

Nowhere does it say to give ALL of your money away.  And it also says, "Anyone who does not provide for their relatives, and especially for their own household, has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever." (1 Tim 5:8)

Christ is not teaching people to allow their own families to starve by giving away everything they have.  Only athiest have come to that perception.

No, you don't have anything that would be accepted as evidence for a topic other than faith, as I said. And since you brought it up.....What is the difference between a claim, and an absolute claim - the distinction is strange and thus, needs clarifying.  Are you trying to create some wiggle room to avoid being accountable for what you say jst?

I have supported my claims.  "Absolute was a bad choice of words."  It should be independent.

Here is your OP:
A common complaint about believers is that they don't all agree about God.  Is it even possible for everyone to agree about God?  If I asked ten people to write down a description of me, I'm certain I would receive ten unique descriptions even though there will probably be some overlap.

Does that make any of them any less true?

THAT is what I responded to. What you wrote, right up there, the OP of this thread.

And noone has shown it to be wrong. 

That's not what I asked you. I VERY SPECIFICALLY ASKED why should someone believe that you, or anyone else knows what you are talking about?

About what?  What the Bible says?  Because they can read and verify it.  Why should someone believe that you know what you're talking about?

Let's be very clear jst - you didn't provide an answer, you created an EXCUSE. It does nothing to resolve the question, it doesn't supply any new information, it provides an accountability free card for your god and it's followers.

No it doesn't supply any new information.  The answer was in the Bible all along.  Thinking that everyone should equally understand God is only based on your own reasoning.  Why should someone believe that you?


Those most certainly ARE independent claims jst.

I haven't ignored any of the Bible's words.  It's the words atheist want to add, like "all" your money. 

Provided you have the capacity to creatively interpret the message the way you want to understand it, sure.

I said God doesn't want to be found by everyone.  Then I supplied a Bible verse to support it.  Here is another.

"At that time they will call to Jehovah for help, But he will not answer them. He will hide his face from them at that time, Because of their wicked deeds." (Micah 3:4)

Go ahead and tell me how I'm misinterpreting that.  Is it somehow unclear? 

And yet, when it is pointed out that you are creatively filling in the gaps with words that are not present on the actual text, you bail on the thread.

I haven't added any words.  You are adding words by saying Jesus taught people to give away "all" they money.

See my quote above.  I haven't added a single word.  YOU go on and interpret it.

It's about f@cking time.

Well I'll just have to remember that you like to change the meaning of words and you support illogical statements such as the one from Hitchens.


Yes, I added details that were different than the details atheists were adding.  The only difference is that mine didn't contradict the Bible.


I offered an alternative explanation to what was being asserted.  But you're right.  I shouldn't interfere when atheists are tickling each other ears. 

Chatter / Re: Far Cry 5
« Last post by Nick on Yesterday at 12:21:23 PM »
Let us know when you get captured and converted.  We may send in a team to pull you out.
Chatter / Far Cry 5
« Last post by jaimehlers on Yesterday at 12:16:12 PM »
I just got a new computer, and as part of it I got an online code for Far Cry 5.  So I've been playing it some.

It's interesting.  You're basically playing a US Marshall rookie who's sent to arrest the leader of a Christian cult in Montana who's been kidnapping people to force them to join, and things go south really fast.  So you end up fighting the cultists who started a full blown insurrection.  It's pretty fun so far.
Chatter / Re: Fundies say the darndest things
« Last post by jaimehlers on Yesterday at 12:12:53 PM »
So long as you do more than just post links to it.  We love our discussions here, just prefer to have some context to go along with them.
Chatter / Re: Fundies say the darndest things
« Last post by Jag on Yesterday at 11:49:06 AM »
I think that would be okay.

Please do add context though. We tend to get very frustrated with members who just drop links with no explanation of what we are supposed to be taking from it.
There was a LONG stretch of time during which I knew I no longer had anything like a belief in gods of any kind, but was still stuck with the belief that my lack of belief condemned me to hell.

Yep, it felt as least as crazy as it sounds.

Eventually, I was able to get myself free from that left-over bit of cognitive dissonance, and I found a real sense of peace.

Being free of the fear of hell was definitely one of the immediate benefits of acknowledging my atheism. That fear plagued me from time to time when I was a believer, terrified that I'd do something that my god couldn't / wouldn't forgive.

But if heaven is fiction, so is hell. Good riddance.
The personal admission wasn't that difficult. I'd stopped going to church for about a year and found the bible a lot less compelling than I did just a few months before. There was a sad, at times even desolate feeling coming to terms with the knowledge that there would be no eternal afterlife, that the god I had envisioned as the perfect parent and friend was purely fictional. A period of mourning, in a way.

It passed. At this point, the most I feel is a mild nostalgia for the positive feelings I had as a believer, kind of like rereading a favorite book that I know is just a story.

Telling others was / is for the most part no big deal. My immediate family (Mom and sis) were more concerned how this would affect my chronic depression than anything else; neither of them are very religious. I only recently told my very Baptist (though fortunately non-fundamentalist) father about my atheism and he didn't seem terribly shocked.
Chatter / Re: Fundies say the darndest things
« Last post by CrystalDragon on Yesterday at 11:30:04 AM »
Well thankee stranger.

I think this just might be a good it verboten to tie in or link activity going on in other sites?

Of course not! Otherwise me sharing my frustrating conversations from ChristianForums would have got me banned a long time ago. :)
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10