# God is a meany pants :(



## stringmusic (Oct 25, 2010)

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?"

this(below) in response to above

"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? -no
Then he is not omnipotent.- wrong
Is he able, but not willing?-not in his will
Then he is malevolent.-wrong
Is he both able and willing?-yes for the able, not in his will.
Then whence cometh evil?-see below
Is he neither able nor willing?-no
Then why call him God?"-explianation below

God could have made the world without evil.
God could have made the world with only good.
God could have made the world without either.
God made the world with both.
The last one of these is the only one were people have a choice and are shown love. Free will.

There will be two types of people in the end. the ones that say to God "I accept you and your will be done"
and the ones that say "I reject you" and God says to them "YOUR will be done"
ultimate love. 

It seems that the question like "why didnt God make the world like this?" has been asked in 100 different ways on this particular forum. I know that I personally have answered the question numerous times. Here is your answer,(see above).
 GOD IS NOT A MEANY PANTS! Although God didn't make the world the way you think that He should have, He gave you the choice to accept or decline, its that simple. What more could you ask for?


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 25, 2010)

You sound like those battered women that keep going back to their abusers. Co dependent, I believe is the term.

"But he loves me.  I can't live without him.  He knows what's best.  I'm weak without him....."


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 25, 2010)

stringmusic said:


> Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
> Then he is not omnipotent.
> Is he able, but not willing?
> Then he is malevolent.
> ...




AMEN!!! GOD dosent send people to Edited to Remove Profanity ----Edited to Remove Profanity ----Edited to Remove Profanity ----Edited to Remove Profanity ---- they send themselves.


----------



## stringmusic (Oct 25, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> *You* sound like those battered women that keep going back to their abusers. Co dependent, I believe is the term.
> 
> "But he loves me.  I can't live without him.  He knows what's best.  I'm weak without him....."



I just wanted to try and answer the same question that seems to be asked on here in everyday, just in different ways, most of the time by the same people.
 Is that the best response you have to TRUTH?


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 25, 2010)

stringmusic said:


> Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
> Then he is not omnipotent.
> Is he able, but not willing?
> Then he is malevolent.
> ...



Able but not willing......

You know what?  I get it.  I really do.   A God could make the Universe in 6 days or 20 seconds.  He could come down as person or a burning bush or a talking jug of milk if he wanted to.  He could allow babies to be born without skin or he could allow a child to be raped and eaten by a psychopath and still call it love because his ways are not our ways.  I get it.  

He's having fun with you.  He's burning you like a kid with a magnifying glass does ants.  Worship him and fear him all you want.  As far as I can tell it still rains on the just and the unjust.  Your father has given his child a loaded gun and the free will to point it at his own head; in love.


----------



## stringmusic (Oct 25, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> Able but not willing......
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 25, 2010)

stringmusic said:


> I just wanted to try and answer the same question that seems to be asked on here in everyday, just in different ways, most of the time by the same people.
> Is that the best response you have to TRUTH?



What you call "truth" I call "lie" and I believe I have more evidence to back up my position.


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 25, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> What you call "truth" I call "lie" and I believe I have more evidence to back up my position.



CALL IT OUT! NAME IT! LETS HERE IT!!! 
DON'T USE WIKIPEDIA AS A SOURCE!!!


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 25, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> CALL IT OUT! NAME IT! LETS HERE IT!!!
> DON'T USE WIKIPEDIA AS A SOURCE!!!



No one ever lived in a fish for 3 days.  That's all you get.


----------



## stringmusic (Oct 25, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> *No one *ever lived in a fish for 3 days.  That's all you get.



Have you spoken to every person that ever lived?


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 25, 2010)

stringmusic said:


> Have you spoken to every person that ever lived?




And you believe it happened because you read it in a book?  I don't know what else to say.


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 25, 2010)

Lets get back to "able but not willing".  What kind of example is that?


----------



## stringmusic (Oct 25, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> Lets get back to "able but not willing".  What kind of example is that?



please re-read the original post, the answer to your question is there, or if you would like, I will answer the question in a different format agian.


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 25, 2010)

So you think we all got here from a massive explosion???? To where if earth was an inch closer to the sun we would burn to death, or an inch away we would freeze to death????? All coinsidence??? No


----------



## TTom (Oct 25, 2010)

an inch?

Man you really should sue whoever provided you with your science education, because they really did fail to teach you very much.

One inch of difference would not cause either the burning or the freezing. The 23 degree tilt of the earth provides much more than a 1 inch relative difference between the northern and southern hemisphere. 

The Earth and the Sun are exactly the distance they are apart because of the basic Laws of Gravity. The mass of the sun and the mass of the Earth and the speed of the Earth circling the Sun are what set the distance.

F=G  mass of object 1 x mass of object 2 /radius squared.

G = (6.67428 X10 negative 11th power)

That math works out for every single planet in the solar system as well as for every moon circling every planet in the universe.

If the Earth had half the mass it does it could circle the sun in 182.5 days and still be at the same distance from the Sun. 

Now I don't consider this all coincidence, I consider science to be the search to understand what laws God used to make the universe. (a very common perspective for scientists)


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 25, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> So you think we all got here from a massive explosion???? To where if earth was an inch closer to the sun we would burn to death, or an inch away we would freeze to death????? All coinsidence??? No



For whatever reason, you seem to have not been exposed to some high school science.  That may not have been your fault.  But now you have a computer and access to the internet.  If you want to find out what the best scientific minds know about how the Universe works, simply look for it.


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 25, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> For whatever reason, you seem to have not been exposed to some high school science.  That may not have been your fault.  But now you have a computer and access to the internet.  If you want to find out what the best scientific minds know about how the Universe works, simply look for it.



I DONT SEE HOW YOU CAN CALL US CHRISTIANS CRAZY FOR BELIEVEING IN GOD BUT YOU BEILIEVE AN EXPLOSION CAUSE EVERYTHING?? I WASNT MEANING AN ACTUAL INCH IM JUST SAYING MUCH CLOSER WE WOULD... I DONT SEE HOW WE COULD END UP IN THE PERFECT PLACE WITH WATER, FOOD, OXYGEN, GRAVITY WHATEVER ELSE YOU THINK COULD BE CAUSED BY AN EXPLOSION, AND IT ALL BE A COINSIDENCE. I THINK YOU ALL HAVE BEEN READING WAY TO MUCH SCIENCE FICTION BOOKS.


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 25, 2010)

YOU THINK YOUR SCIENCE CAN EXPLAIN EVERYTHING???? NO!!!! SCIENTIST CANT EVEN EXPLAIN HOW BUMBLEBEE'S CAN FLY!http://ilovebacteria.com/bee.htm
I KNOW WHY THEY CAN FLY, BECAUSE GOD SAID FLY!


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 25, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> YOU THINK YOUR SCIENCE CAN EXPLAIN EVERYTHING???? NO!!!! SCIENTIST CANT EVEN EXPLAIN HOW BUMBLEBEE'S CAN FLY!http://ilovebacteria.com/bee.htm
> I KNOW WHY THEY CAN FLY, BECAUSE GOD SAID FLY!


 

You're right.  I don't know how I could have been so blind.  

"they can fly because God said "FLY!""

It was right there all along.  Pass the snakes.

By the way, if you want to yell, you can change the font, size and color of your text for dramatic EFFECT


----------



## Phillip Thurmond (Oct 25, 2010)

Ambush 80 Here are the facts
#1.  If your right i've wasted some time trying to be a good person and worshiping someone that does not exixt and I turn to worm dirt and no harm no foul.  I've still lived a pretty good life. 
#2 If i'm right you will spend eternity in torment! 
I'm just not willing to take that chance.  I guess you are!  

Thats the thing about GOD!  He gives us all a choice and free will and does not force us to love him or care about him or any of that.  He lets us all choose for ourselves.

I choose to love him because of what he has done for me.  Has everything in my life been great?  Nope and I don't expect it will be I do however know one thing.  God loves me and has never forsaken me and I will never turn my back on him!  
John 3:16


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 25, 2010)

Phillip Thurmond said:


> Ambush 80 Here are the facts
> #1.  If your right i've wasted some time trying to be a good person and worshiping someone that does not exixt and I turn to worm dirt and no harm no foul.  I've still lived a pretty good life.
> #2 If i'm right you will spend eternity in Edited to Remove Profanity ----Edited to Remove Profanity ----Edited to Remove Profanity ----Edited to Remove Profanity ----!
> 
> ...



Those aren't the only options.  Why don't you know that?


----------



## Phillip Thurmond (Oct 25, 2010)

Ok what are the other options?  Guess I missed out on that part.


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 25, 2010)

Phillip Thurmond said:


> Ok what are the other options?  Guess I missed out on that part.



I will give you one then it's up to you to find more:

The Muslims are right and you're wrong.


----------



## TTom (Oct 25, 2010)

GAbassmaster 

LOL you really should study more accurate sources. Science has for many years understood how bumblebees and other insects fly.

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/1076/is-it-aerodynamically-impossible-for-bumblebees-to-fly

ie you bought a folklore story without finding out the real facts. Somehow that doesn't seem too far fetched for you to do.

BTW science never said bumble bees can't fly, science said that the laws of stationary wing aerodynamics (state of the science in 1934) did not explain how they fly. DuH we hadn't even figured out how to build a helicopter at that point.

Science is always advancing and now they make robots that fly using the same techniques and an understanding of the laws that apply in insect flight.


----------



## Phillip Thurmond (Oct 25, 2010)

I don't/won't worship a dead god and never will.  If that is all you have to offer, Good luck


----------



## TTom (Oct 25, 2010)

Dead God???????

Mohamed is not a God not even in the Islamic Faith is he considered a God. 

So your statement has some serious flaws.

Do you not know that Mohammad is not considered a God by the Muslims? 

Or are you intentionally making a mis statement because it makes your position easier to defend.

BTW Buddha is not considered a God by his followers either.


----------



## Phillip Thurmond (Oct 25, 2010)

Ok your right Muhommad is considered the last great profit of Islam  Still when you read the crap they spew out.   Sorry if this offends /actually i'm not sorry but anyway
Still Like I said I'm willing to bet it all.


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 25, 2010)

Phillip Thurmond said:


> Ok your right Muhommad is considered the last great profit of Islam  Still when you read the crap they spew out.   Sorry if this offends /actually i'm not sorry but anyway
> Still Like I said I'm willing to bet it all.



But you have bet it all.  What if "they"  are right and you are wrong (whoever "they" may be).  You'll be soooooooooooooory........


----------



## TTom (Oct 25, 2010)

I'm good with the idea of you picking your faith. I simply get upset when folks use inaccurate representations of others faiths as a bad crutch to form an argument on.

Why should adopt a faith of cannibals? 
LOL

(a swipe at the idea that one of the essential rituals of the Christian Church is in basic terms canniblistic. especially if you hold to the transmogrification  doctrine)

Done in jest here to illustrate my point.


----------



## Phillip Thurmond (Oct 25, 2010)

Yes and Muslims do worship Mohammad  
There is but one god and his name is Allah and Mohammad is his profit  They do inderectly worship him.  What about all the other profits why are they not talked about?  

To the people of Islam Mohammad is what Jesus is to Christians Last time I check Mohammad died Jesus rose again.  Can't prove it, Wasn't there, but I sure believe it!


----------



## Phillip Thurmond (Oct 25, 2010)

Ambush 80. Nope I don't think I will be but you sure will be!  See You don't have a bet on any team so your lost out on all accounts!


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 25, 2010)

Phillip Thurmond said:


> Ambush 80. Nope I don't think I will be but you sure will be!  See You don't have a bet on any team so your lost out on all accounts!




I'll play (for a little while).

"You'll be sooooooory......"

"No I won't. You will"

"No I won't. you will.  My God can beat up your God.  Your God isn't real."

OK. now your turn.


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 25, 2010)

Eternity is too long to be wrong.


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 25, 2010)

read a little
http://www.livingwaters.com/witnessingtool/scientificfactsintheBible.shtml


----------



## stringmusic (Oct 25, 2010)

I don't know if I did this correctly or not but I think this is the link to watch a video by Ravi Zacharias. Ravi has an entire speach entitled Jesus among other Gods, Im sure there is a place somewhere on the interweb to find it, good listen.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFpumlcvbFA&feature=related


----------



## stringmusic (Oct 25, 2010)

anybody have any other comments on the oringinal thread?


----------



## davidstaples (Oct 25, 2010)

Phillip Thurmond said:


> What about all the other profits why are they not talked about?



Because the church doesn't want you talking about their profits.  If their followers knew what a money making scam the church was they wouldn't happily give 10% (or more) of their earnings week after week.

Oh... you meant prophets?  Nevermind.


----------



## stringmusic (Oct 25, 2010)

davidstaples said:


> Because *the church *doesn't want you talking about their profits.  If *their followers *knew what a money making scam *the church *was they wouldn't happily give 10% (or more) of their earnings week after week.
> 
> Oh... you meant prophets?  Nevermind.



*replace: some churches*

*Most Christians don't follow THE church or the people that lead a place of worship. we are THE church, we follow Jesus and His teachings.*


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 25, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> Eternity is too long to be wrong.



You still insist that you're right yet offer no reason why the other religions are wrong.


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 25, 2010)

stringmusic said:


> anybody have any other comments on the oringinal thread?



I have many.  Regarding the God of the Bible:  

Why doesn't it bother you that he is a "do as I say not as I do" kind of guy?

Why would he let Satan run around making mischief?

Why does he need worshiping so much?

Why is he jealous and angry like a person and less serene like the mightiest being in the Universe should be?

Why is he ever sad?

That's a good start.  more to come.


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 25, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> you still insist that you're right yet offer no reason why the other religions are wrong.



my bible says they are wrong.
Its one of the 10 commandments there are no other gods before him


----------



## stringmusic (Oct 25, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> You still insist that you're right yet offer no reason why the other religions are wrong.



read post #35


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 25, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> my bible says they are wrong.
> Its one of the 10 commandments there are no other gods before him



"Their" holy book says you're wrong.  I guess y'all better duke it out to find out who's right.  Oh yeah, y'all have been killing each other over that very thing for centuries.  Keep it up till you're all gone while the rest of us (who don't get caught in the crossfire) advance society.


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 25, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> "their" holy book says you're wrong.  I guess y'all better duke it out to find out who's right.  Oh yeah, y'all have been killing each other over that very thing for centuries.  Keep it up till you're all gone while the rest of us (who don't get caught in the crossfire) advance society.



no thats a lie... Ive never killed anyone.... My church bretherin aint never killed nobody or any other christians ive ever known.


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 25, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> no thats a lie... Ive never killed anyone.... My church bretherin aint never killed nobody or any other christians ive ever known.



It's a bigger problem than you and your church "bretherin".


----------



## davidstaples (Oct 25, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> my bible says they are wrong.
> Its one of the 10 commandments there are no other gods before him



What about gods after him?  Shouldn't you believe in those too... you know... just in case.  After all, eternity is a long time to be wrong.


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 25, 2010)

davidstaples said:


> What about gods after him?  Shouldn't you believe in those too... you know... just in case.  After all, eternity is a long time to be wrong.



WELL I KNOW SOMTHING YOU DONT KNOW!!!


----------



## stringmusic (Oct 25, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> I have many.  Regarding the God of the Bible:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## TTom (Oct 25, 2010)

Jealousy, see that's a fun angle to take.

What do we know about the root cause of jealousy?
Insecurity right.

So if God is jealous, then God is insecure?
With all the power in the universe God is insecure?


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 25, 2010)

TTom said:


> Jealousy, see that's a fun angle to take.
> 
> What do we know about the root cause of jealousy?
> Insecurity right.
> ...



WHY WOULD GOD BE JEALOUS????


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 25, 2010)

TTom said:


> Jealousy, see that's a fun angle to take.
> 
> What do we know about the root cause of jealousy?
> Insecurity right.
> ...



Kind of like envy.  He's envious of the other God(s) that someone had decided to worship.


----------



## TTom (Oct 25, 2010)

GaBassmaster, thought you were a bible man?

How many verses in the Bible speak of God as being Jealous?

For they provoked Him with their high places,
And aroused His jealousy with their graven images 

You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and fourth generation of those who reject me,

It's your Bible who says he is jealous.

I know


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 25, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> WELL I KNOW SOMTHING YOU DONT KNOW!!!



Psst...I suspect you don't know what you think you do.


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 25, 2010)

God isnt jealous


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 25, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> God isnt jealous



And I was correct!  You don't know what you think you do.

I think you just moved to the back of the bus a Bible authority.


----------



## TTom (Oct 25, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> God isnt jealous




So the Bible is wrong??????

You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and fourth generation of those who reject me,


I can given time provide another dozen bible verses that say God is Jealous.


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 25, 2010)

TTom said:


> So the Bible is wrong??????
> 
> You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and fourth generation of those who reject me,
> 
> ...



NO THATS NOT HOW IT MEANS JEALOUS IT MEANS HE IS JEALOUS OF YOU'RE!!! LOVE!!!! HE LONGS FOR YOUR LOVE FOR HIM NOT OF GODS!!! READ THE SCRIPTURE RIGHT


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 25, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> NO THATS NOT HOW IT MEANS JEALOUS IT MEANS HE IS JEALOUS OF YOU'RE!!! LOVE!!!! HE LONGS FOR YOUR LOVE FOR HIM NOT OF GODS!!! READ THE SCRIPTURE RIGHT




By the way, *THIS IS HOW YOU YELL ON THE INTERNET!!!!!!!!*


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 25, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> NO THATS NOT HOW IT MEANS JEALOUS IT MEANS HE IS JEALOUS OF YOU'RE!!! LOVE!!!! HE LONGS FOR YOUR LOVE FOR HIM NOT OF GODS!!! READ THE SCRIPTURE RIGHT



Care to calm down and explain what you mean?


----------



## TTom (Oct 25, 2010)

I can hear the head splodin  from here. LOL

Gabassmaster, hint you rose to the bait i laid out there like a deer to corn.

You attacked the wrong angle.

The angle you want to attack is not the idea that God is jealous there are dozens of verses where the bible says he is. The angle you want to attack is where I said that jealousy is rooted in insecurity.

You could have gone with the definition of jealousy today and the definition of jealousy during the context of the Old Testament and even the days when translations were made are very different definitions of jealousy.

Of course that leads you into the trap of changing contexts changing the meaning of a book and that leaves so many things open for me to step into and show man's influence on the changes in the bible.


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 25, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> by the way, *this is how you yell on the internet!!!!!!!!*



im not trying to yell


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 25, 2010)

TTom said:


> I can hear the head splodin  from here. LOL
> 
> Gabassmaster, hint you rose to the bait i laid out there like a deer to corn.
> 
> ...



I think you just lost him. 

 Doesn't it say in the Bible that God has a special place in his heart for those with simple, childlike faith?


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 25, 2010)

ttom said:


> i can hear the head splodin  From here. Lol
> 
> gabassmaster, hint you rose to the bait i laid out there like a deer to corn.
> 
> ...





see this is why so many people in america are ignorant. If someone said oh that truck right there is bad. You would be the one person that actually thought they mean it in a bad way!


----------



## stringmusic (Oct 25, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> I think you just lost him.
> 
> Doesn't it say in the Bible that God has a special place in his heart for those with simple, childlike faith?



why am I getting left out of my own thread?


----------



## TTom (Oct 25, 2010)

Oh so me using the new definition of jealousy and you using the old one compares to me using the old definition of bad and you using the new one?????????? 


Actually you have it reversed, you're the one arguing for an old context definition of Jealousy.  So that would by direct comparison make it you arguing for the old context definition of bad. LOL


Edited to add:

Oh and ignorant, are you not the same person who just said God Isn't Jealous AFTER I provided you with the scriptural example saying he was?


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 25, 2010)

ttom said:


> oh so me using the new definition of jealousy and you using the old one compares to me using the old definition of bad and you using the new one??????????
> 
> 
> Actually you have it reversed, you're the one arguing for an old context definition of jealousy.  So that would by direct comparison make it you arguing for the old context definition of bad. Lol



your lookin at everything crossways and aint understanding the point


----------



## davidstaples (Oct 25, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> WELL I KNOW SOMTHING YOU DONT KNOW!!!



I find it difficult to believe that someone who lacks grammatical and spelling skills knows anything about theology that I don't know.


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 25, 2010)

stringmusic said:


> why am I getting left out of my own thread?



Actually, it all relates.  This is the kind of faith that the writers of the Bible prefer from the followers.     Don't understand.   Better yet,Don't question.


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 25, 2010)

davidstaples said:


> I find it difficult to believe that someone who lacks grammatical and spelling skills knows anything about theology that I don't know.



I ISNT TRI  N 2  B  A PUURRRFECT    SPELLLER...
"HERES YOUR SIGN"


----------



## TTom (Oct 25, 2010)

Old with old makes sense Old Jealousy with Old Bad
New with new makes sense New Jealousy with New Bad
Your comparison was New (Jealousy rooted in insecurity) with Old (Bad means bad)that's crosswise.


----------



## davidstaples (Oct 25, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> I ISNT TRI  N 2  B  A PUURRRFECT    SPELLLER...
> "HERES YOUR SIGN"



It's usually not that someone doesn't care enough to use proper English; it's that they don't know proper English.  Ignorance in one subject typically bleeds over to others.  A lackadaisical mind isn't one I trust when it comes to theology.


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 25, 2010)

ttom said:


> old with old makes sense old jealousy with old bad
> new with new makes sense new jealousy with new bad
> your comparison was new (jealousy rooted in insecurity) with old (bad means bad)that's crosswise.



it aint crosswise its crossways gosh!!! And it was an example of how people like you dont understand anything. Cause you dont think outside the box


----------



## Thanatos (Oct 25, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> Able but not willing......
> 
> You know what?  I get it.  I really do.   A God could make the Universe in 6 days or 20 seconds.  He could come down as person or a burning bush or a talking jug of milk if he wanted to.  He could allow babies to be born without skin or he could allow a child to be raped and eaten by a psychopath and still call it love because his ways are not our ways.  I get it.
> 
> He's having fun with you.  He's burning you like a kid with a magnifying glass does ants.  Worship him and fear him all you want.  As far as I can tell it still rains on the just and the unjust.  Your father has given his child a loaded gun and the free will to point it at his own head; in love.



That is not love. That is called freedom. You have the freedom to love or to hate. The gun at your own head would lead one to believe that is hate of something.


----------



## TTom (Oct 25, 2010)

Gabassmaster, you're really going to have to step up your game to compete here. Your grasp of basic logic is lacking.

You focus on a difference in that word but still lack tha ability to grasp the basic Old with Old New with New logic line.

That's not outside the box that's you out of your league.

BTW Merriam Websters says Crossways is a variant of the more correct Crosswise.

Note how the spelling and grammar function underlines crossways (as in check your grammar/ spelling here) but does not underline and mark crosswise as incorrect.

BTW I'm a horrible speller myself, but if you right click the underlined words it gives you the spelling options to choose from so we can not look so bad (old meaning). LOL


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 25, 2010)

Thanatos said:


> That is not love. That is called freedom. You have the freedom to love or to hate. The gun at your own head would lead one to believe that is hate of something.



I can only imagine the self loathing that must accompany believing one's self to be wretched and deserving of He11.


----------



## Achilles Return (Oct 25, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> Cause you dont think outside the box



Hold on, did a southern white protestant male tell me I'm not thinking outside the box?

I think we've found a new definition of irony, folks.


----------



## Thanatos (Oct 25, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> I can only imagine the self loathing that must accompany believing one's self to be wretched and deserving of He11.



No self loathing here. I am glad to be here typing on the internets to all you guys.  Love it!


----------



## Thanatos (Oct 25, 2010)

Achilles Return said:


> Hold on, did a southern white protestant male tell me I'm not thinking outside the box?
> 
> I think we've found a new definition of irony, folks.



I love your post. They spew arrogance and ignorance...the exact same ideas you hate about religion.


----------



## wilber85 (Oct 25, 2010)

Sorry to butt in guys but I always thought this video was informative and easy to understand for those that have a harder time with this stuff 
<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/0gAeYxgwuSo?fs=1&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/0gAeYxgwuSo?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>


----------



## ted_BSR (Oct 25, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> No one ever lived in a fish for 3 days.  That's all you get.



It was a whale, mammel, not a fish.


----------



## ted_BSR (Oct 25, 2010)

Achilles Return said:


> Hold on, did a southern white protestant male tell me I'm not thinking outside the box?
> 
> I think we've found a new definition of irony, folks.



Proving the inverse of your other posts on multiple threads I see. "The need for intellectual superiority"


----------



## ted_BSR (Oct 25, 2010)

"Meany Pants"? Really?  I never imagined God wearing pants.  A robe yes, but not pants?

For real though, He is a God of Mercy.  You only have to accept His gift to realize this. He is the God of the living, not the dead. He is the God that offers redemption.  It seems easy and entertaining to deny Him, and his followers.  The bible says that you will do this. I expect it from you. I am vilified by your rejection.  I am saved from my own sin nature. I hope that you will be too. Amen.


----------



## stringmusic (Oct 26, 2010)

how did this thread turn into a 4th grade grammer class?  Don't answer I already know the answer that most will give. Should I delete this thread or does anybody else have anything else to say about the oringinal thread? If anything, just say that you have no argument against the thread.


----------



## stringmusic (Oct 26, 2010)

> For real though, He is a God of Mercy.  You only have to accept His gift to realize this. He is the God of the living, not the dead. He is the God that offers redemption.  It seems easy and entertaining to deny Him, and his followers.  The bible says that you will do this. I expect it from you. I am vilified by your rejection.  I am saved from my own sin nature. I hope that you will be too. Amen.



Did you write this for me?


----------



## ted_BSR (Oct 26, 2010)

stringmusic said:


> Did you write this for me?



Pretty sure you are aware of this, I wrote it for the others.


----------



## Diogenes (Oct 27, 2010)

Okay—well, there was an OP, way back there, that opined: “Although God didn't make the world the way you think that He should have, He gave you the choice to accept or decline, its that simple. What more could you ask for?”

You’re kidding, right?

Is the world, in this view, so simplistic as to be divided starkly into ‘good’ and ‘evil,’ and with such simple minded choices as “A. I choose the God of the Christians, and thus will live eternally in bliss, knowing no evil,” or “B. I reject the God of the Christians, and thus embrace evil for all eternity?”

Do you really see things in such black or white terms?  

This is certainly a novel method of reasoning, and I’d like to say that it is a new one, but that is hardly the case.  Evangelism does not allow reasoning, and does not allow one to even revise a cherished theory as a consequence of new information.  Instead, new information is revised and reinterpreted, edited, perverted, and warped in such a way as to fit and support the cherished theories.  When that sort of ‘reasoning’ manifests itself in such open challenges as represented in the OP, one must of needs first ask for all education-related taxes to be returned to the taxpayers – clearly we were cheated.

What more could I ask for?  That is really the question?

Okay.  I could ask that the term ‘free will’ be researched just a bit.  Free and independent choice: voluntary decision.  In philosophy, free will is the doctrine that the conduct of human beings expresses personal choice, and is not simply determined by physical or divine forces.  So, by definition, the very term ‘free will’ precludes the narrowing of all choices to only two simple-minded ones.  

And, by definition, ‘free will’ cannot be granted to anyone, as though bestowed as a privilege.  Such an interpretation would imply that a thing once bestowed through some divine largesse can also be taken away.  As though, if one abuses one’s free will, one can be pulled over by an Angel from Above, who will flash his halo as credentials and revoke your free will license.  

Also, this oddly reasoned bit of nonsense hinges on a contention that is in and of itself nonsensical – “Although God didn't make the world the way you think that He should have . . . “    Um?  Who said that God made the world to begin with?  Your God certainly never dropped by to say such a thing.  And I certainly never thought or believed such a thing . . . so, um?  How on earth did an undemonstrated and unsupportable contention become the basis for a ‘reasoned’ argument?  And what manner of presumption goes on from an unsupported assumption to further preface itself on “ . . . the way you think that He should have . . . “?  Huh?

How on earth could I have had any thoughts whatsoever about how a being that does not exist ought to have created a thing that it did not create?  So all that has been done here, logically, has been to take a fiction (God created the world) and assume it as a fact, then append a motive to those with actual free will (he didn’t make it the way we think he should have), and then, based on two false contentions, go into the most outrageous bit of the argument  -- the contention that the speaker actually knows the thoughts and motives of the nonexistent – “He gave you the choice to accept or decline, its that simple . . . “     

Is it now?  That simple?  See, the ‘He’ in question does not exist.  The ‘He’ in question cannot be demonstrated in any way, shape or form, and cannot then be shown to have created anything at all – what with not existing and all, which tends to limit one’s creative abilities.  Yet, this phantom ‘He’ nonetheless gave me the choice to accept or decline?  In your opinion?  

You have to be kidding.  This omnipotent ‘He’ you theorize was so limited as to present only a True or False question for all existence?  One would think the Final Exam would be a bit more difficult, in your theology, given the stakes you propose.

What more can I ask for?  Semi-orderly chaos.  Wait.  We already have that.  Darn.

You see, Sir Isaac Newton gave people the tools to build the modern world.  His methods and theories still work, even though we now know that many were incomplete or wrong from a larger perspective.  Once launched down the path towards rationality and away from intuitive superstitions, reductionist observation took hold, and Einstein came along.  Newton’s illusion of absolute space and time was crushed by quantum theory, which put an end to the idea of controllable measurement.  Just about everything, it turns out, is relative to everything else, and since everything is in motion all the time, and things can only be measured relative to a constant, and since there turn out to be no real constants . . . . well . . .  even Galileo’s observation that the period of oscillation of a pendulum is independent of its amplitude (still taught in every school in America) turns out to be very wrong.  

Newton and Galileo used linear equations, similar to, but much more complex than the false linear thinking outlined above.  Turns out, though, that the system is not closed, and is subject to the turbulence of the non-linear – the potential for complex and unexpected behavior – quantum events, following rules of chaos.  Sorry about that.  

Not a single thing in the observable universe, locally or remotely, supports a contention that some ‘God’ or another ‘made’ the world, ‘created’ stark and narrow choices, gave some the ability to decide what others ‘think,’ endowed some with the status of ‘chosen’ over any others, and/or handed down a decree concerning what is ‘good’ and what is ‘evil.’  

“There will be two types of people in the end.”  No. Again, the presentation of false choices seems to be all the rage, but since you asked what more I could ask for, I’d ask for an end to this sort of nonsensical contention.  In the end, there will only be one type of person – a dead one.  If that simple truth scares the panties off of you I’m terribly sorry, but you won’t get a ‘Get Out Of The Grave Free’ card in this game, no matter what you wish to do by way of taking out a long-term mortgage on your imagined ‘eternal soul’ in this life.  

The truth is much more complex than childish ‘True or False’ questions, and is certainly not contained in an ancient Book of fairy stories.  

Sorry about that.


----------



## Thanatos (Oct 27, 2010)

Your use of all the scientific verbiage might make you look smart, but you are withholding key developments in Newton's and Einstein's findings. It is widely known that general relativity DOES NOT fit or work with quantum mechanics. Scientist are working diligently to try and find a "Quantum Theory of Gravity" to link the two, but have not been successful yet. 

You will not get very far lumping all Christian's into the "good and evil" ignorance basket.


----------



## Thanatos (Oct 27, 2010)

Diogenes said:


> Not a single thing in the observable universe, locally or remotely, supports a contention that some ‘God’ or another ‘made’ the world, ‘created’ stark and narrow choices, gave some the ability to decide what others ‘think,’ endowed some with the status of ‘chosen’ over any others, and/or handed down a decree concerning what is ‘good’ and what is ‘evil.’



What the...

Where in the world did you come up with that idea.


----------



## TTom (Oct 27, 2010)

Thanatos said:


> Your use of all the scientific verbiage might make you look smart, but you are withholding key developments in Newton's and Einstein's findings. It is widely known that general relativity DOES NOT fit or work with quantum mechanics. Scientist are working diligently to try and find a "Quantum Theory of Gravity" to link the two, but have not been successful yet.
> 
> You will not get very far lumping all Christian's into the "good and evil" ignorance basket.



Except that when you actually read instead of skimming, you note that he already addressed the issue that Newtonian physics is being replaced with quantum theory. So your rebuttal rebuts nothing.

"Newton’s illusion of absolute space and time was crushed by quantum theory, which put an end to the idea of controllable measurement. Just about everything, it turns out, is relative to everything else, and since everything is in motion all the time, and things can only be measured relative to a constant, and since there turn out to be no real constants . . . . well . . . even Galileo’s observation that the period of oscillation of a pendulum is independent of its amplitude (still taught in every school in America) turns out to be very wrong.

Newton and Galileo used linear equations, similar to, but much more complex than the false linear thinking outlined above. Turns out, though, that the system is not closed, and is subject to the turbulence of the non-linear – the potential for complex and unexpected behavior – quantum events, following rules of chaos. Sorry about that."


----------



## Achilles Return (Oct 27, 2010)

Thanatos said:


> What the...
> 
> Where in the world did you come up with that idea.



It's true.


----------



## Thanatos (Oct 27, 2010)

TTom said:


> Except that when you actually read instead of skimming, you note that he already addressed the issue that Newtonian physics is being replaced with quantum theory. So your rebuttal rebuts nothing.
> 
> "Newton’s illusion of absolute space and time was crushed by quantum theory, which put an end to the idea of controllable measurement. Just about everything, it turns out, is relative to everything else, and since everything is in motion all the time, and things can only be measured relative to a constant, and since there turn out to be no real constants . . . . well . . . even Galileo’s observation that the period of oscillation of a pendulum is independent of its amplitude (still taught in every school in America) turns out to be very wrong.
> 
> Newton and Galileo used linear equations, similar to, but much more complex than the false linear thinking outlined above. Turns out, though, that the system is not closed, and is subject to the turbulence of the non-linear – the potential for complex and unexpected behavior – quantum events, following rules of chaos. Sorry about that."



Time to go back and read your physics book good sir. Maybe Dio should too...

The theory of relativity is what challenged Newton's findings. Einstein's work on the special and general theory of relativity is what made him so famous.  

Now we bring in quantum theory. Yes it helped us understand the sub atomic world a bit better, but quantum theory and Einstein's theory of general relativity do not mesh well together. Scientist have been working for years trying to find a "quantum theory of gravity", but have yet been unsuccessful. Some of the new theories being trotted out to be this "missing" piece are string theory or M theory.


----------



## Thanatos (Oct 27, 2010)

Think about the sun. If you look directly at it you will be blinded by it. It is hard to look at. How do we know the sun is useful? How do we know we need the sun? 

Through scientific research we can see there is a LARGE amount of evidence that the sun is the reason we exist on this planet. It provides the gravitational stability to support life. It provides the energy to feed the plants that our animals eat and drink. There are many more examples of what the sun does for us to make life possible for us to live on this rock. But...if you look into the sky all you see is a ball of light that blinds you. Good thing we have all that evidence to know how important it is to us...


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 27, 2010)

Thanatos said:


> Time to go back and read your physics book good sir. Maybe Dio should too...
> 
> The theory of relativity is what challenged Newton's findings. Einstein's work on the special and general theory of relativity is what made him so famous.
> 
> Now we bring in quantum theory. Yes it helped us understand the sub atomic world a bit better, but quantum theory and Einstein's theory of general relativity do not mesh well together. Scientist have been working for years trying to find a "quantum theory of gravity", but have yet been unsuccessful. Some of the new theories being trotted out to be this "missing" piece are string theory or M theory.



Are you suggesting scientist put down all this foolishness; particle accelerators and petri dishes and read the Bible to better understand the Universe?



Thanatos said:


> Think about the sun. If you look directly at it you will be blinded by it. It is hard to look at. How do we know the sun is useful? How do we know we need the sun?
> 
> Through scientific research we can see there is a LARGE amount of evidence that the sun is the reason we exist on this planet. It provides the gravitational stability to support life. It provides the energy to feed the plants that our animals eat and drink. There are many more examples of what the sun does for us to make life possible for us to live on this rock. But...if you look into the sky all you see is a ball of light that blinds you. Good thing we have all that evidence to know how important it is to us...



What does the Bible tell you about how the sun works?  I understand it stood still  at one point (rather, the Earth stood still but that wasn't made clear).  I don't have to go into the specifics of what would happen if the Earth stopped orbiting the Sun abruptly, do I?  To quote a firm, certain in its perfection, Bible believer:  "HOW DOES A BEE FLY?  GOD SAYS FLY!!"   That's not a good enough answer for a six year old and it shouldn't be a good enough answer for you either.


----------



## TTom (Oct 27, 2010)

So now we have to include every single step in the process of the advancement of physics from Newton to Quantum Theory. 

How is the point of, "Semi-orderly chaos", made better by including the midpoint step of Einstien and relativity?

Newton gives us the start point for physics as a science and qunatum gives us the point right before chaos theory, thus each holds a place in that journey that cannot be avoided or skipped over. In this case Einstein can be glossed over without losing the meaning.

Edited to add:

Meaning in large part that Einstein can be left out of the leap from Newton to Chaos Theory, the same way we leave out  James Watt, Volta, Ampere', Avagodro, Ohm, Joule and Curie.

All of those Giants of Physics were major steps from Newton to Chaos Theory journey, but individually they were not required for the point to be made.


----------



## DCHunter (Oct 27, 2010)




----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 27, 2010)

Achilles Return said:


> It's true.



 Evidence?


----------



## Thanatos (Oct 27, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> Are you suggesting scientist put down all this foolishness; particle accelerators and petri dishes and read the Bible to better understand the Universe?



Heck no! If it is not evident already I am firm believer in critical thinking and I love science. I cant wait til the particle accelerator rips a hole in our realm of reality into another dimension! 





ambush80 said:


> What does the Bible tell you about how the sun works?  I understand it stood still  at one point (rather, the Earth stood still but that wasn't made clear).  I don't have to go into the specifics of what would happen if the Earth stopped orbiting the Sun abruptly, do I?  To quote a firm, certain in its perfection, Bible believer:  "HOW DOES A BEE FLY?  GOD SAYS FLY!!"   That's not a good enough answer for a six year old and it shouldn't be a good enough answer for you either.



I believe you missed the point of that analogy. Here is a metaphor from C.S. Lewis to help explain, "as I believe the sun has risen, not only because I see it, but because I can see everything else."


----------



## Thanatos (Oct 27, 2010)

TTom said:


> So now we have to include every single step in the process of the advancement of physics from Newton to Quantum Theory.
> 
> How is the point of, "Semi-orderly chaos", made better by including the midpoint step of Einstien and relativity?
> 
> ...



You have now taken the bait to the trap friend.

The way we arrived at quantum theory is all semantics. What we need to know is that NO ONE has yet to find a theory than proves chaos theory, or any "uniting theory of everything". They are working might hard to come up with some system to unite the theories together to make sense of our existence. So the question is...do you "believe" chaos theory to be true? There is no one who could say chaos theory is 100% true. So by your own admission of non belief in unproven faith you can not believe in chaos theory right? Right?


----------



## TTom (Oct 27, 2010)

So by your own admission of non belief in unproven faith you can not believe in chaos theory right? Right? 

ummm Nooooo you set the wrong trap for the wrong species and are under arrest. LOL I'm not an atheist.

BTW how is my calling you on the semantic violation somehow a violation itself? 

Do I believe Chaos Theory to be true?

I believe Chaos Theory has some interesting positions and the potential to be either massively simplifying or massively confusing .
I don't believe it answers all questions. Science tells me that such a position is untenable to begin with.

I'm  not a No Faith guy so again wrong trap for wrong species. I do however insist upon people being able to discriminate between what they know through reason and what they know through faith and never to confuse the two.


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 27, 2010)

ttom said:


> so by your own admission of non belief in unproven faith you can not believe in chaos theory right? Right?
> 
> Ummm nooooo you set the wrong trap for the wrong species and are under arrest. Lol i'm not an atheist.
> 
> ...



the definition of athiest is someone who dosent believe in god.


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 27, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> the definition of athiest is someone who dosent believe in god.



Do you still think that the god of the Bible is not jealous?


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 27, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> Do you still think that the god of the Bible is not jealous?



DO YOU STILL NOT UNDERSTAND THATS NOT WHAT IT MEANS??? PWN


----------



## TTom (Oct 27, 2010)

Thanks for the news flash, LOL

You obviously forgot to do any homework and actually read anything about what I believe. Because I have said many many many times that I believe in a supreme being, a God. It's just that you don't believe he's the same God you believe in.


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 27, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> Do you still think that the god of the Bible is not jealous?



http://www.raptureready.com/faq/faq264.html
YOU EVER HURD OF GOOGLE?


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 27, 2010)

Thanatos said:


> Heck no! If it is not evident already I am firm believer in critical thinking and I love science. I cant wait til the particle accelerator rips a hole in our realm of reality into another dimension!



What does your critical thinking say about a claim that the sun stopped in the sky?




Thanatos said:


> I believe you missed the point of that analogy. Here is a metaphor from C.S. Lewis to help explain, "as I believe the sun has risen, not only because I see it, but because I can see everything else."



The sun isn't the sole source for illumination.  Maybe you can explain to me how you think this quote supports your position.


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 27, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> http://www.raptureready.com/faq/faq264.html
> YOU EVER HURD OF GOOGLE?



I have "heard" of Google.  Perhaps we should discuss the notion of "the anthropomorphic  description of God".  What does that mean to you?


----------



## Thanatos (Oct 27, 2010)

TTom said:


> So by your own admission of non belief in unproven faith you can not believe in chaos theory right? Right?
> 
> ummm Nooooo you set the wrong trap for the wrong species and are under arrest. LOL I'm not an atheist.
> 
> ...



Well you smelled like one and typed like one so i set the trap...haha

My point of semantics is that you were right. It does not matter how we got from that point a to point b in THIS conversation. It sounds like you and I are on the same page. Agree?


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 27, 2010)

Back to the original program:

God as a meany pants

In comparison to God, we are less than childlike in our understanding of anything.  Is that right?   I have a child.  If I see her trying to touch the spinning lawnmower blade I will stop her.  I would never just tell her its dangerous and allow her to exercise free will.  I know better than that.


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 27, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> Back to the original program:
> 
> God as a meany pants
> 
> In comparison to God, we are less than childlike in our understanding of anything.  Is that right?   I have a child.  If I see her trying to touch the spinning lawnmower blade I will stop her.  I would never just tell her its dangerous and allow her to exercise free will.  I know better than that.



she dosent have the knowledge not to. you are old enough and wise enough to decide whether or not there is a god. you have no excuse if you are sent to h@#$ for an eternity.


----------



## Thanatos (Oct 27, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> What does your critical thinking say about a claim that the sun stopped in the sky?



My critical thinking says that it will in 5 billion years  It will turn into a red giant and swallow the earth.  








ambush80 said:


> The sun isn't the sole source for illumination.  Maybe you can explain to me how you think this quote supports your position.



I explained it in the analogy before I posted the quote. But to put it another way...

Instead of looking directly at the sun to learn about it we look at what the sun actually shows us. Because of the sun we can look at the different scientific process that allow life to be sustained. Indirectly we gain a ton of knowledge about the sun.


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 27, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> she dosent have the knowledge not to. you are old enough and wise enough to decide whether or not there is a god. you have no excuse if you are sent to h@#$ for an eternity.



So which one am I supposed to have?  The wisdom and the intellect to recognize that existence of God or Childlike belief?


Care to discuss that there "anthropomorphism of God" concept that you hinged your definition of "jealous God" on?


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 27, 2010)

Thanatos said:


> My critical thinking says that it will in 5 billion years  It will turn into a red giant and swallow the earth.



You know full well what I referred to: the Biblical claim that the Sun stopped in the sky.  Care to offer a logical, feasable explanation for that claim?



Thanatos said:


> I explained it in the analogy before I posted the quote. But to put it another way...
> 
> Instead of looking directly at the sun to learn about it we look at what the sun actually shows us. Because of the sun we can look at the different scientific process that allow life to be sustained. Indirectly we gain a ton of knowledge about the sun.



In a kind of poetic way, I see that what you are still getting at is the notion of irreducible complexity, which has soundly been debunked and dismissed.


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 27, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> she dosent have the knowledge not to. you are old enough and wise enough to decide whether or not there is a god. you have no excuse if you are sent to h@#$ for an eternity.



What if your kid was 6 or 12 or 37?  Because you think they are old enough and should know better you would let them stick their hand in the lawn mower?  That would make you a terrible parent, in my opinion.


----------



## TTom (Oct 27, 2010)

Thanatos, I guess sharing a habitat with the Atheist might get me confused for one every so often. LOL

Pay the nominal fine of $0.02 (or something of like worth) and be more careful in your species identification. LOL Good thing you;re not duck hunting. LOL


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 27, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> What if your kid was 6?  Or 12?  Or 37?  Because you think they are old enough and should know better you would let them stick their hand in the lawn mower?  That would make you a terrible parent, in my opinion.



he died for you and said that if you believe and get saved you will have eternal life with him. But if YOU choose not to believe YOU are rejecting him and sending youself to h@#$. same thing as if you had a son that was in his 30's and you told him if YOU jump off the cliff YOU will die if YOU come with me YOU will live. And he jumps his decision not yours. YOU choose your own destiny by rejecting christ and everyone will stand before him and admit they were wrong.


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 27, 2010)

Care to discuss that there "anthropomorphism of God" concept that you hinged your definition of "jealous God" on?[/QUOTE]

i did no such i just said that not what is means.


----------



## davidstaples (Oct 27, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> he died for you and said that if you believe and get saved you will have eternal life with him. But if YOU choose not to believe YOU are rejecting him and sending youself to h@#$. same thing as if you had a son that was in his 30's and you told him if YOU jump off the cliff YOU will die if YOU come with me YOU will live. And he jumps his decision not yours. YOU choose your own destiny by rejecting christ and everyone will stand before him and admit they were wrong.



I think what Ambush is trying to say is that any parent who actually loved their kid would yank their son away from the cliff... not just sit idly by while they jump off it.


----------



## Thanatos (Oct 27, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> You know full well what I referred to: the Biblical claim that the Sun stopped in the sky.  Care to offer a logical, feasable explanation for that claim?



I know within the Bible you have text written as history and other test written as poetry and many other styles of writing. In Joshua I take this as a bit of hyperbole. If I am wrong the the bible meant this actually happened...so what. In my belief a guy died then rose from the dead three days later. It is silly to get caught up in these differences for what is at stake. 




ambush80 said:


> In a kind of poetic way, I see that what you are still getting at is the notion of irreducible complexity, which has soundly been debunked and dismissed.



Yea, we have already hashed this out months ago. If you fail to see what is right in front of you that is your choice. Thank God. Amen.


----------



## Thanatos (Oct 27, 2010)

TTom said:


> Thanatos, I guess sharing a habitat with the Atheist might get me confused for one every so often. LOL
> 
> Pay the nominal fine of $0.02 (or something of like worth) and be more careful in your species identification. LOL Good thing you;re not duck hunting. LOL



Haha


----------



## TTom (Oct 27, 2010)

That's 1 cent per Ha right? LOL


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 27, 2010)

davidstaples said:


> I think what Ambush is trying to say is that any parent who actually loved their kid would yank their son away from the cliff... not just sit idly by while they jump off it.



and he did... with his life!!!!


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 27, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> he died for you and said that if you believe and get saved you will have eternal life with him. But if YOU choose not to believe YOU are rejecting him and sending youself to h@#$. same thing as if you had a son that was in his 30's and you told him if YOU jump off the cliff YOU will die if YOU come with me YOU will live. And he jumps his decision not yours. YOU choose your own destiny by rejecting christ and everyone will stand before him and admit they were wrong.



You understand perfectly.  If you told and told and told your son not to jump off the cliff and he still wanted to would you just let him?  Or would you tackle him to the ground or shoot him in the leg if you had a gun?  Wouldn't you do anything you could to stop him?

Lets put all the cards on the table right here.

God allows you, his child, to step off into He11, with all the gnashing of teeth and eternal suffering.  He warns you of your fate in a dubious book of extraordinary claims and through his representatives (Gabassmaster for example), who can hear his voice.  And the reason for your unfathomable, eternal suffering?  You refused to proclaim Him as the one and only God.........That's bad parenting and a grossly excessive punishment for the offense.

But wait....His ways are not our ways.  He gets a free pass to act like an irresponsible guardian; sadistic really.  I've often thought: what would  someone have to do to me that I would want them to be in He11 forever.  I've come up with quite a few scenarios, but denying or questioning my existence would not do it.  I guess I'm not as sensitive and insecure about my existence as God. I don't have it in me. I'm just not a meany pants


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 27, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> You understand perfectly.  If you told and told and told your son not to jump off the cliff and he still wanted to would you just let him?  Or would you tackle him to the ground or shoot him in the leg if you had a gun?  Wouldn't you do anything you could to stop him?
> 
> Lets put all the cards on the table right here.
> 
> ...






OH yeah i guess your a better person than god right? you would crucify yourself to save someone??? oh yes you would


----------



## Phillip Thurmond (Oct 27, 2010)

Ambush 80 when you one day go before GOD I want you to remember all this stuff your writing here and see if you can talk your way into Heven because I'm sure that he will understand!  
Also at that time you will bow before him and you will proclaim that he is Lord!  
Don't bother responding to my post because I won't read it.  I'm not going to get into this with  you because I believe as much the way as I do as you believe the things you do.  No need to waste our time with this.  Have a great day!


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 27, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> Care to discuss that there "anthropomorphism of God" concept that you hinged your definition of "jealous God" on?



i did no such i just said that not what is means.[/QUOTE]

You linked me to a site whose content, I assume, you agree with as an explanation for why when the Bible says "God is jealous" that it doesn't really mean "jealous".  Their rationale hinges on this notion of "Anthropomorphising God".  Do you agree with their posit?  If so, perhaps you can explain to me what they meant by "anthropomorphism of God".  



Gabassmaster said:


> and he did... with his life!!!!



He allowed them a way out: "Declare that I am Lord!" then He sits by and watches them fall into the pit.  Do you think he offers them a compulsory "I told you so" as they fall?  Again, if it were my child, I would throw a rock or yell or something if I couldn't actually wrestle them to the ground.


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 27, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> OH yeah i guess your a better person than god right? you would crucify yourself to save someone??? oh yes you would



To save all of humanity?  You bet I would. I might offer my whole family, extended relatives and in-laws included.


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 27, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> i did no such i just said that not what is means.



You linked me to a site whose content, I assume, you agree with as an explanation for why when the Bible says "God is jealous" that it doesn't really mean "jealous".  Their rationale hinges on this notion of "Anthropomorphising God".  Do you agree with their posit?  If so, perhaps you can explain to me what they meant by "anthropomorphism of God".  



He allowed them a way out: "Declare that I am Lord!" then He sits by and watches them fall into the pit.  Do you think he offers them a compulsory "I told you so" as they fall?  Again, if it were my child, I would throw a rock or yell or something if I couldn't actually wrestle them to the ground.[/QUOTE]




he dosent want a bunch of drone robots in heaven. he wants people who love him.


----------



## TTom (Oct 27, 2010)

The question is was crucifixion of God as man a real sacrifice?

(gets ready to make the heads explode with this one)

God knows he's not really going to die and remain dead. So he starts off with the deck stacked entirely in his favor.

He gets to claim to have suffered death, but what suffering is it when you already know it's only 3 days?

God gets to claim to have know what it is to be man, yet he knows he is God in a human body. None of those HUGE nagging questions that actual mortal men must ask and remain in doubt does he have to suffer though. HE doesn't have to face many of the worst challenges in a man's life.
Death of a parent, death of a child, death of a spouse, so many things that in a mortal's life provide that nagging doubt could provide no doubt and thus no suffering in Jesus because, Jesus got to take the test with a cheat sheet.

OK putting on my asbestos drawers, and waiting for the calls for my burning at the stake.


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 27, 2010)

Phillip Thurmond said:


> Ambush 80 when you one day go before GOD I want you to remember all this stuff your writing here and see if you can talk your way into Heven because I'm sure that he will understand!



If he doesn't understand, then perhaps you should reconsider worshiping him.  I get the feeling that you can't wait for non believers to burn.  As if you would like a ring side seat for the condemning.  How sweet will the "I told you so" taste as it drips from your lips? 

By the way, I hope you wear your fire retardant cammo when you find yourself before Allah Hu Akbaar.   See.  Your not scared of that happening either.



Phillip Thurmond said:


> Also at that time you will bow before him and you will proclaim that he is Lord!
> Don't bother responding to my post because I won't read it.  I'm not going to get into this with  you because I believe as much the way as I do as you believe the things you do.  No need to waste our time with this.  Have a great day!



"All units: Be advised, there's been a hit and run...actually more like a jab and hide in the vicinity of Apologetics." (Which this post is absolutely not and therefore inappropriate for the sub forum)


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 27, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> You linked me to a site whose content, I assume, you agree with as an explanation for why when the Bible says "God is jealous" that it doesn't really mean "jealous".  Their rationale hinges on this notion of "Anthropomorphising God".  Do you agree with their posit?  If so, perhaps you can explain to me what they meant by "anthropomorphism of God".
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Don't want to discuss anthropomorphism, huh?


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 27, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> Don't want to discuss anthropomorphism, huh?



why talk on that if your brain cant even comprehend this???


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 27, 2010)

TTom said:


> The question is was crucifixion of God as man a real sacrifice?
> 
> (gets ready to make the heads explode with this one)
> 
> ...



I think a better cautionary story would be if he sent the Holy Ghost part of the trinity to He11 For eternity as an example; that would be a real demonstration of his seriousness.  Perhaps he could allow every person to see and feel He11 for like 2 minutes.


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 27, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> why talk on that if your brain cant even comprehend this???



Ok. Lets not talk on that no more.


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 27, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> Ok. Lets not talk on that no more.


----------



## Thanatos (Oct 27, 2010)

TTom said:


> The question is was crucifixion of God as man a real sacrifice?
> 
> (gets ready to make the heads explode with this one)
> 
> ...



Now we are not on the same page...lol.

To make it short. In my beliefs Jesus suffered the ultimate pain. Imagine you had a father that took care of you for all eternity and one day he asked you to die for some people who would spit on you and curse your name as you went to die for them. Then when death was near that father left you. You had felt his warmth and his embrace for eons and then when he could have saved you there was complete separation. I would say that is more painful than anything any human can experience.


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 27, 2010)

Thanatos said:


> Now we are not on the same page...lol.
> 
> To make it short. In my beliefs Jesus suffered the ultimate pain. Imagine you had a father that took care of you for all eternity and one day he asked you to die for some people who would spit on you and curse your name as you went to die for them. Then when death was near that father left you. You had felt his warmth and his embrace for eons and then when he could have saved you there was complete separation. I would say that is more painful than anything any human can experience.



How about sitting idly by and watching your child walk into the pit of He11 when a simple, verbal "Hey!! Don't!!!" would stop them?  That must be painful, or fun, or mildly amusing or neither.  Who knows what God might make of that?


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 27, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


>



Why can bees fly?


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 27, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> why can bees fly?



why is it scientifically impossible?


----------



## TTom (Oct 27, 2010)

Yet he knew there would be reconciliation. There was never a doubt in his mind that he would return to his father's warm embrace.

It's comparing a weekend fast to starving to death.

I know we're not on the same page here. LOL
Not being limited to Christianity I have alot of latitude in how I approach the great questions.

Now had Jesus not known he was God's only begotten (and God) and he had gone to his death willingly and died and spent 3 days in sheol (sp) without the sure and certain knowledge that he would return. That would be sacrifice of the level you place on the act for me.

complete separation? hmmm how does that work when Jesus is God? (one of those trinity questions that is difficult to explain) Can God be completely separate from himself? How does that work?


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 27, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> why is it scientifically impossible?



I don't know. Why?


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 27, 2010)

BECAUSE SCIENCE DOSENT KNOW EVERYTHING.
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread551673/pg1


----------



## TTom (Oct 27, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> why is it scientifically impossible?



You really don't learn from reading these things at all.

I provided you with the education yesterday that shows that science NEVER said they could not fly. Yet you insist on replaying your ignorant misconception as if it carried some weight.

Your point is a myth, a lie that you continue to try to pass off as truth. I'm going to have to go HUGE I guess

SCIENCE DOESN'T SAY IT'S IMPOSSIBLE FOR A BUMBLE BEE TO FLY.

So stop trying to pass off the myth that it did as true.


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 27, 2010)

TTom said:


> You really don't learn from reading these things at all.
> 
> I provided you with the education yesterday that shows that science NEVER said they could not fly. Yet you insist on replaying your ignorant misconception as if it carried some weight.
> 
> ...




GO DOWN TO FLIGHT
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bumblebee


----------



## Achilles Return (Oct 27, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> he died for you and said that if you believe and get saved you will have eternal life with him. But if YOU choose not to believe YOU are rejecting him and sending youself to h@#$. same thing as if you had a son that was in his 30's and you told him if YOU jump off the cliff YOU will die if YOU come with me YOU will live. And he jumps his decision not yours. YOU choose your own destiny by rejecting christ and everyone will stand before him and admit they were wrong.



Except in your "analogy", there is nothing keeping the son from walking away from the cliff edge alone.


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 27, 2010)

achilles return said:


> except in your "analogy", there is nothing keeping the son from walking away from the cliff edge alone.



exactly there is nothing stopping you from choosing your own fate. Its your free will. You basically ride in the short bus to he##


----------



## Achilles Return (Oct 27, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> OH yeah i guess your a better person than god right? you would crucify yourself to save someone??? oh yes you would



If I was god, I wouldn't need to. I wouldn't have screwed up the first time.


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 27, 2010)

achilles return said:


> if i was god, i wouldn't need to. I wouldn't have screwed up the first time.



he didnt screw up? Dont you know anything about the bible??? Man screwed up. Duh


----------



## TTom (Oct 27, 2010)

According to the section you provided in wiki

According to 20th century folklore, the laws of aerodynamics prove that the bumblebee should be incapable of flight, as it does not have the capacity (in terms of wing size or beats per second) to achieve flight with the degree of wing loading necessary. The origin of this myth has been difficult to pin down with any certainty. John McMasters recounted an anecdote about an unnamed Swiss aerodynamicist at a dinner party who performed some rough calculations and concluded, presumably in jest, that according to the equations, bumblebees cannot fly.[27]


You really make this far too easy. you don;t even read your own links do you?

From any of 95,000 result when you search Bumble Bee flight Myth

The "science has proved that bees can't fly" urban myth originated in a 1934 book by entomologist Antoine Magnan, who discussed a mathematical equation by Andre Sainte-Lague, an engineer. The equation proved that the maximum lift for an aircraft's wings could not be achieved at equivalent speeds of a bee. I.e., an airplane the size of a bee, moving as slowly as a bee, could not fly. Although this did not mean a bee can't fly (which after all does not have stationary wings like the posited teency aircraft), nevertheless the idea that Magnan's book said bees oughtn't be able to fly began to spread.


----------



## Achilles Return (Oct 27, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> exactly there is nothing stopping you from choosing your own fate. Its your free will. You basically ride in the short bus to he##



You are failing to understand something. This "choice" about my fate is a load of hogwash. You are a christian because you were born in the United States. If you had been born in Saudi Arabia, you almost would have almost undoubtedly been a muslim. If you had been born in India, you would have probably have been Hindu. Japan? Shinto. 

And this faith thing - it means there is *no objective way* to discern the truth of your religion. The Muslim faith in their god is just as strong as you have for Jesus. Choosing a religion, then, becomes nothing more than a sick game of cosmic chance with loaded dice. The chances of you "picking" the correct religion are slim to none. You simply have no way to guarantee whether or not you are correct. If there was, it would be called evidence, and you would be using _that_ to debate with us instead of big, colored fonts and weird smiley faces.


----------



## Achilles Return (Oct 27, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> he didnt screw up? Dont you know anything about the bible??? Man screwed up. Duh



Genesis 6:6
And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 27, 2010)

achilles return said:


> you are failing to understand something. This "choice" about my fate is a load of hogwash. You are a christian because you were born in the united states. If you had been born in saudi arabia, you almost would have almost undoubtedly been a muslim. If you had been born in india, you would have probably have been hindu. Japan? Shinto.
> 
> And this faith thing - it means there is *no objective way* to discern the truth of your religion. The muslim faith in their god is just as strong as you have for jesus. Choosing a religion, then, becomes nothing more than a sick game of cosmic chance with loaded dice. The chances of you "picking" the correct religion are slim to none. You simply have no way to guarantee whether or not you are correct. If there was, it would be called evidence, and you would be using _that_ to debate with us instead of big, colored fonts and weird smiley faces.





no the bible says god gives everyone a chance. You are an athiest and he has given you one and you cant say he hasnt when you stand before him.


----------



## Achilles Return (Oct 27, 2010)

Wow.


----------



## TTom (Oct 27, 2010)

Wow is right, LOL

I don't get how you can post the bumble bee cant fly myth as if it is true and then offer up as proof that it is true, a story that clearly says it is folklore and a myth.


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 27, 2010)

TTom said:


> Wow is right, LOL
> 
> I don't get how you can post the bumble bee cant fly myth as if it is true and then offer up as proof that it is true, a story that clearly says it is folklore and a myth.



If you like that one, look up this link that explains why "jealous" doesn't mean jealous.

http://forum.gon.com/showpost.php?p=5449431&postcount=104


----------



## davidstaples (Oct 27, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> exactly there is nothing stopping you from choosing your own fate. Its your free will. You basically ride in the short bus to he##



Gabassmaster - I'd just like to say thank you for providing me with endless amusement today by writing what you have.  When I said in the "There's an Atheist Forum?" thread that us Atheists and agnostics needed somewhere to come laugh at you guys... you're near the top of that list.  Some days I think that movie Idiocracy is more prophesy than fiction.


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 27, 2010)

davidstaples said:


> Gabassmaster - I'd just like to say thank you for providing me with endless amusement today by writing what you have.  When I said in the "There's an Atheist Forum?" thread that us Atheists and agnostics needed somewhere to come laugh at you guys... you're near the top of that list.  Some days I think that movie Idiocracy is more prophesy than fiction.



Its easier to thread a needle with a daggum camel then for a smarty panties to get into Heaven, you know.


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 27, 2010)

Let's talk about how God is a meany pants some more.

Why is it OK for him to watch his children throw themselves into He11?


----------



## davidstaples (Oct 27, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> Let's talk about how God is a meany pants some more.
> 
> Why is it OK for him to watch his children throw themselves into He11?



Because he's God and he says we can't fly.


----------



## stringmusic (Oct 27, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> Let's talk about how God is a meany pants some more.
> 
> Why is it OK for him to watch his children throw themselves into He11?



there was a book written to tell you not to throw yourself into he11, and as a matter of fact, it tells you exactly how not to go to he11.


Dang, miss a half a day on woodys and there is two new pages on the thread, I cant keep up.


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 27, 2010)

stringmusic said:


> there was a book written to tell you not to throw yourself into he11, and as a matter of fact, it tells you exactly how not to go to he11.
> 
> 
> Dang, miss a half a day on woodys and there is two new pages on the thread, I cant keep up.



You expect people to rely on a fanciful, ancient text whose sources, editing and compilation are in question?

Even if I showed my 42 year old child a medical journal showing in graphic detail, injuries sustained by touching spinning lawnmower blades and they still insisted on messing with the lawnmower, I would still try to stop them.  I wouldn't sit by and tell them they brought it upon themselves.  Besides, you don't even offer any real evidence of He11; just unsubstantiated claims and empty threats.


----------



## stringmusic (Oct 27, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> You expect people to rely on a fanciful, ancient text whose sources, editing and compilation are in question?



in question by you.



> *question]Even if I showed my 42 year old child a medical journal showing in graphic detail, injuries sustained by touching spinning lawnmower blades and they still insisted on messing with the lawnmower*


if you look at this deeply you just kinda called yourself stupid. you been shown and you still deny.



> I wouldn't sit by and tell them they brought it upon themselves.


how could you not? at some point we have to take some responsibility for our actions.





> Besides, *you* don't even offer any real evidence of He11; just unsubstantiated claims and empty threats.


your right I don't. The Bible of which I believe tells the Truth does, and yes I understand you don't.


----------



## Thanatos (Oct 27, 2010)

TTom said:


> Yet he knew there would be reconciliation. There was never a doubt in his mind that he would return to his father's warm embrace.



Man...your making getting crucified on a cross and taking the burden of all man's sin like a cake walk. If he was so comfortable with his destiny why did he ask God if there was another way to repay man's iniquity? 



TTom said:


> It's comparing a weekend fast to starving to death.



Yea it's exactly like that...darn.




TTom said:


> Not being limited to Christianity I have alot of latitude in how I approach the great questions.



What binds Christians to having a narrow perspective? 




TTom said:


> complete separation? hmmm how does that work when Jesus is God? (one of those trinity questions that is difficult to explain) Can God be completely separate from himself? How does that work?



There have been many books written on this topic. I will be glad to send you one if you are truly interested.


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 28, 2010)

stringmusic said:


> if you look at this deeply you just kinda called yourself stupid. you been shown and you still deny.



What have I been shown?  Is there a Coffee table book of photos by Ansel Adams taken during one of his expeditions to He11?


----------



## ted_BSR (Oct 28, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> You expect people to rely on a fanciful, ancient text whose sources, editing and compilation are in question?
> 
> Even if I showed my 42 year old child a medical journal showing in graphic detail, injuries sustained by touching spinning lawnmower blades and they still insisted on messing with the lawnmower, I would still try to stop them.  I wouldn't sit by and tell them they brought it upon themselves.  Besides, you don't even offer any real evidence of He11; just unsubstantiated claims and empty threats.



Christ threw himself into the lawnmower blades and stopped them up with his own flesh to save you.  Then he rose from the dead to offer to guide you away from the smoking sputtering heap.  He does not want anyone to experience the alternative to Heaven.

The difference between Christianity and all other religions is that Christ claimed to be the one true God.  No other religous leader or prophet made this claim.  Call me crazy (you will, you have) but this is what I believe.


----------



## Thanatos (Oct 28, 2010)

ted_BSR said:


> Christ threw himself into the lawnmower blades and stopped them up with his own flesh to save you.  Then he rose from the dead to offer to guide you away from the smoking sputtering heap.  He does not want anyone to experience the alternative to Heaven.
> 
> The difference between Christianity and all other religions is that Christ claimed to be the one true God.  No other religous leader or prophet made this claim.  Call me crazy (you will, you have) but this is what I believe.



To add on to this...

If early Christian's wanted to create a super all powerful hero for their faith they did a terrible job by creating Jesus.
Near his death he did not embrace his fate like some other demigods in other religions. He was very worried about his fate and asked God if there was another way to save his creation. In his last breaths he screamed out, "God why have you forsaken me" (this is when he and God became totally separate from each other for the first time in their existence as stated in my earlier post)


----------



## stringmusic (Oct 28, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> *What have I been shown? * Is there a Coffee table book of photos by Ansel Adams taken during one of his expeditions to He11?



I just dont understand, you have been shown and dont even know that you have been shown. I know that you dont agree but this is another way satan keeps people from God. confusion


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 28, 2010)

TTom said:


> Wow is right, LOL
> 
> I don't get how you can post the bumble bee cant fly myth as if it is true and then offer up as proof that it is true, a story that clearly says it is folklore and a myth.



I dont get how you ca post that the BIBLE is a lie myth as it is true and then CANT even offer up any proof as in why?


----------



## davidstaples (Oct 28, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> I dont get how you ca post that the BIBLE is a lie myth as it is true and then CANT even offer up any proof as in why?



Nor can you offer up proof as to why it is true.  Talk about irony.  You just can't make this stuff up.  Or perhaps you can... it's right there in the BIBLE.


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 28, 2010)

davidstaples said:


> Nor can you offer up proof as to why it is true.  Talk about irony.  You just can't make this stuff up.  Or perhaps you can... it's right there in the BIBLE.



Well even if i wasnt a christian... which i am, i would be smart enough to stop and think...... which would i wanna do???? believe its made up go out drink and party mess up my liver, destroy my body, or take a chance that it could be true. i wouldnt wanna take that chance and trust me when i say this it is very fun and i enjoy being a christian! its not a punishment.


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 28, 2010)

ted_BSR said:


> Christ threw himself into the lawnmower blades and stopped them up with his own flesh to save you.



Now THAT would have been impressive.  Of all the ways that people got tortured back in those days, if he really wanted to make a statement, there should have been some burning or dismemberment involved.  Returning from that would have shut everybody up.  Instead of of letting the desciples touch his nail holes, he could have shown them his dismembered limbs.  That would have made for God fearing believers.




ted_BSR said:


> Then he rose from the dead to offer to guide you away from the smoking sputtering heap.  He does not want anyone to experience the alternative to Heaven.



That would have been a good illustration of how not to use a lawnmower.  Now supposing I still wanted to jump on the lawnmower.  Do you think he would try to stop me?  Would you if you could?



ted_BSR said:


> The difference between Christianity and all other religions is that Christ claimed to be the one true God.  No other religous leader or prophet made this claim.  Call me crazy (you will, you have) but this is what I believe.



I don't think you're crazy and have never called you that.  I think in the case of your religious belief that you are irrational.


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 28, 2010)

Thanatos said:


> To add on to this...
> 
> If early Christian's wanted to create a super all powerful hero for their faith they did a terrible job by creating Jesus.
> Near his death he did not embrace his fate like some other demigods in other religions. He was very worried about his fate and asked God if there was another way to save his creation. In his last breaths he screamed out, "God why have you forsaken me" (this is when he and God became totally separate from each other for the first time in their existence as stated in my earlier post)



To the portion in red:  Is this based on speculation or discernment or logic?


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 28, 2010)

davidstaples said:


> Gabassmaster - I'd just like to say thank you for providing me with endless amusement today by writing what you have.  When I said in the "There's an Atheist Forum?" thread that us Atheists and agnostics needed somewhere to come laugh at you guys... you're near the top of that list.  Some days I think that movie Idiocracy is more prophesy than fiction.



It wont be amusing when you  realize your wrong and its too late


----------



## davidstaples (Oct 28, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> It wont be amusing when you  realize your wrong and its too late



That's right... dead people don't laugh.


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 28, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> It wont be amusing when you  realize your wrong and its too late



The Boogey Man is coming to get you.......


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 28, 2010)

davidstaples said:


> that's right... Dead people don't laugh.



you will be very much alive


----------



## davidstaples (Oct 28, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> you will be very much alive



You do realize your fear tactics don't scare me, right?  I find them just as scary as the following:

You're not going to get any presents on Christmas because you don't believe in Santa Claus.

You're going to regret not believing in The Flying Spaghetti Monster.  He's going to eat you one of these days if you don't start believing in him.  You're not going to be laughing when he's chewed off your left arm.


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 28, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> you will be very much alive



Aren't you afraid of the Boogey Man?


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 28, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> Aren't you afraid of the Boogey Man?



NO


----------



## TTom (Oct 28, 2010)

There is a Huge difference Gabass, YOU offered up the wiki resource as YOUR proof that science said something. Thus you set forth that resource as the correct authority in your mind for that subject.

I copied YOUR resource directly and showed you where it supported my position not yours. Showing in your resource where it said it was a myth and folklore and not true.

Yet you lack the integrity to simply admit you were proven wrong with your own resource.


----------



## Thanatos (Oct 28, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> To the portion in red:  Is this based on speculation or discernment or logic?



As I stated to TTom there have been many books written about the subject. No man can understand the relationship of the trinity. At it's best it's very educated speculation. This falls in the area of a Christian's faith without evidence.


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 28, 2010)

Thanatos said:


> As I stated to TTom there have been many books written about the subject. No man can understand the relationship of the trinity. At it's best it's very educated speculation. This falls in the area of a Christian's faith without evidence.



Do you think that if I convinced myself, I mean truly, truly convinced myself that werewolves exist, do you believe that I could find historical documentation, ancient as well as modern eyewitness accounts and even news clippings supporting my belief?  Furthermore, do you think that if I believed they exist that I might start seeing them and evidence of their comings and goings everywhere I look?


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 28, 2010)

TTom said:


> There is a Huge difference Gabass, YOU offered up the wiki resource as YOUR proof that science said something. Thus you set forth that resource as the correct authority in your mind for that subject.
> 
> I copied YOUR resource directly and showed you where it supported my position not yours. Showing in your resource where it said it was a myth and folklore and not true.
> 
> Yet you lack the integrity to simply admit you were proven wrong with your own resource.



Well where does science prove there is no god... it dosent


----------



## TTom (Oct 28, 2010)

Another deflection to avoid truth.
I didn't say science did prove there is no god.

But I get it, you are compelled by your morals to deflect when you are shown to be wrong and if that means making stuff up that the other person never said, then so be it.


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 28, 2010)

TTom said:


> Another deflection to avoid truth.
> I didn't say science did prove there is no god.
> 
> But I get it, you are compelled by your morals to deflect when you are shown to be wrong and if that means making stuff up that the other person never said, then so be it.



you might not ever get saved thats you decision. But you will never change me or the bible.


----------



## TTom (Oct 28, 2010)

Thanatos,

on that last word thing, doesn't that depend on who's gospel you read?

Luke says the last words were 

“Father, into Your hands I commit my spirit”

John says the last words were 

"It is finished"

Now I assume you get the "last words" aspect of the Father why have you forsaken me" frrom the doctrine discussing the 7 last words of Jesus which to me stretches the definition of "Last Words" a very lllllllllooooooooooonnnnnnnggggggg way.

On the separation thing let me try to clarify my question and maybe the logic will make it more clear.

From birth till ascending into heaven Jesus was (God the Son) he did not stop being God the Son when he went to sheol.
So while he could be separated from God the Father and God the Holy Spirit he cannot be separated from God the Son


----------



## davidstaples (Oct 28, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> you will never change me or the bible.



Why not?  Plenty of other people have changed the Bible over the years... what's one more person doing it?


----------



## TTom (Oct 28, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> you might not ever get saved thats you decision. But you will never change me or the bible.




BTW isn't not bearing false witness in those 10 commandments of yours?

I'm only calling on you to live the moral code you profess to hold.


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 28, 2010)

davidstaples said:


> Why not?  Plenty of other people have changed the Bible over the years... what's one more person doing it?



I DON'T READ OUT OF ANY CHANGED OR ALTERED BIBLE. I READ OUT OF THE KING JAMES 1611. I FOR ONE AM AN INDEPENDANT INDEPENDANT INDEPENDANT INDEPENDANT MISSIONARY BAPTIST.


----------



## TTom (Oct 28, 2010)

the 1611 bible? really?

Does your copy say homosexual anywhere in it?


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 28, 2010)

ttom said:


> the 1611 bible? Really?
> 
> Does your copy say homosexual anywhere in it?



yes the version in english though.
And it talks against it .


----------



## TTom (Oct 28, 2010)

HA HA HA Caught bearing false witness again.

The term "homosexual" wasn't even invented in the English language until the late 1800's.

"The term ‘homosexuality’ was coined in the late 19th century by a German psychologist, Karoly Maria Benkert. "

So tell me how the word pop ups in a 1611 Bible over 2 centuries before the term was invented?

The first year it was ever included in a Bible was 1946.

So either the 1611 is a lie or the fact that homosexual is in it is a lie.


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 28, 2010)

TTom said:


> HA HA HA Caught bearing false witness again.
> 
> The term "homosexual" wasn't even invented in the English language until the late 1800's.
> 
> ...



dID I SPELL IT I SAID IT TALKS AGAINST IT??? WHERE YOU GETTING THIS FROM?


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 28, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> dID I SPELL IT I SAID IT TALKS AGAINST IT??? WHERE YOU GETTING THIS FROM?



Here:



Gabassmaster said:


> yes the version in english though.
> And it talks against it .


----------



## Gabassmaster (Oct 28, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> Here:



so you athiest think that the bible dosent speak against gays??? wow thats just sad


----------



## Achilles Return (Oct 28, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> Well where does science prove there is no god... it dosent



It doesn't need to. The burden of proof is on you. We aren't born religious, it is taught to us.


----------



## Achilles Return (Oct 28, 2010)

Gabassmaster said:


> Well even if i wasnt a christian... which i am, i would be smart enough to stop and think...... which would i wanna do???? believe its made up go out drink and party mess up my liver, destroy my body, or take a chance that it could be true. i wouldnt wanna take that chance and trust me when i say this it is very fun and i enjoy being a christian! its not a punishment.



You can not believe in any of it and still not party. I'm not sure what that has to do with believing the bible is valid.


----------



## TTom (Oct 28, 2010)

LOL I asked if your 1611 version used the specific term homosexual.

"Does your copy say homosexual anywhere in it? "

You said it did.

I didn't ask if it spoke against it, that is irrelevant to the question asked.

You said Your 1611 version of the KJV had the term homosexual in it.  Since the word was not created until the late 19th century, I am saying wither your bible is not in fact a 1611, or that you lied about the term being used in it.

What it says about homosexuality is not the point. 
That it would be impossible for the term homosexual to be in a bible printed 200 years or more before the invention of the word is the point.


----------



## ted_BSR (Oct 29, 2010)

Arguing about Jots and Tittles and Wikipedia quotes gets us nowhere.

Think about substance. The Truth is out there for anyone that seeks it.


----------



## Thanatos (Oct 29, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> Do you think that if I convinced myself, I mean truly, truly convinced myself that werewolves exist, do you believe that I could find historical documentation, ancient as well as modern eyewitness accounts and even news clippings supporting my belief?  Furthermore, do you think that if I believed they exist that I might start seeing them and evidence of their comings and goings everywhere I look?



There is plenty of evidence werewolves exist! Have you ever herd of the Twilight books??? Go team Jacob! 

Seriously dude...I cant believe you thought that analogy was okay to post here. That was just plain dumb. Come up with another one and I will answer it.


----------



## Thanatos (Oct 29, 2010)

TTom said:


> Thanatos,
> 
> on that last word thing, doesn't that depend on who's gospel you read?
> 
> ...



To the different gospels...

Each book was written by a different person with a different audience in mind back when it was written. It is my belief that Jesus said all of these things. If you look at the gospels they will have the same parable or stories told different ways. That is because the different writers herd the stories different times and possibly in different variations from Jesus. As you know most people did not write back then everything was passed down by oral communication. So Jesus was telling these stories over and over again. So either the different writers heard them differently, or they gathered the information through second hand knowledge. 

To the Trinity...

I believe that he spoke those words when God was pouring all his wraith on Jesus that was suppose to been applied to us. He went from being God's favored son one minute to getting the full hand of wraith from God the next. Yes, Jesus was still divine, but the father could not look or be connected with him because of all the evil that was upon Christ shoulders.


----------



## TTom (Oct 29, 2010)

Thanatos,

In this case I was not trying to pick apart bible quotes, I'm quite satisfied that the last words Luke reports were the last words Luke herd him say and the last words John reports were the last words John heard him say.

My pick apart was in the idea that the "Why have you forsaken me" were the "last" words as we traditionally understand "Last Words"

The last sentence, statement (singular) to come from a man's lips before his death.

seven separate things are sometimes listed as Jesus's "Last Words" and most of those 7 seem to be long before Jesus reaches the point close to death so they don't make sense to me as really being "Last Words" your "Why have you forsaken me" quote is on the cusp of could be, could not be the "Last Words"

I would in all faith have to believe that John heard the actual last words to pass his lips before death.

"It is done."

Partly I believe this because it follows what we know of man and the phases of death.

denial, anger, bargaining, depression, acceptance.

To fit this framwork onto Jesus's life takes some stretching I'll admit. Denial and anger likely happened while in the desert, this would be when and where Satan tried temptation. Where else would denial and anger have come into play?

Father if it is possible let this cup pass away from me.
Sounds like bargaining on a level.

Depression, hmmm I'd have to stretch a bit to find example of depression. So I'll say this part kinda needs work to fit.

Acceptance, the final acceptance can be nothing other than "It is Done" or "Father into your hands I commit my spirit"

Those statements seem to be pretty much the actual "last" words because there is no way to follow them with more.


----------



## Thanatos (Oct 29, 2010)

TTom said:


> Thanatos,
> 
> In this case I was not trying to pick apart bible quotes, I'm quite satisfied that the last words Luke reports were the last words Luke herd him say and the last words John reports were the last words John heard him say.
> 
> ...



I agree with everything you just said. It does not change  God putting all of the wraith stored up for man unto his eternal son so we could escape it.


----------



## TTom (Oct 29, 2010)

The other aspect we're likely never going to see the same way. 

So I kinda left it be, we were having a good discussion on these aspects, so I left the other aside to foster the path we took.

I still believe knowing that the end of torment is 3 days, then 2 days, then 1 day away makes most things far more bearable. 
Sheol is still Sheol and that's not a piece of cake for even 1 day, but it's not eternity either, and a known end date to a punishment always makes it easier.


----------



## dexrusjak (Oct 29, 2010)

Thanatos said:


> I agree with everything you just said. It does not change  God putting all of the wraith stored up for man unto his eternal son so we could escape it.



Since we're talking about the crucifixion, may I ask a few questions?

1. How is Jesus' sacrifice so impressive?  He knew he would come back to life, and for all we know, he may have used his omnipotence to deaden his nerve endings so as to feel no pain.

2. If Jesus is god, how could god turn his back on himself?  

3. Do you (Christian) believe that I (a nonchristian) need to believe that the crucifixion is a literal historical event (that went down as explained in the Bible) in order to be saved?


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 29, 2010)

Thanatos said:


> There is plenty of evidence werewolves exist! Have you ever herd of the Twilight books??? Go team Jacob!
> 
> Seriously dude...I cant believe you thought that analogy was okay to post here. That was just plain dumb. Come up with another one and I will answer it.



Why do you think that that analogy was not applicable?  Because you don't believe in werewolves?  Because you think that the notion of werewolves is silly?  Try telling someone that has "seen" a werewolf or the Loch Ness Monster or UFO's that they are lying.  Tell them what they experienced wasn't real.  Better yet, tell a Muslim that their God isn't real.  From my stand point, all y'alls claims carry the same weight in my mind.


----------



## Thanatos (Oct 29, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> Why do you think that that analogy was not applicable?  Because you don't believe in werewolves?  Because you think that the notion of werewolves is silly?  Try telling someone that has "seen" a werewolf or the Loch Ness Monster or UFO's that they are lying.  Tell them what they experienced wasn't real.  Better yet, tell a Muslim that their God isn't real.  From my stand point, all y'alls claims carry the same weight in my mind.



Dude you are crushing your credibility with each post. What's the difference between Muhammed, Jesus versus Werewovles and Ol' Nessy? We've debated before and I know that you can bring better stuff than that Ambush.


----------



## davidstaples (Oct 29, 2010)

Thanatos said:


> Dude you are crushing your credibility with each post. What's the difference between Muhammed, Jesus versus Werewovles and Ol' Nessy? We've debated before and I know that you can bring better stuff than that Ambush.



Try seeing it from his point of view.  I think he has a valid point logically.  You look at it as silly, just as he looks at your faith in your god as silly.


----------



## Thanatos (Oct 29, 2010)

davidstaples said:


> Try seeing it from his point of view.  I think he has a valid point logically.  You look at it as silly, just as he looks at your faith in your god as silly.



Lets pretend for a moment that Jesus and Muhammad have no divinity attached to them. These two people walked this earth at some point in the past. There is historical evidence of that. Now...werewolves and nessy, not so much. So you may want to check your use of the word logical, because his point was not logical.


----------



## Achilles Return (Oct 29, 2010)

Thanatos said:


> There is historical evidence of that.



Of Mohammed, yes. Jesus - it's debatable.


----------



## Achilles Return (Oct 29, 2010)

Thanatos said:


> Lets pretend for a moment that Jesus and Muhammad have no divinity attached to them. These two people walked this earth at some point in the past. There is historical evidence of that. Now...werewolves and nessy, not so much. So you may want to check your use of the word logical, because his point was not logical.



The point is that the claims to the resurrection are just as based in reality as the idea that werewolves walk among us today. We have seen evidence of neither.


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 29, 2010)

Thanatos said:


> Lets pretend for a moment that Jesus and Muhammad have no divinity attached to them. These two people walked this earth at some point in the past. There is historical evidence of that. Now...werewolves and nessy, not so much. So you may want to check your use of the word logical, because his point was not logical.



Look up lycanthropy.  Look how far back and how well documented the phenomena has been recorded.



Achilles Return said:


> The point is that the claims to the resurrection are just as based in reality as the idea that werewolves walk among us today. We have seen evidence of neither.



Try and tell that to people who claim to have seen one.  There are many throughout history; predating Christ.


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 29, 2010)

Lets talk about God is a meany pants some more.


----------



## Thanatos (Oct 29, 2010)

Achilles Return said:


> The point is that the claims to the resurrection are just as based in reality as the idea that werewolves walk among us today. We have seen evidence of neither.



I can agree that you have to have faith in the resurrection the same way you would have to have faith in werewolves, but it would be a completely different faith, meaning the depth of faith is easier with Christianity.


----------



## Thanatos (Oct 29, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> Look up lycanthropy.  Look how far back and how well documented the phenomena has been recorded.
> 
> 
> 
> Try and tell that to people who claim to have seen one.  There are many throughout history; predating Christ.



AMBUSH!!! COME ON DUDE! Give it up. There are so many better analogies out there to use to discredit Christianity and you will not leave this one alone.


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 29, 2010)

Thanatos said:


> AMBUSH!!! COME ON DUDE! Give it up. There are so many better analogies out there to use to discredit Christianity and you will not leave this one alone.



I'm not trying to discredit Christianity or belief in werewolves.  I'm just trying to illustrate that their basis for belief is the same.


----------



## Thanatos (Oct 29, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> I'm not trying to discredit Christianity or belief in werewolves.  I'm just trying to illustrate that they're basis for belief is the same.



I stated this a couple post up.

"I can agree that you have to have faith in the resurrection the same way you would have to have faith in werewolves, but it would be a completely different faith, meaning the depth of faith is easier with Christianity."


----------



## Achilles Return (Oct 30, 2010)

Thanatos said:


> meaning the depth of faith is easier with Christianity.



This statement is meaningless. Faith is faith. There isn't a degree to it - both entice a belief without evidence. There is absolutely no rational or logical reason to believe that a man can be resurrected in the manner of Jesus and is just as believable as the existence of werewolves.


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 30, 2010)

Achilles Return said:


> This statement is meaningless. Faith is faith. There isn't a degree to it - both entice a belief without evidence. There is absolutely no rational or logical reason to believe that a man can be resurrected in the manner of Jesus and is just as believable as the existence of werewolves.



Werewolves and Bigfeet leave claw marks and footprints.  There are pictures of sea monsters.


----------



## Thanatos (Oct 30, 2010)

Achilles Return said:


> This statement is meaningless. Faith is faith. There isn't a degree to it - both entice a belief without evidence. There is absolutely no rational or logical reason to believe that a man can be resurrected in the manner of Jesus and is just as believable as the existence of werewolves.



This is in answer to Ambush's response too.

I understand your point. That is what God want's from us. To believe Jesus died and rose again on faith. I know you do not have that and you do not want that. BUT! You are incorrect about the depth of faith.  I have not seen people risk their lives to go and spread the "word" of the werewolves, or drive planes into buildings because the high master werewolf told them so. Most people dont claim to have a personal relationship with Big foot, Chupacabra, Nessy, etc. There is a reason for this.


----------



## ambush80 (Oct 30, 2010)

Thanatos said:


> This is in answer to Ambush's response too.
> 
> I understand your point. That is what God want's from us. To believe Jesus died and rose again on faith. I know you do not have that and you do not want that. BUT! You are incorrect about the depth of faith.  I have not seen people risk their lives to go and spread the "word" of the werewolves, or drive planes into buildings because the high master werewolf told them so. Most people dont claim to have a personal relationship with Big foot, Chupacabra, Nessy, etc. There is a reason for this.



That is what makes religion a particularly dangerous type of superstition.


----------



## Achilles Return (Oct 30, 2010)

Thanatos said:


> This is in answer to Ambush's response too.
> 
> I understand your point. That is what God want's from us. To believe Jesus died and rose again on faith. I know you do not have that and you do not want that. BUT! You are incorrect about the depth of faith.  I have not seen people risk their lives to go and spread the "word" of the werewolves, or drive planes into buildings because the high master werewolf told them so. Most people dont claim to have a personal relationship with Big foot, Chupacabra, Nessy, etc. There is a reason for this.



I don't know anything particularly noble about "risking" their lives for the sake of faith. There is similarly nothing noble for slaughtering others because of faith. Perhaps it is not without depth, but I never doubted a christian's sincerity. My point is that popular opinion doesn't validate _any_ kind of faith - so the world kills and maims over _your_ religion? That does nothing but cause me sadness.


----------



## Thanatos (Oct 30, 2010)

Achilles Return said:


> I don't know anything particularly noble about "risking" their lives for the sake of faith. There is similarly nothing noble for slaughtering others because of faith. Perhaps it is not without depth, but I never doubted a christian's sincerity. My point is that popular opinion doesn't validate _any_ kind of faith - so the world kills and maims over _your_ religion? That does nothing but cause me sadness.



It causes me sadness to buddy. 

I know y'all are tired of this and now we are getting into ground already covered. The last thing I will say is this. I can't wait until you guys figure out that the same scalpel your using to cut religion from your mind would also need to be used to cut out your evolutionary naturalism beliefs if you were intellectually honest.


----------



## davidstaples (Oct 31, 2010)

Thanatos said:


> It causes me sadness to buddy.
> 
> I know y'all are tired of this and now we are getting into ground already covered. The last thing I will say is this. I can't wait until you guys figure out that the same scalpel your using to cut religion from your mind would also need to be used to cut out your evolutionary naturalism beliefs if you were intellectually honest.



I look at evolution as not necessarily 100% fact, as nobody has been alive for the past few million years or however long to validate it.  It's very likely according to the existing evidence, but until someone can 100% validate it... it is a theory.  But at least there's more evidence than just a book.


----------



## ted_BSR (Nov 1, 2010)

davidstaples said:


> I look at evolution as not necessarily 100% fact, as nobody has been alive for the past few million years or however long to validate it.  It's very likely according to the existing evidence, but until someone can 100% validate it... it is a theory.  But at least there's more evidence than just a book.



No, it is not, there is not. In fact man's own mathematic laws of probablity suggest that the odds of evolution being the cause of the human race are astronomically stacked against it, and all your evidence is in books too.

You require mountains of faith to believe that the fairy tale of evolution is the origin of the human race.  I commend you on the giganticness of your faith.  It is far stronger than mine in what I believe.


----------



## davidstaples (Nov 1, 2010)

ted_BSR said:


> No, it is not, there is not. In fact man's own mathematic laws of probablity suggest that the odds of evolution being the cause of the human race are astronomically stacked against it, and all your evidence is in books too.
> 
> You require mountains of faith to believe that the fairy tale of evolution is the origin of the human race.  I commend you on the giganticness of your faith.  It is far stronger than mine in what I believe.



So books written 1500+ years ago are much more factual than books written within the last century based upon fossil examinations and real scientific research?  Oh... okay... well, whatever helps you sleep at night.


----------



## ted_BSR (Nov 1, 2010)

davidstaples said:


> So books written 1500+ years ago are much more factual than books written within the last century based upon fossil examinations and real scientific research?  Oh... okay... well, whatever helps you sleep at night.



I sleep well.  Science has lied to you David.  I am pretty sure of this, because I am a scientist.


----------



## Thanatos (Nov 1, 2010)

davidstaples said:


> So books written 1500+ years ago are much more factual than books written within the last century based upon fossil examinations and real scientific research?  Oh... okay... well, whatever helps you sleep at night.



I know you sleep well. That wool cap that covers your eyes must help you drift off very quickly...


----------



## ted_BSR (Nov 1, 2010)

Thanatos said:


> I know you sleep well. That wool cap that covers your eyes must help you drift off very quickly...



Edited, Wrong quote, sorry.


----------



## davidstaples (Nov 1, 2010)

Thanatos said:


> I know you sleep well. That wool cap that covers your eyes must help you drift off very quickly...



As must you... believing in mystical beings probably makes you all warm and fuzzy inside.


----------



## Thanatos (Nov 2, 2010)

davidstaples said:


> As must you... believing in mystical beings probably makes you all warm and fuzzy inside.



I have my doubts like you, but when I weigh the evidence versus the meaning of our existence my belief is simple.


----------



## Nicodemus (Nov 4, 2010)

Thread has been cleaned up. Ya`ll keep it that way.


----------



## davidstaples (Nov 4, 2010)

Nicodemus said:


> Thread has been cleaned up. Ya`ll keep it that way.



Wow, did I miss something?


----------



## Nicodemus (Nov 4, 2010)

davidstaples said:


> Wow, did I miss something?





If you didn`t get a PM, you didn`t.


----------



## davidstaples (Nov 4, 2010)

Nicodemus said:


> If you didn`t get a PM, you didn`t.



Haha, gotcha.  Must have been something that went on in the last short little while then as earlier this morning the last update I saw in this subforum was yesterday morning.  Gotta try and keep things civil.    Thanks Nic!


----------



## stringmusic (Nov 4, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> Lets talk about God is a meany pants some more.



This thread has gotten off that course long ago. Maybe everyone understands and believes that he is not a meany pants after all? That was the point of the thread after all, I feel great about it


----------



## davidstaples (Nov 4, 2010)

stringmusic said:


> Maybe everyone understands and believes that he is not a meany pants after all?



Pretty much.  Those that believe in him don't think he's a meany pants.  The rest of us just don't believe in him.  That which does not exist cannot be a meany pants.


----------



## stringmusic (Nov 4, 2010)

davidstaples said:


> Pretty much.  *Those that believe in him don't think he's a meany pants.*  The rest of us just don't believe in him.  That which does not exist cannot be a meany pants.



isnt this one of the reasons for the non-belief?


----------



## Achilles Return (Nov 4, 2010)

stringmusic said:


> isnt this one of the reasons for the non-belief?



Eh..not exactly. The primary reason is lack of evidence. The "meany pants" part goes to show the logical and moral inconsistencies.


----------



## ambush80 (Nov 4, 2010)

stringmusic said:


> isnt this one of the reasons for the non-belief?




It is a very good reason to not believe in the God of the Bible.


----------



## The Original Rooster (Nov 4, 2010)

ambush80 said:


> It is a very good reason to not believe in the God of the Bible.



Good to see you back Ambush!


----------



## ambush80 (Nov 4, 2010)

RoosterTodd said:


> Good to see you back Ambush!


 
I was laying low......Non-believers have been dropping like flies.

Actually, I've just been busy.


----------



## philtuts (Nov 19, 2010)

Ambush80- I'm genuinely interested, how did we all get here on earth in human form and what is our purpose? Is this all random?


----------



## ambush80 (Nov 19, 2010)

UrbanHunter33 said:


> Ambush80- I'm genuinely interested, how did we all get here on earth in human form and what is our purpose? Is this all random?



My answer to your questions are: "I don't know" and "maybe".


----------

